Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times,

Elon Musk said on Jan. 10 that his X social media platform would open its new algorithm to the public within a week.

“We will make the new X algorithm, including all code used to determine what organic and advertising posts are recommended to users, open source in 7 days,” Musk wrote in a post on X on Jan. 10.

“This will be repeated every 4 weeks, with comprehensive developer notes, to help you understand what changed.”

Authorities in the UK and the European Union notified Musk’s X and xAI on Jan. 5 that its regulatory bodies were aware of reports alleging that X’s artificial intelligence chatbot Grok had been used to generate sexually explicit images, including images that appeared to depict minors.

European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said that the EU is “very well aware of the fact that [Grok] is now offering a ‘spicy mode’ showing explicit sexual content with some output generated with childlike images.”

“This is not spicy. This is illegal. This is appalling. This is disgusting,” Regnier told reporters on Jan. 5

Musk had written in a post two days prior that “anyone using Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.”

On Jan. 8, Regnier said a retention order the EU sent to X last year would be extended to the end of 2026. The order regarded the platform’s algorithms and the potential dissemination of illegal content.

The EU also fined X 120 million euros, or $140 million, last month, accusing the company of violating the bloc’s Digital Services Act transparency obligations. The fine was levied in relation to X’s “blue checkmark” subscription model, allegations of limited transparency regarding X’s ad repository, and the platform not giving researchers access to its public data.

French prosecutors in July 2025 launched a probe into X, citing alleged algorithm abuse and fraudulent data extraction by either the platform or its executives. The investigation followed a previous preliminary probe from January 2025 after the French government received complaints from a lawmaker and a senior French official about suspected foreign influence by X.

After French public institutions and researchers provided prosecutors with their findings from the preliminary probe, prosecutors asked police to investigate the company as “both a legal entity and through individual persons.”

Prosecutors called the alleged crimes “organised interference with the functioning of an automated data processing system” and “organised fraudulent extraction of data from an automated data processing system.”

X dismissed the probe as a “politically-motivated criminal investigation” in a post from its Global Government Affairs account on July 21, 2025.

“French authorities have requested access to X’s recommendation algorithm and real-time data about all user posts on the platform in order for several ‘experts’ to analyze the data and purportedly ’uncover the truth’ about the operation of the X platform,” the company wrote at the time.

“The involvement of these individuals raises serious concerns about the impartiality, fairness, and political motivations of the investigation, to put it charitably. … French authorities have classified X as an ‘organized gang’ for the purpose of the investigation.

“This characterization, which is usually reserved for drug cartels or mafia groups, enables the French police to deploy extensive investigative powers under French law, including wiretapping the personal devices of X employees.”

X stated that it “remains in the dark as to the specific allegations made against the platform.”

“However, based on what we know so far, X believes that this investigation is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech,” the social media platform stated.

Authored by David DesRoisiers via The Spectator,

At 2 a.m. on Saturday, President Trump gave a New Year’s kinetic expression to his recently published National Security Strategy and what it means in the American hemisphere. If we take President Trump at his blustering word – which those in the administration’s Maduro-adjacent crosshairs should – this is just the first, big, shock-and-awe move by the United States in a resetting of the rules-based order that has governed our hemisphere.

This time on America First terms.

In Europe, those who take Trump seriously and see the long-term upside in his policies, call him “Daddy.” Last weekend Trump showed the “Papi” side of this national security strategy in our hemisphere. The Venezuelan people woke up praising the Papi of Venezuelan freedom. There is a new sheriff overseeing the hemisphere – and there are going to be regional and global consequences.

China is going to have to tighten its belt and stop building roads and propping up adversaries in our hemisphere. Cuba, too, should be very worried. What happened in Venezuela was not a product of a Bay of Pigs military mindset. Like Venezuela, Cuba is surrounded by the US Navy. Cuba’s infrastructure was shot before the hurricanes hit. The country looks like North Korea at night – and its people spend their days in a Hunger Games-pursuit. Without Venezuelan oil and other needed subsidies, Cuba will find itself completely dark in a matter of weeks. And their best fighters are stuck in Venezuela. Going home is not an option; escaping to Colombia and joining the Narcos is the likelier move. Soon enough, the Cuban regime with collapse under its own weight, followed by a Cuban Diaspora returning home, welcomed as liberators.

The narco-industrial complex needs to show that they are listening to Papi Gringo and adapting to new market conditions. Discontinuing the fentanyl trade and hanging its leadership from bridges would be a constructive first act of  “We hear you, Papi.”  Taking this step would help the cartels protect their core business, which has not always been poisoning Americans.

To date, President Trump has been a model of kinetic restraint and has studiously avoided the excesses of regime change and nation-building overreach.

Trump blew the minds of the neocons and their America First critics in Iran. He showed the world, in Operation Midnight Hammer, a middle path. Trump is doing so again in Venezuela with Operation Absolute Resolve. Under Trump’s leadership and direction, his administration scrupulously planned and executed a multi-agency kinetic response with minimal casualties to the regime’s key players – none to populace – resulting in a tomorrow that favors peace, and an orderly transition to better. When have we seen that before?

Tucker Carlson – with whom I disagree, but whom I refuse to quit, cancel, or stop listening to – is a not-so-stable genius when it comes to foreign policy and conduct of war. In contrast, Carlson has much to offer on how “We the People” think about our nation’s obligations to each other, citizen to citizen, which includes our elected representative. Domestic policy is the constructive lane for Tucker’s flavor of America First Quakerism.

But foreign policy is not Tucker Carlson’s strong point. Nor, frankly, is it a strong point of his foil and former colleague Mark Levin, who Carlson often depicts as a totem of neoconservatism. However, it is a strength of President Trump, and it is being faithfully executed by his Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth.

