According to Reuters national security reporter Phil Stewart on X, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has targeted a data center facility operated by Oracle in Dubai. 

IRAN’S REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS SAY THEY HAVE TARGETED ORACLE’S DATA CENTER IN DUBAI – STATE MEDIA

— Phil Stewart (@phildstewart) April 2, 2026

Not much is known about the IRGC strike on Oracle’s data center or what type of air-delivered munitions were involved. There is no word on what damage the facility sustained.

Context on Oracle’s data center operations in the Middle East: 

Oracle’s Dubai facility is its Oracle Cloud UAE East region, with the region identifier me-dubai-1 and region key DXB. Oracle says the Dubai cloud region is located in Dubai, UAE, and the company also operates a second UAE region in Abu Dhabi. 

Oracle’s data center map:

Oracle’s status page currently shows no operational issues in Dubai or worldwide. 

On Wednesday, the IRGC targeted Amazon’s cloud computing operation in Bahrain. Also, last month, numerous data centers operated by U.S. companies were hit by IRGC drones (read report).

Earlier this week, Sepah News, the IRGC’s official news outlet, named 18 U.S. companies with operations in the Middle East that are now considered “legitimate targets.”

“From now on, for every assassination, an American company will be destroyed,” the RGC-affiliated news outlet said.

The list of companies also included Cisco, HP, Intel, Oracle, IBM, Dell, Palantir, JPMorgan, Tesla, GE, Spire Solutions, Boeing, and UAE-based artificial intelligence company G42.

Related:

• U.S. Alerts Goldman Sachs Paris After Iranian Group Threatens Terror Bombing

One thing the U.S.-Iran conflict has taught the world is that civilian infrastructure is not off limits, as well as the massive security gaps in protecting data centers from cheap drones. 

Authored by Alexander William Salter via AmericanMind.org,

It’s illegal in theory and ineffective in practice.

The independence of the Federal Reserve System has become a major source of public controversy. As political leaders signal dissatisfaction with monetary policy, officials and commentators rush to defend the central bank’s insulation from democratic pressure.

We are told, as if it were self-evident, that central bank independence is a pillar of sound economic governance.

But this confidence is misplaced. The economic case for central bank independence is far weaker than its defenders suggest. And the constitutional case is weaker still.

Start with economics. The standard argument is that independent central banks deliver low and stable inflation because they are insulated from short-term political incentives.

Elected officials, facing electoral pressures, might be tempted to juice the economy with artificially loose monetary policy. By contrast, independent technocrats can take the long view.

Early empirical studies did show that countries with independent central banks experienced lower inflation. Yet more recent research has cast doubt on this relationship.

The correlation is sensitive to different samples and methods. In many cases, the supposed benefits of independence disappear entirely.

A more plausible explanation has emerged. Countries that enjoy low and stable inflation share deeper institutional characteristics: respect for the rule of law, stable political systems, and credible commitments to property rights. These are the real foundations of sound money. Central bank independence accompanies these basic governance norms, but its standalone effect is debatable.

This matters for a free-enterprise economy. Monetary policy is not a neutral technocratic exercise. Interest rates are prices: the price of time, risk, and capital. When insulated officials tinker with those prices at their discretion, the result is distorted market signals. Cheap credit can mislead investors, encourage unsustainable projects, and redistribute wealth in opaque ways. Independence does not eliminate politics. It simply hides politics behind a veil of expertise.

If the economic case for independence is overstated, the constitutional case is entirely bunk. The Constitution is clear: Congress holds the power “to coin Money” and “regulate the Value thereof.” Monetary authority, like all legislative power, originates with the people’s representatives. Congress may delegate certain functions to administrative bodies, including by creating a central bank. But delegation is not abdication. Those who exercise delegated authority remain accountable to the laws Congress passes and, ultimately, to the chief executive charged with enforcing them.

Yet the modern Fed operates as if our constitutional framework were irrelevant. Its leaders enjoy significant protection from removal. Its decisions (targeting interest rates, allocating credit, regulating banks, etc.) have sweeping consequences for the entire economy. If this does not constitute the exercise of executive power, it is hard to say what does.

The Supreme Court has recently emphasized that administrative agencies cannot be insulated from presidential oversight simply because they possess technical expertise.

The separation of powers does not yield to convenience, nor to the promise of better policy outcomes.

