Via Middle East Eye

Syria has formally handed over operations of Tartus port, the second largest port in the country, to the UAE-based logistics company DP World. 

DP World officially commenced operations on Wednesday, months after signing a 30-year concession agreement worth $800m with Syria’s General Authority for Land and Sea Ports. The deal has been described as one of the largest global investments in Syria’s logistics sector in years, and aims to turn the port into an efficient trading hub. 

“We are committed to applying DP World’s global expertise to build a modern and digitally enabled port that will grow trade, create opportunities and firmly position Tartus as a key trade hub in the Eastern Mediterranean,” said Fahad al-Banna, the newly appointed chief executive of DP World Tartus. 

DP World said in a statement that it would upgrade the port’s infrastructure, expand its handling and storage capacity and invest in bulk handling systems. 

In June, Syria’s government annulled a 2019 agreement between Bashar al-Assad’s administration and the Russian company Stroytransgaz to manage Tartus. 

Damascus said the deal was terminated due to the Russian company breaching its contract, including by failing to invest a promised $500m in modernizing that port’s infrastructure. 

The government, led by President Ahmed al-Sharaa, also said in a statement at the time that the previous deal was “unfair to Syrian sovereignty”, with Syria receiving 35 percent of port revenues while Stroytransgaz got 65 percent. 

Since the fall of the Assad dynasty’s decades-long rule in December, the new administration has been aiming to re-establish economic ties with western and regional powers. 

Along with Tartus, a 30-year deal was also signed with French shipping company CMA CGM to operate Latakia port, the largest port city in the country.  

In June, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order lifting sanctions on Syria, to support the country’s reconstruction following over a decade of war. The European Union and the UK also eased sanctions. Earlier this week, Sharaa became the first Syrian president to visit the White House since the country’s independence in 1946. 

Submitted by Michael Kern of OilPrice.com,

The European Union’s development bank has decided to provide additional funds to Ukraine’s state energy firm Naftogaz to secure natural gas supply amid continued Russian attacks on the Ukrainian energy infrastructure. 

The European Investment Bank (EIB), the bank of the European Union, will extend a $147-million (127 million euros) grant to Naftogaz, according to an EIB statement carried by Reuters. 

Last month, the EIB extended a loan of $348 million (300 million euros) to Naftogaz in an urgent measure to strengthen energy resilience and replenish Ukraine’s long-term gas reserves ahead of winter. 

The loan “will secure energy supply for households and businesses, following damage to Ukrainian infrastructure caused by Russia’s ongoing attacks,” the EIB said in October. 

Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure intensified as temperatures began to drop in the autumn. Ukraine has discussed with G7 countries additional natural gas imports as it seeks to boost imports by 30% to offset the damage from Russian strikes on its gas infrastructure. 

Naftogaz said in early October that Russia launched another massive attack on Ukraine’s gas infrastructure. The targets were civilian facilities that supply Ukrainians with gas during the heating season.  

“As a result of this attack, a significant portion of our facilities has been damaged. Some of the destruction is critical,” Naftogaz CEO Sergii Koretskyi said.

In the past week, Naftogaz signed an agreement with Polish energy firm Orlen for the supply of U.S. LNG, and agreed with Greek company ATLANTIC-SEE to jointly work to ensure U.S. LNG supply to Europe and Ukraine through Greek LNG terminals and the Vertical Corridor. 

Separately, Ukraine’s imports of electricity from the European Union surged to a 2025 high in October as Russia intensified attacks on the power grid to wreak additional havoc as temperatures drop. 

The Russia-Ukraine war on strategic energy assets has escalated in recent weeks, with Russia targeting gas facilities and power infrastructure in Ukraine, and Ukraine increasing drone strikes on Russian refineries and key export hubs.  

At a moment the Zelensky government is suffering embarrassment and under a global spotlight for a wide-ranging corruption case related to the country’s struggling state energy sector, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has issued some unusually strong words directed at Ukrainian leadership.

In televised remarks Thursday he revealed that he personally urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to get serious about curbing the flow of young Ukrainian men to Germany as they need to serve in the defense of their own homeland. Merz disclosed some of the contents of his latest call.

“In a lengthy telephone conversation today, I asked the Ukrainian president to ensure that young men in particular from Ukraine do not come to Germany in large numbers – in increasing numbers – but that they serve their country,” Merz said “They are needed there.”

