Blog

CHANGE: Trump’s TSA Reportedly Ending Stupid Shoe Removal Policy at Airports With a Catch

One of the most notorious elements of security theater is going away from our nation’s airports for at least some passengers.

The New York Times reported on Monday that for the first time since 2006, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is actually letting people keep their shoes on during airport screenings. Precheck passengers had enjoyed this perk at most U.S. airports.

A source told the outlet the TSA began dropping the requirement over the past few days.

There is a catch, however. As Yahoo notes, individuals must have a pre-approved, mandatory Real ID document to qualify.

People who do not possess a Real ID may still have to take their shoes off in the nasty airports and get subjected to further screening by TSA agents.

So, people will essentially have a choice between what type of invasion of privacy they prefer. Does this really enhance our Constitutional liberties?

The TSA responded to this reported change with neither a confirmation nor a denial.

“TSA and DHS are always exploring new and innovative ways to enhance the passenger experience and our strong security posture,” a spokesman for the agency told The New York Times. “Any potential updates to our security process will be issued through official channels.”

As CBS notes, the no-shoes rule was implemented by TSA nationwide five years after British citizen Richard Reid, the “shoe bomber,” tried to blow up an American Airlines flight from Paris to Miami with explosives hidden in his shoe in December 2001.

Thankfully, his plan failed, and the plane landed safely in Boston after passengers helped take him down. Massachusetts State Police officers took him into custody.

Reid is currently serving a life sentence.

Keep reading

Trade Crackdown: 14 Countries Receive Tariff Letters Including Japan, South Korea And Thailand

  • US President Donald Trump announced plans to impose higher tariff rates of 25%-40% on key trading partners and signed an executive order holding off the new duties until Aug. 1.
  • Tariffs on Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Kazakhstan and Tunisia, would be 25%, South Africa and Bosnia 30%, Indonesia 32%, Bangladesh and Serbia 35%, Thailand and Cambodia 36%, while Laos and Myanmar would face a 40% levy.
  • Meanwhile, Trump suggested the possibility of additional trade negotiations and delays at the White House shortly after he sent out the tariff letters, as he said the notifications were “not 100% firm”. He also said the US is close in making a deal with India.
  • White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said additional letters will arrive in the coming days.

Main takeaways:

  1. the deadline was pushed towards August 1st vs. July 9th;
  2. announced new tariff levels (effective on August 1st) for 14 countries
  3. Trump said that the tariffs on each country would be separate from any “sectoral” tariffs that he imposes;
  4. we should expect more deals/letters coming: Leavitt said Trump will send more letters 

Keep reading

A Big, Beautiful Financial Weapon Against Illegal Immigration

Buried in the Big, Beautiful Bill is a weapon Trump can use against illegal immigration, disincentivizing working illegally in the United States while at the same time cutting into money laundering by Mexican and other drug cartels.

The weapon is a one percent remittance tax on money sent by aliens in the U.S. home to their country. Small change? By the end of 2023, remittances sent by workers in the U.S., many illegal, to other countries reached approximately $93 billion dollars—about 14 percent of total remittances across the globe. Main recipient countries include India, Mexico, Guatemala, and Venezuela. Mexico currently receives money tax-free. U.S. law makes that possible, and it needs to be changed. The tax is expected to collect $10 billion for the U.S. in revenues.

“Directo a México” is the official remittance program of the Federal Reserve Bank, facilitated through the FedGlobal service, which allows illegal immigrants to transfer money to Mexico’s central bank at no additional fee. Since 2003, after an agreement was signed by George W. Bush, users of U.S. financial institutions subscribed to Directo a México can send payments to any bank account in Mexico at no cost. New Yorkers can see such services advertised in Spanish on the subway; in smaller cities the transfer work is done by Wells Fargo, Moneygram, and check-cashing storefronts. States with large populations of illegal Mexicans, such as California and Texas, rank highest in remittance outflows.

It is a well-used system—in 2022, Mexico received $56 billion in remittances from the U.S., establishing the country’s position as the second-largest destination for such funds worldwide. Remittances from abroad accounted for roughly 4.5 percent of Mexico’s total GDP in 2022 (in some poorer Mexican states remittances comprised 15 percent or more of their GDP) and form the largest single source of foreign income for Mexico, outstripping the income brought in by any other source, including foreign direct investment from the United States, tourism, and manufacturing exports. The total value of remittances increased by roughly 32 percent between 2019 and 2023, rising by an average of five percent per year. Mexico does not just send hundreds of thousands of illegal workers to the U.S.; its domestic economy outright depends on them working in el Norte. Much the same for the other leading countries, such as India, though much of its remittances come from H1-B visa holders.

Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum knows the value of the program and showed just how desperately her country relies on these remittance payments in a statement that “fanned the flames of the LA riots.”

“Mexican citizens in America work hard to pay their bills. We don’t want this tax to affect the remittances of our countrymen,” Sheinbaum said. “If necessary, we will mobilize. We will not allow them to punish those who help the least fortunate.”

