A prominent Turkish defense official has given a rare interview to a regional Middle East outlet wherein he describes NATO as a “zombie alliance” which has outlived its functionality and legitimacy as a real military alliance, something which is becoming increasingly evident at Trump threatens to walk the United States away from being its main funder and leader.

Retired Rear Admiral Cem Gurdeniz is architect of the “Blue Homeland” maritime doctrine and remains a prominent geopolitical commentator in Turkish society and the region. Blue Homeland signifies Ankara’s expanded maritime claims in the eastern Mediterranean of the last several years.

The controversially includes waters surrounding the entirety of the EU country of Cyprus (based on the decades-long Turkish occupation of northern Cyprus), which gives Turkey access to large deposits of natural gas. These claims have renewed the long-running geopolitical standoff between Turkey and Greece and Cyprus, with the EU backing their argument that Turkeys is violating their sovereignty.

Thus the Blue Homeland doctrine has pitted NATO powers against each other, with Turkey possessing the second largest army within the NATO alliance. But the country remains somewhat of a wayward thorn in the side of the alliance, given it being at odds with the US on many fronts, most especially policy in northern Syria and the Kurdish question.

Adm. Gurdeniz was recently interviewed by prominent Turkish journalist Ceyda Karan for the Lebanon-based The Cradle, and among the most notable remarks of the former top official is seen in the following:

NATO is now a zombie alliance. It exists more as a myth than a functional military bloc. Its expansion has been reckless. Its operations – from the Balkans to Libya to Ukraine – have destabilized entire regions, and its credibility is collapsing.

The EU, meanwhile, is pushing a €800 billion (approximately $864 billion) military revamp under the name “ReArm Europe.” But this requires massive austerity at home. European governments are preparing their populations for war, not peace. They need enemies to justify the spending.

He then admits, “But without US leadership, NATO cannot survive as a coherent structure. Trump’s America will not fight for Estonia or send troops to Moldova. Europe will have to defend itself – and it is not ready.”

One might not expect this kind of blistering commentary from an admiral from a NATO country, but this is somewhat less surprising coming from someone whose career was in the Turkish military.

Below is the partial interview with link below to the full transcript…

* * *

The Cradle: With US President Donald Trump back in office and the Ukraine war exposing NATO’s weaknesses, how should we understand the rupture in the western-led world order?

Gurdeniz: We are witnessing the second great breakdown of a global security order since World War II. The first came after 1990, when the Soviet Union voluntarily dissolved, and Washington rapidly expanded its influence across Eastern Europe. But today, 80 years after the end of that war, the US is beginning its own retreat – shifting its strategic center of gravity from Europe to the Asia-Pacific. 

The Trump administration recognises this. Its strategy is no longer about global control but about retrenchment and preparing for great power rivalry in the Pacific, particularly with China. This isn’t a tactical adjustment – it’s a systemic collapse. NATO’s defeat in Ukraine was not just a battlefield loss – it was the end of an illusion.

The Cradle: What broke the neocon-led post-Cold War consensus?

Gurdeniz: The post-1990 order was built on the illusion of unipolarity. The US declared liberal capitalist democracy as the universal model. In this system, the west controlled finance, China was tasked with manufacturing, and resource-rich states were expected to supply energy and raw materials. 

But this model encountered fatal contradictions. US military power failed in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. Instead of stability, it brought destruction. Russia reasserted itself militarily after 2008. China rose economically and technologically, challenging western hegemony. 

And together, they built a Eurasian counterbalance. Most crucially, the Global South saw through the facade. Israel’s genocide in Gaza, supported openly by Washington, shattered any remaining legitimacy. The western system now lies exposed – economically overleveraged, diplomatically isolated, and militarily vulnerable.

The Cradle: How do you interpret the Trump administration’s posture toward this collapse?

Gurdeniz: Trump is not the architect of this collapse – he is the product of it. He and his team understand that the post-1945 model no longer serves the US. The manufacturing base is hollowed out. Debt has reached $34 trillion. 

The dollar is being bypassed in global trade. American power is contracting. What Trump offers is a retreat masked as strength. He wants to end America’s entanglements and focus on restoring domestic industry. He knows NATO is a burden, not an asset. His challenge is not ideological – it’s existential. He wants to keep the American empire alive by cutting it down to a sustainable size.

The Cradle: What’s the fate of NATO in this equation?

Gurdeniz: NATO is now a zombie alliance. It exists more as a myth than a functional military bloc. Its expansion has been reckless. Its operations – from the Balkans to Libya to Ukraine – have destabilised entire regions, and its credibility is collapsing.

The EU, meanwhile, is pushing a €800 billion (approximately $864 billion) military revamp under the name “ReArm Europe.” But this requires massive austerity at home. European governments are preparing their populations for war, not peace. They need enemies to justify the spending.

But without US leadership, NATO cannot survive as a coherent structure. Trump’s America will not fight for Estonia or send troops to Moldova. Europe will have to defend itself – and it is not ready.