German Chancellor Merz:

In a call today, I asked the Ukrainian President to ensure that young Ukrainian men do not return to Germany in growing numbers, but serve in their own country where they are needed. pic.twitter.com/4fz8bLic8J

— Clash Report (@clashreport) November 13, 2025

Within Merz’s conservative ranks there’s been growing alarm over the large numbers of fighting-age men fleeing Ukraine and into Western Europe.

Zelensky policies have enabled this, as his administration relaxed exit rules related to martial law, just months ago for the first time of the war letting Ukrainian men aged 18 to 22 leave the country. Ukrainian citizens can’t even be drafted until they are 25, under current law.

American officials have also criticized Ukraine’s policy, given in most militaries in the world, eighteen makes one eligible to be recruited.

Further, according to Politico, “Members of Merz’s ruling coalition fear that the growing presence of young Ukrainian men in Germany will be turned into a political flash point by members of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, who criticize the government’s ongoing support for Kyiv.”

Last month The Telegraph reported “Almost 100,000 fighting-age Ukrainian men have left the country in the past two months after Volodymyr Zelensky eased departure rules, new figures show.” 

Those figures were primarily based on the Polish border guard, as the neighboring EU country shares a long border with Ukraine, and has been from the start of the war absorbing refugees and trying to maintain strict counts and records. And surely many of these young men made it to Germany and other Western European countries.

While men aged 25 to 60 can be conscripted into the military and sent to the front lines, men 24 and under still cannot. Again, this has been hugely controversial as even US members of Congress have complained that Washington is sinking billions into the war effort against Russia, and Kiev won’t even tap into its most eligible fighting-age demographic. And so the expected drain of young men from the country is happening after border restrictions were loosened by Kiev last summer.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Italy’s potential extradition of a Ukrainian suspect to Germany could lead to a highly publicized (and predictably politicized) trial that implicates Poland in this unprecedented attack on a fellow NATO ally.

The Wall Street Journal recently published a detailed piece about “The Nord Stream Investigation That’s Splintering Europe Over Ukraine”.

The gist is that Germany’s investigation into the Ukrainian trace, which is likely a preplanned red herring as argued here in early 2023, has already worsened ties with Poland after one of its judges refused to extradite a Ukrainian suspect.

It could soon worsen ties with Ukraine too if Italy soon extradites another one and a highly publicized (and predictably politicized) trial follows.

Germany’s Nord Stream investigation has placed it in a dilemma since it needs to pin the blame on someone for one of the largest sabotage/terrorist attacks in decades, yet it doesn’t dare look into the American trace that Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh drew attention to in early 2023. Accusing it of orchestrating this attack would risk punitive tariffs from Trump and could convince him to authorize the gradual transfer of some EUCOM infrastructure from Germany to neighboring rival Poland.

On that topic, the Ukrainian trace also conveniently implicates Poland, thus inflicting damage to its reputation.

The idea that this NATO ally played even just a passive role facilitating a third country’s attack against a “fellow” member, let alone might be trying to cover the aforesaid up after declining to extradite one of the suspects, could have real-world consequences.

Germany might rally other allies against supporting Poland in a hypothetical crisis with Russia, for example, and could even blame Poland for it.

Not only that, but Poland’s proposal for Germany to subsidize its arms industry as a form of World War II reparations could be opposed on the pretext that the long-term damage that Poland helped Ukraine inflict to Germany equals whatever Germany might have subsidized, therefore negating the request. Worsened bilateral relations could then give a boost to the conservative opposition, which dislikes Germany almost as much as it dislikes Russia, ahead of fall 2027’s next parliamentary elections.

Replacing the ruling liberal-globalist coalition, which could be achieved by allying with the populist-nationalist opposition upon complying with their demand that senior party leaders resign, would strengthen the challenge that Poland poses to German influence in the region. That’s because the Right would control the presidency and parliament, thus breaking the deadlock that’s been in place since the current coalition obtained power in December 2023 and enabling more effective policy implementation.

This outcome could still occur even without a highly publicized German trial implicating Poland in the Nord Stream attack, but it’ll make it much more likely if that happens. In such a scenario, already fractious EU and NATO unity might further weaken, with this possibly hamstringing cooperation against Russia through the “military Schengen” and other emerging multilateral frameworks. A security dilemma could also develop between them amidst their mutual adversarial perceptions and arms buildups.

