Summary

• Fujairah says 3 injured in Iranian attack on Oil Industry Zone, UAE confirms “air defenses are now dealing with a missile threat”, we have gotten reports of explosions in Dubai, which has sent oil higher and Emini futures into the red. UAE threatens retaliation. 

• CENTCOM hails two US merchant ships exiting Hormuz Strait safely in “first step”. Bessent issues remarks warning the US “will fire if fired upon.”

• Iran insists Hormuz is under its control & says it targeted & struck a US Navy vessel, which the Pentagon/Central Command has denied.

• Trump announced Sunday US will ‘help free up’ ships stuck in Hormuz Strait through Project Freedom. Iran has in response issued a “redefined the control zone” in Strait of Hormuz.

• Pakistan facilities good faith return of Iranian crew members of US-seized merchant ship from two weeks ago.

UAE Threatens Military Response

A fresh official statement: “The United Arab Emirates strongly condemns the new Iranian attacks that targeted civilian sites and facilities in the country, using missiles, drones, and cruise missiles, which resulted in the injury of three Indian nationals.”

“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs affirmed in its statement that these attacks constitute a serious and reckless escalation, and a blatant violation of the security and stability of the state, as well as a clear violation of the principles of international law and the United Nations Charter.” And the UAE followed with the threat that it has the right to respond militarily against ongoing “aggression and provocation”: 

The UAE stressed that it will not tolerate any aggression against its security and sovereignty, and that it will respond with full force and firmness to these attacks, in a manner that fully protects its national security and the safety of its citizens and residents, in accordance with international law.

There are further confirmed reports of injuries and a fire at one or more oil facilities:

Three Indian nationals have been injured in the drone attack on Fujairah’s petroleum industrial site being blamed on Iran, the Fujairah Media Office says. The three have been taken to the hospital and their injuries have been termed “moderate”.

UAE, Bahrain, Oman Under Threat

UAE air defences are actively engaging multiple Iranian missile and drone threats today, with the Ministry of Defence confirming four cruise missiles were detected heading toward the country; three were successfully intercepted over territorial waters while the fourth fell into the sea. Explosions have been reported in the Dubai area as air defence systems responded, prompting the National Emergency Crisis and Disaster Management Authority (NCEMA) to issue public safety alerts. In Fujairah, Iranian drones struck the Petroleum Industries Zone, causing a fire at the critical oil export terminal that includes the VTTI facility – the UAE’s key Hormuz-bypass hub. The Fujairah Media Office has confirmed three Indian citizens were moderately injured in the attack, marking the first reported civilian casualties in the current wave. UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) separately reported suspicious activity and a fire aboard a cargo vessel approximately 36 nautical miles north of Dubai, with cause unknown.  

The incidents unfold against a backdrop of heightened US-Iran tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran claims control and has warned it will “forcefully stop” vessels violating its regulations, while denying US reports of safe transits under “Project Freedom.” CENTCOM has rejected Iranian claims of striking a US Navy vessel. Markets reacted sharply: Brent crude pushed back toward session highs above $119, E-mini futures turned lower, equities sold off, and the US 30-year Treasury yield rose above 5.01% for the first time since July. The situation remains fluid with conflicting claims on both sides, and further official updates from UAE authorities are expected.

Injuries Reported

The Fujairah Media Office / Emirate has confirmed that 3 Indian citizens/residents were moderately injured in today’s Iranian drone attack on the Fujairah Petroleum Industries Zone (oil industry complex).

• Injuries are described as moderate (no fatalities reported).
• This is the first confirmed civilian injuries from the current wave of attacks.
• The incident is directly linked to the VTTI oil facility strike and the fire reported minutes earlier in the same zone.

Dubai, UAE Oil Infrastructure, Cargo Tankers Reportedly Struck by Iranian Missiles & Drones 

Following reports from the Following a report from the UAE National Emergency Crisis and Disaster that Emirati air defenses are responding to a missile threat, we have seen reports of explosions in Dubai, which has sent oil higher and Emini futures into the red

https://x.com/NCEMAUAE/status/2051337214282596616?s=20

Bloomberg adds that the UAE has detected four missiles coming from Iran

• *UAE DETECTS FOUR MISSILES COMING FROM IRAN: DEFENSE MINISTRY

Air defense systems are currently responding to a missile threat. Please remain in a safe location and follow official channels for warnings and updates. pic.twitter.com/DJFh6q8xi1

— NCEMA UAE (@NCEMAUAE) May 4, 2026

At the same time, the UK MTO Operations Center said that it has received reports multiple “Suspicious activities”

• *UKMTO RECEIVES REPORT OF INCIDENT 36NM NORTH OF DUBAI

• *UK NAVY: CARGO VESSEL REPORTED A FIRE IN THE ENGINE ROOM

• *UK NAVY: CAUSE OF THE FIRE IS UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME

Perhaps worst of all, it appears attacks have recommenced on UAE energy infrastructure (specifically, Fujairah – the end point of the pipeline the UAE uses to bypass the Strait of Hormuz).

• *UAE’S FUJAIRAH SAYS AERIAL ATTACK FROM IRAN

• *FUJAIRAH: IRAN DRONE ATTACK CAUSES FIRE AT OIL INDUSTRIAL ZONE

• Operations at the strategic facility have been affected. 

In the fog of war, it is increasingly unclear what is real and what is fiction, but while it is certainly possible that Iran has decided to re-escalate against the UAE, which is now as much of a nemesis as Iran, there is the possibility that the UAE is creating conditions for a false flag, hoping to drag the US into what would now be a “defensive” operation and thus not needing Congressional clearance.

In any case, the market is not happy, with stocks turning red…

… and oil pushing back to session highs.

And bonds are being dumped with 30Y yield back above 5.01% for the first time since July…

Bear in mind what Goldman warned on Friday: 

It feels as though there are a few lines in the sand starting to develop in markets:

• 120 USD in Crude (note COA roll likely dampens vol a bit today compared to earlier in the week),

• 4.5% and 5.0% in UST 10/30yrs,

• 160 in USDJPY

we would be wary of all of these and the proximity to them all adds further fuel to any future resolution risk rally/Dollar sell-off.

