Amid very confused and mixed messaging coming from Washington over the status and future fate of Hormuz oil transit, the EU is trying its hand at a solution.

France ⁠and ⁠Italy have ​opened ‘tentative’ talks ‌with Iran ‌seeking ⁠to ⁠negotiate a deal to ​guarantee safe ​passage for their tankers ⁠through vital strait which remains a crucial chokepoint for stalled global crude transit, the ​Financial ⁠Times reports Friday, citing people briefed on ⁠the efforts.

This comes as US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said in a Friday morning Pentagon briefing there is “no clear evidence that Iran has laid mines” in the Strait. This contradicts an avalanche of reporting from earlier this week which said at least a dozen mines were laid.

The two key overnight and morning headlines which have most impacted oil markets remain confirmed India-Iran talks for safe passage, and now EU efforts to do the same…

Regardless, it’s more than obvious that the waterway is de facto shut – with perhaps the exception of some Chinese or possibly an Indian vessel being allowed through – also amid persisting threats of rocket and drone attacks.

According to the Financial Times, “European capitals have opened the tentative discussions in an attempt to restart oil and gas exports without expanding the conflict, three officials briefed on the talks told the FT, as shipping companies look to western navies to provide potential escorts for their tankers.”

“France is one of the countries involved in the talks, two of the officials said,” the report continues. “The first official said Italy had also made attempts to open discussions with Tehran on the issue.”

As for whether the war expands or not, that’s in no way under Europe’s control – but remains something pertaining only to Israel, the United States, and Iran – the main players in the conflict.

The case for some shred of optimism or hope? However, Trump and Hegseth’s bellicose tones on Friday morning, vowing to keep ramping up military action over Tehran, underscores continued extreme uncertainty:

If Iran allows China and India oil through the Strait, that’s more than half of normal oil traffic already (7mmb/d). Throw in the Saudi East-West pipeline for redirection (another 7mb/d) and the blockade suddenly shrinks a lot pic.twitter.com/64xoGJpiHG

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 13, 2026

Meanwhile the Trump administration has sought to push back against reporting by CNN and others which alleges war-planners didn’t actually take into account that attacking Iran would result in Hormuz’s closure or blockage.

Here’s how Hegseth responded to the charge on Friday morning – while trying to paint a general picture that the mainstream media is clouding the picture, and just trying to make Trump ‘look bad’:

“This is always what they do, hold the strait hostage. CNN doesn’t think we thought of that? It’s a fundamentally unserious report,” Hegseth said. “The sooner David Ellison takes over that network, the better.”

Skeptics have pushed back against Pentagon and White House claims of lengthy preparations and plans to use military force to clear the Strait of Hormuz, and yet now 13 days into a war with Iran and there’s been no US action in the waterway, and not so much as a single US naval escort that anyone is aware of.

So far there does seem to be a constant flow of words on the issue coming from the White House and Pentagon – and yet a clear strategy still hasn’t been articulated, much less clear action taking shape.

Authored by Stuart Chirls va Freightwaves.com,

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran has effectively trapped 10 Maersk ships in the Persian Gulf, its chief executive said.

In separate interviews with CNN and the Wall Street Journal, Vincent Clerc said the Danish carrier’s ships “cannot get out,” are “stuck in the Upper Gulf” and cannot leave the region.

As a safety measure, Clerc said the vessels have been grouped offshore and away from ports under attack. At least one ship is under contract to the U.S. government’s Military Sealift Command, according to data on maritime identification websites.

Even if a ceasefire allowed vessel traffic to begin moving, Clerc said it would take a week to 10 days for the world’s second-largest liner (MAERSK-B.CO) to resume normal operations.

Clerc’s comments underscore the frustrations of shipping lines who have requested and repeatedly been denied naval escorts by the Trump administration. Carriers have been told in briefings that the Strait is still too dangerous for transit. 

Iran on Wednesday used unmanned boats to attack two tankers, and also deployed missiles and drones to attack ports, airports and other landside targets in the Gulf region. A ONE container ship sustained damage from unidentified projectiles.

Maersk is prioritizing the safety of crews, ships, and customers’ cargo, said Clerc, and will only restart voyages if that safety is guaranteed.