Observers should remember that this is possible solely due to Germany refusing to investigate the American trace in the Nord Stream attack, instead opting to look into the Ukrainian one that also involves Poland. The public demands that someone be blamed for the spike in costs brought about by Germany being cut off from cheap and reliable Russian gas. The elite therefore decided to pin the blame on them, but it’s unclear whether they thought through the consequences touched upon in this analysis.

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

China’s innovation drive is reaching fever pitch in 2025.

Let’s cut to the chase and focus on four crucial domains.

1.The Huawei Factor

Huawei is already testing its first, self-developed EUV lithography machine capable of producing 3nm chips. Trial tests are going full blast at the research center in Dongguan, and mass production should start in 2026.

It’s impossible to overstate how much of a game-changing paradigm this Chinese breatkthrough – specifically in laser-induced discharge plasma (LDP) – is all about. It’s set to turn the seminconductor technology environment totally upside down.

The physics involved in Huawei’s LDP is fundamentally different from the method employed by the Dutch ASML’s de facto monopoly. This being China, it’s simpler, smaller and cheaper.

Huawei’s technology is bound to smash that monopoly while solidifying China’s chip independence. Talk about cost efficiency: Huawei aims to produce EUV machines at a fraction of the cost of ASML’s (around $350 million for each unit), and no less than flood China with homegrown 3 nm chips.

All that is happening after the proverbial Western “experts”, following the 2019 sanctions imposed by Trump 1.0, dictated that China would take up to 15 years to just catch up. After all, EUV technology is too deeply embedded in the Western-controlled supply chain. It was assumed that China would never be able to smash the monopoly.

Well, of course any monopoly is smashable when public-private partnerships – in academia and tech – release untold billions of dollars into R&D, rally the best minds, and focus on building an EUV eco-system from scratch.

This is not only about tech; it’s a geoeconomic and geopolitical earthquake. There was a serious debate going on across China that it would be a matter between 2 and 3 years to cut off any dependence on US/Western tech. Well, Huawei and SMIC will be moving closer to mass production of these 3 nm chips already by next year. Not hard to do the math on where the future of global chipmaking lies.

Invest In R&D And Reach Patent Heaven

Now cut to Fan Zhiyong, Huawei’s Vice-President and Minister of Intellectual Property, talking at the company’s 6th Innovation and Intellectual Property Forum this past Tuesday.

He explained how “from the brand-new HarmonyOS 6 operating system to the powerful Atlas 950 supernode, our R&D team has achieved remarkable successes. Although many leading software and hardware products are massive systems engineering projects, we are making every effort to make them open to everyone.”

Huawei conducts an innovation and intellectual property forum nearly every year, discussing the importance of open/protected intellectual property as well as promoting its Top Ten Inventions: this year they featured, among others, supernodes; the Harmony OS; foldable screens; short-range optical interconnects; and next-generation solid state drives.

There’s no secret: a lot of investment in R&D is behind all these breakthroughs. Over the past five years, Huawei has invested more than 20% of its annual sales revenue in R&D. According to the EU Industrial R&D Scoreboard 2024, Huawei is Number 6 globally in R&D expenditure.

Huawei does not see these accomplishments as leading to a “closed garden”. On the contrary: the strategy is to foment an “open industry”, including the launch of a series of new open source software and hardware.

This opennes is reflected by the fact that Huawei is one of the world’s largest patent holders. By the end of 2024, Huawei held over 150,000 valid authorized patents globally, ranging from over 50,000 Chinese patents to over 29,000 patents in the U.S. and 19,000 in Europe.

And that brings us to…

2. Total Tech Sufficiency

And of course that is centered on AI. Cut to three recent key tech moves:

A. Beijing has banned foreign AI chips in every state-funded data center across the nation. Exempted will be only a few private companies which build their own data centers.

B. Local and regional governments were encouraged and are already subsidizing the electricity bills of AI data centers. China has a key infrastructure advantage over the US: cheap and extremely abundant power – as I saw it in my recent travels in Xinjiang. That is essential to offset the cost of switching to domestic chips, a more energy-intensive operation. For example, Huawei’s AI server system – CloudMatrix 384 – consumes more energy than Nvidia’s NVL72 system.

C. Beijing is also rolling out a new, ambitious “AI Plus Manufacturing” plan, included in the broader AI Plus initiative.

