Clarity, at a glance
TRMNL is an e-ink companion that helps you stay focused.

Stay focused
Meet the world's first dedicated screen for things that matter.

A British woman has died from rabies after she was "scratched" by a puppy in Morocco, her family said.

Yvonne Ford, 59, from Barnsley, South Yorkshire, had light contact with the stray dog while on holiday in February in the North African country.

In a social media post, reported by the Press Association, Mrs Ford's family said she developed a headache two weeks ago and later couldn't "walk, talk, sleep, swallow".

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) said there was no risk to the wider public due to no documented evidence of rabies passing between people.

SpaceX's next Starship rocket exploded during a ground test in South Texas late Wednesday, dealing another blow to a program already struggling to overcome three consecutive failures in recent months.

The late-night explosion at SpaceX's rocket development complex in Starbase, Texas, destroyed the bullet-shaped upper stage that was slated to launch on the next Starship test flight. The powerful blast set off fires around SpaceX's Massey's Test Site, located a few miles from the company's Starship factory and launch pads.

Live streaming video from NASASpaceflight.com and LabPadre—media organizations with cameras positioned around Starbase—showed the 15-story-tall rocket burst into flames shortly after 11:00 pm local time (12:00 am EDT; 04:00 UTC). Local residents as far as 30 miles away reported seeing and feeling the blast.

SpaceX confirmed the Starship, numbered Ship 36 in the company's inventory, "experienced a major anomaly" on a test stand as the vehicle prepared to ignite its six Raptor engines for a static fire test. These hold-down test-firings are typically one of the final milestones in a Starship launch campaign before SpaceX moves the rocket to the launch pad.

The explosion occurred as SpaceX finished up loading super-cold methane and liquid oxygen propellants into Starship in preparation for the static fire test. The company said the area around the test site was evacuated of all personnel, and everyone was safe and accounted for after the incident. Firefighters from the Brownsville Fire Department were dispatched to the scene.

The Iberian blackout was a consequence of grid management, not any power source.

The blackout that took down the Iberian grid serving Spain and Portugal in April was the result of a number of smaller interacting problems, according to an investigation by the Spanish government. The report concludes that several steps meant to address a small instability made matters worse, eventually leading to a self-reinforcing cascade where high voltages caused power plants to drop off the grid, thereby increasing the voltage further. Critically, the report suggests that the Spanish grid operator had an unusually low number of plants on call to stabilize matters, and some of the ones it did have responded poorly. //

It may be tempting to view the cascading failures as a sign of incompetence on the part of the grid operators. But these are the same operators who managed the process of black-starting the grid to normal operations within a matter of hours. There should (and undoubtedly will) be questions about the low number of plants dedicated to grid stabilization, but that can be handled with a simple policy fix. An equally focused correction can likely address any problems at the problematic facility that triggered the whole chain of events.

The real issue is why so much hardware on the grid didn't follow its operating specifications, either disconnecting early or failing to respond properly to the calls for stabilization.

Notably missing in all of this is any mention of renewable power. Spain has a lot of it, and it tends to be used to meet a higher fraction of demand during the spring and fall, when heating and cooling demand is lowest. Opponents of renewable energy were quick to point to the Iberian blackout as evidence of the unreliability of wind and solar (accusations that The New York Times was willing to echo). The investigation indicates that all these accusations were completely without merit.

Thanks to the nature of my day job, I’ve covered quite a few commercial aviation accidents during the past decade. It’s easy to get caught up in the fast-paced news cycle and in some ways unintentionally neglect the human element of these tragedies.

The effort of producing content on these disasters, along with post-accident investigations, can stave off thoughts – at least temporarily – about how people are impacted, both in terms of the victims and their loved ones.

But that was far from the case last Wednesday when PSA flight 5342 and a Black Hawk helicopter collided over the Potomac River.

I grew up on the Maryland side of the Washington, D.C., area and started my aviation career at Reagan National. The so-called “little airport by the river,” as one former airport manager called it, was almost my second home.

In the early hours of the war, it was reported that dozens of top Iranian military leaders were taken out in a single strike, and how that strike came to be is just as incredible as the result. According to a new report, the subterfuge used to get all those IRGC generals into a single bunker is like something right out of a spy novel.

Amit Segal told the Call Me Back podcast on Monday: “What Israel did was create a fake phone call for 20 members of the air force senior staff an calling them to a specific bunker in Tehran.”

This meant there was no one to give the order to fire the initial salvo of 1,000 ballistic missiles as Iran had previously threatened to do, he added.