It is worth noting that his two war captains both have neocon resumes and let’s-give-war-a-chance tendencies, a cause of concern for the America First crowd. It does appear, however, that they have evolved to embrace a third way – Trump’s way – between the excesses of neoconservatism and the deficits of America First Quakerism.

Tucker and Levin are both prisoners of mindsets that necessarily lead to failure. In contrast, Trump’s approach to peace and war defies the worst features of each, and in doing so delivers on the partial in both within a win-win outcome. Iran’s nuclear ambitions got crushed without American boots on the ground, regime change and suffering of non-combatant, and combatants and leadership.

Just because Trump’s actions in Iran, and now in Venezuela, make Senator Lindsay Graham giddy, doesn’t mean that Trump’s foreign policy instincts have been captured. As in Iran, what is happening in Venezuela is not regime change; it is regime influence through leverage. This difference between the former and latter is a distinction with a huge, game-changing difference. 

Here’s a tactical expression of the American strategy: Trump does not punish the innocents – men, women, or children – or all the guilty for that matter. That is America First, restraint born of prudence. Trump hits targets – Iran’s nuclear enrichment and weaponization capacity – and cocksure leadership who don’t know the comparative size of their stick: Maduro. And when Trump does act, he does so with a precision and measure born of patient, disciplined planning and rehearsal, and with open communication to those on the ground, counseling calm, and, if not, a reality of more coming. Trump offered Maduro an off-ramp that did not require a jail cell. He could be living the al-Assad life somewhere that fits his despotic liking. He did not take it, however, and woke up in a very different position. Trump offered his second-in-command, Delcy Rodríguez – his ruthless Lady Macbeth – a second chance and new lease of life, a receivership relationship for her and her dirty-hand cronies.

This is not regime change. This is regime influence. On the same day of the extraction, the Venezuelan leadership that was spared was offered a peace-and-reconciliation olive branch. He has extended that opportunity to those already charged as co-conspirators to become collaborators in building a better Venezuela on terms that the US dictates. Foment chaos and expect to be replaced by your number two, who will distinguish themselves as a patriot by killing their boss, assume the title and play nice with Papi.

Just imagine if what we pulled off in Venezuela with Maduro, we did in Iraq with Saddam Hussein. Get him in his palace while he is sleeping and leave his people and leadership alone. And while this is happening, reach out to his second-in-command and make an offer that he or she can’t refuse with wash, rinse and repeat consequences of noncompliance.

This is a genuine Art of War insight. Give the existing leadership an opportunity to survive and evolve into better, or at least enough time to steal enough money and get out of the country. Doing so will take away the incentive to circle around the leader and fight like their fates are locked at the hip with his. Decouple their fates and you compete on a completely different terrain.

How much human suffering could have been avoided if this was our default, first response to bad behavior in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Trump’s National Security Strategy is an evolution of the art of war and statecraft. The “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine is an improvement to rally around.

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

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

According to plans from the Federal Chancellery, Germany’s foreign intelligence service, the BND, is set to significantly expand its surveillance capabilities. The focus is particularly on internet communication transmitted from within Germany to abroad, which is to be included in the agency’s monitoring catalog going forward.

After months of heated debates over the expansion of the Brussels censorship apparatus under the Digital Services Act and EU chat control, attention to the EU Commission’s espionage activities has somewhat subsided. Now, a draft law from the Chancellery, obtained by WDR, NDR, and Süddeutsche Zeitung, is causing a stir.

The proposed expansion of BND powers makes one thing clear: German politics is moving in lockstep with the Brussels Commission—going all out against the privacy and communications of citizens, media, and government-critical organizations.

A Reminder of the NSA Scandal

We recall the scandal over a decade ago involving the US National Security Agency (NSA). Whistleblower Edward Snowden exposed the agency’s operations. The NSA collected global telecommunications and internet data—including phone calls, emails, and online communications of millions of citizens—often without any criminal cause. Programs like PRISM, which allowed direct access to data from US tech companies, or X-Keyscore, which could monitor internet activity in real time, already showed how advanced state surveillance had become and what technical possibilities were available to government actors.

The leaked Chancellery document now shows where Germany is headed: the draft law follows almost the same principle. The BND would be allowed to monitor internet traffic from Germany to abroad, which was previously prohibited, capturing up to 30% of traffic. Internet communications would be stored for six months, this time including content—not just metadata—tracking connections between specific actors.

A Strategic Door Opener

The Chancellery’s approach to expanding BND powers is familiar: first, the door to the actual rule-breaking is opened. Safe spaces for journalists working for state media of authoritarian states are gradually eroded. Determinations of who counts as “authoritarian” will likely fall to an “ethics commission” subjected to the strict ethical rules of Merz’s Chancellery.

Soon, terms like “hate and incitement” or “anti-democratic activities,” as always cited in the fight against the opposition, come into play. In short: priority content revolves around the AfD circle. This also affects libertarian and conservative viewpoints opposing the climate-socialist complex or military sector expansion. Issues like a “Europe of regions” and resistance to the growing Brussels power complex will likely become part of the BND’s monitoring guidelines.

From this starting point, surveillance powers are gradually expanded—based on political urgency.

If foreign providers and platform operators are uncooperative, the BND could gain permission to legally hack and extract personal data and communications—even within Germany’s borders. It is a carte blanche for every “spy hat.” The social climate in Germany is visibly taking on the features of a digitalized DDR.

Digital Mass Surveillance

Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s draft goes far beyond previous EU-wide chat control attempts. Legal hacking of foreign systems, including Google, Meta, or Elon Musk’s platform X, is planned. The justification for this invasive policy is constructed as a strategic necessity: Germany’s IT infrastructure is increasingly threatened by hostile cyberattacks.