Point A is ultra-pertinent because Trump 2.0 is debating whether to allow Nvidia to sell a downgraded version of its Blackwell chips to China. Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang is lobbying for it like there’s no tomorrow, desperate of losing the Chinese market to Huawei for good. He bombastically announced that China is only “nanosenconds” behind the US on semiconductors.

Point C is also ultra-pertinent because as we saw with the Hauwei factor, Beijing is going for no holds barred AI chip self-sufficiency.

Beijing is deploying a very clever strategy. No foreign chips in data centers means a de facto protected market to domestic chip innovators which match foreign chip performances. Talk about a massive incentive.

Li Lecheng, Minister of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), has announced that MIIT will soon issue an “AI Plus Manufacturing” plan, focusing on rolling out AI upgrades in key industries; expanding intelligent assisted design, virtual simulation, and early defect detection; promoting brand new AI-enabled mobile phones and computers; and accelerating R&D for next-generation intel devices such as humanoid robots and brain-computer interfaces.

In a nutshell: that is how Beijing wants to implement AI in every nook and cranny of the Chinese economy. It’s a no holds barred total innovation strategy. Sanctions? What sanctions?

3. Clean Energy

This revolution is already on – with China leaping ahead of the whole collective West, installing, for instance, nearly 900 gigawatt of solar capacity, more than the US-EU combo.

Last year, China generated 1826 terawatt/hour of electricity out of solar and wind power – five times the energy equivalent of all its nuclear warheads.

Yes: that’s a certified energy superpower.

4. An Early-Warning Detection Big Data Platform

The Nanjing Research Institute of Electronics Technology – China’s number one defense-electronics center and a hub of key innovation even under US sanctions – is developing a ground-breaking “distributed early-warning detection big data platform” capable of tracking up to 1,000 missile launches worldwide in real time.

The platform fuses data from an enormous array of space-, air-, sea-, and ground-based sensors, using advanced algorithms to distinguish warheads from decoys and proceed to action across secure networks.

The system integrates literally anything: fragmented, heterogeneous data streams from multiple sources – radars, satellites, optical, electronic reconnaissance systems – no matter where they come from, and when.

Cue to the system’s integration with interceptor missiles. During the Victory Day military parade last September in Beijing, China presented a new generation of air defense and anti-ballistic missiles, including the HQ-29, capable of intercepting hostile missiles beyond the atmosphere. Call it the Chinese Dragon Dome.

These are only 4 vectors amid the concerted Chinese tech drive, one of the key themes of the next Five-Year Plan to be approved next March in the “Two Sessions” in Beijing.

Now cut to Ronnie Chan, the Chair Emeritus of the Asia Society and the chairman of its Hong Kong Centre. He’s one of those affable old-school Hong Kong elite members who’s seen it all – and capable of synthesizing what’s ahead in a sharp and sweet manner. What he said recently at a seminar organized by the Shanghai Development Research Foundation could not be more relevant.

Let’s take just three key takeaways:

1. “The Chinese people are resilient and patient. As long as domestic stability is maintained, external pressure only strengthens their endurance (…) in this China–U.S. rivalry, there will be no true winner, but the side that stands longer in the end will be China.”

2. “China’s economy has not been over-financialised, and it continues to be grounded in the real economy. Only when manufacturing is strong can a nation remain stable and resilient.”

3. “China must stay calm — neither blindly optimistic nor blindly pessimistic. China possess a vast market, a complete industrial chain, and a diligent population. As long as internal stability holds, external pressures cannot defeat it. The real opportunities ahead do not lie in real estate or finance, but in the service sector and innovation-driven real economies.”

There is no Chinese “miracle”: it’s all about planning and hard work. And now to the next stage: no holds barred innovation.

Drunk driving remains one of the leading causes of traffic deaths in the United States, claiming an average of 34 lives every day — a total of 13,429 in 2023, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Nearly one-third of all road fatalities are alcohol-related. But as new data from The Suzuki Law Firm shows, the problem is far from evenly distributed. Certain states, cities, and even car brands are far more likely to be associated with drunk driving incidents than others, revealing stark regional and behavioral trends.

Among the 50 largest U.S. cities, Omaha, Nebraska, has the highest rate of drunk driving citations, with 4.48 per 1,000 drivers — more than double the 50-city average of 1.9. San Jose and Sacramento, California, follow closely at 3.68 and 3.55 per 1,000 drivers, respectively, according to Suzuki Law Offices.

