Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

This is the opposite of how Ukraine treats its indigenous Russian minority…

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba warned on Friday that “It has become clear that assimilation would be extremely fast if we do not change our policy towards Ukrainians abroad”, calling on these refugees to “remain Ukrainian” with the innuendo that they shouldn’t plant roots in the West.

He didn’t explicitly say so, but it’s strongly hinted that he hopes that those millions who’ve fled the latest phase of the Ukrainian Conflict over the past two years will eventually return home to their country.

Kiev-based economist Alexey Kushch said in an interview with Ukrainian journalist Yury Romanenko last week that “I estimate that [after the conflict is over] Ukraine’s demographic profile <…> will be made up of 25 million people, including ten million senior citizens, five million children and two to three million disabled persons and veterans receiving social benefits. About seven to eight million working adults will make up the core of the economy.”

These two developments coincided with Ukraine’s passing of a new conscription law that doesn’t include a demobilization clause, which the media reported has left troops feeling “betrayed” while a member of the Rada described it as a “point of no return” in terms of turning citizens against the government. Kuleba obviously hopes that unassimilated Ukrainians will feel so unwelcome in the West that they’ll return home to risk their lives in the meatgrinder and then rebuild their country when the conflict ends.

Basically, he’s manipulating them on a faux “patriotic” pretext into creating problems for themselves abroad so that they’ll consider moving back to Ukraine, but his rhetoric is extremely hypocritical since it’s the opposite of how Kiev itself treats minorities.

It was observed that “The West Would Never Talk About Its Minorities The Way That Ukraine Talks About Its Russian One” after Rada speaker Ruslan Stefanchuk denied their very existence and associated rights last fall.

In other words, Kuleba wants Ukrainian refugees not to assimilate into their host societies, with a wink and a nod that they should exploit the liberal–globalist West’s related legislation and socio-cultural norms to preserve their culture as much as possible.

At the same time, Stefanchuk denies the existence of Ukraine’s indigenous Russian minority, thus depriving them of any rights and therefore creating the exact same situation inside of Ukraine that Kuleba hopes that his country’s own refugees avoid.

These are blatant double standards, but they’re unlikely to be discussed but the Mainstream Media since these organizations have an interest in covering up for Ukraine’s fascist policies, which is exactly what Kiev is practicing.

There’s nothing wrong with refugees or immigrants retaining their identity, nor with countries promoting assimilationist and integrationist policies, but what belies ulterior ideological motives is having double standards when it comes to one’s own group and country.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

A new YouGov poll has found that Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf’s popularity has nosedived since the introduction of ridiculous the hate crime law that caused police to receive over 8000 reports in one week.

The Telegraph reports that Yousaf now has an approval rating of minus 32, equating to a 15-point drop for since the beginning of the year.

The report notes that even among people who voted for his Party, more believe he is doing a poor job than those who think he is doing well.

📉 Humza Yousaf’s popularity with Scottish voters has plummeted following the introduction of his new hate crime laws, a new poll has revealedhttps://t.co/0nyft85KBf

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) April 14, 2024

Just 29 per cent of Scottish National Party voters believe Yousaf is doing a good job, while 36 per cent think he has been poor in office.

Consequently, Yousaf’s popularity among his own voters is now minus seven, down from plus 14 in January, a massive drop.

The leading pollster, Sir John Curtice commented that the results showed that the First Minister is “deeply and increasingly unpopular”.

It seems that JK Rowling was right when she predicted that Yousaf will “get his richly deserved comeuppance” when Scottish people vote.

Yousaf also now faces increased calls among Scottish Conservatives to hold a vote that would to repeal the “disastrous” law, as police cannot cope with the increased workload.

🔵 Humza Yousaf faces Tory vote to repeal hate crime law https://t.co/ICFfjlzeSr

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) April 15, 2024

The 8000 hate crime reports in the first week vastly outnumber all other weekly reports of significant crimes combined, including  assault, vandalism and drug possession.

The initial 8000 complaints is also more than the annual total of all hate crime reports for all previous years.

Calum Steele, the former general secretary of the Scottish Police Federation, commented that officers “are genuinely embarrassed. They feel that the service and by extension [they] as individual police officers will catch some of the public brunt.”

As we have previously noted, Yousaf’s infamous ‘anti-white’ rant in front of the Scottish Parliament on the 11th of June 2020 has been repeatedly reported to police under the new law by those opposed to the new legislation.

Yousaf himself has declared that anyone reporting his speech as a potential hate crime is “far right.”