Yet when it comes to the Federal Reserve, the Court has signaled a willingness to tolerate precisely such insulation—a “special case” for the most powerful economic institution in the country.

This exception is indefensible. Appeals to history or prudence, however well-grounded, are not constitutional arguments. An agency that wields executive power must answer to the chief executive. Concerns about how that works in practice does not justify ignoring the Constitution.

The truth is that central bank independence persists not because it is firmly grounded in law or economics, but because the alternative unsettles us. We worry, not without reason, that elected officials might misuse monetary policy for short-term gain. But the Constitution does not permit us to resolve that fear by concentrating vast economic power in the hands of unaccountable experts. A free and self-governing people must confront the difficult task of designing institutions that combine competence with accountability.

That begins with Congress. There are several legislative reforms that can restore the rule of law to monetary policy. First, lawmakers should narrow the Federal Reserve’s mandate to a single, clear objective—price stability—rather than the vague and conflicting goals it currently pursues. A simpler mandate would make it easier to evaluate performance and hold policymakers responsible when they fail.

Second, Congress should revisit the legal protections that shield senior Fed officials from removal. Freedom of judgment is one thing; freedom from oversight is another. Officials entrusted with such consequential authority must ultimately answer to elected leadership. Legislators ought to make it easier to fire central bankers.

Finally, the president should take a more active role in ensuring that the Fed operates within its statutory and constitutional bounds. This does not mean dictating day-to-day interest rate decisions. Instead, it means recognizing that monetary policy, like all exercises of government power, must remain subject to democratic control. President Trump’s nomination of Kevin Warsh as the next Fed chairman is a good start. The two must work together to restore normalcy to the Fed’s everyday operations, something missing since the 2007-08 financial crisis.

Economic stability is obviously desirable. But we cannot purchase it at the cost of self-government.

Republican principles require officials to be answerable to the people.

If we are serious about preserving the constitutional order and free enterprise, we must abandon the comforting myths of central bank independence and restore accountability to the Federal Reserve.

The Gulf energy shock is now hitting Asian economies with full force.

In Seoul, President Lee Jae Myung on Thursday urged citizens to “save every drop of fuel,” a new sign policymakers are moving quickly into crisis mode as the U.S.-Iran conflict raises the risk of nasty fuel shortages across some of Asia’s most energy- and Hormuz-dependent economies.

Lee told lawmakers in a parliamentary address about the urgent need to conserve fuel. He warned that the Middle East crisis has triggered one of the worst energy shocks ever.

“I earnestly appeal to all citizens to actively participate in energy-saving movements in daily lives, such as taking public transportation and conserving electricity,” Lee said.

He added, “The current crisis is not a passing shower that quickly subsides, but rather a massive storm whose duration is uncertain, making it all the more severe.”

South Korea is trying to offset a collapse in energy imports from the Gulf region, with the Hormuz chokepoint still disrupted as the U.S.-Iran conflict enters its second month.

Lee’s government proposed a $17 billion emergency program to cushion households and businesses against fuel price shock.

Seoul has already imposed a fuel price cap, expanded fuel tax cuts, and moved to secure alternative supplies of key petrochemicals such as naphtha, as well as urea for fertilizer.

Seoul also announced it will delay the shutdown of coal-fired power plants and has lifted caps on coal-fired electricity, as coal switching across Asia goes into high gear to offset losses in Gulf energy flows.

In South Asia, India has told coal-fired power plants to crank up power generation. 

Australian officials asked citizens to trade their cars for public transport to conserve fuel. Fuel shortages in the country have become visible in recent weeks because it is highly exposed to Gulf energy flows.

Last month, China halted refined fuel exports to the region to preempt a potential fuel shortage.

JPMorgan analysts recently explained that the energy shockwave from the Iran war is already hitting Asia, with Africa next, then Europe, and shortly thereafter the U.S., especially West Coast states.

The disruption of petrochemical production in the Gulf region has also sparked a global plastics supply crisis. To note, China is the world’s largest plastic consumer and producer.

Which country will be next to declare a fuel crisis and urge citizens to take public transportation? 

Authored by Aidan Johnston via Gun Owners of America,

President Trump campaigned on restoring robust protections for the Second Amendment. Yet more than a year into his second term, gun owners feel disillusioned, and many are planning to sit out the midterm elections.