Shipping executives gathered in Connecticut for an industry conference said that the Iran war has idled 10,000 merchant crew and hundreds of vessels in the Persian Gulf. Mariners have little choice but to stay with their ships, since most airlines have suspended flights into and out of the area.

Maersk, like others major carriers, has suspended or re-routed some services to and from Gulf states and is rerouting vessels via alternate hubs, to stage cargo until the strait is re-opened. It has also assessed shippers with a number of emergency surcharges.

The closure of Hormuz and related disruptions in the Red Sea have had “profound” effects on global shipping and supply chains, Clerc said, and that Maersk is in “uncharted territory.”

Bunkering terminals in Asia and the Middle East could risk running dry amid the disruption of fuel supply chains, and he warned added costs for diversions and delays will be passed on to customers.

In a statement late Thursday on X, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced that the U.S. will allow countries to purchase Russian crude oil already at sea. The move aims to temporarily boost global supply availability, as the IEA warned earlier that the Middle East conflict has sparked one of the worst energy shocks on record.

“To increase the global reach of existing supply, @USTreasury is providing a temporary authorization to permit countries to purchase Russian oil currently stranded at sea,” Bessent said.

He continued, “This narrowly tailored, short-term measure applies only to oil already in transit and will not provide significant financial benefit to the Russian government, which derives the majority of its energy revenue from taxes assessed at the point of extraction.”

.@POTUS is taking decisive steps to promote stability in global energy markets and working to keep prices low as we address the threat and instability posed by the terrorist Iranian regime.

To increase the global reach of existing supply, @USTreasury is providing a temporary…

— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) March 12, 2026

UBS analyst Nana Antiedu told clients earlier this morning that about 124 million barrels of Russian-origin oil were at sea across 30 locations worldwide.

More specifically, Bloomberg analysts said about 30 Russian tankers are in Asian waters and may be available for purchase. These tankers carry about 19 million barrels of Russian crude and 310,000 tons of refined products.

Bloomberg data show these Russian tankers are signaling “for orders” or, in other words, have no clear destination yet. They could be unloaded in Singapore or Malaysia.

Robert Rennie, head of commodity research at Westpac Banking, was quoted by Bloomberg as saying, “Of course, any supply helps, but this is a smaller help than it looks.”

Rennie estimated that of the 125 million to 150 million barrels of Russian crude on the water, about a third is off China and is likely to end up in storage, while 30 million to 40 million barrels are in India and are likely to be consumed there.

Rennie said the rest is in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic. “We are only really talking about replacing maybe four or five days of lost Gulf exports. Sure, it helps, but it is no panacea,” he added.

Bessent’s office also issued India a 30-day waiver at the beginning of the month so that New Delhi could buy Russian oil at sea to build reserves and cushion against an oil shock.

Brent crude futures are largely unchanged from when Bessent posted on X overnight. President Trump said the U.S. has “plenty of time” in the Iran war. Brent hovers around $100/bbl as of 0630 ET.

The Trump administration has taken several steps to combat triple-digit Brent and WTI prices, including the planned release of 172 million barrels from the U.S. SPR. The release is part of a much larger 400-million-barrel SPR dump worldwide, agreed upon by the 32-nation IEA. This comes as the IEA warned about the worst-ever energy shock to hit the world. Also, the Trump administration is waiving a century-old law that requires U.S. ships to transport goods between American ports, so that domestic supplies can be shifted around more quickly.

Via Remix News,

A newly released study by the German Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA), nearly 50 percent of Muslims under the age of 40 in Germany hold “Islamist” views, with these Muslims expressing an attraction to Islamism, a preference for Sharia law over the German Basic Law, and harboring anti-Semitic prejudices.

The findings, described as “explosive in nature,” were featured in the latest edition of the “Motra Monitor.” The study reports that as of 2025, Muslims in Germany under the age of 40 (45.1 percent) hold “latent or manifestly Islamist attitudes.“

Some German politicians have already voiced their views on the study’s release. Wolfgang Kubicki, a prominent politician in the Free Democrats (FDP) and former MP, stated on X: “This study should set off all the alarm bells. It is a societal time bomb. We must not only talk about migration, but also about integration and religion. The policy of naively looking away has favored this development. The naivety must stop.”