Several other California cities, including Fresno, Long Beach, Bakersfield, and Oakland, also rank near the top, reflecting the state’s combination of car dependence, warm weather, and limited public transit options. Meanwhile, Chicago, Tulsa, and Philadelphia have among the lowest DUI citation rates, each with fewer than one per 1,000 drivers.

When fatal crashes are considered, Texas emerges as the country’s deadliest drunk driving hotspot. El Paso leads the nation, with 60.8 percent of fatal accidents involving an impaired driver, followed by Fort Worth, Houston, Dallas, and Arlington — giving Texas five of the top ten cities for drunk-driving-related deaths. The study attributes this to the state’s extensive road networks, strong drinking culture, and comparatively uneven enforcement of alcohol-related laws. Conversely, cities like Milwaukee, Miami, and Tampa report the lowest percentages of fatal crashes involving drunk drivers.

The Suzuki Law Office article notes that car brand data paints an equally striking picture. Luxury automakers dominate the list of vehicles most frequently cited for DUIs, with BMW drivers leading at 3.09 drunk driving citations per 1,000 drivers, followed by RAM (3.00), Acura (2.69), Audi (2.42), and Volvo (2.42).

At the opposite end, Mercury (0.86), Land Rover (1.16), and Lincoln (1.16) drivers have the lowest DUI rates. The Suzuki Law Firm’s analysis references a University of California, Berkeley study that supports this trend, noting that “fancy cars were less likely to stop, and BMW drivers were the worst,” linking luxury ownership to more aggressive or careless driving behaviors.

Tesla drivers stand out in another way — not for DUIs specifically, but for the highest overall number of driving incidents nationwide. In 2024, Teslas were involved in 36.9 incidents per 1,000 drivers, up from 31.1 in 2023. RAM and Subaru followed closely behind. When examined state by state, RAM drivers were the worst in 16 states, especially New Jersey, where they recorded 74.2 incidents per 1,000 drivers.

Regionally, Nebraska, California, and Texas remain the most prominent DUI hotspots, each for different reasons. Nebraska’s high rate likely reflects both heavy drinking and stricter enforcement. California’s mix of sociable, outdoor culture and limited transit access contributes to its problem, while Texas’s vast highways, strong car culture, and lenient policies exacerbate risk.

The full study is here.

Authored by Andrew Moran via The Epoch Times,

The country’s top housing regulator said the Trump administration is considering another tool that could address America’s affordability challenges.

“We are actively evaluating portable mortgages,” Bill Pulte, Federal Housing Finance Agency director, said in a Nov. 12 post on X, providing no further details.

This comes days after he suggested that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were “evaluating how to do assumable or portable mortgages, in a safe and sound manner.”

Portable mortgages would allow homeowners to transfer their existing mortgages—rates, terms, and amortization schedule—to a new residential property.

The concept, in theory, would help borrowers avoid penalties and possibly save on interest.

It is unavailable in the United States but is an option in Canada, the UK, and parts of the European Union.

Assumable mortgages refer to when a homebuyer takes over the seller’s existing mortgage, including the interest rate, balance, and repayment terms.

Unlocking the Golden Handcuffs

For the past few years, the supply of existing homes has been a challenge for the real estate market.

Despite a year of gradual gains, housing inventory remains historically low, totaling about 1.55 million units—well below the long-term average of 2.2 million units recorded from 1982 to 2025.

With months’ supply at 4.6—the number of months it would take to exhaust current housing stocks—the market still favors sellers, underscoring persistent market supply constraints.

Although the United States has struggled with years of underbuilding, a sizable factor has been the lock-in effect that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, when the Federal Reserve slashed interest rates to zero percent to help cushion the economic blows from the country’s shutdown.

Shortly afterward, 30-year mortgage rates cratered, reaching an all-time low of 2.65 percent in January 2021.

First-time homebuyers and homeowners took advantage of this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity when home prices were lower than they are today.

Today, approximately half of all current U.S. mortgages originated during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Additionally, many homeowners refinanced at the lower mortgage rates.

However, this has made it difficult for public policymakers to unlock the golden handcuffs.

Nearly 53 percent of U.S. households enjoy a mortgage rate lower than 4 percent, so they have been reluctant to list their homes for sale, effectively constraining supply.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency estimated in a 2024 paper that the lock-in effect prevented about 1.72 million home sales between 2022 and 2024 and increased home prices by 7 percent.