Keep reading

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Nominates Trump for Nobel Peace Prize, Presents Him with Letter of Nomination

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Monday during a dinner meeting with President Trump that he is nominating the President for the Nobel Peace Prize. 

Netanyahu made his third appearance at the White House —the most of any foreign leader—on Monday to have dinner and meet with the President to discuss the situation in Gaza.

During their dinner, the Prime Minister presented President Trump with his letter to the Nobel Prize Committee, officially nominating Trump for the Peace Prize.

“He’s forging peace as we speak, in one country and one region after the other,” Netanyahu said.

WATCH:

Netanyahu: He forged the Abraham Accords. He’s forging peace as we speak, in one country and one region after the other. So, I want to present to you, Mr. President, the letter I sent to the Nobel Prize Committee. It’s nominating you for the Peace Prize, which is well deserved, and you should get it.

Trump: Thank you very much. This, I didn’t know. Wow. Thank you very much. Coming from you, in particular, this is very meaningful.

Keep reading

“Troops Could Vanish Like Squid”: New Bio-Inspired Camo Lets US Soldiers Evade Sight And High-Tech Sensors Instantly

The fusion of biology and technology continues to break new ground, as seen in a remarkable project funded by DARPA and the Air Force. By leveraging the natural abilities of cephalopods, particularly the squid, researchers are developing advanced camouflage technology for military applications.

This bio-inspired innovation promises to revolutionize how soldiers hide in plain sight, adapting to various environments by mimicking the squid’s adaptive skin. Such breakthroughs not only highlight the potential of bioinspired materials but also reinforce the crucial role of interdisciplinary research in defense and technology.

The Science Behind Squid-Inspired Camouflage

At the heart of this innovative research is the study of squid skin, particularly the light-reflecting cells known as iridophores. Researchers at the University of California, Irvine, in collaboration with the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, have delved into the unique cellular structures of the longfin inshore squid. These iridophores contain tightly coiled columns of a protein called reflectin. These proteins act like natural Bragg reflectors, enabling the squid to change colors rapidly and efficiently.

Through advanced imaging techniques such as holotomography, scientists have captured detailed three-dimensional views of these cells, revealing how the columns of reflectin twist and organize themselves to manipulate light. This ability allows the squid to transition from being transparent to displaying vibrant colors, a mechanism that could be pivotal in developing materials that mimic these changes for military use.

Keep reading

The FBI Claims Epstein Didn’t Have a “Client List” – But What About The Speed Dial List of Names in Epstein’s Bedroom Uncovered by O’Keefe Media Group?

If there was no Epstein “client list,” then who is on the speed dial list of names in Jeffrey Epstein’s bedroom, uncovered by the O’Keefe Media Group?

The FBI released a 2-page memo on Sunday concluding Jeffrey Epstein did not have a “client list” that he used for blackmail. The FBI also determined that Epstein did commit suicide in August 2019.

In May, FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino ignited a firestorm across conservative circles after publicly backing the official narrative that Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide.

The FBI memo says there is no evidence that Epstein blackmailed powerful political figures.

Additionally, the memo suggests that no further Epstein records will be released.

In May, the O’Keefe Media Group released newly-obtained images from Jeffrey Epstein’s island bedroom.

The footage shows speed dial labels on an alleged sex trafficker’s landline telephones, revealing associates Epstein called frequently from his private island bedroom.

Many of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes were committed on his private island, Little St. James, in the Caribbean.

Epstein frequently called the associates and or clients on his speed dial list.

Keep reading

‘No exceptions’: Trump threatens additional tariffs on BRICS-linked countries

US President Donald Trump has threatened to impose additional tariffs on any country affiliated with the BRICS+ group of emerging economies. 

Trump made the threat early on 7 July in a post on his Truth Social platform. 

“Any Country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10 percent Tariff,” the US president said. 

“There will be no exceptions to this policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” he added. 

Trump’s statement coincided with an ongoing BRICS summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 

On Sunday, the bloc made a declaration condemning the rise in US tariffs in an indirect swipe at Washington, expressing “serious concerns.”

These measures are “inconsistent with WTO (World Trade Organization) rules” and “threaten to reduce global trade, disrupt global supply chains, and introduce uncertainty.”

In a statement at the summit, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva slammed NATO’s decision to hike military spending by five percent of GDP annually by 2035. 

“It is always easier to invest in war than in peace,” Lula said, while also condemning the genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. 

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi attended the BRICS summit. Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian was initially scheduled to participate before Israel launched a brutal US-backed war against the country in mid-June. 

The BRICS nations condemned the recent US and Israeli strikes on Iran during the summit. 

“We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since 13 June 2025. We further express serious concern over deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities,” the bloc said, adding that the attacks “constitute a violation of international law.”

As the fate of stalled nuclear talks between Tehran and Washington remains uncertain, US economic sanctions have continued to target Iran. 