He further stated that “anyone who demands a caliphate is an enemy of democracy. Enemies of democracy without German citizenship must leave the country. Neighborhoods where ghettoization provides fertile ground for radicalization must be restructured. Islamic associations without a clear demarcation from extremists must not be interlocutors for politics. Germany must act secular and self-confident.”

He further called for an end to headscarves in schools and other state institutions “not to harass or suspect the wearers, but to make it clear that the only binding source of our values is the Basic Law.”

Bei dieser Studie müssen alle Alarmglocken angehen. Das ist eine gesellschaftliche Zeitbombe. Wir dürfen nicht nur über Migration reden, sondern auch über Integration und Religion. Die Politik des naiven Wegsehens hat diese Entwicklung begünstigt. Die Naivität muss aufhören.
Wer… pic.twitter.com/h7rvl4GjbQ

— Wolfgang Kubicki (@KubickiWo) March 12, 2026

Beyond rising crime rates, terrorism offenses, and demographic change, the soaring numbers of Muslims in Europe also raise fundamental questions about worldview and society.

The “Motra monitor,” a monitoring system tracking radicalization, spans 598 pages. It is published by the BKA and receives funding from several entities, including the Federal Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Family Affairs. While the report addresses various forms of extremism, including right-wing movements, it places a significant focus on Islamist extremism.

Evidence of these tensions surfaced in the summer of 2025 when “young Muslims and radical left-wing Germans occupied the Gutenberg Memorial in Frankfurt to demonstrate against Israel, some of them willing to use violence.“

The study’s researchers highlight a concerning core demographic, noting that “manifest Islamist attitudes are most prevalent among Muslims under 40, at 11.5 percent.“

In this context, “manifesto“ indicates that a person’s radicalization toward Islamism is already clearly evident and pronounced.

Further complicating the social landscape is a much larger group identified by the authors as having “latently Islamism-savvy attitudes.” This segment has seen a massive increase since 2021. The research group writes that “this amounts to 33.6 percent for those under 40 in 2025.“

While “latent” suggests these Islamist attitudes are present, the radicalization has not yet become openly visible. Combined, these two groups account for “45.1 percent“ of all under-40 Muslims in Germany.

Renowned Islamism researcher Prof. Susanne Schröter, who conducted most of her research into Islamism at the Institute of Ethnology at Goethe University Frankfurt and served as the director of the Frankfurt Research Center for Global Islam until 2025, said to Bild: “Islamism-savvy means that Muslims consider Islamist interpretations of Islam to be correct, are attracted to Islamist organizations close to the Muslim Brotherhood or Salafism, prefer Sharia to the Basic Law, and usually also have anti-Semitic prejudices.”

The BKA study suggests that the radicalization of young Muslims accelerated significantly following the Hamas terrorist attacks on Oct. 7, 2023.

Germany is far from the only country seeing the rise of Islamism within the populace. A sobering study from the prestigious polling service Ifop from last year shows that hardline views are growing amongst Muslims in France, including an emphasis on the laws of Islam being placed over those of the state, particularly among young Muslims. At the same time, Christianity is collapsing in France.

Among Muslims in general, 44 percent polled say they “respect the rules of Islam” as being more important “than respect for French laws.” For those aged 15-24, 57 percent believe the rules of Islam are more important than “respect for French laws.”

Some 38 percent of French Muslims approve of all or part of Islamist positions, doubling the figure of 19 percent in 1998, underlines Ifop.

Correspondingly, the share of Muslims who want Islam to modernize has fallen from 48 percent in 1998 to 21 percent today. When Ifop requested respondents to choose between the Civil Code and Sharia law on “an important subject in your family, such as ritual slaughter, marriage or inheritance,” 49 percent of Muslims chose to respect French laws, down from 62 percent in 1995. The consumption of alcohol among Muslim men has also fallen sharply, from 46 percent in 1989 to only 26 percent today.

Today, 33 percent of Muslims residing in France — French citizens or foreign nationals — feel sympathy for one of the Islamist movements, a figure that rises to 42 percent among young people. Within this population, 3 percent have sympathy for the most radical and bloody ideology, jihadism.

Read more here…

According to polls, around half of the US population identifies with feminism and feminist activism (though, this stat is in steep decline among Gen Z men).  But if this is truly the case and there is such a large population of feminist allies out there in the ether, why don’t they ever show up to movie theaters to support films with blatant feminist messaging? 