Patience is key as always.

Some of those signals have been hit and others are looming.

* * * 

Bessent: Will Fire if Fired Upon

Coinciding with ‘Day 1’ of Trump’s Project Freedom to “guide” stranded vessels out of the heavily contested Strait of Hormuz, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has issued fresh remarks and warnings on Monday.

US Treasury Secretary Bessent says US is opening up the strait, we have absolute control of the strait. A quick summary of his main points via Newsquawk:

• Iranians do not have control of the strait.
• Project freedom was not done in coordination with Iran.
• If Iranians want to escalate, we are willing to do so.
• US is firing only when fired upon.
• It is a good time for US partners to step up and pressure Iran.

He further gave a very broad and fuzzy timeline, stating this ‘aberration’ will be over in ‘weeks or months’. At this point, admin officials are careful to avoid calling it a ‘war’ – given it has been 60 days since the start, and there’s the lingering question of Congressional authorization and war powers. Latest out of Hormuz:

Iranian IRGC attack hit a South Korean-linked ship in the Strait of Hormuz. Source: Yonhap

Pentagon: Two US-Flagged Ships Exit Hormuz

On Monday morning, US Central Command announced that within 12 hours after President Trump unveiled ‘Project Freedom’, a pair of US-flagged merchant ships made it out of the Strait of Hormuz. The wording of the statement makes it sound like a US naval escort made this possible – though the degree to which this was the case remains unclear. Below is the CENTCOM statement.

U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyers are currently operating in the Arabian Gulf after transiting the Strait of Hormuz in support of Project Freedom. American forces are actively assisting efforts to restore transit for commercial shipping. As a first step, 2 U.S.-flagged merchant vessels have successfully transited through the Strait of Hormuz and are safely headed on their journey.

This is being hailed as a the latest Pentagon success, however, the reality remains that Washington is celebrating a solution to a problem that did not exist before the launch of Operation Epic Fury. Or in other words, the US is seeking to open the strait which had never been closed prior to the Iran war. Meanwhile…

pic.twitter.com/NM0SdwNu9A

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) May 3, 2026

IRGC Says It Struck US Navy Ship, US Officials Deny

Iran is claiming to have attacked and struck a US Navy vessel, announcing that it stopped US warships from entering the Strait of Hormuz “with a firm and swift warning” and noting that “additional news will be announced later” – a statement by state Tasnim News Agency said. Soon after, Fars news agency said that two missiles hit a US navy vessel near Jask island after it ignored warnings from the IRGC to halt. Jerusalem Post also picked up on the statement, writing:

However, soon after Axios stated that a “senior US official denies a US ship was hit by Iranian missiles.” CENTCOM soon after said that no US navy ships have been struck, adding that US forces are supporting Project Freedom and enforcing the naval blockade on Iranian ports. It is the latest claimed major incident soon on the heels of President Trump the night prior announcing “Project Freedom” to “guide” stranded ships out of the Strait of Hormuz. New threats:

But as we also noted, WSJ explained that Project Freedom “is a process through which countries, insurance companies and shipping organizations can coordinate moving traffic through the Strait, according to a senior U.S. official. It doesn’t currently involve U.S. Navy warships escorting vessels through the strait, the official said.” So a lot of confusion remains. UAE meanwhile chimes in with some verification of a strike on a LNG tanker:

• UAE SAYS ADNOC VESSEL HIT BY TWO IRAN DONRES IN HORMUZ
• UAE CONDEMNS TARGETING OF ADNOC VESSEL BY DRONES IN HORMUZ

🚨 LIVE IN THE STRAIT: The U.S. just launched “Project Freedom” to escort neutral commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, but the sanctioned tanker NOOH GAS (IMO 9034690) is currently attempting transit.

Windward Multi-Source Intelligence is tracking NOOH GAS in… pic.twitter.com/zLgIzNsgUG

— Windward (@WindwardAI) May 4, 2026

Trump had also said in his Monday Truth Social statement that he is “fully aware that my Representatives are having very positive discussions with the Country of Iran, and that these discussions could lead to something very positive for all.”

Iranian Tanker Crew Swap in Pakistan

Some kind of ‘good faith’ swap is in the works, per Al Jazeera:

The crew members of an Iranian ship that was seized by the United States after it “failed to comply” with the US blockade on Iranian ports have been transferred to Pakistan for repatriation, Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said.

“As a confidence-building measure by the United States of America, twenty-two crew members held aboard the seized Iranian container ship, ‘MV Touska’, have been evacuated to Pakistan,” the ministry said in a statement on Monday.

Pakistan’s foreign ministry is facilitating their return, after a couple weeks ago the US Navy seized it and characterized the capture of the merchant ship part of the spoils of war.

CNN had reported at the time that “US Central Command (CENTCOM) says the guided-missile destroyer USS Spruance warned the Touska repeatedly over a six-hour period, during which time the container ship was steaming in the Arabian Sea toward Bandar Abbas, Iran.” It was among the earliest direct actions by the US Navy after the US declared a blockade on all Iranian ports.

Iran Warns US It Will Attack

A fresh escalatory warning and rhetoric out of Iran’s military on Monday: US forces will be attacked if they enter the strait, as well as any commercial ship or oil tanker not willingly coordinating their movements with Iran ahead of time. That’s according to Ali Abdollahi, the head of the Iranian military’s unified command, and as cited in Al Jazeera:

“We warn that any foreign armed forces, especially the aggressive US army, will be attacked if they intend to approach and enter the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement said.

All of this means that what Trump touted as an act of “goodwill” has the obvious potential to become a dangerous flashpoint. Some pundits have raised the possibility of a new Gulf of Tonkin incident.

The IRGC reportedly carried out a missile strike on two ships attempting to cross the Strait of Hormuz at night.