The BND is to play a key role and act more independently from US intelligence services. Germany aims to participate in the global intelligence network chessboard. In practice, surveillance is more likely to target its own citizens, as technical and personnel resources are insufficient to operate on an international level. The long retention and analysis periods make the direction clear: while French intelligence may store data for up to four years and the UK or Italy operate “as long as necessary,” German citizens are slowly losing privacy against an expanding bureaucratic state.

Cynical Politics and Opposition Oversight

For Green Party politician Konstantin von Notz, chair of the Parliamentary Control Panel for Intelligence (PKGr), the situation is clear: cybersecurity should be better funded but within strict legal frameworks.

At first glance, this sounds lawful but is systematically undermined by actual government actions—the proposed powers go far beyond necessary intelligence work. Brussels and Berlin’s political direction points precisely toward mass surveillance of digital communication. Platforms like X act as catalysts for opposition voices against Berlin and Brussels, criticizing Russia policy, the pandemic regime, and the growing bureaucratic apparatus. Here, clashes between state and opposition flare up.

Particularly distasteful is outsourcing monitoring to so-called “Trusted Flaggers” who report undesired content—creating a surveillance network reminiscent of DDR methods: opposition members face pressure, legal action, or loss of bank access—a social death by government command. In this context, expanding BND powers is a step toward interlinking multiple surveillance systems. The end of the secrecy of correspondence and anonymous digital communication seems sealed for EU citizens.

Repressive and Hypocritical

During the EU chat control debate, Germany initially publicly opposed indiscriminate surveillance to maintain appearances and give the impression of adhering to civil liberties traditions. Historically, libertarian forces in Germany successfully resisted state-driven data retention—proof of a healthy societal immune system.

Now, the BND is set to close this “informational” gap, initiated directly by the Chancellor. Merz theatrically portrays himself as a defender of freedom while leaving his party and coalition to ostentatiously oppose deep EU chat control.

Merz remained silent during year-end debates, fully aware that the next 180° turn had already been drafted into law. Now, with calculated cynicism, he positions Germany’s spy apparatus against its own citizens.

When the draft will enter parliament remains unclear. The Chancellery has provided no statements on this critical issue; it operates clandestinely. Germany of the 2020s still lacks effective societal “antibodies” against the growing state repression apparatus, possibly due to decades of media framing portraying the state as benevolent.

In summary: Germany has become a driving factor in both destructive climate policy and systematic erosion of civil rights in the EU—or perhaps always was, skillfully avoiding the appearance of being a malicious player in this unpleasant game.

Human rights groups say that hundreds of people have been killed during mass demonstrations that have roiled Iran in recent weeks, with thousands more detained.

At least 192 protesters have been killed since the mass demonstrations started, said the Norway-based Iran Human Rights group on Sunday. It said that “unverified reports” have shown that several hundred people, or even more than 2,000, might have been killed so far.

“Due to the total internet blackout and severe restrictions on access to information, independent verification remains a serious challenge under the current circumstances,” the organization stated.

A U.S.-based group, the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) said Sunday that at least 538 people have been killed in the government suppression of nationwide protests, adding that 490 deaths were protesters and 48 were members of the regime’s security forces.

Around 10,600 people have been detained, the group reported, adding that the death toll and arrest numbers will likely rise.

The Epoch Times’ Jack Phillips reports that it has not been able to independently verify the group’s reports. The Iranian regime has not released any official figures about the death toll or how many people have been detained.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said Sunday that outside groups have been fomenting discord in the country and have been facilitating riots as well as general unrest. He also signaled that the country’s regime would be willing to speak to some of the protesters.

“We have made our decision to resolve their problems with every possible approach … that is why we are holding talks with them on a daily basis,” Pezeshkian said, according to state-run Tasnim News.

Speaking to the youth in Iran, Pezeshkian said that they should “not … be deceived by these rioters and terrorists” and said that those individuals “are trained,” according to his comments carried by state-run media outlet PressTV.

There have been reports from inside the country that some buildings, including Mosques or courthouses, have been set on fire amid the unrest. The Epoch Times has not been able to independently those reports, either.

The demonstrations began on Dec. 28, 2025, over the collapse of the Iranian rial currency, which trades at over 1.4 million to $1, as the country’s economy is squeezed by international sanctions levied in part over its nuclear program. The protests intensified and grew into calls directly challenging Iran’s theocratic regime.

President Donald Trump has offered support for the protesters, saying on social media that “Iran is looking at FREEDOM, perhaps like never before. The USA stands ready to help!!!”

“Iran’s in big trouble. It looks to me that the people are taking over certain cities that nobody thought were really possible just a few weeks ago,” Trump told reporters on Friday. “We’re watching the situation very carefully. I’ve made this statement very strongly, that if they start killing people like they have in the past, we will get involved … that doesn’t mean boots on the ground, but it means hitting them very, very hard where it hurts.”

In this frame grab from footage circulating on social media shows protesters dancing and cheering around a bonfire as they take to the streets despite an intensifying crackdown as the Islamic Republic remains cut off from the rest of the world, in Tehran, Iran, Friday, Jan. 9, 2026. UGC via AP

Trump’s comments were made about a week after the U.S. military launched an operation in Venezuela, an ally of Iran, that captured leader Nicolás Maduro on drug-trafficking charges.

About six years ago, Trump ordered a U.S. military strike that killed top Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani, who the Trump administration described as a major backer of attacks on American forces in the Middle East. And over the summer, the U.S. and Israeli militaries launched strikes on facilities associated with Iran’s nuclear program, prompting Iran to launch missile barrages at a U.S. air base in Qatar that led to no casualties.

Some Iranian officials have responded by saying that the country could strike Israel or the United States. A parliamentary speech by Mohammad Baagher Qalibaf, the speaker of the Iranian body who has run for the presidency in the past, issued direct threats to both countries.