The Cradle: Is the world truly shifting to a multipolar order – or is it still premature? 

Gurdeniz: The shift is real and irreversible. BRICS is growing. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is expanding. Trade is moving away from the dollar. Regional powers like Iran, India, Brazil, and Turkiye are asserting themselves. This is not a return to Cold War blocs. It’s a rebalancing – a world where no single centre dominates.

Multipolarity is not about utopia. It is about sovereignty. It allows nations to align based on interest, not coercion. The challenge now is to build institutions that reflect this reality – new trade systems, security frameworks, and development banks that are not controlled by the west.

The Cradle: You’ve long championed the “Blue Homeland” maritime doctrine. How does this fit into Turkiye’s future in Eurasia?

Gurdeniz: Blue Homeland is not a slogan – it’s our geopolitical imperative. Turkiye is surrounded by contested waters: the Aegean, the Eastern Mediterranean, and the Black Sea. If we surrender these spaces, we become landlocked and irrelevant.

Western powers, particularly through Greece and Cyprus, want to trap us in Anatolia. The Seville Map, backed by the EU, would reduce our maritime space by 90 percent. That is a geopolitical death sentence.

Blue Homeland asserts our legal rights, our naval presence, and our energy interests. Combined with the Middle Corridor – which links us to Central Asia and China – we form a continental-maritime axis. This is the backbone of Turkiye’s 21^st-century strategy.

TRUMP: “The U.S. can’t lose $1.9 trillion on trade & also spend a lot of money on NATO in order to protect European nations. We cover them with military, then we lose money on trade. The whole thing is crazy!”

“The American people understand it a lot better than the media!” pic.twitter.com/gSC29Ze5xb

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) April 7, 2025

The Cradle: What is your assessment of Turkiye’s economic orientation in this new world order?

Gurdeniz: We must abandon the illusion that foreign direct investment and EU integration will save us. That model has failed. It brought debt, privatisation, and dependency. Our economy must be built on production, not speculation.

This means reindustrialisation, food and energy sovereignty, and regional trade in local currencies. We must protect strategic sectors from foreign ownership. Our Central Bank must be independent not just from the government, but from foreign influence.

Only then can we speak of economic sovereignty.

The Cradle: What about diplomacy? Should Turkiye align with a particular bloc – or pursue non-alignment?

Gurdeniz: We must pursue what I call “assertive non-alignment.” That means refusing to be anyone’s satellite. We keep our options open. We cooperate with Russia, China, and the Global South, but also engage with Europe and the US where our interests align.

But there are red lines. We will not join sanctions regimes against our neighbors. We will not host foreign bases targeting other states. And we will not be dragged into NATO’s failing wars.

Our diplomacy must serve our geography – balanced, firm, and sovereign.

The Cradle: The EU claims to be a “values-based” project. How do you respond to this claim?

Gurdeniz: The EU’s values are selective. When it comes to Turkiye’s maritime rights, they back Greek maximalism. When it comes to Palestine, they say nothing. When it comes to Israel’s crimes, they call it “self-defense.”

This is not about values – it’s about power. The EU wants Turkiye as a buffer zone, a refugee warehouse, and a source of cheap labor. It will never accept us as equals. And we should not want to join such a club.

Our dignity is not for sale.

Read the rest here.

Via The Epoch Times,

The UK cancer care system is facing a “critical breaking point,” a number of experts have warned.

In a comment article published in The Lancet Oncology, the researchers have called for radical action to head off deepening financial pressures.

The article calls for the appointment of an independent National Cancer Director and an office of support to take data-driven actions across the UK.

The government has responded, saying it is determined to drive down waiting times for cancer patients.

Mark Lawler, professor of digital health at Queen’s University Belfast and lead author, said: “The urgency is clear: in my mind, we are already in the midst of a cancer crisis, precipitated by 14 years of gross mismanagement of cancer by the previous administration and the collateral impact of Covid and national lockdowns on cancer services and cancer patients.

“Now, more than ever, we must learn from each other, acknowledge the scale of the challenge, and implement data-driven solutions and achieve efficiencies, some of which may be contentious in the short term, but are essential for long-term cancer control within financial constraints.”

The comment article highlights several policy recommendations which the authors state will improve survival and quality of life for people with cancer.

Among the issues highlighted is the abolition of NHS England, which the authors said marks a “seismic shift” in UK health care governance.

The authors warn that the “greatest risk lies in reactive, short-term, ill-informed decision-making” by the government, which they state could further reduce UK cancer survival rates, deepen health inequalities, and escalate inefficiencies.

Professor Pat Price, from Imperial College London, who is chairwoman of Radiotherapy UK, said: 

“Delayed cancer treatment has become the deadly norm in this country, and we won’t reverse it unless we commit to doing things differently.

“If we keep doing the same things, with the same voices in the room, we’re going to continue to face some of the worst cancer outcomes in Europe.