To top this all off, staff working for Police Scotland are being told to read a pre-prepared transcript defending Yousaf when people call to report him under the odious new law.

Under the new legislation, anyone deemed to have been verbally ‘abusive’, in person or online, to a transgender person, including “insulting” them could be hit with a prison sentence of up to seven years.

*  *  *

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.

Via Middle East Eye

The Islamic Republic’s Saturday attack on Israel was a made-for social media moment. It was also the ultimate test of US efforts to cobble together a coalition of Arab states and Israel in a so-called Middle East NATO, to jointly defend an attack from Tehran.

Israel, the US, France, the UK, and Jordan managed to intercept around 99 percent of the drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles fired at Israel by Iran in retaliation for an attack on its embassy in Damascus, Syria. Radar and early warning systems that the US maintains at its military bases across the Gulf were instrumental in tracking the slow-moving armada of missiles and drones, current and former US, Israeli and Arab officials told MEE, adding that the US was able to scramble jet fighters from Saudi Arabia and Qatar at the last minute to particpate in the operation. 

But in the end, the oil-rich Gulf states downplayed any involvement and left the heavy lifting of fighting off Iran’s attack to the US, its western allies and Jordan, the resource-poor Hashemite Kingdom dependent on US financial assistance.

For its part, Jordan cast its role actively downing Iranian drones as self-defense and not related to protecting Israel.  “There was unprecedented cooperation between Israel, the US and the Jordanians,” Michael Milshtein, a former Israeli military intelligence officer, told Middle East Eye. “But calling this a coalition is an illusion.”

Middle East Eye reported on Friday that the Gulf monarchies were shutting down US options to launch strikes against Iran in the event Washington felt the need to retaliate against Tehran’s attack on Israel. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Oman, and Kuwait all scrutinized their basing agreements with Washington to do the bare minimum that was required and avoid being involved in direct strikes on Iranian targets. 

Bilal Saab, a former US Department of Defence official, now at Chatham House, told MEE that the Gulf states’ calibrated actions underscored the limits of the Biden administration’s push for a Middle East Nato. “When we start seeing authorizations to use Gulf airspace to launch strikes on Iranian targets, then we can start talking about a Middle East Nato. Right now, it’s the exact opposite,” he said.

“I think what we saw from Saturday’s attack pumps the breaks on any idea of an Arab and Israeli Nato.”

Propaganda war

As the dust from Saturday’s attack settles, the way regional states responded in the lead-up to the assault is becoming a new battleground between Tehran on one hand, and the US and Israel on the other – that has little to do with the Palestinians but rather the bigger question of who calls the shots in the Middle East.

The Biden administration and Israel are keen to cast Israel’s successful defense as the byproduct of a united front of allies, including Arab states. Israeli war cabinet minister Benny Gatz praised the “regional cooperation” that allowed Israel to defend itself.

Successful coordination with Arab states would allow Israel to present Saturday as a strategic win, which could help reduce tensions by lessening the need for a more forceful Israeli response, according to analysts. “What this weekend demonstrated is that Israel did not have to and does not have to defend itself alone when it is the victim of an aggression, the victim of an attack,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Monday.

For its part, the Islamic Republic’s goal is to isolate Israel, preventing any cooperation between them and Gulf states. “It’s a total propaganda war right now,” Aziz Alghashian, a Saudi analyst and expert on ties between Israel and Gulf states told MEE.

Tehran and Washington are already sparring over whether advance notice of the attack on Israel was given.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said that Tehran gave the US about 72 hours prior notice of the attack through “our friends and neighbours”. On Monday, the Wall Street Journal appeared to confirm that claim, reporting that Iran briefed officials from Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states on its attack. Turkish officials also told MEE that Turkey, a member of Nato, was briefed on the attack days in advance. The US, however, denied it was given a days-long heads up before the assault. 

Julien Barnes-Dacey, director of the Middle East and North Africa programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told MEE that an Iranian leak to Gulf states would logically be passed on to the US because Arab rulers are afraid a deadly Iranian strike on Israel could spark a wider war, which Iran hoped to avoid. 

“Jordan and the Arab Gulf states are first and foremost concerned about preventing regional escalation,” he told MEE. “I don’t see this as Gulf states doubling down on a strategic alignment with Israel. They are going to keep talking with Iran to prevent an unravelling that they fear will suck them all in.”

‘Provoking Iran’

To be sure, the Arab Gulf states are linked more closely with Israel today than any time in history, and Israel’s war on Gaza has not led the UAE or Bahrain to rip up the 2020 Abraham Accords which saw them normalise ties with Tel Aviv.