The IRGC Navy reports that the ships turned off their transponders and were operating in the interests of the US Navy. pic.twitter.com/64Ez5bFOpR

— Dimitri Lascaris (@dimitrilascaris) May 4, 2026

And per BBC, things are already coming to a head:

The Iranian military is claiming it has prevented a US Navy destroyer from entering the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranian state media reports that the public relations arm of the army says: “With a firm and swift warning from the Islamic Republic Navy, the entry of American and Zionist enemy destroyers into the Strait of Hormuz was prevented.”

But it is hard to precisely confirm any of this, also as the Pentagon is mum and not expected to affirm any of Iran’s claimed ‘successes’ in stopping US naval movement in regional waters. There have also been reports of Iranian vessels firing warning shots on a US ship. And according to Axios Monday morning:

A U.S. official said the rules of engagement for U.S. forces in the region have been changed and they were authorized to strike immediate threats against ships that cross the strait, like IRGC fast boats or Iranian missile positions.

Iran’s ‘Control Zone’

Iran has “redefined the control zone” in Strait of Hormuz, stretching from south of Mount Mobarak in Iran to south of UAE’s Fujairah, and from west of Qeshm Island in Iran to Umm al-Quwain in the UAE, according to Tasnim.

A statement from Iranian State TV gives Iran’s perspective on Trump’s new Project Freedom, as it insists the strait is “under the control of the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran”.

Again, all of this directly contradicts Washington’s stance, and the two sides are once again headed toward escalation amid zero sum contrary positions with apparent willingness to use force. As a reminder, Trump had on Sunday described that “For the good of Iran, the Middle East, and the United States, we have told these Countries that we will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business.”

Some More Regional Developments

via Al Jazeera

• Two missiles hit a US navy vessel near Jask in the Strait of Hormuz after it ignored warnings from the Revolutionary Guard to halt, state media quote the IRGC as saying.
• The reported attack comes after US President Donald Trump announced a naval mission, dubbed Project Freedom, to guide stranded ships out of the Strait of Hormuz on Monday.
• Iran’s Foreign Ministry says it is assessing a response from Washington to its latest 14-point proposal to end the war. Trump had called Tehran’s proposal “unacceptable”.
• Israel continues to bombard Lebanon, wounding five medics, and has expanded its area of control in Gaza by announcing a so-called “Orange Line”.

Authored by Mary Prenon via The Epoch Times,

The Cigna Group, one of the country’s largest health services and insurance firms, is joining others, including Aetna and UnitedHealthcare, in divesting its individual health exchange business.

By the end of 2026, Cigna Group will no longer offer insurance through the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as “Obamacare,” the company said during its April 30 earnings call.

According to its first-quarter earnings report, as of March 31, the company’s individual exchange business had 369,000 members in individual and family plans.

“We did not make this decision lightly, and appreciate the importance of ensuring patients have continuity through the transition,” Brian Evanko, Cigna Group’s president, chief operating officer, and incoming CEO, said during the earnings call.

“Looking to the future, there’s no question that the status quo in healthcare is unsustainable. Costs continue to rise, as does demand for healthcare services, an untenable equation,” he said.

“We will support members through their open enrollment transitions into 2027.”

Cigna’s decision comes after other health insurance companies, such as CVS Health and UnitedHealthcare, divested insurance business under the ACA.

In its first-quarter 2025 earnings report, released on Feb. 10, CVS Health announced that it was exiting its individual exchange business, where its health insurance arm, Aetna, independently operates ACA plans, beginning in 2026.

Years earlier, UnitedHealthcare said in a filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission in December 2016 that its Employer and Individual program would participate in individual public exchanges in only three states in 2017, a sharp reduction from 34 states in 2016.

At the beginning of this year, the Alliance of Safety-net Hospitals predicted that expiring tax credits for buying health insurance under ACA exchanges could affect nearly 4.8 million people in 2026, as the cost of such plans continues to escalate.

Evanko said Cigna’s decision to vacate the individual healthcare business now is necessary in order to support the firm’s strategic direction for the future. This will allow the insurer to focus its efforts on enhancing customer service with streamlined pharmacy services and additional system improvements.

Evanko noted that over the years, Cigna has continued to add or subtract from its portfolio as needed to position its core healthcare business for sustainable growth.

Last year, Cigna divested its group life and disability business, touting the recent sale of its Medicare businesses.

“Divesting each of these assets enabled greater focus and investment in the remaining businesses within our portfolio, supporting our forward-looking growth path,” he noted.

However, in 2025, Cigna acquired CarepathRx, a pharmacy service dealing with more than 40 health systems and 1,000 hospitals. Last year, Cigna also invested in Shields Health Solutions, which allows it to partner with hospitals and health systems serving patients with complex needs or requiring specialty medications.

Cigna’s first-quarter earnings of $68.52 billion outpaced market expectations of $66.2 billion. Its earnings per share of $7.79 also exceeded the forecasted $7.61.

However, the company’s shares declined by 2.64 percent on May 1, closing at $282.90.

Going forward, Evanko said the insurer plans to continue embracing data and modern technology to improve customer satisfaction and offer more personalized services.

Evanko noted that Cigna has also introduced Signature, its new rebate-free pharmacy benefits model.

According to Evanko, high-cost branded prescriptions represent about 10 percent of all prescriptions nationwide, but nearly 90 percent of total drug spending. The new Signature model is designed with the patient at the center, and its Price Assure capacity guarantees consumers the lowest possible out-of-pocket costs when filling their prescriptions.

Cigna expects the Signature model to become standard in 2028 and for at least 50 percent of its Evernorth Pharmacy Benefit Services members to be enrolled in Signature by the end of 2028.

A luxury cruise ship carrying 149 passengers and crew is facing a suspected hantavirus outbreak that has already left three people dead. The vessel is currently anchored offshore near Cape Verde, the island nation in the central Atlantic off the west coast of Africa, as health officials rush to assess the scale of the outbreak.