A townhouse for sale in Elkridge, Md., on Sept. 27, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

The average contract interest rate for a 30-year mortgage is 6.34 percent.

In addition to exacerbating housing affordability problems, it also creates broader economic issues, including the restriction of labor mobility, which affects productivity and limits household formation.

“These factors may combine to reduce utility for borrowers and underscore the importance of understanding the extent to which borrowers are locked-in,” the paper states.

Housing affordability became one of the top priorities for the current and previous administrations.

President Donald Trump recently proposed creating 50-year mortgages, a move designed to help more Americans priced out of the market to get their feet in the door of homeownership.

Trump later told Fox News host Laura Ingraham that a 50-year mortgage is “not even a big deal.”

Pulte called it a “game changer.” However, after some pushback on social media, Pulte said a 50-year mortgage option was “simply a potential weapon in a wide arsenal of solutions that [the Federal Housing Finance Agency is] developing right now.”

In an interview with Fox News on Nov. 10, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett defended the proposal, saying that it could lower monthly payments for middle-class Americans.

“What it does is, it reduces the monthly payment quite a bit for a typical home for middle America by a few hundred dollars a month,” Hassett said. “We need to help people get back into homes.”

In the four weeks ending on Oct. 26, the median U.S. monthly housing payment was $2,530, according to data gathered by Redfin. This is down by 1.4 percent year-over-year, the sharpest decline since November 2024.

“This is out-of-the-box thinking,” an Israeli official has been quoted in Axios as saying. “We want to change the way we handled past agreements and put more emphasis on US-Israel cooperation. The Americans like this idea.”

The comment stems from what many on the American Right increasingly see as a very asymmetrical relationship based on Washington’s seeming longtime ‘blank check’ approach to its number one Mideast ally. Israel typically does what it wants, and the American taxpayer funds it – currently to the tune of around $4 billion per year in military aid. And then there’s extra Gaza war-related aid on top of that stemming back to 2024.

In the wake of the Trump-brokered ceasefire in Gaza, which Prime Minister Netanyahu appeared to resist at first, there’s been emerging evidence and commentary pointing to the White House applying unprecedented pressure on Israel to conform.

Axios is reporting Thursday the Israel wants to double the length of the next round of the security funding agreement with the Untied States, in a report which has far been denied by Netanyahu:

Israel is seeking a new 20-year security agreement with the U.S. — doubling the usual term and adding “America First” provisions to win the Trump administration’s support, Israeli and U.S. officials tell Axios.

While the past agreement promised Israel around $4 billion per year in military aid, and Israel is likely to seek at least that much going forward, passing such a deal will now be more complicated because of growing frustrations with Israel, including within Trump’s MAGA base.

The current 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), signed in 2016 under Barack Obama, expires in 2028. Israel wants to conclude the new deal over the next year.

It must be remembered that in 2024 under the Biden administration Congress signed off on a multibillion-dollar emergency military assistance package for Israel in addition to the annual foreign aid/military assistance package.

But the atmosphere has changed among Trump’s Republican base, as especially more and more young people are calling out such massive support for Israel as the opposite of America First.

This pushback is being led by voices like Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Thomas Massie… and even Nick Fuentes is growing in influence, in terms of mainstream popularity among young conservatives.

AIPAC is sending fundraising emails attacking me for saying, “the most truthful and easiest thing to say that Oct 7th in Israel was horrific and all hostages must be returned, but so is the genocide, humanitarian crisis, and starvation happening in Gaza.”

Well this is the sign… pic.twitter.com/AF3RUrAWAY

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) August 7, 2025

They question why American bombs have been used to obliterate civilians in huge numbers in Gaza, while also warning against entangling alliances which bring blowback on US interests and security.

It looks like Israel is responding to this in some ways, for example by seeking to use the language of America First in order to try and satisfy Trump admin officials, to arrive at the best deals.

Authored by James Bovard via The Mises Institute,

During the recent government shutdown, the temporary interruption of benefits to 42 million food stamp recipients was hyped as practically the greatest human rights violation of our time. A Nation magazine headline howled: “The United States Is Letting Its People Starve.” But the delayed payments had scant impact in part because many states offered supplemental benefits, many recipients had leftover benefits on their Electronic Benefit Cards (EBTs), and because vast numbers of food pantries and other private charities provided relief.