“In the event of an attack on Iran, both the occupied territory and all American military centers, bases and ships in the region will be our legitimate targets,” Qalibaf said over the weekend. “We do not consider ourselves limited to reacting after the action and will act based on any objective signs of a threat.”

Via Remix News,

In yet another major blow to the German automobile labor market, Mercedes has announced it will be relocating production of its A-Class from Rastatt, Germany, to Kecskemét, Hungary. While Hungary’s foreign minister is taking a victory lap, Germany’s largest opposition party is sharply crticizing he government as signs grow that Germany’s automobile market is faltering.

Trade Minister Péter Szijjártó has officially confirmed Mercedes move, writes Budapester.

Szijjártó credited the success to “an economic policy based on sound common sense and a stable government that continually attracts new investment projects from global companies in America, Asia, and even Germany.”

However, the news is not being welcomed in Germany, with the Alternative for Germany (AfD) pointing out the dire economic situation the country is facing.

“Mercedes-Benz has stood for German engineering excellence and Germany’s economic upswing for decades. Yet, like many other automakers, the company is cutting jobs in Germany and expanding in other countries. As a result, the entire production of the A-Class is being relocated to Hungary. 20,000 employees are expected to lose their jobs as a result,” wrote AfD politician Christian Abel on X.

“This is a direct consequence of Friedrich Merz’s green climate and energy policies. To make Germany an attractive industrial location again, a genuine economic policy turnaround is needed through the termination of the energy transition, the combustion engine ban, the abolition of fleet emission limits, and the elimination of state-mandated reporting requirements. If this is not possible within the EU, Germany must seriously consider a Dexit,” he wrote.

His last comment has proven controversial in the AfD itself, with the mainline position that a Dexit will not be considered. In 2024, it was reported that AfD co-leader Weidel said she ruled out completely the idea that a Dexit, or exit of Germany from the EU, was possible.

Nevertheless, in 2023, the country lost a staggering 120,000 manufacturing jobs, highlighting serious problems.

However, Hungary, already a major manufacturing hub for German automobile producers, is now set to expand. Production of the A-Class is slated to begin at the Kecskemét plant as early as Q2, with production planned to continue until 2028.

“Hungary is demonstrating economic brilliance at a time when all of Europe is suffering from the consequences of the war in Ukraine and the misguided policies of the EU headquarters in Brussels,” Szijjártó wrote on social media.

Mercedes’ decision proves that investors embrace Hungary’s political stability, low taxes, and highly skilled workforce, with the Kecskemét plant its largest production site in Europe; only in China does the group have a larger capacity, notes Budapester.

Mercedes, named “Most Attractive Employer” in 2024, now directly employs more than 5,000 people in Hungary.

In October 2024, the plant celebrated the milestone of 2 million vehicles produced; in the future, the site will be able to manufacture both combustion engine cars and plug-in hybrids and all-electric vehicles.

Mercedes is also setting up its first R&D center in Hungary. With the relocation of A-Class production, the German automaker is now entrusting three models to the Hungarians, as the electric GLB and the new C-Class were already being built in Kecskemét.

Last December, Szijjártó also posted about new jobs in Szeged brought by Germany’s Rheinmetall as well. “Rheinmetall’s new hall has been completed, which means more than 300 new, highly skilled jobs in the city! Such investments contribute to Hungary becoming one of the most important European centers for future technologies, which is why we supported the German company’s 29 billion forint investment with 13 billion forints.”

The plant will produce high-tech components for both civil and defense applications, focusing on electromobility (e-mobility), hydrogen vehicles, and renewable energy power plants, alongside some military electronics. It’s Rheinmetall’s first major site outside Germany that combines civil and defense activities under one roof, creating jobs and positioning Hungary as a hub for future technologies.

Read more here…

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

Italian authorities are attempting to force the internet service provider Cloudflare to delete and block certain online services. Cloudflare is resisting and has turned to the U.S. government for support.

The fight for a free internet is intensifying.

The struggle over control of information, censorship, and economic dominance in the digital space is increasingly becoming a fundamental civilizational question. That the European Union now sees not only the EU Commission but also national governments and security apparatuses siding with information diktats, against the fundamental principle of free speech, sends a dangerous signal to the world. The EU has effectively withdrawn from the circle of freedom-oriented state actors.

Into this picture fits a recent report from Italy. A tweet by the founder and CEO of the internet infrastructure provider Cloudflare, Matthew Prince, has caused a stir.

Yesterday a quasi-judicial body in Italy fined @Cloudflare $17 million for failing to go along with their scheme to censor the Internet. The scheme, which even the EU has called concerning, required us within a mere 30 minutes of notification to fully censor from the Internet any… pic.twitter.com/qZf9UKEAY5

— Matthew Prince 🌥 (@eastdakota) January 9, 2026

Prince reports that Cloudflare has been hit with a $17 million fine by a — as he calls it — clandestine cabal in Italy. The accusation: Cloudflare refused to participate in an Italian censorship mechanism at the behest of this group.

A Cabal of Regulators and Media Corporations

Specifically, this concerns a system controlled by the Italian media authority AGCOM (Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni) called the “Piracy Shield.” This blocking system is officially aimed at combating illegal sports and media streaming services. The main targets are the economic interests of major players such as Italy’s Serie A football league, Sky Italia, DAZN, Mediaset, and other large European media and rights corporations.

Private actors, comparable to the so-called “Trusted Flaggers” now familiar in Germany, operate on behalf of the Italian media sector within this system. They report websites, IP addresses, or suspicious domains to the Piracy Shield. The authority then compels internet service providers and infrastructure operators like Cloudflare to implement the corresponding blocks within just 30 minutes. Every advertising minute counts; piracy is indeed a dangerously significant economic factor. The question is: How do states and affected companies enforce copyright? Do they operate under the rule of law and avoid collateral damage, such as backdoor state censorship?