“In the massively overlooked area of radiotherapy cancer care, for example, nearly two-thirds of cancer patients are waiting too long for their cancer treatment.

“Too often, we see cancer policy take a tunnel-vision approach, only focusing on areas like early diagnosis and completely overlooking the fact that we need to actually treat patients if we want to improve survival.

“The international environment, domestic funding pressures and a lack of policy priority to take the action needed could eclipse attempts to reverse the poor cancer outcomes the country faces.

“If we want to stop cancer patients in this country from dying needlessly, the promised cancer plan has to be radical. It needs to be data-driven.

“And it needs to ensure that, if money is tight, we’re spending it on the things that are proven to improve cancer outcomes.”

Mark Lawler, professor of digital health at Queen’s University Belfast, in an undated file photo. Queen’s University Belfast/PA

Another issue highlighted by the research team is the need to cut consultation by the current government, which they said is delaying the development of a new national cancer strategy.

Lawler said:

“We cannot continually consult our way out of a crisis – the evidence we and others have provided is irrefutable.

“We have more than enough data intelligence – what we need to do is act on this evidence as a matter of urgency.

“At the turn of the century, Denmark had worse cancer outcomes than the UK.

“But by prioritising cancer at the very top of the Danish health agenda, they now have among the best improvements in cancer outcomes in Europe. We need to ‘do a Denmark’.”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said the government had “inherited a broken NHS where too many cancer patients are waiting too long for diagnosis and treatment.”

The spokesperson said: “We are determined to drive down waiting times and our Plan for Change is already getting patients seen and treated faster, with 80,000 more diagnosed or ruled out with cancer between July and January.

“The NHS exceeded its faster diagnosis cancer target for the first time in February amid record demand—almost four-fifths of people received a definitive cancer diagnosis or all-clear within four weeks.

“This is just the start: our National Cancer Plan will set out further how we will improve cancer care to bring this country’s cancer survival rates back up to the standards of the best in the world.”

There’s little doubt that ‘spy wars’ between Russian and NATO countries have already long been in progress in parallel to the ground war in Ukraine. This also amid a spate of mystery sabotage and arson attacks both in Europe and Russia, in what appears tit-for-tat covert ops targeting infrastructure.

But a new Times (UK) report strongly suggests Russia and Belarus are increasingly ready to jointly ramp up these spy and espionage measures against NATO targets, connected to the Ukrainian proxy war.

Kremlin intelligence officials describe that moving to an offensive spy posture is the necessary reaction to increased provocations by NATO countries near the Russian border.

According to the Times:

The Belarusian and Russian security services are preparing to take “preemptive” measures against Nato member states, the Kremlin’s spy chief has said.

Sergei Naryshkin, head of Russia’s SVR foreign intelligence service, accused Nato of an increase in military activity near the borders of the two countries. Belarus is Russia’s strongest ally in Europe and the Kremlin has used its territory for attacks on Ukraine. Moscow also says it has transferred tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus.

Spy chief Naryshkin described while in Minsk alongside Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, “We feel and see that European countries, especially France, Britain and Germany, are increasing the level of escalation around the Ukrainian conflict, so we need to act preemptively. We are ready for this.”

Nothing that there have been no ‘mystery’ sabotage attacks in either Serbia or Hungary (both which are relatively Russia friendly), The Times recounts:

A recent report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank said the number of attacks nearly tripled between 2023 and 2024, after quadrupling between 2022 and 2023. It read: “Despite the increase in Russian attacks, western countries have not developed an effective strategy to counter these attacks.”

There have been mystery fires inside Russia as well, particularly targeting defense and energy sector buildings. To some extent, both are likely waging intensified sabotage campaigns against the other at this point.

Last year, Anne Keast-Butler, head of the UK’s GCHQ, or signals intelligence operations (which is the equivalent of America’s NSA), warned in her first major speech that President Putin was plotting “physical attacks” against Western targets.

The GCHQ director claimed at the time that Moscow is busy “nurturing and inspiring” groups of cyber attackers, and is even “in some cases seemingly coordinating physical attacks against the West.”

Last year, an Ikea in Lithuania’s capital went up in flames, and authorities just last month pinned it on Russian intelligence or saboteurs after a lengthy investigation. The fire, which targeted the Swedish retailer store in Vilnius on the May 9, 2024, resulted in no casualties. Interestingly, the two prime suspects taken into custody were actually Ukrainian citizens.

“It has been established that through a series of intermediaries… the organizers of these crimes are in Russia and this is connected to military intelligence and security forces,” the Lithuanian prosecutor’s office said, describing a ‘destabilization’ campaign in Europe.

Ukrainian leaders continue to brainstorm ways to replenish the military’s ranks, amid slow but steady gains by Russian forces along frontlines in Donetsk. Casualties on either side are believed to be in the hundreds of thousands, as the tragic conflict grinds on endlessly.