Having viewed President Trump’s election as a generational opportunity to course-correct, the stark reality is that not all that much has changed with respect to the nation’s gun laws. Gun owners’ frustration centers not on the Administration’s broader record, but on the large number of times the Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi has fallen short on gun rights.

Ms. Bondi entered office with a mixed record on the Second Amendment. During her time as Florida’s attorney general, she supported a number of anti-gun restrictions after the Parkland shooting, including red flag laws, raising the age for gun ownership, Florida’s open carry ban, and a ban on bump stocks.

Understandably, then, gun rights groups voiced concerns during her nomination. In retrospect, they were completely justified.

For starters, President Trump ordered Bondi to prepare and submit a report examining Second Amendment infringements. But DOJ then sought an extension, and the deadline for DOJ’s report came and went with no public evidence that it was ever delivered. This has left a visible gap where decisive action was promised.

But gun owners aren’t just disappointed in a lack of a public roadmap. DOJ and ATF thus far have failed to curtail three major Biden-era rules that candidate Trump pledged to eliminate in his first week.

First, Biden’s so-called “ghost-gun” regulation survived Supreme Court review in a case that the Trump Department of Justice should have immediately rendered moot.

Second, a regulatory ban on pistol stabilizing braces continues to be enforced against some firearms despite pro-gun injunctions.

Third, Biden’s universal background check rule remains on the books, with DOJ attempting various legal maneuvers to avoid it being struck down.

These unfinished tasks – and many more like them – fuel a narrative of inaction at the department level.

Contrast DOJ’s lack of forward progress on gun rights with progress elsewhere in the administration.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon is using the Civil Rights Division to challenge unconstitutional state-level gun controls, earning regular praise from Second Amendment advocates.

The Department of Veterans Affairs restored gun rights to more than 250,000 veterans previously flagged solely for needing fiduciary assistance with benefits.

The Treasury Department rolled back reputational-risk guidance that had pressured banks against serving the firearms industry.

The Department of the Interior expanded hunting access on federal lands.

And , Congress eliminated a century-old $200 tax on suppressors and short-barreled firearms.

But that Congressional enactment merely circles back to another area where Ms. Bondi’s leadership has lagged. After federal lawmakers reduced the National Firearms Act tax from $200 to zero, DOJ inexplicably continued defending related federal registration requirements against litigation by Gun Owners of America and fifteen Republican state attorneys general.

For its part, GOA repeatedly has offered to help DOJ deliver on President Trump’s campaign promises. But those proffers have almost always been rejected or ignored. Rather, we’ve received a number of requests to temper our criticism of Ms. Bondi, so as not to offend her notoriously sensitive feelings.

As a result, public statements proclaiming that Ms. Bondi’s DOJ is the “most pro-Second Amendment administration in history” became a punchline among Trump’s pro-gun base, rather than a rallying point. Among gun owners, the feeling about DOJ has been, ‘with friends like these, who needs enemies?’

Rather than advancing the president’s agenda on the Second Amendment, Bondi protected the institutional interests of the Department of Justice. Under her leadership, DOJ continued defending unconstitutional gun laws, fought to moot promising pro-Second Amendment lawsuits without resolution, slow-walked deregulatory efforts, and repeatedly assured gun owners that the status quo represented the best achievable outcome.

At one point, Bondi even “bragged” to Congress about ATF—an agency that tyrannized gun owners for four years under Joe Biden.

Gun owners did not vote for President Trump merely to preserve business as usual at the DOJ. Rather, they elected him to radically de-weaponize federal power and fundamentally reorient federal priorities toward safeguarding constitutional rights.

The net result is a paradox. Across most of the executive branch and in Congress, the second Trump term has delivered tangible gains for gun owners. Yet polling and grassroots sentiment still show a negative impression of the administration on firearms issues. Nearly all of that discontent traces back to DOJ’s utter failure to deliver on the President’s campaign promises.

The good news is that this problem is easily fixed by whomever becomes the next Attorney General. A clear roadmap exists:

First, announce immediately that the three Biden ATF rules are no longer being enforced. Direct the ATF to cease new prosecutions or administrative actions based on them.

Second, in ongoing litigation, pursue swift settlements that include binding commitments to non-enforcement and regulatory rescission of Biden-era gun control.

Third, instruct the department to stop defending plainly unconstitutional gun laws and regulations in court, consistent with recent Supreme Court precedent.