According to Prince, all of this happens without a judicial order or prior review, bypassing due legal process entirely. The measures affect not only allegedly illegal content but also deeply intrude into the technical infrastructure of the internet.

Cloudflare as a Critical Infrastructure Node

Cloudflare has announced that it will legally challenge the fine. As a U.S. company operating parts of its infrastructure in Europe, it is foreseeable that this conflict will quickly escalate to the political level. Prince has already stated that he will present the case in Washington this week. Italy should prepare for an uncomfortable confrontation with U.S. Vice President JD Vance, known for speaking bluntly on matters of free speech. Tricks and maneuvers by European policymakers are well known in U.S. government circles.

To understand the significance of this situation, one must look at Cloudflare’s business model. The company is one of the central pillars of internet infrastructure. It protects millions of websites from cyberattacks, accelerates data flows, and provides fundamental services like the DNS resolver 1.1.1.1. Cloudflare is not a traditional content provider but a digital shield — and precisely for this reason, a particularly vulnerable target for state censorship efforts.

Cloudflare’s current immunity from such interference is largely due to its U.S. headquarters. There, the current U.S. government explicitly supports internet freedom — regardless of European media and political criticisms of Donald Trump.

Censorship Instead of the Rule of Law

The collaboration between Italian regulatory authorities and powerful media corporations exposes a problem: Instead of choosing the lawful path through the courts — for example, by blocking financial flows to illegal services — actors resort to immediate, executive-enforced blocks. This creates infrastructure that enables far-reaching censorship, including against political opponents. Two goals appear to be pursued: enforcing national corporate interests and positioning the Italian surveillance apparatus within the broader trajectory of European policy increasingly focused on internet control and regulation.

Cloudflare’s CEO has made clear that this course could have immediate consequences for Italy. Planned responses include withdrawing free security services for Italian users, removing servers from Italian cities, and halting further investments in the country. Even the pro bono cybersecurity protection for the Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics is now in question.

Italy is sending mixed signals. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government often positions itself against Brussels’ line — critical of the Ukraine war, skeptical of further climate regulation, and more restrictive on migration. That the country opens the door to regulatory arbitrariness in digital free speech is especially perplexing in this context.

Precedent Cloudflare

Cloudflare establishes a compelling precedent. European regulators are likely to scrutinize the legal consequences closely. For the EU, this could become a lever to enforce its own censorship measures more effectively, ultimately blocking unwanted platforms — such as Elon Musk’s X — and further narrowing the corridor of acceptable discourse.

However, Cloudflare, headquartered in San Francisco, is primarily subject to U.S. law. Neither Italy nor the European Union can globally regulate the company, which digitally secures around 20% of global internet traffic. The EU can only exert pressure within its internal market — through fines, proceedings against European subsidiaries, or by steadily expanding regulatory requirements.

That open escalation has not yet occurred is largely due to Cloudflare’s systemically important role for European business, public administration, and cybersecurity. A withdrawal of Cloudflare from European digital infrastructure would carry unpredictable technical risks and, amid rising hacker threats, significant economic damage.

Current indications suggest that the U.S. government will again place its protective hand over Cloudflare — and thus over central elements of free speech. Italy would then be forced to address illegal streaming and systematic rights violations through lawful means, such as cooperation with banks and payment providers. Negotiation, rather than wielding the regulatory hammer to crush fundamental rights, would become the unusual approach.

That calls to expand security agencies’ surveillance — for instance, Germany’s BND — show Europe sliding further down a slippery slope. Free speech risks losing its status as an inalienable right — and could once again emerge as a central civilizational hallmark in the United States.

Even Pope Leo XVI in his New Year’s address warned of the erosion of free speech in Western nations, a final cautionary signal against the descent into civilizational barbarism.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe is a German graduate economist. For over 25 years, he has worked 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.

Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times,

The federal government is embarking on what Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has called “the most important infrastructure project that we’ve had in this country for decades.” It is attempting to modernize and upgrade the nation’s entire air traffic control system within a timeline of roughly three- and-a-half to four years.

Multiple aviation experts, ranging from former pilots and controllers to professors and an aviation lawyer, say the changes are needed and long overdue.

The entire project is projected to cost at least $32.5 billion, according to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), with the initial $12.5 billion downpayment funded by President Donald Trump’s spending bill in July 2025. Duffy has asked Congress for an additional $20 billion to complete the project by the end of the president’s term.

This is what the FAA has said it plans to do in this multi-year modernization project, which portions of the project experts say are most critical, some of the obstacles the federal government might face, and background on the company chosen to lead the endeavor.

What to Expect

The FAA’s plan to “deliver Americans a state-of-the-art air traffic control system” will involve replacing telecommunication lines, radar systems, software, hardware, and other core U.S. aviation infrastructure.

The agency said it will replace copper lines with fiber optics—a project that Duffy recently said is already more than 30 percent complete—and will swap outdated communication hardware with wireless and satellite technology.

These changes will be made at nearly 5,000 locations, alongside implementing more than 25,000 new radios and 462 new digital voice switches, according to an FAA fact sheet.

An air traffic controller monitors screens beside a digital Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) clock inside the control tower at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) on Sept. 4, 2013. Reed Saxon/File/AP Photo

The agency said more than 600 radar systems that “have gone past their life cycle” will be replaced. Some U.S. radar systems, particularly ground-based radar, date back to between the 1940s and the 1970s.

“The primary radar system—that goes back to World War II, and that’s still in use. And that’s basically detecting that there is something in the air. You can’t always tell what it is,” said Margaret Wallace, a former military air traffic controller and an assistant professor of aviation management at Florida Institute of Technology.