The Ukrainian presidential administration’s deputy head, Col. Pavel Palisa, has this week raised eyebrows by backing mandatory conscription for women while citing the Israeli model. Palisa advanced the idea that military service should be a national obligation for all men and women, and this is where current discussions on recruitment should focus.

“If a citizen claims to support the state, job, education, I don’t know, in general, to claim some payments from the state budget, they should serve… there is a minimum contract, let it be annual,” the official said. His words were later translated and cited in Russian media.

He strongly suggested that until military service is fulfilled for able-bodied young people, they should not have access to certain state benefits.

Col. Palisa continued by explaining the the armed forces of Ukraine has “a lot of different jobs” and “no matter how wild it sounds now, maybe we need to learn the experience of Israel in this.”

But it remains that Ukraine’s legal conscription age is still at 25 – which was lowered from 27 last year. Stricter reforms also made leaving the country for men much harder, amid a crackdown on evading the draft as well as desertion.

Washington officials have frequently criticized that young men aged 18 to 24 are still not able to be conscripted. Most armies throughout the world have 18-year olds serving in them, as the backbone of the lower enlisted ranks.

Foreign Policy has previously observed that “conscription is breaking Ukraine” – given that in many cases men are literally nabbed on the streets and thrown into vans, where they are taken off to boot camp, eventually to be thrown to the hellish front lines:

In Ukraine today, no topic is more barbed than that of compulsory military service. Few want to talk about conscription publicly; men within service age range, 25 to 60 years old, are particularly reticent. “It’s just too sensitive. I hope you understand me,” one man told me, referring to the many families in his circle of friends whose sons, brothers, and fathers are on the front or have perished there. Some fear that speaking out might prompt a letter from the Defense Ministry announcing their call-up. Or worse, they might be plucked randomly by recruitment officers on the streets and, should their documentation prove their eligibility for service, sent straight to boot camp.

In early October, Marco, a Ukrainian energy analyst who requested anonymity, said his brother-in-law, an IT specialist, had been stopped by traffic cops on a road near Kyiv. But the officers weren’t alone. Defense Ministry personnel assigned to the recruitment division accompanied them. They demanded to see the 30-year-old’s “military ticket,” a passport of sorts issued by the ministry that contains all data relevant to military service, such as age, professional status, and health condition. All Ukrainian men between 18 and 60 are required to have one. 

Should Col. Palisa’s vision for applying the ‘Israeli model’ in Ukraine become a reality, the country might also see women taken from their homes and from the streets in the same fashion.

Stop labeling everything you dislike about Ukraine as Russian propaganda (!)
Forced conscription into the war in Ukraine isn’t Russian propaganda; it’s a tragedy, especially for ordinary, poor, working-class individuals who are being sent into the meat grinder due to the will and… pic.twitter.com/4PNaRzm4PS

— Marta Havryshko (@HavryshkoMarta) March 2, 2025

The longer the war drags on, the more desperate authorities will become to replenish military ranks. But drastic change to an already controversial and strained system could destabilize the Zelensky government, which is likely why he’s held off implementing anything too drastic or radical until now.

Via The Cradle

Saudi Arabia is planning to pay off the debts owed by Syria to the World Bank, according to three sources cited by Reuters on Monday. “Saudi Arabia plans to pay off Syria’s debts to the World Bank … paving the way for the approval of millions of dollars in grants for reconstruction and to support the country’s paralyzed public sector,” the sources said. 

“Damascus is short of foreign currency and a previous plan to pay off the debts using assets frozen abroad did not materialize … World Bank officials have discussed providing financing to help reconstruct the country’s power grid, heavily damaged by years of war, and also to support public sector pay,” they added. 

A Saudi Finance Ministry source told the outlet that “We do not comment on speculation, but make announcements, if and when they become official.”

Reuters had reported over the weekend that Syria will be sending a delegation to the US for the annual World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) meetings in Washington later in April. 

The extremist-led Syrian administration of Ahmad al-Sharaa, which assumed power after the fall of former president Bashar al-Assad’s government, has been hoping to secure some relief from the heavy sanctions imposed on Damascus over the years. 

The UK and a number of EU countries have lifted some of their sanctions on Syria, and Washington provided a six-month exemption from some sanctions in January. The US has also given Syria a list of demands that it wants the Syrian government to fulfill in exchange for partial relief from sanctions, reports said late last month.

These include the destruction of any chemical weapons, cooperation on “counter-terrorism,” and ensuring foreign fighters are not granted top positions. Several militants who fought with Al-Qaeda and ISIS-linked organizations against the former government have been incorporated into the army and given posts of command. 

Syrian government forces killed over 1,500 Alawites in a series of bloody sectarian massacres early last month. Tens of thousands have been displaced and have fled to Lebanon. 

Syria’s debt at the World Bank stands at around $15 million, which must be paid before the international financial institution can approve a grant and any other kind of financial assistance.  Additionally, the Syrian economy has been decimated by years of war and sanctions. 

The UN issued a report on February 20 highlighting that the Syrian economy will not be able to recover fully before 2080, 55 years from now.