The obvious conclusion is that the public has been lied to and there is no vast feminist movement.  It’s a paper tiger, a fantasy, a mirage. 

We have seen this reality play out time and time again over the past few years as the American populace has now awakened to Hollywood’s woke propaganda agenda.  Almost every instance of a new film or streaming series being exposed as far-left in its content results in financial failure.  There is no audience for these projects.   

The entertainment industry has resorted to masking feminist propaganda behind popular branding and false marketing in order to trick consumers into theater seats (the Barbie movie comes to mind), but these successes are few and far between.  Such projects might have a small, niche market on militant progressive streaming services like Netflix, but they still call for a bare bones budget and minimal marketing on dedicated woke media platforms. 

Around 20 years ago, feminist art house flicks, LGBT dramas and race based commentaries were made for around $10 million a pop and were relegated to festivals like Sundance and Cannes.  At these exclusive events they would garner ample and pompous applause from uppity New York and LA socialites and then fizzle into obscurity where they belong.

Today, major studios are spending upwards of $150 million in production and marketing costs to make and distribute the same kinds of film school garbage, and they are losing their shirts. 

A recent example is aging actress and amateur director Maggie Gyllenhaal’s feminist monster film “The Bride”, which latches onto the public domain story of Frankenstein (every movie must be a remake or a reboot to get greenlit these days). 

The project was given a production budget of $90 million and a marketing budget of $65 million – A total of $155 million spent to bring the dead plot to life.  In its opening week, The Bride has brought in around $14 million in global box office receipts, and keep in mind, half those revenues go to theaters.  

It’s a unmitigated disaster; the biggest theatrical flop of the year and it probably won’t be beat in 2026.  That said, anyone with any sense could have predicted this movie’s downfall. 

The story follows a woman possessed by the spirit of Mary Shelley, who is back from the dead to tell the story of “the bride” she had always meant to tell.  She says she was “held back by the patriarchy” from writing the tale, but now you get to see it on the big screen for $20 per ticket and $50 for popcorn and soda.  Lucky you.

The woman is, of course, murdered by evil men and then brought back to life by a scientist who is seeking a companion for the Frankenstein Monster (played by Christian Bale), who is lonely after 100 years of being an angry “incel”.

The story then devolves into a college girl’s self indulgent fan fiction of the Bride of Frankenstein, mixing elements of Sid and Nancy with Bonnie and Clyde.  The main character and her male sidekick go on a killing spree, which inspires other women across the country to commit copycat crimes and murder the “men who wronged them”.

Maggie Gylenhaal:

“Maybe I’ll get in trouble but…when I really became a director was actually… the morning that Trump was first elected.”

She explains it was in order to fight “sexism”…

Get ready for more of this retarded crap at the Oscars..pic.twitter.com/XZkCpfD1IB

— Aɴᴛ (@AntSpeaks) March 10, 2026

There is nothing new or groundbreaking about the concept.  From “Thelma and Louise” to the movie “I Shot Andy Warhol”, there are hundreds of movies and TV shows affirming the feminist notion that women are immune to accountability. In other words, if a women does something evil, we must assume she has a good reason.  Or, women are allowed to do evil as long as they perceive themselves to be victims. 

The Bride is yet another tired version of this ongoing feminist trope of women being “empowered” by psychopathy.  Not only that, but it regurgitates the leftist extremist fantasy of becoming some kind of Marxist martyr and triggering a bloody mob frenzy.  The fundamental motivation of these stories is narcissistic in nature; a desperate desire to be so adored and worshiped that people would gleefully destroy or kill to honor your name.  

The theatrical apparatus is still being bombarded with woke content into 2026 despite dismal audience attendance because most of these movies were approved and started filming during the Biden Administration when studios thought the woke indoctrination machine was well protected.  The Bride received approval in January of 2024 and started filming that same year.  A lot has changed since then. 

For now, entertainment productions are plummeting (down 60%) and Hollywood is lost.  They centered their entire business model around the woke agenda and now they have no idea how to restructure and create real content again.  It is likely these companies will collapse in due course, making way for newcomers with better ideas, greater talent and less political zealotry.   

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

The UK government is ramping up its assault on free expression, now urging schools, councils, and workplaces to monitor and report “anti-Muslim hostility” as part of a broader strategy that critics slam as a tool to silence legitimate debate.