In the decades since World War II, the FAA has “added layers of technology … and if a lower level has an issue, then that’s going to create issues in all the other layers of technology,” Wallace told The Epoch Times.

Additionally, the FAA is increasing the number of airports that deploy the “Surface Awareness Initiative” (SAI). SAI is a ground-based monitoring system that allows air traffic controllers to see all aircraft traversing runways, taxiways, and other surface movement areas at airports.

As of March 2025, SAI was operational at 18 airports. The FAA aimed to install it at 50 airports by the end of 2025 and a total of 200 airports overall. An FAA spokesman told The Epoch Times on Jan. 6 that the system has now been installed at 52 air traffic control towers.

Modernizing air traffic control will also involve building a new consolidated air route traffic control center for the first time in six decades and replacing multiple control towers and one Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) facility.

TRACON facilities manage air traffic for several airports in specific regions, such as the New York City or Tampa metropolitan areas.

Air traffic controllers monitor aircraft activity at Philadelphia International Airport on Nov. 11, 2025. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Desperately Needed

U.S. airspace is in desperate need of upgrades, multiple aviation experts said.

“The basic radar technology obviously needs to be upgraded and have better detection systems. With all the GPS [global positioning system] and everything we have, I think it would be reasonable to use that as a secondary technology as well,” said Wallace, who teaches classes on air traffic control and airport management.

She described how other countries have upgraded the way their air traffic control infrastructures identify aircraft and communicate across multiple systems within their airspace, leading to improved reliability throughout.

The United States still uses analog frequency radios, similar to the AM/FM radios found in cars, which—unlike radios in airport control towers—have already been outpaced by digital devices such as smartphones that utilize new technology, Wallace said.

Some of these radios have created headaches for pilots flying into busy airspaces, according to Shawn Pruchnicki, a safety expert, former pilot, and aviation professor at Ohio State University.

“The number one problem that I think if you ask any pilot, and probably the majority of controllers, would tell you, is that we have this single channel for communications that only one person can talk at a time. I don’t know how you get around that,” Pruchnicki told The Epoch Times.

Sometimes pilots will be handed off to a new radio frequency from a previous one, and “then all of a sudden … you listen, and it’s just like this constant barrage of air traffic control clearances. It’s like this person’s not even taking a breath, and you’re just like, ‘Oh, dear God … this airspace, apparently, is out of control.’”

Even though the controllers in the tower can see and direct the planes without constant communication with pilots, Pruchnicki said there are times when a pilot needs to check in with the tower, especially if there’s an emergency, and it can “become problematic” if there are too many pilots waiting to speak on congested radio channels.

An air traffic controller stands beneath a radar screen in the control tower at Washington’s Reagan National Airport. The FAA said more than 600 radar systems that “have gone past their life cycle” will be replaced. Charles Dharapak/File/AP Photo

Making these upgrades throughout the U.S. airspace requires an entire overhaul, including rebuilding whole facilities to make way for modernized hardware and software, Wallace said.

“Because you can’t just say, ‘oh, let’s flip the switch, and we’re going to use this today,’” she said.

There’s also the need to balance the need for  change with the caution to maintain safety within a system as complex and critical as aviation, according to Shem Malmquist, who has worked in aviation for nearly 40 years, including as a commercial pilot, professor, and safety consultant.

“Whether it’s politics or whatever, you have some people that want to push forward and come up with the new ideas and constantly change things. And then you have the other, that’s the conservative side, saying, ‘No, no, wait, wait, wait; we know this other thing is working. Let’s not change too quickly,’” he told The Epoch Times.

“Those two working together creates a balance, and the same thing is true on development of safety-critical systems. You want that balance.”

Compressed Timeline

Although the upgrades are necessary, some aviation experts are concerned about the three-and-a-half to four-year timeline.

“I think it’s probably aggressive,” Greg Reigel, an aviation lawyer and private pilot, told The Epoch Times.

Reigel said the project is essentially one of the most ambitious and wide-reaching infrastructure projects in American history.

“I think it’s a good thing. I think they’re on the right track,” he said.

”I just hope that they’re doing this the right way, and that safety is first and foremost, and they’re not getting outside political or financial pressure with respect to deadlines or going live” with upgraded hardware and software, Reigel said.

Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy speaks at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on Oct. 23, 2025. Duffy recently said the FAA has replaced more than 30 percent of its copper lines with fiber optics. Eric Lee/Getty Images

Wallace said it’s not a “realistic timeline” to do a “full overhaul” of U.S. air traffic control.

“We can get some facilities started, but even when we get them up and built and everything, we still have to have a test period.”

When a new facility is built to replace an old one, it takes time to transition workers from one building to another. Throwing human factors into the mix complicates it further, Wallace said.

“It’s great to have all this new technology, but how do humans adapt to it? So they work with certain systems now; there’s going to be a big training process.” she added.

Malmquist said that any changes to a system as complex as U.S. airspace are going to require careful consideration, “management of change procedure,” and documentation of all alterations to air traffic control infrastructure and why they were replaced or modified.

“When you make a change, you can go back and trace back and say, ‘Is this going to affect these other things, but then how they’re going to interact in unexpected ways?’” he added.

Peraton to Lead Upgrade Project

The federal government on Dec. 4, 2025, announced that it had chosen Peraton, a national security and technology firm that contracts with the Department of Defense, to be the “prime integrator” of the air traffic control modernization project.

As prime integrator, Peraton’s main initiative will be managing the modernization project and making sure it is delivered on time without major disruptions to U.S. airspace, the FAA said in a fact sheet the same day.