These steps require no new legislation and can be executed quickly. Implementing them would demonstrate fidelity to the president’s agenda, neutralize a huge source of voter dissatisfaction, and energize the gun-rights community ahead of the midterms.

Time is short. The midterms loom, and sustained enthusiasm from Second Amendment voters remains essential to building the durable majority President Trump envisions. The next Attorney General will have the tools to repair DOJ’s relationship with gun owners. What DOJ needs now is the will to use them decisively.

The Trump administration on Thursday announced a pair of tariff actions under national-security authority, maintaining core 50% duties on many imported steel, aluminum and copper products while overhauling the rules to exempt goods containing negligible amounts of those metals and imposing 100% tariffs on imported patented pharmaceuticals that do not meet new domestic production or pricing conditions.

The pharmaceutical measure targets branded drugs and active ingredients brought in by companies that have neither struck “most-favored-nation” pricing deals with the U.S. government nor committed to manufacturing in the United States. Exemptions will be honored for firms that reach such agreements or are already building or expanding U.S. plants. The policy gives large drugmakers 120 days and smaller ones 180 days to comply. Generics and certain trade-agreement partners are largely unaffected.

Exceptions were also granted, lowering tariffs to 15 percent – for the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, and South Korea, and a 10 percent levy for the United Kingdom.

Reduced rates reflect prior commitments with trading partners, according to a senior administration official.

The UK was awarded a lower tariff “because they were the first ones who did this deal, and they committed to raise their prices for pharmaceuticals, and they have actually done so,” the official told reporters during a background call on April 2.

Trump negotiated deals with 13 pharmaceutical companies over the past year, securing $400 billion in domestic manufacturing investments, the Epoch Times reports.

In tandem, the White House released updated fact sheets detailing changes to Section 232 tariffs on steel, aluminum and copper and their derivative products. The administration will keep 50% tariffs in place on many imported steel, aluminum and copper products. However, goods in which the total steel, aluminum or copper content is below 15% will be effectively exempted. Some other derivative goods will face a lower 25% rate if they are deemed “substantially made” of one of the metals. Even so, 50% tariffs will remain on a large number of derivative products—including imported steel pipe—and will be assessed against the full value of the product, not merely its metal content.

A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to describe the changes before formal announcement, said the revisions were designed “to simplify a complicated policy and provide more fairness to businesses grappling with President Donald Trump’s tariff regime.”

The adjustments follow months of lobbying by companies that complained that earlier duties on derivative products unfairly hit items containing only trace amounts of metal, Bloomberg reports. Officials cited consumer products such as dental floss, which contains a small metal cutter but otherwise has negligible steel or aluminum content, and washing machines as examples that will now receive relief.

Summary of metals tariffs (via the White House):

• The Trump administration will maintain 50% tariffs on many imported steel, aluminum, and copper products under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
• The policy simplifies duties for goods made with negligible amounts of these metals to provide fairness to businesses and ease compliance.
• Goods with total steel, aluminum, or copper content below 15% will be effectively exempted from the metals tariffs.
• Some derivative goods will be subject to a lower 25% rate if they are deemed “substantially made” of steel, aluminum, or copper.
• 50% tariffs will remain in place on a large number of derivative products – including, for example, imported steel pipe – and will be assessed against the full value of the product, not merely its metal content.
• The revisions address months of lobbying from companies that said earlier duties unfairly hit items containing only trace amounts of metal.
• Examples of products receiving relief include consumer goods such as dental floss (small metal cutter with negligible steel/aluminum content) and washing machines.
• The changes build on the administration’s second-term trade agenda and follow the Supreme Court’s earlier decision striking down certain emergency authorities, allowing the White House to continue using Section 232 national-security tools.
• Administration officials emphasized that the revisions will not have a significant impact on consumer prices and will help ensure the tariffs function as originally intended.

The revised metal tariffs were established under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. They come roughly one year after the launch of the administration’s second-term trade agenda, which initially imposed broad levies using emergency authorities. The Supreme Court earlier this year struck down certain country-by-country tariffs imposed under that emergency law, prompting the administration to rebuild protections through alternative pathways.

Administration officials said the changes are intended to support domestic production and American workers while easing compliance burdens. Jon Toomey, president of the Coalition for a Prosperous America, a group representing U.S. manufacturers, welcomed the move. “This action will help ensure these tariffs function as intended to support domestic production and American workers,” he said.