As part of that agreement, Israel was also absorbed into Centcom, the US’s overall central command in the Middle East. Israeli military officials were even dispatched to Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base, MEE previously reported, but it’s not clear if those officials are still in the country.

But Saturday’s attack on Israel underscored the US’s limited success in fostering closer security cooperation between Israel and the Gulf states, Milshtein, the former Israeli military intelligence officer, told MEE. Gulf states have no love lost for Iran, but are wary of what they believe to be the US’s waning influence in the region and limited appetite to come to their defense, as Washington did for Israel. The US did not retaliate to the 2019 attack on Saudi Arabia’s Aramco oil facilities that was blamed to have been backed by Iran.

The Gulf states’ frustration with the US only grew when the Biden administration took office. Biden and members of his party criticised Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman over human rights issues. Saudi Arabia and the UAE also viewed the administration’s response to Houthi missile and drone attacks as tepid.

In response, they moved to patch up ties with Tehran. In April 2023, the UAE appointed its first new ambassador to the Islamic Republic after seven years. Saudi Arabia and Tehran normalised ties in a deal brokered by China.

“Most of the Arab states promoted reconciliation with Iran because they couldn’t rely on Biden’s administration,” Milshtein said. “They preferred to deal with Iran and not the Americans”

Saab, at Chatham House, said to achieve true regional coordination between Israel and the Gulf states, Washington would need to provide concrete security guarantees. Saudi Arabia has requested such support, along with new weapons systems, as part of a deal to normalise ties with Israel, but those talks are stalled as Israel pounds the Gaza Strip. “The last thing the Gulf is going to do is provoke Iran and not have the backing of the Americans,” Saab said.

Alghashian said Saturday’s attack on Israel likely reaffirmed Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman’s decision to restore ties with Tehran. He said Riyadh’s goal is to “stay out of the way” of tensions between Israel and Iran as it pursues its economic development. “The strategic value of restoring ties with Tehran is paying dividends,” he said.

Authored by Autumn Spredemann via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Several of Cuba’s latest “terrorists” live in Miami.

Luis Zuniga, a former diplomat and political prisoner of the Castro regime, is one of 61 people listed as a “terrorist” by Cuba and accused of promoting, planning, organizing, financing, or supporting actions against the Cuban communist party.

Exiles who oppose the Cuban communist party have suffered vicious attacks and assassination attempts over the years. However, a new wave of targeting was ignited after the regime, under its leader, President Miguel Díaz-Canel, published a list of alleged “terrorists” in December 2023.

The list was given to Interpol and government officials from different nations, including the United States in December 2023.

“I think the overt and covert campaign of threats and intimidation by the Cuban dictatorship against U.S. citizens of Cuban descent is very important,” Orlando Gutiérrez-Boronat told The Epoch Times. He is an author, cofounder, and spokesperson for the Cuban Democratic Directorate.

Mr. Boronot’s outspoken resistance to Cuba’s communist regime landed him a spot on the so-called “terrorist” list. He has been accused of trying to destabilize the Cuban government, along with threats of violence on more than one occasion.

“I think being included in that list … is definitely a threat.”

Some believe Cuba’s “terrorist” list and the newest round of menace toward exiles was launched because the Cuban government is on increasingly shaky ground at home.

The regime has witnessed 1,033 protests across the island in February and March this year, according to the Cuban Conflict Observatory. In recent weeks, demonstrations of all sizes have erupted across the island due to ongoing electricity and food shortages.

It’s reminiscent of the protests in July 2021, which was the largest series of anti-government demonstrations on the island since former leader Fidel Castro’s 1950s revolution. More than 700 people connected with the landmark event are still in prison, according to Human Rights Watch.

Now, Cuban Americans in Miami are fearful as Castro devotees launch a new wave of threats and their homes are targeted.

Ramon Saul Sanchez is number 29 on the list. He said he’s been struggling for the freedom of Cuba for more than 40 years and asserts the terrorist labeling is just another communist party tactic to manipulate the narrative.

“They like to use those labels. In Cuba, if you’re not pro-Castro, you’re a worm. You’re a counter-revolutionary,” he told The Epoch Times. ”I’ve never been convicted of terrorism or even charged.”

Activist and journalist Ninoska Perez wasn’t at all surprised to find her name on the list.

“I’ve always had the threats. They don’t like everyone to announce what they do wrong and their crimes,” Ms. Perez told The Epoch Times.

When she worked with the Cuban American National Foundation, Ms. Perez said she was targeted as an enemy of Fidel Castro’s regime early on. She called the organization Castro’s “biggest nightmare” at the time since it showcased what life on the island was actually like under communism.