Under Labour’s plans, institutions will be encouraged to track incidents of ‘prejudice’ against Muslims, with a new definition adopted to clarify unacceptable behavior. This comes amid a surge in hate crimes, but opponents warn it could muzzle criticism of Islamism or immigration policies.

Schools are at the forefront, with the government pushing for monitoring in education settings where antisemitism and anti-Muslim hate have reportedly normalized.

Schools, councils and workplaces will be encouraged to monitor incidents of anti-Muslim hostility under Labour ‘Islamophobia’ plans that critics warn risk having a “chilling effect” on free speech. https://t.co/URDChhiVht

— The Daily Sceptic (@LD_Sceptics) March 10, 2026

This escalating surveillance in schools reeks of authoritarian control, prioritizing thought policing over genuine security.

The strategy includes boosting security for mosques and Muslim schools through schemes upgrading CCTV, alarms, and fencing. A new “anti-Muslim hostility tsar” will oversee implementation, advising schools, universities, and public services on tackling hatred.

Communities Secretary Steve Reed defended the move in Parliament: “Today, we are adopting a non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility. This gives a clear explanation of unacceptable prejudice, discrimination and hatred targeting Muslims, so we can take action to stop it.”

But Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has blasted the vague wording, warning it could chill free speech and make people afraid to criticize Islam, migration, or Islamist extremism. He argued it might be used to silence debate rather than stop actual attacks.

Labour’s Islamophobia definition ‘will curb free speech’ and inhibit criticism of religion, says counter-terrorism tsar.

The Government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, has said that the official definition could stop people freely criticising… pic.twitter.com/vhxKjwVodS

— The Free Speech Union (@SpeechUnion) March 9, 2026

Tory MP Miriam Cates echoed concerns, noting the definition raises serious questions. A recommendation from Hall suggested including examples of free speech not deemed anti-Muslim hatred to safeguard open discussion.

Richard Holmes, from the Free Speech Union, added: “It risks hindering free speech under the law and legitimate criticism of Islamism.”

Labour insists the definition won’t halt legitimate criticism of religion, focusing instead on tackling anti-Muslim hatred without protecting Islam from scrutiny.

This push also ties into the leaked “social cohesion” strategy previously covered earlier, where the government branded the Union Jack and other national flags as potential “tools of hate” wielded by the “extreme right” to intimidate.

That draft allocated £800 million over 10 years to areas under “pressure,” highlighting how antisemitism has become “normalised” in society, from schools to the NHS.

It’s also part of the regime’s broader censorship drive, like plotting another X shutdown over Grok’s “offensive” roasts targeting religions. As users pointed out, the likely real motive behind the push is that Kier Starmer’s administration can’t handle a platform exposing their constant lies and spreading of misinformation.

Meanwhile, counter-terror police are warning teens that sharing “funny” content online could land them a criminal record, framing memes as potential terrorism gateways. In one ad, a white schoolboy faces device seizures for linking material later deemed extremist—all while real threats from Islamist ideology go under-prioritized.

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.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

Even with some temporal distance and broader perspective, the election result in Baden-Württemberg makes no sense. That the two eco-socialist parties, fused into a kind of political twin planet—Bündnis 90/Die Grünen and the CDU—could claim almost two-thirds of the votes cast is staggering given the economic situation in the country. It raises a fundamental question: Can—or will—Germans no longer connect economic decline with political responsibility in any meaningful way?

Baden-Württemberg’s capital, Stuttgart, is notably at the epicenter of this decline. The city serves, in a way, as a blueprint for the future envisioned by green transformation advocates.

It makes no difference whether it is green ideologues and hardliners like Jürgen Trittin exploiting the cultivated German guilt complex for their degrowth fantasies, or CDU politicians of the Merkel-Merz line staging placebo reforms for public consumption. Both strategies ultimately point to the same goal: replacing traditional German industry with a state-controlled command economy.

That the Mittelstand and major industry are collapsing under mounting fiscal pressure and the energy transition catastrophe is undeniable. Added to this is a kind of vacuum effect in the capital markets.

Every subsidy, especially the state-guaranteed high returns in the green art economy, drains valuable resources from the free market. Startup funding, growth financing, and venture capital are systematically squeezed or driven abroad.