The White House downplayed the revised tariff scheme’s likely impact on consumer prices. Officials noted that while some imported steel and aluminum goods could face higher duties under the new full-value assessment, the simplified structure should reduce administrative headaches for importers.

Full official proclamations, fact sheets and implementation guidance from the Commerce Department and U.S. Customs and Border Protection are now available on whitehouse.gov. Affected industries have a window to adjust supply chains before the changes take full effect. Trading partners are expected to review the measures in the coming days.

Summary

• No mention of ceasefire while vowing to keep hitting Iran ‘extremely hard’ in Wed. night Trump speech. Escalating tit-for-tat overnight strikes. Oil drops on reports of Iran-Oman coordination to reopen strait.

• US intelligence assessments say Iran is not ready to negotiate given it believes it has the strategic upper-hand, and doesn’t believe Trump is ‘serious’ about talks: NYT

• Highest bridge in Iran, connecting Tehran and Karaj, destroyed – amid reports of expanding attacks on civilian infrastructure. Iran threatens Port of Haifa in response.

• UK’s Starmer chairs virtual summit of over 30 countries to discuss methods of how to reopen Hormuz Strait

*  *  *

Iran, Oman Reportedly Coordinating on Reopening Strait of Hormuz

Emerging headlines say that Iran is drafting a protocol with Oman for the potential reopening of Strait of Hormuz traffic, per state IRNA: 

Kazem Gharibabadi, Legal and International Deputy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, pointed out that even in peaceful conditions, the traffic of ships should be monitored and coordinated with the coastal countries, Iran and Oman, and said: “Of course, these requirements will not mean restrictions, but to facilitate and ensure safe passage and provide better services to ships that pass through this route.”

And Bloomberg also confirms: “Iran is drafting a protocol with Oman to monitor traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, state-run IRNA reports, citing Iran Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi.”

After earlier headlines suggesting a prolonged war (and thus Hormuz closure), this note of optimism has pushed oil prices down once again:

Tit-For-Tat Escalation of Strikes in Overnight Hours

By many accounts the overnight hours saw one of the largest Iranian missile attacks on Israel, with multiple salvos sent since midnight and many cluster munitions. Several Israelis were wounded, including reports of children and infants. Via Bloomberg:

After US President Trump last night pledged more aggressive attacks in coming weeks, Iran’s army chief ramped up threats, saying that “if the enemy attempts a ground operation, not a single person should survive,” as the US ordered thousands of troops to the region.

One particularly alarming escalation is that the Houthis have now joined in on Iran’s ballistic missile attacks, with the Yemeni group said to be coordinating the strike waves with Tehran, and alongside Hezbollah in the north. At least 50 rockets were fired out of southern Lebanon alone on northern Israel and Haifa, resulting in some injuries but no reports of fatalities. Israel has hit back, bombing at least 40 Hezbollah infrastructure targets in Lebanon in the past 24 hours, killing 10 operatives – per regional military reports.

Among overnight Iranian targets included a Ground Forces base, ballistic missile storage, and sites near Isfahan, international reports say. There have also been reports of recent strikes on Jordan, northern Iraq, as well as the Gulf states, with Qatar demanding that Tehran pay compensation for its immense losses and damage.

Oil Prices Surge After Trump Vows To Hit Iran ‘Extremely Hard’ In Speech

“Tonight, Iran’s navy is gone, their air force is in ruins, their leaders, most of them… are now dead. Their command and control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is being decimated as we speak,” President Trump stated in his address from the White House last night. “Their ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed, and their weapons factories and rocket launchers are being blown to pieces, very few of them left.” Trump said further that the United States is “on the cusp of ending Iran’s sinister threat to America and the world.“

He declared that Israel and the United States are nearing their main goals in the war against Iran and that the conflict would end soon, though he gave no clear timeline. He repeatedly emphasized the war was close to finishing in his address, but didn’t define what ‘mission accomplished’ would look like exactly. The key thing is that no concrete timeline was given.

In the speech, Trump highlighted the “swift, decisive and overwhelming” blows delivered to Iran over the past four weeks, calling them “victories like few people have ever seen before.” He did not specify when operations would end but said the US would strike Iran “extremely hard” over the next two-three weeks while negotiations continue. There was more talk of sending Iran “back to the stone age” – after in the past declaring that the US would “help” them:

“We are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages, where they belong.”