Democrats accused Trump of “weaponizing hunger.” But the real problem is that politicians going back more than half a century have weaponized dependency to destroy limits on government power.

Most Americans support giving government assistance to people who are unable to feed themselves. But politicians profited by multiplying the number of people who relied on Washington for their next meal.

In 1969, President Richard Nixon was sharply expanding US bombing of southeast Asia. Nixon sought to bolster his humanitarian image by vastly increasing federal food handouts. He held a White House Summit and received glowing press coverage for proclaiming, “The moment is at hand to put an end to hunger in America itself for all time.” That year, 3 million Americans received food stamps, a burgeoning federal program that cost $228 million. Last year, the program cost $100 billion.

Why did food stamps become so expensive?

Government surveys in the 1960s showed that most of the poor did not need federal aid to have an adequate diet. But it was politically profitable to pretend that low-income Americans were helpless by definition. To further that goal, Washington launched a war on self-reliance.

Even though food stamp enrollment quadrupled between 1968 and 1971, Congress mandated an outreach program for states to recruit more recipients. A USDA magazine reported in 1972 that food stamp workers could often overcome people’s pride by saying, “‘This is for your children’. . .the problem is not with welfare recipients but with low-income workers: It is this group which recoils when anything even remotely resembling welfare is suggested.” The magazine triumphally announced: “With careful explanations. . .coupled with intensive outreach efforts, resistance from the ‘too prouds’ is bending. More and more are coming to the conclusion that taking needed assistance does not mean sacrificing dignity.”

In 1974, the Food Research and Action Center—a federally-funded activist group—successfully sued USDA to require the agency to further increase its food stamp outreach efforts. The USDA suggested sending food stamp workers to unemployment offices to distribute leaflets, and in Pennsylvania food stamp aides went to supermarkets to hustle shoppers. By 1976, twelve states had conducted door-to-door recruiting campaigns, and seventeen had conducted telephone campaigns. Door-to-door food stamp advertising became a favorite project for Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) workers.

In Wisconsin, 2,000 copies of the Food Stamp Nursery Rhyme Coloring Book were distributed. In Kentucky, a traveling puppet show told folks how and why to sign up for benefits. A typical 1975 USDA brochure announced, “You are in good company. Millions of Americans use food stamps.” A leaflet distributed in Maryland and paid for by the federal government showed a gaunt face on the cover with the question, “Did you know some people would rather STARVE than seek HELP. . .” On the inside, the brochure said,

PRIDE NEVER FILLS EMPTY STOMACHS . . . Are you one of thousands of Maryland residents who. . .have too much pride to consider applying for help? Then you need to know more about the Food Stamp program.
Food Stamps should NOT be confused with CHARITY! In fact, food stamps are designed to help you help yourself.

The Community Services Administration funded scores of local and national food stamp advocacy organizations to increase enrollment in food programs. The federal Office of Economic Opportunity called in 1971 for community action agencies to “prick the public conscience” over the need for more food handouts, declaring, “food stamps are not used as often as they ought to be, particularly by the intermediate income families among the poor.”

During the Clinton administration, AmeriCorps played a leading role in food stamp recruiting. The Mississippi Action for Community Education (MACE) was one of the most prominent food stamp recruiters—at least on paper. Its 1999 grant application promised that its AmeriCorps members would “conduct door-to-door canvassing to identify potential food stamp recipients” and would also provide “assistance in completing necessary applications for food stamps.” The goal of the program was to enroll “75% of surveyed rural Mississippi residents who are eligible for food stamps, but are not receiving them.”

I dropped in on MACE headquarters in Greenville, Mississippi to ask a few questions for a Readers Digest article I was writing. MACE’s Fanny Woods was evasive about their AmeriCorps program and her answers contradicted MACE’s statements in its reports to AmeriCorps headquarters. I mentioned those evasions to the AmeriCorps Inspector General. They launched an investigation that was joined by the FBI and resulted in MACE’s executive director being sent to federal prison. Rather than doing food stamp recruiting, MACE simply had ghost employees on its AmeriCorps payroll.

Ironically, that was a better result for taxpayers than if the food stamp recruiting actually occurred.

At the end of the Clinton era, 17 million Americans received food stamps—a sharp decline from the 28 million recipients in 1994. A 1996 welfare reform act was decisive in curbing dependency. However, President George W. Bush took office in 2001 and sought to vigorously expand food stamp enrollment as part of his “compassionate conservatism” sideshow to his war on terrorism atrocities.