A computer screen displays real-time air traffic over North America in the control tower at O’Hare International Airport in Chicago on Feb. 11, 2015. The FAA said it plans to replace outdated communications hardware with wireless and satellite systems at nearly 5,000 sites, along with more than 25,000 new radios and 462 digital voice switches. M. Spencer Green/File/AP Photo

Several aviation experts told The Epoch Times that they had not heard of Peraton before seeing the FAA’s announcement. The company was spun out of another defense contractor, the former Harris Corporation. Veritas Capital bought Harris Corporation’s government IT services division in 2017 and renamed it Peraton.

In a September 2025 statement, Peraton said it “brings to the table a holistic approach, unhindered by a failed history of FAA supplier performance and technical bias in serving as a pure-play systems integrator.”

Peraton did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

Harris Corporation had a decades-long history of involvement in the aviation industry, with a 2016 annual report listing air traffic control management as one of the company’s four key business components.

In 2002, Harris Corporation partnered with Lockheed Martin to develop technology for air traffic management and communications.

In 2009, the Harris Corporation acquired SolaCom Technologies, Inc., a privately held air traffic control company that was based in Quebec, Canada, at the time.

The FAA awarded Harris a 15-year, $291 million contract in 2012 to provide a new communications system for air traffic control as part of the agency’s previous “NextGen” initiative.

NextGen was similar to the Trump administration’s current plan to upgrade U.S. air traffic control nationwide, but with a key difference: it had a timeline of more than 20 years, with 2025 being the initial target date for deployment. A 2024 Department of Transportation report indicated that the project had stalled, with some portions being delayed until at least 2030.

Not content with launching a dizzying cascade of international conflicts, Trump just lobbed a nuke at the Fed. 

While Trump’s vendetta against the Fed’s Lisa Cook set for a January showdown before the Supreme Court, the Trump admin dramatically raised the stakes on Sunday when the NYT first reported, and minutes later Fed Chair Jerome Powell confirmed that the US central bank had been served grand jury subpoenas from the Justice Department threatening a criminal indictment, in what Bloomberg said was a dramatic escalation of the Trump administration’s attacks on the Fed.

As the NYT first reported, the US attorney’s office in the District of Columbia has opened a criminal investigation into Powell over the central bank’s renovation of its Washington headquarters and whether the Fed Chair lied to Congress about the scope of the project. The inquiry, which includes an analysis of Powell’s public statements and an examination of spending records, was approved in November by Jeanine Pirro, a longtime ally of President Trump who was appointed to run the office last year, the NYT sources said.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has directed US attorneys offices to look into cases of potential taxpayer abuse, said one of the NYT sources. In comments broadcast by NBC, Trump said that the DOJ’s Fed subpoenas “nothing to do with interest rates” and denied any involvement in the legal matter.

The investigation escalates Trump’s long-running feud with Powell, whom the president has continually attacked for resisting his demands to slash interest rates significantly (and, in retrospect, Trump was right as the Fed did in fact cut rates at its last 3 meetings having belatedly observed the dramatic deterioration in the labor market without an offsetting surge in inflation). The president has threatened to fire the Fed chair – whom he nominated for the position in 2017 – and raised the prospect of a lawsuit against him related to the $2.5 billion renovation, citing “incompetence.”

In a striking public response to the NYT report, Powell – who has historically ignored public commentary on Trump’s public assaults – issued a forceful written and video statement released Sunday evening using the Federal Reserve’s official account on X, in which he said the action was related to his June congressional testimony on ongoing renovations of the Fed’s headquarters. But he said “this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration’s threats and ongoing pressure.” The Fed Chair then continued:

“This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress’s oversight role; the Fed through testimony and other public disclosures made every effort to keep Congress informed about the renovation project. Those are pretexts.”

“The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president. This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions — or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.”

“I have deep respect for the rule of law and for accountability in our democracy. No one—certainly not the chair of the Federal Reserve—is above the law. But this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration’s threats and ongoing pressure,” 

“Public service sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats. I will continue to do the job the Senate confirmed me to do with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people.”

Video message from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell: https://t.co/5dfrkByGyX pic.twitter.com/O4ecNaYaGH

— Federal Reserve (@federalreserve) January 12, 2026

In the statement, Powell said he intends to continue doing his job “with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people.” He did not discuss the fact that his delayed actions during the covid crisis sparked the biggest bout of runaway inflation in 40 years, presided over the biggest insider trading scandal at the Fed which led to multiple resignations at the central bank, and was explicitly political by cutting rates in September 2024, two months before the November election, in a bid to sway the vote for Kamala Harris. 

Ironically, this latest dramatic escalation in the war between the White House and the Marriner Eccles building which are located less than a mile apart, takes place even as Powell has been doing what Trump has wanted all along: cutting rates. The president has repeatedly called for aggressive rate cuts and repeatedly mused about firing Powell. In another extraordinary step, Trump also sought to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook. The Supreme Court is set to take up the Cook case later this month.

While the Fed last month cut their benchmark rate to a target range of 3.5% to 3.75%, the third consecutive quarter-point cut, after holding rates steady through much of 2025 when inflation was supposedly about to surge, yet never did while shelter inflation sank to multi-year lows, officials have signaled they’re in no rush to lower rates again until they have more data on inflation and jobs.

since a few ppl don’t get it
– he has been a failure post covid, and is yet unaccustomed to any scrutiny, now playing a hero
– lawfare has been a fact of American politics since at least Obama; 10x’ed under Biden > if you were not protesting back then, sorry

— Barbarian Capital (@BarbarianCap) January 12, 2026

Policymakers meet next in  just over two weeks, on Jan. 27-28, with futures trading shows a minimal chance of a move at that gathering.

Powell’s term as chair will expire in May. His underlying seat on the Fed’s Board of Governor’s doesn’t end until 2028. He hasn’t indicated whether he intends to depart in May or stay on at the central bank.