The result of all this was to send oil prices back near the highs since war started…

Iran is continuing to target US bases and assets across the region – even in Jordan and Israel (tech companies):

⚡️Insane video shows Iranian missile striking a US base in Jordan. pic.twitter.com/A56X10tSuq

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) April 2, 2026

NYT: US Intelligence Contradicts Trump, Says Tehran Not Ready to Negotiate

The New York Times has meanwhile reported that several US intelligence agencies believe Iran is currently unwilling to engage in serious negotiations. “The assessments say the Iranian government believes it is in a strong position in the war and does not have to accede to America’s diplomatic demands, the officials said. And while Iran is willing to keep channels open, they said, it does not trust the United States and does not think President Trump is serious about negotiations,” NYT says.

However, there’s a glimmer of hope, per the report: “The Iranian government could engage diplomatically under the right conditions, said two Iranian officials and a Pakistani official. Tehran wants to see that Washington is willing to talk seriously about ending the war and not just negotiate a temporary cease-fire, they said. They added that the language in public statements from Iran has been harsher than that of private messages it has passed to the United States.”

More shifting war aims and objectives…

Three days ago Rubio omitted nuclear capabilities from the list of war aims. Now they are back on. Every day is an adventure. https://t.co/3LtzZ49kA5 pic.twitter.com/YBSAk0ewSD

— Shashank Joshi (@shashj) April 2, 2026

‘Highest Bridge in Middle East’ Hit by Airstrikes

There’s more evidence of US-Israeli attacks on Iran civilian infrastructure, as it’s being reported Thursday that fresh airstrikes hit a highway bridge connecting Tehran and Karaj, according to Fars News Agency. Several people were injured, and multiple areas of Karaj were also struck. The bridge was actually just constructed, having been inaugurated earlier this year.

Fars identified it as the B1 bridge, dubbed the highest bridge in the Middle East. Tehran also continues to get pummeled hard, amid reports that the prior 24 hours saw the biggest wave of Iranian missiles and cluster munitions on Tel Aviv to date.

B1 bridge in Karaj has been hit in US-ISRAELI attacks.

This bridge is reportedly the “highest bridge in West Asia.” pic.twitter.com/rZUhmeT9ph

— Alireza Akbari (@itsalireza_akb) April 2, 2026

Operation Epic Fury seems to now be going after buildings and centers which play a vital role in terms of civilian infrastructure and maintaining day-to-day life in the country…

Established in 1920, the Pasteur Institute of Iran in Tehran is historically significant as the oldest leading public health and vaccine production center in the Middle East – Now its bombed pic.twitter.com/6ATW7wlmr8

— Alex Vatanka (@AlexVatanka) April 2, 2026

UK Gathers Over 30 Countries to Discuss How to Open Strait of Hormuz

Nearly three dozen countries are holding virtual meeting Thursday to coordinate diplomatic and political pressure to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. But notably the United States will not be represented in the virtual summit.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the meeting, chaired by Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, “will assess all viable diplomatic and political measures we can take to restore freedom of navigation, guarantee the safety of trapped ships and seafarers and to resume the movement of vital commodities.”

Iranian attacks on commercial vessels and continued threats have halted nearly all traffic (there have been some exceptions) through the waterway linking the Persian Gulf to global oceans, cutting off a critical oil route and driving petroleum prices sharply higher – with some 16 or more tankers having been directly attacked so far, per Bloomberg estimates.

Aftermath of Wednesday drone strike on oil warehouse in the Kani Qirzhala area on the outskirts of Erbil, northern Iraq:

Meanwhile Qatar has submitted another letter to the UN demanding that Iran “provide compensation for all damages” and to cease its attacks on Gulf countries.

The global tug-of-war for fuel looks set to accelerate, with traders scrambling to secure supplies even more aggressively after President Trump showed no signs of an end to hostilities (and a reopening of the Strait) any time soon.

The longer the Strait of Hormuz remains closed, the more intense the competition is likely to become. Traders have warned that Europe is at risk of diesel shortages in the coming weeks.

“Everything about this market is wild,” said Philip Jones-Lux, a senior oil analyst at energy analytics firm Sparta Commodities.

“Europe is still short of diesel, but the situation in Asia is so much more acute that prices there are pulling barrels halfway around the world.”.

Nevertheless, Europe’s diesel futures rose to the highest level since 2022, as the Iran war hits supply of the fuel that powers the global economy.