Entrepreneurs may even choose the simpler path of marching along, extracting subsidies on the way to the green paradise. The problem is that state-run economics, whether executed by private companies as government proxies or directly by the state, adds no value to the economy. It is a destructive mechanism, felt even by city treasurers in Stuttgart, the new capital of ideological escapists.

Last year, trade tax revenue collapsed by roughly fifty percent—a clear sign of massive economic damage. The city budget deficit surged to €800 million. Only a €2.4 billion emergency credit keeps the city afloat over the next three years.

In real life, those responsible for this disaster might face court for insolvency mismanagement. But for politics in Germany—and much of the European Union—different standards evidently apply.

Hardly anyone seems to notice that the technological and emotional flagships with which the region identified over generations are collapsing under the green regime. Daimler alone cut 7,000 jobs in the Stuttgart region, Bosch another 4,000.

The state risks becoming a gigantic social park, partially deforested for monstrous wind turbines, its landscapes overrun with solar farms.

It is interesting to observe how conservative work ethic, once a prominent regional virtue, has translated over time into militant green-socialist moralism.

That the system still functions at all owes today’s Southwest Germany precisely to nuclear power from France. Even this shows: this universal law is sometimes tinged with bitter cynicism.

No matter how high Württembergers and Badeners have built their walls of illusion, the waves of real economics will shatter this political illusion of reform denial. Rumors are already circulating that Porsche may have to lay off up to 5,000 employees in the region. Regional industrial production is no longer competitive.

It will be a painful learning process. But even South German green enthusiasts cannot indefinitely evade the axioms of economics.

Competitiveness is not created in the seminars of flourishing NGOs or the numerous ecological interest groups preaching through the media in zealot tones.

No, companies will learn it the hard way: their real wealth, now overgrown with the swamp plant of moralism, was the product of rigorous discipline, market order, and rational bourgeois ethics. Globally sought-after engineering achievements contributed significantly.

Still, about twelve percent of the region’s total economic output comes from mechanical engineering—the very sector weakened most under the green-socialist regime, second only to the region’s automotive industry, another pillar. VDMA report

Like Shakespeare, the Romeo and Juliet of the German economy are now taking their own lives. Since 2018, industrial production in Germany has fallen over twenty percent, with mechanical engineering alone losing five percent last year.

This is no longer a recession—it is a conscious economic decline in the name of the green god, worshiped in Baden-Württemberg more fervently than anywhere else in the republic. A shame for this beautiful region with its rich and remarkable history.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a German graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

Low-cost interceptor drones are poised to see massive demand across U.S.-aligned Gulf states as the conflict with Iran grinds deeper into its second week, exposing the absurdity of expending multi-million-dollar interceptor missiles to eliminate IRGC drones that cost roughly $20,000 to $30,000 each.

One day after The Wall Street Journal reported that Saudi Arabia is in talks with Ukrainian counter-drone firms to acquire low-cost interceptor drones, the outlet provided additional color on Thursday on the companies involved and how the interceptors would be fielded.

Apparently, oil giant Saudi Aramco is in talks with Ukrainian drone companies SkyFall and Wild Hornets to acquire interceptor drones to defend its oil fields against IRGC drone attacks.

The move to acquire interceptor drones comes after IRGC drone strikes on the Berri oilfield, and amid a broader wave of IRGC attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure that has severely disrupted production.

🇮🇷🇸🇦⚡️- Visual confirmation of Iranian drone strike on Saudi Arabia’s ARAMCO, in Ras Tanura, causing a massive fire.

Footage credit –@AryJeay pic.twitter.com/hg0EWnKtXe

— MonitorX (@MonitorX99800) March 2, 2026

The CEO of a major Saudi oil exporter said earlier this week that the conflict in Iran could have “catastrophic consequences” for crude markets.

By Thursday, the International Energy Agency warned that the conflict in the Middle East had sparked the biggest oil supply disruption in history. It said global supply will plunge by 8 million barrels per day in March.

The importance of interceptor drones and other counter-drone technologies for protecting high-value assets was recognized during this conflict, as civilian infrastructure, such as data centers and skyscrapers, also became targets.

We first told readers, weeks before the conflict began, about the urgent need for kinetic interceptors to guard data centers.

Drone threats in the US will also begin to push urgency among the government and corporate America to field counter-drone technologies.