The MV Hondius is currently anchored offshore near Praia, the capital and largest city of Cape Verde. Ship-tracking data show the vessel anchored just off the coast on Sunday after transiting from Argentina, with its prior voyage originating near the Antarctic Peninsula.

Track the virus-plagued ship.

Hondius’s operator, Oceanwide Expeditions, told BBC News that a Dutch husband and wife, as well as a German national, had died but did not reveal the cause of death. However, the Dutch company said hantavirus was confirmed in a 69-year-old UK national who is in intensive care in Johannesburg, South Africa.

The main transmission risk of the deadly virus to humans is through infected rodent urine, droppings, saliva, or contaminated dust, especially in poorly ventilated areas. People can inhale contaminated particles when rodent waste is disturbed.

Oceanwide Expeditions confirmed two other crew members on board “with acute respiratory symptoms, one mild and one severe.“

“It is not entirely uncommon for rodents to hitch a ride on a ship, which would be one possibility,” Charlotte Hammer, assistant professor and infectious disease epidemiologist at the University of Cambridge, told the UK Science Media Center.

Hammer noted, “People having been infected when the ship last made port in Argentina is another possibility. The last possibility would be human-to- human transmission, which, particularly at scale, would be very unlikely.”

Bloomberg quoted the World Health Organization, which is “facilitating coordination between member states and the ship’s operators for medical evacuation of two symptomatic passengers, as well as a full public health risk assessment and support to the remaining passengers on board.”

This is yet another reminder of why cruises are a terrible way to spend a holiday.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais, barring racial gerrymandering, has many on the left feigning vapors, despite the predictions of many of us that this result was likely.

While figures such as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) declared that the court itself has been “gerrymandered” to rig the upcoming elections, this decision is actually the culmination of decades of jurisprudence by various justices — particularly Chief Justice John Roberts.

Indeed, the decision will cement the legacy of the Roberts Court in moving the country toward a colorblind system of laws.

Like most Americans, Roberts abhors racial discrimination in any form. He holds the quaint idea that when the drafters of the 14th Amendment barred discrimination on the basis of race, they meant it. This is why, in 2006, Roberts famously wrote, “It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

Roberts sees no difference between such discrimination when it disfavors one or another race. It is all a sordid business, and he has spent decades writing eloquent arguments for the court to abandon its conflicted and hypocritical approach to racial discrimination.

The court has struggled to rationalize using race to discriminate when it serves a higher purpose, such as greater equity or affirmative action. Some of those opinions were constitutionally incomprehensible.

For example, in 2003, in Grutter v. Bollinger, the court divided five to four on whether to uphold racial admissions criteria used to achieve “diversity” in a class at the University of Michigan Law School. However, in her opinion with the majority, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stated that she “expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”

Few of us could understand how O’Connor found a type of expiration date on permissible racial criteria in the Constitution.

Throughout that period, however, certain justices held firm that there is a bright-line rule against such racial criteria. That includes the author of the court’s Callais decision, Justice Samuel Alito, but also Roberts, who in 2007, put it succinctly: “The way to stop discriminating on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”

One can certainly disagree with this interpretation and the low tolerance for racial criteria. However, this had nothing to do with the midterm elections. It is the result of dozens of opinions building up to this point.

From college admissions to gerrymandering, the court has created the bright line that figures like Roberts have long sought. In doing so, they have moved this country closer to a colorblind jurisprudence than at any time in our history.

The Biden administration was found repeatedly to have violated the Constitution through racial discrimination in federal programs. Democratic leaders have fought this trend and have pledged to reverse these decisions. Some even demand that Democrats pack the Court with a liberal majority as soon as they retake power.

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that whites cannot be placed under additional burdens when bringing discrimination lawsuits.

Much of the coverage of the Callais decision is long on rhetoric and short on substance. The court did not “gut” the Voting Rights Act. It also did not strike down Section 2 of the act. Rather, the court held that neither the act nor the Constitution gives legislators authority to manipulate districts so as to effectively guarantee the race of the elected representatives — any race.

For decades, the courts have faced endless litigation over district configurations designed to elect minority representatives. It is a system that gave candidates an advantage based solely on their race. The court held that such racial gerrymandering is unlawful. The Voting Rights Act will now be read to prevent intentional racial discrimination. Courts will still bar any districts designed “to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race.”

That does not mean that racial discrimination has been eliminated in our nation, or that we do not need to commit ourselves wholly to its eradication. The stain of slavery and segregation remains with us, as does the lingering scourge of racial prejudice. African Americans and other minorities still face invidious discrimination that cannot be tolerated in our system. We still have much work to be done.

In the area of voting rights, the courts have and will continue to strike down any rules designed to suppress or block minority voters.

Despite this ongoing struggle with racism, there are reasons to be hopeful.

As the Rev. Martin Luther King put it, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Non-whites are now powerful players in American politics. White voters are expected to be a minority in this country within two decades.

We have now elected a black president and a black vice president. Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (who declared the Court “illegitimate” after the Callais opinion) expects to be the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.

This progress was hard-fought, and both the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act played important roles in achieving greater racial diversity in our society.

And the Callais decision is also part of that progress. We are moving into a new era where racial criteria and discrimination are neither rationalized nor tolerated. There is now reason to hope that we will indeed end “this sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.“

Headline Factory Orders rose 1.5% MoM in March (dramatically better than the 0.6% MoM expected) – the best since November. February’s data was also revised higher. However, overall, orders were only up 2.1% YoY – the lowest since JUly 2025

Source: Bloomberg

Core Factory Orders surge 1.6% MoM (also better than the 1.3% MoM expected) and up for the 5th straight month. That dragged the YoY growth in core orders up 4.09% YoY – the best since Nov 2022…

Source: Bloomberg

Given the surge in ISM Manufacturing’s New Orders sub-component…

Source: Bloomberg

…there is a notable divergence between the ‘soft’ survey data and the ‘hard’ data.