) The added bonus for the Israelis was that Iranian military leadership was essentially crippled from the moment of Israel’s first strike against the world’s top sponsor of terrorism.

As The Chronicle reported, Mossad had used “falsified communications through Iranian channels” to call the meeting — which successfully lured “the entire senior leadership of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Force, including Commander General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, his deputies, and key technical personnel, into a fortified bunker outside Tehran.”

Mossad, Israel's intelligence service, infiltrated Iranian backchannels and then placed 20 different fake phone calls to IRGC leaders. Those calls instructed them to all meet a reinforced bunker in Tehran, an order none of them questioned. It's safe to speculate that Mossad agents were on the ground to confirm their arrival, and shortly after, the entire place was blown sky-high. //

How did that happen? The answer lies in how antiquated and authoritarian Iran's military structure was and remains. When you serve at the behest of an Islamic dictator who tortures and kills people who step out of line, you aren't exactly in a position to question an order. When the calls came in to head to the bunker, wondering if things seemed a little suspicious wasn't an option. So all the generals blindly listened.

But weren't there just other leaders ready to step up and carry out the Mullahs' decrees? Not really. Unlike the U.S. military structure, where junior officers are trained and placed in a defined, highly redundant chain of command, Iran's top brass were insular loyalists. With them out of the way, chaos ensued.

Pan Am’s famous logo is returning to the skies this week as part of a transatlantic luxury tour.

The journey, known as “Tracing the Transatlantic,” will take travelers in a circuit from New York to Europe and back on board a privately chartered, all-business-class Boeing 757-200 bearing Pan Am’s blue and white insignia. The tour departs from New York-JFK on Tuesday and makes stops in Bermuda; Lisbon, Portugal; Marseille, France; London; and Foynes, Ireland, before returning to New York.

The trip is limited to just 50 participants.

“Tracing the Transatlantic” is a collaboration between tour operator Criterion Travel and private jet touring business Bartelings in an official licensed partnership with Pan Am.

On Monday, the Pan Am Museum Foundation wrote on social media that the 757 was close to landing at JFK after a flight from Florida. It is registered as TF-FIC and will be operated by Icelandair. //

While Pan American World Airways ceased operations over 30 years ago, Pan Am Global Holdings continues to manage the defunct airline’s intellectual property and licenses the Pan Am name and logo.

wiredog • June 17, 2025 11:52 AM

“Organizations are likely to continue to rely on human specialists to write the best code and the best persuasive text, but they will increasingly be satisfied with AI when they just need a passable version of either.” and as Clive mentioned “High end reference based professional work.”

As a programmer with 30 years experience I’ve been using some of the LLMs in my work. One thing I’ve noticed is that LLM often knows about a Python library I’ve never heard of, so when I ask it to write code to compare two python dictionaries and show me the differences it tells me about DeepDiff and gives me some example code. Which would have taken hours of research and some luck otherwise.

The other thing I’ve noticed is that LLMs seem to follow a 90/10 rule. 90% is right on, 10% whisky tango foxtrot? The 10% seems to arise related to lightly or inconsistently documented APIs (AWS, for example…). The thing is, a dev just out of college has the same success rule. So junior devs absolutely can be replaced with LLMs.

But then where will we get the midlevel and senior devs in 5 to 10 years? Accountancy firms are apparently wrestling with this question too.

Clive Robinson • June 17, 2025 11:21 AM

@ pattimichelle, ALL,

With regards,

“Has anyone proven that it’s always possible to detect when AI “hallucinates?””

The simple short answer would be,

“No and I would not expect it to be.”

Think about it logically,

Think how humans can be fed untruths to the point they believe them implicitly, it is after all what “National curricula” do. Yet they have never checked what they have been told is factual or not. Nor are they likely too because they have exams to pass. Even so nor in a lot of cases are they capable of checking for various reasons not least because information gets withheld or falsified. It’s why there is the saying,

“History belongs to the victors”

Even though most often it’s the nastier belief systems that go on to haunt us down the ages over and over (think fascism or similar totalitarian Government).
[...]

Clive Robinson • June 17, 2025 8:04 AM

@ Bruce,

With regards,

“But it may still be used whenever it has an advantage over humans in one of four dimensions: speed, scale, scope and sophistication.”

You’ve left out the most important,

“Repeatability”

Especially “reliable repeatability”

Where AI will score is in two basic areas,

1, Drudge / Makework jobs
2, High end reference based professional work.