A Qatari official announced on March 13 that Doha will be providing Syria with natural gas to boost the country’s energy sector. However, the new government’s extremist nature has caused concern for some states. 

🚨🇸🇾 Jolani regime terrorists snuck into Hmeimim airbase & tried to force Alawite refugees to leave! pic.twitter.com/GLYuDPoeWT

— OstensibleOyster (@Ostensiblay) March 16, 2025

Three European envoys warned Syrian authorities during a meeting in Damascus last month that international support for the country would depend on the government “cracking down” on extremist elements, according to Reuters. 

“The abuses that have taken place in recent days are truly intolerable, and those responsible must be identified and condemned. There is no blank check for the new authorities,” a French Foreign Ministry spokesman told the outlet when asked about the message delivered by the European envoys in Damascus.

Both the United States and Russia have been calling for new elections in Ukraine, also after President Putin has branded Zelensky as ‘illegitimate’ due to previously canceling presidential elections, citing martial law amid the war.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has issued some interesting new comments weighing in on the ‘what’s next’ from Moscow’s perspective after Zelensky is eventually out, and a new president steps in. The top Russian diplomat expressed skepticism that things will actually change substantially in Kiev.

If Zelensky gets ousted, Lavrov began in the interview with Kommersant, then the Kremlin believes it likely someone else will simply carry on the “Russophobic” regime in Ukraine with a new “half-Fuhrer“.

“Europe will do everything to ensure the regime does not change in its essence,” Lavrov stated, before asserting provocatively, “They’ll find some new half-Fuhrer… but the essence of the regime will remain.”

He further weighed on current French and British-led efforts to forge a ‘coalition of the willing’ to provide European boots on the ground, ostensibly as a ‘peacekeeping’ force for Ukraine.

“They have come up with a ‘resilience force’… In other words, in order to maintain Ukraine’s resilience, they are not going to send blockade troops… but the military of ‘civilized’ Western countries,” Lavrov said sarcastically, as cited in English-language Russian media.

Among the chief complains Moscow has long presented before the world is that the Ukrainian government suppresses the rights of Russian-speakers in Ukraine. Kiev authorities have also been persecuting the largest Orthodox Church of Ukraine, because it maintains spiritual communion with Moscow.

For example, a regional church media source reports the following violent incident from last week:

At least four churches were attacked by these schismatics and nationalists in just one day this week, Tuesday, April 8. They assaulted several people, leaving at least one young woman bleeding, reports Foma, with reference to Ukrainian outlets. In some cases, they managed to seize the churches, and in some they were driven away by the Orthodox parishioners.

Early in the morning, St. Michael’s Church in the village of Svetilnya, Kyiv Province, was seized. Police officers sat in a parked car idly watching as an unknown man cut through the church doors with an angle grinder.

Lavrov in the interview called out Western capitals for continuing to support this harsh crackdown on religious freedom and language rights. Much of the population of the east and south of Ukraine has long spoken Russian as their first language.

“All these peacekeeping schemes drawn up by the Macrons and Starmers are based on the need to preserve at least a piece of land where a Nazi, openly Russophobic regime will remain, geared towards preparing another war against Russia, as was done with the Minsk agreements,” Lavrov said.

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

Following the release of his new book, The Dark Sides of Migration, Swiss forensic psychiatrist Frank Urbaniok has called for European asylum policy to finally take migrant crime statistics into account, claiming that certain migrant groups are “disproportionately criminal” due to cultural factors.

Urbaniok, one of Switzerland’s most prominent forensic experts with over three decades of experience analyzing violent offenders, suggests that cultural influences from countries such as Afghanistan, Morocco, and Tunisia contribute significantly to higher crime rates among migrants from these regions.

“Afghans are reported more than five times, Moroccans more than eight times, and Tunisians more than nine times more often than Swiss nationals for serious violent crimes,” Urbaniok stated in an interview with Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung, citing his analysis of crime data from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

“The disproportionate crime rate has a lot to do with cultural influences. It is about how violence is dealt with, the image of women, or the role of the rule of law in these countries. I have been dealing with criminals for 33 years and have seen thousands of cases at close range. That’s why I know how strong and relevant these imprints can be. Sometimes, they persist for generations,” he said.

The cover of his book has drawn some criticism for prominently featuring a knife, which he insists is a “good symbol” as it “reflects the growing sense of insecurity in public spaces.”

While careful to clarify that he does not condemn all migrants — he explains why he preceded “Migration” in his book title with “The Dark Side of” — Urbaniok makes no secret of his belief that the cultural background of asylum seekers should influence immigration decisions. “There are countries that are unproblematic, those that are problematic, and those that are highly problematic… and I don’t understand why that doesn’t play a role in the question of who we let into the country.”

Urbaniok proposes an explicit quota system that would limit asylum admissions from countries with high crime rates. In his view, the absolute right to asylum is unrealistic and harmful to public safety: “Hundreds of millions of people would theoretically be entitled to seek asylum in Switzerland, but we could never take them all in.”