Shares of transportation and logistics giants FedEx and UPS dropped in premarket trading after Amazon debuted Amazon Supply Chain Services, opening its freight network to sellers far beyond the Amazon marketplace.

Amazon said ASCS is a move to “open its freight, distribution, fulfillment, and parcel shipping capabilities to businesses of all types and sizes.” It gives companies outside the Amazon marketplace access to a global delivery network with two- to five-day delivery and 24/7 service.

“With this launch, Amazon is expanding its third-party logistics capacity to support businesses in industries such as healthcare, automotive, manufacturing, and retail,” Amazon noted.

Amazon said the move mirrors its AWS playbook: build infrastructure for its own operations, prove it internally, then sell it externally.

This story may sound familiar. Amazon built another major offering—cloud infrastructure—for the same reason: to run its own business better. And then Amazon started selling it. That’s how Amazon Web Services (AWS) was born, and it’s transformed how the world builds and runs software. Now, Amazon is ready to do that for the supply chain. -AMZN

Following the ASCS news, FedEx and UPS dropped in premarket trading, both down around 4%.

“Amazon is bringing the infrastructure, intelligence, and scale of its supply chain services—proven over decades—to businesses everywhere, much like Amazon Web Services did for cloud computing,” said Peter Larsen, vice president of ASCS. 

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

The S&P 500 hit a fresh record high last week. The median stock in the index is sitting 13% below its 52-week peak. That divergence is not a footnote or a curiosity. It’s the loudest warning the market has flashed since the dot-com era, and it’s arriving at the worst possible moment on the calendar. Market correction risk is climbing, and this summer it’s stacked on top of three other forces that almost never converge at the same time.

After three decades of watching market cycles play out, I’ve learned that the dangerous moments are those in which everything looks fine on the surface and rotten underneath. That’s exactly where we are right now. The market correction risk we’re staring at into the summer isn’t driven by a single bearish data point. It’s driven by four of them showing up together, and ignoring any of them would be a costly mistake.

The Breadth Divergence Is As Bad As It Gets

The narrowness of the current rally is not opinion. It is arithmetic.

The S&P 500 has rallied roughly 14% off its late-March washout to a new high near 7,125. Look under the hood, and you find a market hollowed out. The equal-weight S&P 500 has declined about 1% over the same period. The Magnificent Seven is up roughly 10%. The semiconductor index is up 30%. Everything else is sitting on the curb.

That kind of dispersion has only happened a handful of times since 1980. Goldman Sachs’ equity strategy team flagged it directly in a note this week, warning that this level of breadth has historically preceded larger-than-average drawdowns over the following six to twelve months. They’re not the only ones flagging it. Hedge fund net tilt to momentum is sitting near a multi-year high, and gross leverage remains at the upper end of the five-year range. When everyone is positioned the same way and the leadership is two names deep, the unwind is never gentle.

While breadth is the headline. The supporting cast of technical signals is just as ugly.

The 14-day relative strength index on the S&P 500 has spent most of the past three weeks above 70, the threshold that has historically marked overbought conditions. We’ve seen a textbook negative divergence: price made a new high last week while RSI made a lower high. That same pattern showed up at the January 2018 top, the February 2020 top, and the late 2021 peak. None of those were resolved kindly.

The advance-decline line for the broader NYSE has rolled over even as the index pushes higher. The percentage of S&P 500 stocks above their 200-day moving average has dropped to roughly 56%, while the index itself is printing new highs. We saw a similar decline in breadth as the market was advancing, just before the “Liberation Day” selloff in 2025.

The Volatility Index is sitting in the mid-teens, which sounds reassuring until you remember that the VIX was at 12 in January 2020 and 15 the week before the bottom dropped out. Low realized volatility breeds complacency, complacency breeds leverage, and leverage breeds unwinds. We have all three. None of these signals, individually, predicts market correction risk with precision. Together, they identify a market that has used up its margin of safety.

As we have noted before:

“Markets do not crash from euphoric tops. They crash from complacent ones, and right now we have a complacent market with collapsing breadth, deteriorating technicals, and the worst seasonal window of the year staring it in the face.“

Summer Seasonality Is Real, And This Year Is Worse

The “sell in May and go away” cliche gets dismissed every spring by someone who hasn’t bothered to look at the data. The data is unambiguous.

Going back to 1950, the May-through-October window has produced an average S&P 500 return of roughly 1.7%, while the November-through-April window has produced an average return of over 7%. The summer months, specifically June through September, account for the bulk of that weakness, and the historical pattern in years where the market entered May at or near all-time highs is materially worse than the long-run average.

Mathematical statistics support this: $10,000 invested in the market from November to April vastly outperformed the same amount invested from May through October. Interestingly, the max drawdowns are significantly larger during the “Sell In May” periods. Previous major market declines occurred in October 1929, 1987, and 2008.

However, not every summer works out poorly. Historically, there are many periods where “Sell In May” did not work and markets rose. 2020 and 2021 were examples of periods when massive Federal Reserve interventions pushed prices higher in April and the subsequent summer months. However, in April 2022, the decline in prices was sharp as the Fed began an aggressive campaign of interest rate hikes the previous month.

I want to be clear about something. Seasonality alone is not a reason to sell. It’s a backdrop, not a trigger. But when you stack a weak seasonal window on top of collapsing breadth and stretched positioning, you’ve removed the natural support that usually shows up to absorb selling. Buyers thin out in the summer. Volume dries up. Volatility spikes on increasingly small catalysts. That’s the setup we’re walking straight into.

Midterm Election Years Are The Most Volatile Of The Cycle

Here’s a fact that almost no one talks about until it’s too late. Midterm election years are, on average, the worst of the four-year presidential cycle for equity returns and the most volatile by a wide margin. From May through October, the S&P 500 historically delivers its weakest returns of the four-year cycle, with deeper average drawdowns and more frequent corrections than non-election years.