As Bloomberg reports, futures traded as high as $1,498 a ton, or more than $200 a barrel, as they surged as much as 9.7% in London.

Prices have almost doubled since the war in the Middle East started over a month ago with US and Israeli attacks on Iran, and Tehran’s retaliation resulting in an effective closure of the vital Strait of Hormuz.  

As Goldman futures trader, Robert Quinn notes (pro subs can read Quinn’s full note here), the onset of the Iran War forced substantial producer short covering in European Diesel.

According to Commitment of Traders, Gasoil Producer, Merchant, Processor, and User (PMPU) shorts tumbled -$13bn during February 24th – March 10th.

This marked the largest 2 week decline since Russia attempted to invade Ukraine.

But PMPU downside eventually reinitiated, albeit slowly. Over March 10th – 24th, PMPU shorts rebounded +$3.9bn.

And speculators resumed long purchases. After generally liquidating throughout the initial price rally, Managed Money, Other, and Non-Reportable bought +$1.3bn of gross longs from March 17th – 24th.

As questions surrounding the conflict’s sustainability surfaced, general risk reduction ensued.

Over March 24th – April 1st, which included the administration’s initial signaling for an end to the fighting, Gasoil aggregate open interest shed -$3.7bn.

Notably, 3 month implied volatility and normalized 25 delta put-call skew retraced from their respective max and min. 

Thus Trump’s recent vow to strike Iran “extremely hard” has conceivably prompted more speculative gross long buying and/or producer short terminations. 

Europe generally produces less diesel than it consumes and relies on imports.

But, interestingly, even as the ‘normal’ flow is into Europe, there is massive demand from the rest of the world – most notably Australia – where panic buying, especially in rural areas, has driven up demand and left some service stations out of fuel.

The government has urged conservation, blaming the shortages on hoarding rather than underlying supply disruptions.

As Bloomberg concludes, with little sign of when the Hormuz waterway might be fully reopened, pressure is increasing on diesel markets.

The fuel is the lifeblood of the global economy – used to power everything from trucks to construction equipment – and rising prices risk driving up inflation around the world.

The secondary (and tertiary) impact of Trump’s war in Iran are just getting started.

Nano Nuclear submitted a Construction Permit Application (CPA) to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for their Kronos microreactor project at the University of Illinois. The filing marks the latest step in a project we’ve tracked since site characterization began last fall.

Watch: Modular Energy Pioneer Nano Nuclear Begins Drilling First Reactor In Illinois https://t.co/hUcFvtXfaD

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 24, 2025

Kronos is a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) engineered for commercial deployment. It delivers 15 megawatts of carbon-free baseload power using meltdown-resistant TRISO fuel and helium coolant. The design emphasizes walk-away safety, autonomous operation during grid outages, and scalability through multiple units. Intended uses include powering artificial intelligence data centers, industrial electrification, military bases, and remote communities. 

Nano Nuclear acquired the technology in 2024 from Ultra Safe Nuclear Corp. and positioned it as one of the first commercially ready microreactor platforms.

The University of Illinois partnership targets the first full-scale Kronos research reactor deployment. We detailed the October 2025 launch of geotechnical drilling and site characterization work, followed by a ceremonial groundbreaking. Those steps built on state support from Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and positioned the campus project as the lead effort in Nano’s broader commercialization roadmap. The company has since expanded discussions for additional deployments in Texas, South Korea, and at U.S. federal sites.

Under the NRC process, staff will first review the application package for completeness and docketing. Once accepted, the agency will conduct a formal technical and environmental evaluation. Nano estimates this formal review phase will take approximately 12 months, after which the NRC could authorize construction. The timeline aligns with recent agency efforts to streamline advanced reactor licensing while maintaining rigorous safety standards.

Company executives described the submission as validation of years of engineering and pre-application engagement. Chief Technical Officer Florent Heidet called it “a defining moment” that separates ready projects from those still in early development. 

The milestone keeps Nano on track for initial test operations at Illinois by the late 2020s and supports its goal of factory-built, fleet-scale microreactor production.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

A career criminal with 23 prior arrests and 70 charges was allowed to roam free until she stabbed a pregnant woman in broad daylight outside a Harris Teeter in Charlotte’s Cotswold Village Shopping Center on March 18. 