In 2008, food stamps were renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program1SNAP—to sound more wholesome and attractive. But the program remained a junk food entitlement and food stamp recipients were twice as likely to be obese as eligible low-income people not receiving food stamps.

Food stamp recruiting went into overdrive with the Obama administration. USDA bankrolled state government propaganda campaigns. A North Carolina social services agency won a USDA “Hunger Champions Award” for its ad campaign attacking “mountain pride” as a reason for not accepting government handouts. In Alabama, people received fliers proclaiming: “Be a patriot. Bring your food stamp money home.” A USDA brochure advised its field offices to, “Throw a Great Party…. Putting SNAP information in a game format like BINGO, crossword puzzles. . .is fun and helps get your message across in a memorable way.” USDA promoted a 10-part Spanish-language radio “novella” to encourage immigrants to go on the dole. The Obama administration also made food stamps more inviting by banishing the requirement for able-bodied recipients to seek to get a job.

The Biden administration ramped up both welfare recruiting and benefits, helping maximize the number of dependents. In 2022, President Biden proclaimed a goal “to end hunger in this country by the year 2030.” Biden did not explain why a hundred-fold increase in federal food aid spending since Nixon’s 1969 proclamation had failed to end hunger.

Political demagogues have long invoked the number of food stamp recipients as proof of the failure of the market economy and the injustice of capitalism or neoliberalism or whatever they are calling the system that week. As long as more than 40 million people depend on food stamps, politicians can exploit push-button hysteria to claim that any interruption in their spending or power will result in vast suffering and (hint, hint) starvation, especially of children and minorities and women.

The Trump administration is taking some steps to curb food stamp abuses, reviving the work requirement, cracking down on fraud, and approving state-level reforms that end junk food purchases. Simply returning to the program standards of the late 1990s would radically decrease enrollment. As Mises Institute’s Ryan McMaken recently noted, “Nearly half of households headed by illegal-immigrants receive food stamps”—a benefit that was banned in the 1996 welfare reform bill.

Unfortunately, since the Reagan era, any high-profile proposal to curb food stamp spending is accepted as sufficient proof of mass hunger and imminent catastrophe. Reducing the number of dependents is a vital first step to curbing Leviathan. But how many politicians will have the savvy or the courage to resist the Hunger Hysteria Industrial Complex?

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said on Thursday that an individual allegedly tried to confront acting U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey Alina Habba and destroyed property.

Bondi vowed to find and prosecute the person.

“Last night, an individual attempted to confront one of our U.S. Attorneys,” she said, before confirming that the U.S. attorney was Habba. The person then allegedly “destroyed property in her office, and then fled the scene,” Bondi added. “Thankfully, Alina is ok.”

“Any violence or threats of violence against any federal officer will not be tolerated. Period. This is unfortunately becoming a trend as radicals continue to attack law enforcement agents around the country,” Bondi wrote in a post on X.

Bondi did not provide details about the incident. A description of the suspect was not provided.

In a separate comment, Bondi vowed to find the perpetrator and said that they would be “brought to justice.”

“Our federal prosecutors, agents, and law-enforcement partners put their lives on the line every day to protect the American people, and this Department will use every legal tool available to ensure their safety and hold violent offenders fully accountable,” Bondi said.

In a post on X, Habba said she “will not be intimidated by radical lunatics” for doing her job, in response to Bondi’s post.

Minutes later, FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed on X that the FBI is involved in the investigation into the individual who confronted her and stressed there will be “zero tolerance” for such acts.

Habba is considered an ally of President Donald Trump, as she served as one of his personal attorneys, namely during his trial in New York City, and as a White House counselor before she was tapped to serve as the acting U.S. attorney for the state.

The Senate has not yet confirmed Habba as the U.S. attorney for the state, and the White House withdrew her nomination in the upper chamber in July as part of a procedural maneuver to allow her to remain in an acting role. The judge’s order said that her actions since July could be declared void, but put his order on hold so that the Department of Justice (DOJ) could appeal.

On Oct. 20, a three-judge panel of the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals questioned the administration’s decision to keep Habba as the top federal prosecutor in New Jersey but didn’t immediately issue a ruling after the arguments.

According to the DOJ, Habba’s office supervises hundreds of federal prosecutors and other officials. That includes offices in Newark, Camden, and Trenton, New Jersey.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.