The renowned psychiatrist rejected accusations of exaggeration in his book, countering that much of the public discourse on foreigner crime amounts to “targeted disinformation” designed to downplay uncomfortable truths. “Many fear that citizens will not be able to deal with the facts,” he said.

In several European nations, foreign crime data is obscured by the fact that naturalized citizens in their respective countries are categorized as, for example, “German” or “Austrian,” even if they are foreign-born or of a historic migration background.

“Too many problematic people remain here,” Urbaniok said.

“I see them in the statistics and every day in my profession for thirty years. That’s unpleasant. What is really unpleasant is the realization that these problems can still exist a generation later. That’s why you can’t say that we have the matter under control. On the contrary, the problems are huge.”

Urbaniok has appeared at events hosted by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP), a party known for its hardline stance on immigration. While acknowledging that the SVP identifies the scale of the issue, Urbaniok criticized the party for what he considers to be a too simplistic solution. “It is a sign of their perplexity when they believe that all you have to do is control the borders and everything will be fine.”

He also spoke of the firewall against the Alternative for Germany (AfD), which he believes prevents the party from becoming more moderate and mainstream and enables radicals with pro-Russia and unpalatable, overtly xenophobic views to ride its coattails.

“The AfD does not distance itself enough from right-wing radical and xenophobic forces. It represents positions, for example vis-à-vis Russia, that I consider unacceptable. I don’t like their agitational language, but I think it is wrong to try to contain a party that has over 20 percent of the vote with firewalls. This only promotes the radical forces in this party,” he told the Swiss newspaper.

Despite the backlash against the issues raised in his book, Urbaniok remains defiant and optimistic about its release later this month. 

“The publishers were afraid for their image,” he said, revealing that several publishers declined to publish his book. “They try to have an educational effect on the population, and I think that is wrong and harmful to our democracy.”

Read more here…

Authored by Shane Festa and Brent Sadler via The Daily Signal, a publication of The Heritage Foundation,

In the days around the U.S. presidential election, dozens of People’s Liberation Army warplanes cruised through Taiwanese airspace. Such behavior is a microcosm of China’s audacity and confidence to act with increasing impunity.

During President Joe Biden’s tenure, the Chinese military consistently probed Taiwan’s readiness and Washington’s leadership. Data from the Taiwanese Ministry of Defense indicates Chinese activity around Taiwan has spiked by over 30 percent compared to the same period last year, potentially a calculated jab to see how Trump 2.0 will respond to cross-strait antagonism.

As 2024 came to an end, the communist Chinese turned up the heat on Taiwan, flexing their muscles whenever opportunities arose. On Oct. 15, China’s Joint Sword 2024B exercise saw 111 aircraft cross the Taiwan Strait‘s median line—a record high. In December, coinciding with Chinese leader Lai Ching-te’s return from a visit to the U.S., naval activity surged again. Between Dec. 9 and Dec. 11, over 90 warships and dozens of aircraft were detected around the island nation.

In recent weeks, the People’s Liberation Army has returned to sending provocative signals. As typical, China’s military activities ebb and flow to send specific strategic messages or in reaction to perceived provocations, such as when the USS Ralph Johnson and USNS Bowditch transited the Taiwan Strait earlier this year.

That operation triggered an abnormally intense response for early February—30 Chinese aircraft were detected in Taiwan’s northern, southwestern, and eastern air defense identification zones in a single day. By comparison, the last transit of the Taiwan Strait by a U.S. Navy vessel, the USS Higgins on Oct. 21, 2024, saw China deploy only 14 aircraft in response.

Unlike the situation under the Biden administration, Beijing recognizes Trump 2.0’s focus on it hinders China’s absorbing Taiwan on a timeline of its choosing.

Moreover, shortly after Chinese Lunar New Year celebrations wrapped up, the Chinese military conducted unannounced live-fire drills on Feb. 27—unprecedented for that time of year when operational levels are typically lower and during less-than-ideal weather. The drills spanned from 40 nautical miles off Taiwan’s coast to the Tasman Sea between Australia and New Zealand, fomenting some consternation in Canberra and Wellington.

By mid-March, the 10-day average of median line crossings by Chinese aircraft showed a significant rise, almost doubling from six on March 17 to 11.8 by March 21—largely attributable to one day’s spike in activity on March 18.

Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Guo Jiakun explained the activity by citing a recent change to a State Department fact sheet that eliminated language opposing Taiwan‘s independence, stating, “This is yet another example of the United States’ stubborn adherence to the erroneous policy of using Taiwan to suppress China.” The surprise drills in February and March produced unexpected spikes in activity, indicating that even under President Donald Trump, China is still keen on testing boundaries.