Going back to 1962, the average maximum intra-year drawdown in a midterm election year has been around 17%, materially worse than the roughly 13% average for non-midterm years. The summer and fall of midterm years are particularly rough. The S&P 500 has averaged a peak-to-trough decline of nearly 19% between April and October of midterm election years. Then, almost without exception, the market bottomed in late October and rallied hard into year-end and through the following twelve months.

The pattern is not a coincidence. Policy uncertainty rises into November. Corporate guidance turns conservative, and fiscal posturing in Washington dominates the headlines. Capital markets dislike uncertainty, and there’s no time on the four-year calendar with more of it than the summer leading into midterms. We are now six months from the November vote, and the polling, the policy backdrop, and the geopolitical overhang make this midterm cycle more contentious than most. The historical record is clear: market correction risk runs hottest during this specific window of the four-year cycle.

Iran, Oil, And The Inflation Pipeline

The market has been remarkably good at compartmentalizing the conflict in the Persian Gulf. That works until it doesn’t.

Brent crude is sitting above $109 a barrel, roughlyl 40% above its level on the eve of the conflict. WTI has tracked closely behind and currently sits at ~$102 a barrel. The Strait of Hormuz remains a chokepoint for roughly 20% of global oil flows. Any escalation that genuinely threatens that transit lane is a step-function risk for energy prices. As discussed in “Hormuz,“ so far the market has been able to stave off the impacts of higher oil prices. However, there is a clock on that capability. The longer oil prices remain elevated, the greater the risk becomes for the market.

“The duration of the conflict, specifically when the Strait of Hormuz returns to normal shipping traffic, is the single most important variable for every downstream economic and market forecast. Here is how we frame the three scenarios:” – Bull Bear Report

The reason the math gets worse with time is that energy is the cleanest pass-through to inflation. Every $10 sustained increase in oil adds roughly 0.2 to 0.3 percentage points to headline CPI within three months. A similar amount flows into core inflation a quarter later as transportation costs feed through to goods. The Fed has been holding the line on rate cuts for exactly this reason. If the Iran situation worsens, oil pushes through $130 or $140. At that point, the case for any easing this year evaporates entirely, and the case for an actual rate hike re-enters the conversation.

That is not a market that has been priced in. Equity multiples right now are sustained on the assumption that disinflation continues and the Fed eases later this year. Take both of those legs out from under valuations, and the math gets ugly fast.

Managing Market Correction Risk

The honest counterargument is straightforward. AI capital expenditure is the single largest spending cycle the corporate sector has seen in a generation. The latest GDP for Q1 2026 showed that 75% of the growth came from capital expenditures which offset weakness in Personal Consumption which comprises 70% of the calculation.

Furthermore, the hyperscaler earnings continue to come in ahead of expectations, and while the breadth problem is an issue, it can be resolved as easily through a “catch-up” of laggards as a “catch-down” of leaders. That’s a real argument, and we should consider it seriously.

However, there’s a problem with that last argument. A “catch-up” requires a catalyst, and the catalysts on the table right now are not friendly to the laggards. Consumer stocks are the largest weight outside of tech, and oil at these levels is a direct tax on consumer disposable income. Industrials and materials need an improving global growth picture, and the war is doing the opposite. Financials need a steepening yield curve and falling credit spreads, and we have neither. The path to a benign rotation runs through an improvement in the macro backdrop that I do not see arriving in the next sixty days.

The narrow leadership can extend. Goldman’s own work shows the median narrow-breadth episode lasts about three months, with the late-1990s outlier stretching to over two years.

Let me be clear that I am not calling for an imminent crash. I am saying that the conditions for a sharp, violent drawdown are as fully assembled as I have seen them in a long time, and the seasonal calendar is the worst possible place to find out. As

The actionable takeaways are not exotic. They are the basics, applied with discipline.

None of these moves requires timing the top, and none of them requires a bearish call. They require recognizing that the risk-reward at this level is asymmetric in the wrong direction, and behaving accordingly.

As noted above, it is crucial to remember that markets do not crash from euphoric tops, but rather from complacent ones. Currently, that complacency in the market is becoming more obvious, given collapsing breadth, deteriorating technicals, the worst seasonal and political cycles of the year, and an active geopolitical conflict driving energy prices to multi-year highs. Every one of those forces, taken alone, is something I’d flag for clients. Together, they make market correction risk between now and the November election the highest I have seen since early 2022.

I’m not telling you to get out of the market, but I am suggesting that you take some action today to mitigate the risk of tomorrow. Rebalance your portfolio, take profits, and raise cash levels while you can, on your terms.

Let me be clear about what I’m saying and what I’m not. The risks are elevated, but elevated risks are not certainty. Markets can, and often do, exactly the opposite of what every reasonable signal suggests they should, and nothing in this analysis guarantees a correction will arrive this summer. The narrow rally could extend. Iran could de-escalate overnight. The seasonal pattern could break. However, what is dangerous is doing nothing while the risk stack looks like this one.

If the market defies the odds and grinds higher into year-end, yes, you’ll underperform for a stretch. That is a recoverable outcome. Underperformance can be made up through disciplined participation over the next 12 to 24 months. Lost capital cannot. A 30% drawdown requires a 43% rally just to break even, and the math gets uglier the deeper the hole. That is the asymmetry that should drive every decision right now. The investors who survive long market cycles are not the ones who catch every uptick. They are the ones who refuse to be wiped out when the setup turns against them.

In 2024, voters handed the Republican Party a trifecta in Washington – the White House, the House, the Senate – and yet one of the most broadly popular pieces of election-integrity legislation in recent memory is collecting dust in the upper chamber.

The SAVE America Act would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and mandate photo identification to cast a ballot. It has already passed the House, and polls show that voters across party lines, and even racial lines, support it. It reportedly has the votes to pass in the Senate, but it can’t break the 60-vote threshold to end the filibuster. Republicans have called for nuking the filibuster to get it passed, but even that won’t happen because Senate Majority Leader John Thune won’t pick a fight.