The 38-year-old victim was loading her car with her three-year-old child nearby when Marvina Marie Hardy (also known as Marvina Marie Hardy-Butler), 40, of Waxhaw, attacked her with a steak knife, stabbing her in the sternum. 

The victim fought back. Both she and her unborn baby are expected to recover.

🚨 HOLD JUDGES ACCOUNTABLE — RIGHT NOW.

Career criminal with 23 prior arrests and 70 charges just stabbed a pregnant woman in a North Carolina parking lot.

She should’ve been locked up for life years ago.

Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent pic.twitter.com/cW3vQUzVvV

— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) March 31, 2026

Hardy was tracked to Flagler County, Florida, after public tips and surveillance video from inside the store helped identify her. 

She now faces extradition to North Carolina on charges of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill/inflict serious injury and battery of an unborn child. The motive remains unknown.

This preventable horror is the direct result of a revolving-door justice system that treats violent repeat offenders like minor nuisances. 

The same deadly pattern has repeated across blue cities and states. In Chicago, a man fresh out of jail threatened to kill white people with hammers on a CTA train, ranting racial threats just two days after release.

That city’s transit system has faced the same chaos, with officials scrambling to meet federal demands after repeated attacks — including one where a career criminal with 72 prior arrests set a woman on fire on the Blue Line.

Even more grotesque is the case of a cannibal axe murderer released back into society despite his sick crimes. In 2012, Tyree Smith hacked a homeless man to death with an axe in Bridgeport, Connecticut, then ate portions of his brain and eyeball.

Found not guilty by reason of insanity, he was committed to a psychiatric hospital — only for the Connecticut Psychiatric Security Review Board to grant him conditional release after just over a decade, citing “clinical progress” through medication. 

As we have highlighted, there are so many examples of recurring failures occurring weekly:

These stories expose the same broken system: activist judges and soft-on-crime policies that rack up dozens of arrests and charges for predators, then slap them with low bonds or early releases. 

From pregnant women in parking lots to transit riders, random innocents pay with blood while officials chase “rehabilitation” and “equity.”

The public stepped up with tips that helped catch Hardy in Florida. That same energy must now demand real accountability from judges who keep unleashing monsters. Law-abiding Americans deserve to shop, ride trains, and walk streets without fear.

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.

Tesla reported a disappointing first quarter, delivering 358,023 vehicles worldwide, falling short of Wall Street expectations of about 372,000, according to Bloomberg-compiled estimates and the company’s own release.

The miss marks Tesla’s second consecutive quarter below forecasts, underscoring continued pressure on its core automotive business as it navigates slowing electric-vehicle demand and a more competitive global market.

Despite the shortfall, deliveries were still up 6.3% year over year, benefiting from an easier comparison period when production of the Model Y was temporarily paused across multiple factories and the company faced consumer backlash tied to CEO Elon Musk. Even so, the results highlight the growing challenges Tesla faces in sustaining growth in its main revenue-generating segment, even as investor focus has increasingly shifted toward its longer-term bets on artificial intelligence, autonomous driving, and robotics.

As Bloomberg noted this week, a slower pace of growth may persist. Demand for EVs is cooling globally, US buyers no longer benefit from federal tax credits, and Tesla’s lineup is narrowing as Models S and X are phased out, all while competition intensifies.

“If they can show that there’s stability in the numbers without the tax credit — and they can, at least with the delivery number — I think that that would be a win,” said Gene Munster.

Notably, just days before reporting, Tesla had circulated a company-compiled consensus estimate suggesting deliveries of around 365,645 vehicles for the quarter.

That figure was based on forecasts from a wide range of sell-side firms, including Daiwa, Deutsche Bank, Cowen, Canaccord, Baird, Wolfe, Exane, Goldman Sachs, RBC, Evercore ISI, Barclays, Mizuho, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, Truist, UBS, Jefferies, JPMorgan, Needham, HSBC, Cantor Fitzgerald, and William Blair.

At the time, Tesla emphasized that it does not endorse analysts’ projections, noting that the figures represent aggregated estimates rather than company guidance, with only prior quarters reflecting actual reported results.

Elon Musk said in a post on X on Wednesday that orders for the Model S and Model X have effectively ended, though some remaining inventory is still available. He added that there will be an official event to mark the close of the era, noting that he has a deep appreciation for those vehicles.

 “We will have an official ceremony to mark the ending of an era. I love those cars,” Elon Musk said at the time.