To better ascertain China’s evolving military strategy and intent, the U.S. must leverage its forward-looking approach to intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. In February, Adm. Samuel Paparo, commander of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, warned that China’s heightened activity near Taiwan was in fact rehearsal for an attempt at forced reunification. This activity aims to desensitize Taiwan and its partners through sustained high military presence and gray-zone tactics that obfuscate preparations for kinetic conflict.

Project Overmatch, the Navy’s contribution to the Joint All-Domain Command and Control initiative, is accelerating anticipated development timelines, arming the Navy with artificial intelligence and advanced drone technology. That said, a potential demonstration of the return on investment here could become available with spring exercises coming in the Pacific. With this in mind, the fielding of operationally useful mass data analytics and artificial intelligence-assisted decision-making systems can be achieved in part by emulating Task Force 59’s success in the Arabian Gulf.

There, autonomous vehicles and associated information networks served as the connective tissue between machines and manned vessels, enabling a wider and persistent sensor coverage previously unseen, which could soon be made lethal as demonstrated in November’s Digital Talon exercise. The drills showcased Central Command’s prowess in testing aerial autonomous launches and recoveries, as well as identified challenges for the group dubbed “the pioneers” to overcome in the future.

In the Pacific, this approach could give the U.S. a critical edge in countering China’s tactics and deter aggression. The private sector has matched this movement toward activity-based intelligence. Predictive models and sensors suites from companies like Windward track anomalous behavior using automated information systems, capable of subverting bad actors who seek to conceal their identities while at sea.

Data streams from platforms such as Northrop Grumman’s Manta Ray could create a sensor-heavy ecosystem capable of identifying, tracking, and predicting targeted activities like dark ships involved in sanctions avoidance, Chinese maritime militia activities, illicit narcotics trafficking at sea, and clandestine operations all in near real-time.

China is now seeking to check America’s—and Trump’s—response to its intimidation of Taiwan. Lawmakers must act without delay to equip the Indo-Pacific Command with the resources to field the appropriate technologies to pace rising Chinese provocations.

Done well, perhaps the next time China or Russia seeks to snip undersea cables in Asia or harass partners in the region, by detecting anomalous or illicit activities through cutting-edge monitoring, the United States could better position forces to preempt such moves before they become a confrontation at sea. To achieve this, our naval forces must have robust maritime domain awareness necessary to stay one step ahead.

*  *  *

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

Authored by Al Perrotta via The Daily Signal,

One hundred sixty years ago tonight, at Ford’s Theater, John Wilkes Booth put a bullet in the head of President Abraham Lincoln. 

What motivated the 26-year-old actor? 

Fame?  

No, he had plenty of that. His photos were outsold only by Honest Abe himself.  

Acclaim?  

No, contrary to tales told in school that he was jealous of the critical raves afforded his father Junius and brother Edwin, Booth earned reviews any young actor would die for. He even refused to perform under his real name until he earned reviews worthy of the name.  

To avenge the Confederacy’s defeat? 

You’re getting closer. Booth raged and despaired over the suffering incurred by the South. 

Actually, John Wilkes Booth told us his motivation. 

After shooting Lincoln and making his dramatic leap to the stage, Booth shouted “Sic Semper Tyrannis!” (“Thus always to tyrants.”) Or to put it another way, “Lincoln was a threat to democracy.” 

Threat to Democracy 

Twice last summer, amid a daily drumbeat from former President Joe Biden, Democrats, and the media that Donald Trump was a “threat to democracy,” a budding tyrant, two would-be assassins came very close to killing him. Ryan Routh was charged Thursday in Florida for his attempt.  

A recent study indicates 55% of self-described leftists think the assassination of Trump would be “justifiable.” Given the rhetoric, given the vast numbers with a similar heart, it’s no wonder Routh thought he was doing the world a favor.  

“Everyone across the globe from the youngest to the oldest know [sic] that Trump is unfit to be anything, much less a U.S. president,” Routh wrote in a letter found after his arrest. “U.S. presidents must at bare minimum embody the moral fabric that is America and be kind, caring and selfless and always stand for humanity.” 

So did Booth, who wrote while on the run: 

Our country owed all her troubles to him, and God simply made me the instrument of his punishment.

A country that groaned beneath this tyranny, and prayed for this end, and yet now behold the cold hands they extend to me. 

Booth grew increasingly dismayed at being vilified and rejected. 

I am here in despair. And why? For doing what Brutus was honored for. What made Tell a hero? And yet I, for striking down a greater tyrant than they ever knew, am looked upon as a common cutthroat. 

In a letter attempting to justify his actions, Booth wrote: 

When Caesar had conquered the enemies of Rome and the power that was his menaced the liberties of the people, Brutus arose and slew him. The stroke of his dagger was guided by his love of Rome. It was the spirit and ambition of Caesar that Brutus struck at. 

Oh, that we could come by Caesar’s spirit, 
And not dismember Caesar. 
But, alas! 
Ceasar must bleed for it. 