Thune’s position on the issue is rather passive. “The votes aren’t there, one, to nuke the filibuster,” Thune said, presenting the math as immovable fact rather than a leadership challenge.  “I’m the person who has to deliver sometimes the not-so-good news that the math doesn’t add up, but those are the facts and there’s no getting around it.” Even if true, he hasn’t mounted any visible pressure campaign on fence-sitters. No arm-twisting. No caucus discipline. No public strategy to persuade reluctant senators. 

Democrats, by contrast, are marching in lockstep against the SAVE America Act. Even John Fetterman-who’s broken with his party on Israel, immigration, and the war in Iran-has fallen in line here. That kind of discipline doesn’t happen by accident. Democratic leadership knows how to hold its caucus together, and when it decides to oppose something, it makes sure everyone sticks to the script. 

Thune, by contrast, seems content to wave the flight of surrender on the SAVE America Act. For a majority leader with a mandate from both the White House and the voters, that posture is increasingly difficult to defend.

The frustration on the right is real and growing. Unified Republican control of Washington was supposed to break the logjam on issues exactly like this one – legislation that is popular, straightforward, and central to election integrity. Instead, grassroots conservatives are watching their agenda strangled by Democrat obstruction and Republican spinelessness. 

That raises a serious question: Should Thune be replaced with a more effective Republican as Majority Leader? Replacing leaders isn’t unheard of. In fact, former Rep. Matt Gaetz pulled off exactly this in the House in 2023 – filing a motion to vacate and forcing a floor vote that ended Kevin McCarthy’s speakership in a matter of days. 

One member, one motion, and the speaker was gone. 

But the Senate doesn’t work that way. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who has been among Thune’s more pointed critics, explained to a user on X that the Senate doesn’t have the same mechanism for removing leadership as the House does. “In the House of Representatives, a tiny number of lawmakers can oust the speaker – at any time. That feature is unique to the House. In the Senate GOP, we don’t even have a rule or procedure for replacing a leader in the middle of a two-year term.”

Lee acknowledged that any five senators can technically force a conference meeting, but quickly threw cold water on the idea that this amounts to any meaningful action. “It is true that under our rules, any five senators can call for a meeting of the entire conference at any time. But in practice, that kind of meeting tends not to materialize unless a solid majority of the conference wants it to happen,” he explained. And even if such a meeting were called and actually held, the obstacles would multiply from there. “To pursue the outcome you’re suggesting, one would have to use that meeting to propose a new procedure for a mid-term leadership swap, and that – at a minimum – would require a majority of the conference to support it. For a whole host of reasons – including the fact that Senator Thune is beloved by colleagues and very popular within the conference – the odds of that happening are literally 0 in 100,000,” Lee concluded.

Thune isn’t going anywhere, and the SAVE America Act remains stuck in limbo. All the while, the clock on the 119th Congress keeps ticking.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

The CIA’s MKUltra program, one of the most disturbing chapters in American intelligence history, refuses to fade into obscurity. 

A congressional hearing scheduled for May 13 is thrusting the agency’s decades-old experiments back into the spotlight, raising fresh questions about government secrecy, ethical boundaries, and the protection of individual liberties against unchecked power.

Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna announced that the Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets will examine the Cold War-era program. The move comes amid recently surfaced documents and persistent claims surrounding the death of a key scientist involved in the work. 

Hearing on May 13. MK Ultra. House Oversight Taskforce. pic.twitter.com/0Sz4filfXi

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) April 29, 2026

What began as a quest for mind-control tools during tense global rivalry has left a legacy of distrust that continues to challenge public faith in intelligence agencies.

Project MKUltra ran primarily from 1953 to 1964 under the CIA’s Office of Technical Services. It encompassed 144 subprojects exploring drugs, hypnosis, isolation, sensory deprivation, and psychological techniques designed to manipulate human behavior for interrogation and other purposes. 

The agency tested these methods on unwitting subjects—including criminals, mental patients, drug addicts, Army soldiers, and ordinary citizens—often without consent or knowledge.

A 1956 internal document even weighed testing substances on foreign nationals but ultimately determined that “unwitting testing on American citizens must be continued.” Most records were destroyed in 1973 on orders from senior CIA officials. 

The program’s existence only became public in 1975 through investigations by the Church Committee and the Rockefeller Commission, sparking widespread outrage and leading to new congressional oversight of intelligence activities.

The National Security Archive later summarized the scope of the abuses against “subjects, often US citizens, who frequently had no idea what was being done to them.”

One case that continues to fuel skepticism involves Dr. Frank Olson, a biological warfare scientist. On November 19, 1953, Olson was one of at least eight men covertly dosed with LSD during a CIA meeting. Nine days later, he fell from the 13th floor of a New York City hotel room. The death was officially ruled a suicide, but family members and others have long alleged foul play.

Olson reportedly became paranoid in the days after the dosing, stopped eating, and discarded personal items. His nephew, Paul Vidich, has been outspoken about the family’s suspicions. Vidich stated: “Getting thrown out the window was a very convenient way of disposing of a national security risk. To summarize my view, he was murdered.”

Olson had reportedly developed moral qualms about the nature of the work, raising concerns he may have been viewed as a liability.

Gangster James “Whitey” Bulger, who was subjected to MKUltra experiments while imprisoned in Atlanta in 1957, later described the harrowing effects in his own words: “Total loss of appetite. Hallucinating. The room would change shape. Hours of paranoia and feeling violent.”

Tennessee Congressman Tim Burchett recently voiced broader doubts about official accounts of the program. He said: “I just go back to the whole concept of MKUltra. They kidnapped people and loaded them up with acid or other mind-altering drugs. They tried to erase their memories. They were sued in court. Then they claimed it didn’t exist. In 1975, they ordered records destroyed, and later admitted it had existed but no longer did. Which lies are we supposed to believe?”

A CIA spokesperson previously addressed the program’s history, stating: “The MKULTRA program ran from 1953 until the lack of productive results and ethical concerns about unwitting testing led to its cessation in 1963. CIA is committed to transparency regarding this chapter of its history, including by declassifying information on the programs and making it publicly available on CIA.gov.”