Earlier this weekend, Trump said he has already picked his nominee to replace Powell. He has not named Powell’s successor, but Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, is a front-runner.

In response to news of the investigation, Republican Senator Thom Tillis, a member of the Senate Banking Committee which oversees the Fed, came to the Fed’s defense on Sunday night. In a statement he said he would “oppose the confirmation of any nominee for the Fed — including the upcoming Fed chair vacancy — until this legal matter is fully resolved.”

“If there were any remaining doubt whether advisers within the Trump administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve, there should now be none. It is now the independence and credibility of the Department of Justice that are in question,” Tillis said.

The Trump administration last summer ramped up scrutiny over the Fed’s renovation of two historic buildings and rising costs associated with the project. Fed budget documents show cost estimates for the project had risen to $2.5 billion in 2025, compared with $1.9 billion in 2023. In testimony last June, Powell broadly disputed media reports, and criticisms from administration officials and some congressional Republicans, that the project had extravagant design features, such as a VIP dining room and roof terrace gardens, Bloomberg reported.

Powell also said during the testimony that the project’s plans had “continued to evolve” and that some earlier features “are no longer in the plans.”

Office of Management Director Russ Vought referenced the testimony in a letter he sent to Powell last July asking for details on the renovation. Bill Pulte, director of the Federal Housing Finance Administration and a fierce critic of Powell, has alleged that Powell lied about the specifics of the project during the hearing and suggested the matter could amount to sufficient legal “cause” to justify removing the Fed chief from his role. At the time, Republican Representative Anna Paulina Luna also asked the DOJ to consider investigating and prosecuting Powell for allegedly lying under oath in his testimony.

Amid the controversy, Trump toured the renovation site and signaled the project was not reason enough to fire Powell. Months later, on Dec. 29, Trump said he was considering a “gross incompetence” lawsuit against Powell related to the project.

Under the law that created the Fed, the president can remove members of the Board of Governors only for cause, generally interpreted to mean inefficiency, malfeasance in office or neglect of duty.

“It sounds like Trumpian vengeance and pressuring him to leave in May,” said Mark Spindel, author of The Myth of Independence: How Congress Governs the Federal Reserve, said in reaction to the subpoenas. “If Powell hung around on the board, that complicates Trump’s majority — he needs the seats.”

Ironically, by escalation the Fed against Powell, Trump may have made Powell’s decision to stick around and mess with the president’s plans for a ultradovish Fed, problematic.

Or maybe not and it’s all for show: according to the latest Polymarket odds, the probability of Powell being federally charged by June 30 – a date that is beyond Powell’s chairman tenure – is only 18%.

The US dollar weakened on news of the probe, falling against all its major counterparts, while gold extended gains to a record high and bitcoin jumped. Futures on the S&P 500 Index fell 0.3%.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Jan. 11 told Cuba that it should forge a deal with the United States now that Washington has pushed Venezuela to cut off its supply of oil and money to the communist-run island.

After the U.S. military captured Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3, interim Venezuelan leader Delcy Rodríguez has redirected oil deliveries to the United States.

Cutting off Venezuelan oil supply to Cuba, which has historically relied on support from Caracas, would apply significant pressure to the Caribbean country, which has been under communist control since Fidel Castro’s 1959 revolution.

“Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela. In return, Cuba provided ‘Security Services’ for the last two Venezuelan dictators, BUT NOT ANYMORE!” Trump wrote on social media, referring to the Cuban security forces who were killed during the operation to capture Maduro and bring him to the United States to face a federal indictment.

The U.S. president said Venezuela no longer needs protection from Cuban security forces now that it has the United States, “the most powerful military in the world,” to protect its officials.

“THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA—ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE,” Trump said.

Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez, leader of the Cuban regime, responded to Trump in a series of social media posts on Jan. 10, saying the communist nation is “ready to defend the Homeland to the last drop of blood.”

“Those who blame the [communist] Revolution for the severe economic shortages we suffer should hold their tongues in shame,” he said.

As Jacob Burg reports for The Epoch Times, assessments by the U.S. Intelligence Community paint a grim picture inside the communist nation, with Cuba’s tourism and agriculture industries significantly affected by routine blackouts, trade sanctions, and a host of other problems.

The island’s tourism industry has seen a decline since the COVID-19 pandemic, and its economy has retracted alongside Venezuela’s over the past decade. U.S. embargos have also added to Cuba’s domestic concerns.

Between January 2025 and November 2025, Caracas sent an average of 27,000 barrels per day to Cuba, accounting for roughly 50 percent of the island’s oil deficit, or a quarter of Cuba’s total energy demand, according to the Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA’s shipping data and reports.

Cuba also receives oil shipments from Russia, which will likely become one of the island’s sole remaining suppliers if Washington’s oil embargo continues.

Mexico has also supplied Cuba with oil, although Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said on Jan. 7 that recent oil exports to the island are not higher than what they have been historically.

Pressure on Cuba increased after the United States seized two additional Venezuelan-linked oil tankers on Jan. 7.

Trump recently told reporters on Air Force One that he thinks that “Cuba looks like it is ready to fall.”

“I don’t know if they’re going to hold out, but Cuba now has no income,” he said. “They got all their income from Venezuela, from the Venezuelan oil.”

Richard Feinberg, a professor emeritus at the University of California–San Diego, who has served in several high-ranking U.S. national security roles, told Reuters that Cuba’s economic conditions are “certainly very bad.”

“When a population is really hungry, what it does is, your day-to-day is just about survival. You don’t think about politics, all you think about is putting bread on the table for your family,” Feinberg said. “On the other hand, people can become so desperate that they lose their fear, and they take to the streets.”