A few months before the US-backed war on Iran, a brief trade war erupted between Beijing and Washington. 

Beijing imposed high levies on US-sourced natural gas imports in response to Trump’s sweeping tariffs on Chinese exports. 

China and the US agreed on 12 May to remove most of the tariffs imposed on each other. 

Keep reading

Netanyahu Visits White House: Genocide Made Invisible

Whatever the outcomes of Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the White House on Monday and the latest scenario for a ceasefire in Gaza, a bilateral policy of genocide has united the Israeli and U.S. governments in a pact of literally breath-taking cruelty. That pact and its horrific consequences for Palestinian people either continue to shock Americans or gradually normalize indifference toward ongoing atrocities on a massive scale.

Recent news reporting that President Trump has pushed for a ceasefire in Gaza is an echo of a familiar refrain about peace-seeking efforts from the Biden and Trump administrations. The spin remained in sync with the killing – not only with American bombs and bullets but also with Israel’s refusal to allow more than a pittance of food and other essentials into Gaza.

Last year began with a United Nations statement that “Gazans now make up 80 per cent of all people facing famine or catastrophic hunger worldwide, marking an unparalleled humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip amid Israel’s continued bombardment and siege.” The UN quoted experts who said: “Currently every single person in Gaza is hungry, a quarter of the population are starving and struggling to find food and drinkable water, and famine is imminent.”

In late February 2024, President Biden talked to journalists about prospects for a “ceasefire” (which did not take place) while holding a vanilla ice cream cone. “My national security adviser tells me that we’re close, we’re close, we’re not done yet,” Biden said, before sauntering off. He spoke during a photo op at an ice cream parlor in Manhattan, while the UN was sounding an alarm that “very little humanitarian aid has entered besieged Gaza this month.”

During the 16 months since then, variants of facile verbiage from top U.S. government officials have repeated endlessly, while normalizing genocide with a steep race to the ethical bottom, so that – in Orwellian terms, much like “war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength” – genocide is not genocide.

Refusal to acknowledge the complicity and impunity is most of all maintained by avoidance and silence. The process makes a terrible truth inadmissible rather than admittable.

All the doublethink and newspeak must detour around the reality that the U.S.-supported Israeli siege of Gaza is genocide, which the international Genocide Convention defines as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” – with such actions as “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”

Israel’s actions in Gaza clearly meet that definition, as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have unequivocally concluded with exhaustive reports.

But under the cloaks of the Israeli and American flags, the official stories insist that the unconscionable should be invisible.

Keep reading

The Day I Found Out The Gulf War Was Fake

The morning after the 2020 election was stolen was a seminal moment in my life. I remember it very clearly — the emotions, the feeling of betrayal, the determination to fix my country’s problems.

However, last night I listened to Tucker Carlson’s interview with Scott Horton, a journalist who conducted a deep dive into the reasons for the recent decade’s forever wars.

Something changed inside me after listening last night.

I separated from the United States Air Force in 1994, after graduating from USAFA, and flying special operations helicopters.

The Gulf War was my era, my colleagues, my generation. It defined who we were as a military force.

Last night, I learned the entire justification for The Gulf War was fake.

I remember thinking back then that something was off about George H. W. Bush’s — “This will not stand…” — but I put it aside, and loved my country, trusted its leaders.

I knew personally many of the heroes of that war. Many of them died.

The honor, courage and sacrifice they exuded will not be matched.

Keep reading

Data Collection Can Be Effective and Legal

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: Data Collection Can Be Effective and Legal

Introduction

It’s an Artificial Conundrum

It is not necessary to make an end-run around the U.S. Constitution to thwart terrorism and other crimes.

Those claiming otherwise have been far from candid – especially since June 2013, when Edward Snowden revealed gross violations of the Fourth Amendment by NSA’s bulk electronic collection. U.S. citizens have been widely misled into believing that their Constitutional right to privacy had to yield to a superseding need to combat terrorism.

The choice was presented as an Either-Or conundrum. In what follows, we will show that this is a false choice. Rather, the “choice” can be a Both-And. In sum, all that is needed is to place advanced technology that has been already demonstrated into the hands of officials not driven by lust for a cushy retirement.

Sophisticated collection and processing technology that also protects the right to privacy has been available for decades, enabling highly efficient and discriminating collection. Despite that, top officials have opted for quasi-legal, cumbersome, ineffective – and wildly expensive – technology that has done little more than line the pockets of contractors and “old-friend” retirees.

U.S. officials have been caught lying under oath – with impunity – with false claims about the effectiveness of the intrusive, high price-tag technology they procured and implemented.

In the Annex to this Memo we briefly portray the illustrative behavior of one such senior official. We do so in the belief that a short case study may shed light on the apparent motivation of many senior officials who seem to take far too lightly their oath to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States.

We took the same oath. It has no expiration date.

Keep reading