More than 1,200 pages of related documents were published by the National Security Archive in 2025, adding to the public record and prompting renewed congressional interest.

Do Echoes of MKUltra Persist Today?

Officially, the program ended over six decades ago. Yet the widespread destruction of records in 1973—before full public disclosure—has left gaps that continue to invite skepticism. 

Some researchers and observers argue that the pattern of initial denial followed by partial admissions raises legitimate questions about whether similar behavioral research or influence operations might have evolved under different names or classifications.

While no concrete evidence confirms ongoing programs identical to MKUltra, the historical precedent of secrecy, combined with rapid advances in surveillance technology, neuroscience, and data-driven behavioral manipulation, has led some to speculate that the underlying goals of understanding and influencing human minds have not been entirely abandoned. 

Full declassification, they contend, remains the only path to definitively closing the book—or exposing any unfinished chapters.

The upcoming hearing represents a rare moment of accountability. In an age when intelligence capabilities grow more sophisticated by the day, ensuring that past abuses are thoroughly examined serves as a vital safeguard. 

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Europe is in far greater economic trouble that most people realize.  In an April 2026 report by the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), it was reveled that the UK’s GDP per capita is lower than all 50 U.S. states, including the poorest, Mississippi. While the majority of Britons mistakenly believe the UK is as wealthy or wealthier than the US, data shows the UK’s average income lags behind the lowest-performing US states, highlighting a significant economic gap.

The quiet decline of the once mighty British Empire right under the nose of the general populace is just one of many examples of Europe not understanding their own precarious economic circumstances. 

Far-left governments on the other side of the Atlantic have openly sought to sabotage conservative political movements, imposing authoritarian lawfare and mass censorship in order to prevent losing their grip on power.  The globalist leadership in these countries has designated the Trump Administration and US nationalist groups as a “bad influence” on their own citizens. 

The key conflict is about forced third world immigration and forced multiculturalism.  Leftist politicians desperately want this process to continue, but the US is enforcing a migrant reversal, which makes Europeans wonder why their governments are not doing the same?  The juxtaposition is embarrassing and makes the liberal agenda more difficult. 

Because of this snub against the multicultural project, the Trump Administration’s scrutiny of European censorship, tariff’s against nations that had their own tariffs on US goods and Trump’s demand that NATO countries pay their fair share in defense, the elitists across the pond have turned sour on their relationship with America.

They have been noticeably interested in undermining US operations in the Gulf against Iran, denying the US access to airspace and making things unnecessarily complicated.  One can theorize the deeper motives behind this decision (the presence of 50 million Muslims in Europe, many of them migrants, might explain the apprehension to do anything that might be seen as European hostility to Iran), but it’s clear that the behavior of some EU leaders has grown increasingly petty.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently sparked intense controversy by stating that the U.S. is being “humiliated” by Iran and lacks a clear strategy in the conflict, calling the situation “ill-considered”.  It’s difficult to understand this assertion without knowing Merz’s definition of “humiliation”. 

With the majority of Iran’s leadership dead or incapacitated, at least half of their missile stock destroyed and Trump’s reverse blockade crushing the Iranian economy within just a couple weeks ($1 US dollar is currently equal to around 1.8 million Rial), one has to wonder what success looks like to the Germans (perhaps an old-school blitzkrieg would impress them more). 

It doesn’t really matter, because Merz’s comments were met with a sharp response from the Trump Admin, and now it is likely that US bases in the country will soon be shut down.  Upon hearing this news, Merz suddenly changed his tune and praised the US partnership with Germany:

“The United States is and will remain Germany‘s most important partner in the North Atlantic Alliance. We share a common goal: Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons…”

The United States is and will remain Germany‘s most important partner in the North Atlantic Alliance. We share a common goal: Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.

— Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz (@bundeskanzler) May 3, 2026

That’s an incredible attitude adjustment in the span of only 24 hours.  At the same time, a NATO spokesperson scrambled to rekindle diplomatic relations, claiming that European leaders were trying to understand the US decision to pull troops, as if the reasons were not blatantly clear already. 

Why is Merz abruptly shifting his rhetoric?  Probably because he just realized the benefits Germany draws from the US military bases in the region; benefits which Germany has enjoyed for decades. 

Citizens in Italy, Spain and Germany are expressing concerns that the removal of US bases will cost local and national economies dearly.  With approximately 36,400 active-duty US personnel (as of late 2025) across major sites like Ramstein Air Base and facilities in Bavaria, the US military functions as a major economic engine, especially in rural and smaller urban areas. 

Germany rakes in around $4.1 billion annually through US spending around military bases.  US operations support more than 10,000 direct German jobs (civilian employees at bases) and an estimated 70,000 indirect jobs (in construction, services, and supply chains). The US also invests billions annually in base operations, expansion, and modernization.  The removal of troops would squeeze these already struggling rural communities.   

President Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw at least 5,000 US troops from Germany has raised concerns among residents living near Ramstein Air Base. pic.twitter.com/hllQNYiuYg

— DW News (@dwnews) May 3, 2026

Italy collects around $312 million every year in base generated revenues in Naples alone, and at least 5000 direct jobs are created. 

In Spain, $713 million is pumped into local economies annually through US bases, plus around 8000 jobs for Spanish military staff and civilian workers.   

U.S. defense spending directly supporting European security is substantial, with the U.S. maintaining a nearly $1 trillion global defense budget. While direct on-ground operational costs were previously estimated around $30–$36 billion annually in 2025.  This might not sound like much, but the effects are substantial in poorer rural areas.  

The economic advantages of the US presence go far beyond direct spending.  US military security allows Europe to spend minimal on defense, which means they have far more cash to spend on social welfare programs like universal healthcare.  All of these programs go away with a US exit from NATO.  

Beyond the obvious loss of defense capability that comes with a US exit from NATO, the economic factor should not be overlooked.