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

German automaker Volkswagen plans to cut around 50,000 jobs in Germany by 2030 as profits slump and the company struggles with rising costs, tariffs, and declining margins.

The job cuts were announced alongside the company’s 2025 financial results, which showed net profit falling 44 percent to €6.9 billion — the lowest level since the fallout from the Volkswagen emissions scandal.

At the same time, Volkswagen’s board has come under fire after securing additional bonus payments tied to the 2025 financial year.

According to reporting by Tichys Einblick, board members are set to receive bonuses of up to €1.75 million each after the company unexpectedly reported around €6 billion in net automotive cash flow for 2025, a figure that the news outlet claims was achieved by adopting “creative accounting practices.”

It pushed Volkswagen above the €5.6 billion threshold in its executive compensation scheme, activating the highest bonus tier for board members.

The cash-flow result was partly achieved through a factoring operation in which Volkswagen sold outstanding receivables from its operating business to generate immediate liquidity, according to the report.

In the same financial year, workers were forced to forgo bonuses of up to €5,000 due to the company’s weak performance.

In a letter to shareholders on Tuesday, CEO Oliver Blume confirmed the planned workforce reduction, saying the figure applies across the entire Volkswagen Group in Germany. The company had already announced plans to cut around 35,000 jobs at the core Volkswagen brand by the end of the decade.

The company said the drop in net profit was driven by billions of euros in charges linked to its sports car subsidiary Porsche AG, the impact of U.S. import tariffs, and the costs of restructuring across the group.

Revenue remained largely stable at just under €322 billion, down 0.8 percent compared with the previous year, while global vehicle deliveries slipped slightly to just under 9 million units.

Sales rose 5 percent in Europe and 10 percent in South America, but declined 12 percent in North America and 6 percent in China, where the Asian country’s domestic market continues to thrive.

Profitability was particularly affected by a sharp collapse in earnings at Porsche, where operating profit fell to just €90 million from more than €5 billion a year earlier.

CFO Arno Antlitz warned that the current level of profitability is not sustainable. “2025 was shaped by geopolitical tensions, tariffs, and intense competitive pressure, but the operating margin of 4.6 percent adjusted for restructuring is not sufficient in the long run,” his statement from the company’s press release read.

Volkswagen said its transition toward electric vehicles is also weighing on margins. Fully electric models now account for 22 percent of the company’s order backlog, and electric vehicle sales rose 55 percent last year, but high development and production costs continue to reduce profitability.

Looking ahead to 2026, the group warned that “challenges are expected in particular from the macroeconomic environment, uncertainties regarding restrictions in international trade and geopolitical tensions.”

It also cited “increasing competitive intensity, volatile commodity, energy and foreign exchange markets, as well as high requirements resulting from emissions-related regulations.”

Read more here…

Authored by Brett Wilkins via Common Dreams

A Republican senator apologized this week for what US military investigators have reportedly determined was an American missile strike on a girls’ school in southern Iran that killed around 175 people—mostly children—amid continued sidestepping by President Donald Trump, who has blamed Tehran for the massacre.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.)—who supports the US-Israeli war on Iran—first apologized for the attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ elementary school in Minab during a Monday interview with NBC News senior national political reporter Sahil Kapur. “It was terrible,” Kennedy said. “We made a mistake… I’m just so sorry it happened.”

Kennedy repeated his apology Tuesday on CNN, telling political correspondent Kasie Hunt: “The investigation may prove me wrong. I hope so. The kids are still dead, but I think it was a horrible, horrible mistake. I wish it hadn’t happened. I’m sorry it happened.”

Reuters first reported last week that US military investigators believe American forces carried out the school strike, a preliminary conclusion that came on the heels of a New York Times analysis that found the US was “most likely to have carried out the strike” due to its near-simultaneous bombing of a nearby Iranian naval base.

This week, Iranian officials displayed fragments from what is believed to be the Tomahawk missile used in the school bombing. The remnants were marked with the names of two US arms companies, a Pentagon contract number, and the words “Made in USA”.

On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that the ongoing military probe has determined that the US launched the Tomahawk strike, which paramedics and victims’ relatives said was a so-called “double-tap,” in which the attacker bombs a target and then follows up with a second strike meant to kill survivors and first responders. Investigators attribute the strike to a “targeting error,” according to the Times.