Guerrero Cubano

Today, Ms. Perez works for a Miami radio station and has recently had a member of her family in the city surveilled at home by suspected members of the Cuban regime.

“It’s not only that they put you on a terrorist list, but they make public your home address.”

In March, the YouTube channel “Guerrero Cubano,” which translates to Cuban Warrior, posted a video that contained photos and addresses of the homes of exiles whose names appear on the “terrorist” list. Ms. Perez’s cousin lives in one of the homes.

She said it’s one thing to come after her since, as she put it, “I understand that what I do upsets a powerful dictatorship. I’m not complaining about that.”

Coming after her family, however, is much worse.

“It’s even worse because they’re subjecting her to this,” Ms. Perez said, adding that her cousin mentioned a couple of times that she’s seen strange cars parked near her house that don’t belong to any of the neighbors.

Compounding this, she feels there’s little that can be done to stop the threats. “What’s the police going to do? Patrol your house 24 hours? They simply can’t do that.”

In the Guerrero Cubano video, the narrator claims the Miami police have to be guarding homes now because people are scared. The same male narrator further states he will continue sharing information on the homes of Cuban exiles being targeted by the communist regime. He also claimed to know where the list members eat and what medications they take. The narrator even went as far as threatening to visit targeted exiles in the hospital.

The Miami Police Department didn’t respond to an Epoch Times request for comment on the recent threats against Cuban exiles.

“It’s scary for anybody,” Ms. Perez said.

It’s a vicious cycle that Cuban Americans know all too well. Threats and attacks from communist agents have come in waves over the decades.

She recalled a time in the 1990s when the Castro regime sent an assassin to Miami to kill a member of the Cuban American National Foundation. The target was afforded several days of police protection and the assassin failed. But, Ms. Perez said, the police can’t be everywhere all the time. If they intercept or deter one communist assassin or agitator, the Cuban regime can just send another.

In the past several decades. Ms. Perez said the most notable lull in harassment or threats of attack from Cuba’s communist party was during the administration of President George H. W. Bush from 1989 to 1993.

The U.S. State Department said it’s “aware of the list released by the Cuban government.”

Read more here…

Almost the entire global population breathes air that exceeds the air quality limits set by the World Health Organization (WHO).

In this graphic, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu maps the world’s most polluted countries according to IQAir, ranked by their annual average PM2.5 concentration (μg/m³) in 2023. The unit μg/m³ refers to micrograms per cubic meter.

What is PM2.5?

PM2.5 refers to fine particulate matter, with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less, that can travel deep into your lungs and cause health problems.

In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) updated its air quality guidelines for PM2.5. The recommended maximum annual average level for PM2.5 is now 5 μg/m³, down from the previous target of 10 μg/m³.

Common sources of PM2.5 pollution include engine exhaust, power plant combustion, smoke from fires, dust, and dirt.

How Does PM2.5 Pollution Affect Humans?

Research published in 2022 from the Air Quality Life Index (AQLI) found that 97.3% of the world’s population is exposed to levels of PM2.5 that exceed the WHO guidelines.

This takes 2.2 years off the global average life expectancy, relative to a world that met the WHO guideline.

In South Asia specifically, the AQLI believes residents could be losing up to 5 years off their lives. The region has been a global hotspot of air pollution for years, home to 37 of the 40 most polluted cities in the world.

Interestingly, fine particulate matter can travel hundreds of kilometers, often crossing national boundaries.

For instance, approximately 30% of air pollution in the Indian state of Punjab originates from neighboring Pakistan. Similarly, an estimated 30% of pollution in Bangladesh’s largest cities is traced back to India.

By The Committee for A Responsible Federal Budget

The Biden Administration recently announced a new plan to cancel student debt for up to 30 million borrowers and released a preliminary rule this morning detailing parts of this plan. The proposal, which is being introduced through the rule making process, would replace the Administration’s initial proposal to cancel between $10,000 and $20,000 per person of debt, which was struck down by the Supreme Court.

Elements of the plan in today’s proposed rule would cost nearly $150 billion, according to the Department of Education. However, this excludes a proposal to allow the Secretary of Education to cancel debt for those facing hardship or likely to default. Including this provision, we estimate the plan could cost $250 billion to $750 billion, depending on how the additional cancellation is designed.

The plan itself has five major components. It would:

• Cancel accumulated interest for borrowers with balances higher than what they initially borrowed, capped at $20,000 for those in standard repayment and uncapped but restricted to individuals making less than $120,000 annually or couples making under $240,000 enrolled in an income-driven repayment (IDR) plan.