Booth, a man steeped since birth in Shakespearean drama, sought the death of Lincoln as Shakespeare’s Brutus did Caesar’s. This fear stemmed not from what the president had done, but from the belief that with his enemies conquered, Lincoln would keep his war powers and reign as a tyrant. 

This gets to one of the most tragic elements of Lincoln’s assassination, positively Shakespearean in its awfulness. 

John Wilkes Booth failed to realize that with the war over, Lincoln was the best friend the South had. And Booth had a role to play. The greatest of his life. 

A Terrible Missed Opportunity? 

Lincoln wanted a gentle reconciliation between North and South, “with malice toward none, and charity for all.” Many powerful forces around him had plenty of malice toward the Confederacy, and no mood for charity. Those in the South whose towns had been laid waste and their sons laid to rest by the hundreds of thousands, would also have trouble with reconciliation.  

Lincoln’s mission of unifying the country in peace looked to be as difficult as winning the war. He would need all the help he could get.

Author Michael Kauffman discovered an intriguing tidbit when researching his book “American Brutus.” A worker at Ford’s Theater saw Booth hand an attendant a card, and the attendant bring the card into the Presidential Box.  

What happened next is not known. But is it not possible that Lincoln received Booth’s card, and knowing Booth’s fame, his oratory gifts and his sympathies, realized the actor could prove very valuable in helping “bind the nation’s wounds”? Who better than America’s First Family of Theater to help bring the nation together? Perhaps the theater-loving president even knew the three acting Booth brothers would be sharing the stage at a benefit the following week.  

With the war over and the comedy romp “Our American Cousin” playing out beneath him, did Lincoln see in Booth’s card a golden opportunity? Is it not likely an excited Lincoln told the attendant, “Yes, send Mr. Booth in”? 

Rather than summon a potential partner, Lincoln summoned his own executioner. Booth killed not only the president, but all hope for a gentle reconciliation.  

How much better for his beloved South had Booth pulled up a chair instead of a pistol? 

How much better for our nation and their own dreams if liberals sought Trump’s cooperation rather than destruction?

The future is in their hands. The 55% who believe Trump’s assassination would be justified would heed well the lesson of John Wilkes Booth.  

After being cornered in a barn in Port Royal, Virginia and shot, Booth looked down at his hands and uttered his final words: “Useless. Useless.”

A criminal referral against New York Attorney General Letitia James has been filed with the DOJ, alleging that James had “falsified records” to get home loans for a Virginia property that she claimed was her “principal residence” in 2023 – while she was serving as a New York state prosecutor.

Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director William Pulte sent the missive to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy AG Todd Blanche, claiming that in late August 2023 – weeks before she launched her civil fraud trial against the Trump Organization for inflating the values of its properties.

In 2021, James also purchased a 5-family Brooklyn property, but has “consistently misrepresented the same property as only having four units in both building permit applications and numerous mortgage documents and applications,” the letter noted.

Loans secured for this property could have reduced her mortgage interest rate by as much as 1% – leaving James with lower monthly payments under the federal Home Assistance Modification Program (HAMP) since it was listed as containing just four units, according to Pulte.

Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte refers New York Attorney General Letitia James for potential prosecution over alleged mortgage fraud. pic.twitter.com/VyGGEtndQe

— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) April 16, 2025

Documents from the NYC Department of Buildings show a pattern of inconsistencies about a Brooklyn property James owns—inconsistencies that mysteriously received special treatment when reported.

As White Collar Fraud noted last month; 

The Certificate of Occupancy for 296 Lafayette Avenue in Brooklyn—issued January 26, 2001—clearly states the property is a five-family dwelling regulated under NYC housing laws. James purchased this property on February 14, 2001, just two weeks after this Certificate of Occupancy was issued. This official classification has been on the books for more than two decades.

Yet James repeatedly filed permit applications identifying the same property as a four-family dwelling—a classification subject to different regulatory requirements under New York City building codes. Under NYC building code classifications, her property with five units would be classified as C2 (which applies to buildings with 5+ units), while her filings list it as C3 (which applies to 3-4 unit buildings). This fundamental contradiction between the long-established Certificate of Occupancy and her permit applications raises serious questions about regulatory compliance.

“While this was a long time ago, it raises serious concerns about the validity of Ms. James representations on mortgage applications” wrote Pulte, attaching several documents showing James had purchased another property with her father as a co-signer, but falsely listed the pair as “husband and wife” in 1983 and 2000.

James also granted power of attorney to Shamice Thompson-Hairston, a relative, to sign an Aug. 17, 2023, document authorizing the purchase of the first property, according to WCF.

“Ms. James, for both properties listed above, appears to have falsified records in order to meet certain lending requirements and receive favorable loan terms,” Pulte wrote, adding that James could be charged with wire fraud, mail fraud, bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution.

Its perfect. pic.twitter.com/hBQpTL3q1r

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 16, 2025

lol @pulte for the win — next: recap and release! pic.twitter.com/CiuGD2d3xr

— Quoth the Raven (@QTRResearch) April 16, 2025