This, as Trump—who warned as his illegal war started that “bombs will be dropping everywhere”—continued sidestepping blame for the attack. On Saturday, Trump said aboard Air Force One that “based on what I’ve seen, that was done by Iran.“

Two days later, the president falsely claimed that Iran has “some” Tomahawk missiles and may have used one of them to bomb the school. Iran has no Tomahawks—which are highly restricted and sold only to a handful of close allies—and the US does not sell weapons to the Iranian government, with the notable exception of the Iran-Contra Affair, when the Reagan administration secretly sold arms to Tehran in order to fund anti-communist Contra terrorists in Nicaragua.

Other senior Trump administration officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and US Ambassador to the United Nations Michael Waltz have declined to back the president’s claims and have instead deferred to the ongoing military investigation. Kennedy told NBC News and CNN that the school bombing was unintentional.

“Other countries do that sort of thing intentionally, like Russia,” he told Kapur. “We would never do that intentionally.”

GOP Senator John Kennedy on why he felt it was important to apologize and acknowledge the truth about the bombing of a school in Minab, Iran, which multiple reports indicate was caused by a U.S. military targeting error.

“Because I think it’s the truth…we’re investigating, but… pic.twitter.com/8zinLyncA8

— Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) March 10, 2026

Since then-President George W. Bush launched the so-called Global War on Terror following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, more than 430,000 civilians have been killed in over half a dozen countries, according to the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs.

In 2020, the Costs of War Project reported a 330% rise in civilian casualties in Afghanistan following the first Trump administration’s move to loosen military rules of engagement meant to protect noncombatants. While campaigning for president in 2016, Trump infamously vowed to “bomb the shit” out of Islamic State militants and “take out their families”—a war crime—and after his election he ramped up bombing of Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and other countries, killing thousands of civilians.

The Biden administration subsequently attempted to tackle the issue, publishing the Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan (CHMR-AP), which laid out a series of policy steps aimed at preventing and responding to the death and injury of civilians. However, since returning to office, Trump has effectively sidelined the plan. Prioritizing “lethality,” Hegseth said at the outset of the current war that US forces won’t be bound by “stupid rules of engagement.”

Israel, which is bombing Iran along with US forces while simultaneously striking Lebanon and Gaza—where an estimated more than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded during 29 months of what many call a “genocidal war”—dramatically loosened its rules of engagement following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack, effectively allowing for an unlimited number of civilian deaths in any strike targeting any member of the militant resistance group, no matter how low-ranking.

According to leaked Israel Defense Forces data, 5 in 6 Palestinians killed by the IDF through the first 19 months of the US-backed war were civilians. Hundreds of Iranian and Lebanese civilians have been killed by US and Israeli attacks since February 28. US and Israeli use of artificial intelligence systems to select bombing targets exponentially faster than any person has also raised concerns regarding a lack of meaningful human oversight. One former IDF officer said AI enabled a “mass assassination factory” in Gaza. Last year’s US and Israeli attacks on Iran also killed hundreds of civilians, according to the group Human Rights Activists in Iran.

Kennedy’s apology—which some observers dismissed due to the senator’s support for the war and rejection of a war powers resolution meant to limit Trump’s ability to attack Iran without the legally required congressional approval—is still notable, as US leaders, and especially Republicans, are usually highly reluctant to say they’re sorry for civilian deaths.

The history of US-Iran relations they don’t teach you:

A month after the US shot down Iran Air Flight 665, killing 290 passengers, George H.W. Bush proudly declared:

“I’ll never apologize for the United States, I don’t care what the facts are.” https://t.co/1nNvIYR9MX pic.twitter.com/iFa3Ydh4Fo

— Afshin Rattansi (@afshinrattansi) February 25, 2026

For example, after the USS Vincennes accidentally shot down Iran Air Flight 655 in 1988, killing all 290 civilians aboard, then-Vice President George H.W. Bush—who was running for president—infamously declared, “I’ll never apologize for the United States of America, ever; I don’t care what the facts are.”

Two years later, Bush, then president, awarded the Vincennes officer in charge of air warfare a commendation medal for the “heroic achievement” of “quickly and precisely” downing the civilian airliner. The ship’s captain was also honored with the Legion of Merit for his “outstanding service.”