• Automatically cancel loans for borrowers in standard repayment who would be eligible for cancellation had they applied for programs such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) or the new IDR program, Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE).

• Automatically cancel loans for borrowers who have been repaying undergraduate loans for over 20 years or graduate loans for over 25 years.

• Cancel debt of those who attended low-financial-value programs, including those that failed accountability measures or were deemed ineligible for federal student aid programs.

• Forgive debt of borrowers who are “facing hardships” or are likely to default on their loan payments.

The Department of Education has estimated the first four components of the plan would cost $147 billion over a decade, with half the cost stemming from the cancellation of accumulated interest. This is in line with estimates we are currently producing, though well above estimates of $77 billion from the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM). A huge source of uncertainty is how these provisions would interact with existing IDR programs and how much of the debt would otherwise be cancelled under current policy. 

Importantly, today’s rule does not include the Administration’s hardship cancellation plan, which would “authorize the automatic forgiveness of loans for borrowers at a high risk of future default as well as those who show hardship due to other indicators.” 

This is by far the most unclear and potentially the most costly part of their proposal, since cancellation could be both wide-ranging and ongoing. We estimate this proposal could cost between $100 billion and $600 billion over a decade. However, there’s a tremendous amount of uncertainty, with design choices possibly resulting in much lower costs than our range – for example, PWBM estimates this provision would only cost $7 billion. 

It is unclear how the Administration will define hardship, but they discuss 16 possible criteria such as other consumer debt, age, and health care or housing expenses and also declare hardship could be defined based on “any other indicators of hardship identified by the Secretary.” In assessing default risk, the rule allows cancellation for cancellation for those with an 80 percent likelihood of default, as determined by the Secretary. Importantly, over $150 billion of debt is currently in default (and loans in default generally have around a 70 percent recovery rate). We also estimate that a further 6 million borrowers are over 90 days delinquent on their loans, which is another predictor of a high likelihood of default and would further push up the number. The historically high rates of delinquency appear to be related to challenges around restarting student loan repayments last year.

While the default provision would be limited to the next two years under the most recent draft of the proposal, the hardship component has no time limit and thus opens a new venue for a future administration to cancel large amounts of student loan debt. An analysis by FREOPP argues that it could cover over 70 percent of college students. 

In total, our $250 billion to $750 billion estimate for the total cost of the plan would be in line with the cost of the Administration’s $400 billion blanket debt cancellation, which was ruled illegal by the Supreme Court. It would be on top of more than $600 billion of debt cancellation already enacted through unilateral executive action. As we have shown before, these policies would put upward pressure on inflation and interest rates by supporting stronger demand, and much of the benefits would accrue to high-income and highly-educated Americans. In the coming weeks, we will produce further analysis of the Administration’s latest proposal and continue to refine our cost estimates as more data is made available. These analyses will be available at our student debt cancellation resources page.

Fueled by strong consumer spending and a resilient job market, the U.S. economy expanded faster than expected in 2023, with a real GDP growth rate of 2.5%.

Oil-rich states were among the strongest performers in the country as production boomed. Much of this was due to the war in Ukraine driving up the price of oil, spurring companies to boost output. Other sectors, such as retail trade, also played a key role in driving growth amid robust consumer demand.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte, shows the fastest growing states by real GDP, based on data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Strongest State Economies in 2023

As the world’s largest oil producer, the U.S. hit a historic 12.9 million barrels per day in crude oil production in 2023—more than any other country ever.

Given these tailwinds, the top five fastest-growing states by real GDP in 2023 were all powered by the mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction sector. Below, we show the strongest state economies by real GDP growth last year:

North Dakota witnessed the highest growth, with real GDP rising by 5.9%.

As the third largest oil-producing state, it also has one of the strongest job markets in the country. In February 2024, the state’s unemployment rate was 2.0%, significantly lower than the national average of 3.9%.

Falling in second is Texas, whose economy surged to $2 trillion in inflation-adjusted terms. In 2023, the oil and gas industry generated about $72 million per day in local and state taxes in addition to state royalties. Roughly half of U.S. crude oil exports are shipped from Corpus Christi Bay, a port along the Texas coastline.

As the seventh-fastest growing state, Florida’s economy was largely supported by retail trade, its biggest driver. Moreover, Florida boasted the highest growth rates nationwide in both personal and property income, rising at 7.0% and 8.8%, respectively, over the year.

By contrast, some of the slowest growing states were Delaware, Mississippi, and New York, each with a real GDP growth rate falling below 1%.