The first actually occupies depending on who you believe between 1/6th and 2/5ths of the work force.

We’ve seen this eat into jobs involving “guard labour” first with CCTV to “consolidate and centralise” to reduce head count. Then to use automation / AI to replace thus reduce head count even further.

The second is certain types of “professional work” where there are complex rules to be followed, such as accountancy and law.

In essence such proffessions are actually “a game” like chess or go, and can be fairly easily automated away.

The reason it’s not yet happened is the “hallucination issue”. Which actually arises because of “uncurated input” as training data etc. Which is the norm for current AI LLM and ML systems.

Imagine a “chess machine” that only sees game records of all games. Which includes those where people cheat or break the rules.

The ML can not tell if cheating is happening… So will include cheats in it’s “winning suggestions”. Worse it will “fill in” between “facts” as part of the “curve fitting” process. Which due to the way input is “tokenised and made into weights” makes hallucination all to easily possible.

It’s what we’ve seen with those legal persons who have had to work with limited or no access to “legal databases” and has caused Judges to get a little irritable under the collar.

The same applies to accountancy and tax law, but is going to take a while to “hit the courts”.

With correct input curation and secondary refrence checking through authoritive records these sorts of errors will reduce to acceptable levels.

At which point the human professional in effect becomes redundant.

Though care has to be exercised, some apparently “rules based professions” are actually quite different. Because they essentially require “creativity” for “innovation”. So scientists and engineers, architects and similar “designer / creatives” will gain advantage as AI can reduce the legislative / regulatory lookup / checking burden. In a similar way that more advanced CAD/CAM can do the “drudge work” calculations of standard load tolerances and the like.

If you’ve worried that AI might take your job, deprive you of your livelihood, or maybe even replace your role in society, it probably feels good to see the latest AI tools fail spectacularly. If AI recommends glue as a pizza topping, then you’re safe for another day.

But the fact remains that AI already has definite advantages over even the most skilled humans, and knowing where these advantages arise—and where they don’t—will be key to adapting to the AI-infused workforce.

AI will often not be as effective as a human doing the same job. It won’t always know more or be more accurate. And it definitely won’t always be fairer or more reliable. But it may still be used whenever it has an advantage over humans in one of four dimensions: speed, scale, scope and sophistication. Understanding these dimensions is the key to understanding AI-human replacement. //

Those are the four dimensions where AI can excel over humans. Accuracy still matters. You wouldn’t want to use an AI that makes graphics look glitchy or targets ads randomly—yet accuracy isn’t the differentiator. The AI doesn’t need superhuman accuracy. It’s enough for AI to be merely good and fast, or adequate and scalable. Increasing scope often comes with an accuracy penalty, because AI can generalize poorly to truly novel tasks. The 4 S’s are sometimes at odds. With a given amount of computing power, you generally have to trade off scale for sophistication.

Even more interestingly, when an AI takes over a human task, the task can change. Sometimes the AI is just doing things differently. Other times, AI starts doing different things. These changes bring new opportunities and new risks. //

It is this “phase shift,” when changes in degree may transform into changes in kind, where AI’s impacts to society are likely to be most keenly felt. All of this points to the places that AI can have a positive impact. When a system has a bottleneck related to speed, scale, scope or sophistication, or when one of these factors poses a real barrier to being able to accomplish a goal, it makes sense to think about how AI could help.

Equally, when speed, scale, scope and sophistication are not primary barriers, it makes less sense to use AI. This is why AI auto-suggest features for short communications such as text messages can feel so annoying. They offer little speed advantage and no benefit from sophistication, while sacrificing the sincerity of human communication. //

Where the advantage lies

Keep this in mind when you encounter a new application for AI or consider AI as a replacement for or an augmentation to a human process. Looking for bottlenecks in speed, scale, scope and sophistication provides a framework for understanding where AI provides value, and equally where the unique capabilities of the human species give us an enduring advantage.

Newly announced catalog collects pre-2022 sources untouched by ChatGPT and AI contamination. //

As it turns out, his pre-AI website isn't new, but it has languished unannounced until now. "I created it back in March 2023 as a clearinghouse for online resources that hadn't been contaminated with AI-generated content," he wrote on his blog.

The website points to several major archives of pre-AI content, including a Wikipedia dump from August 2022 (before ChatGPT's November 2022 release), Project Gutenberg's collection of public domain books, the Library of Congress photo archive, and GitHub's Arctic Code Vault—a snapshot of open source code buried in a former coal mine near the North Pole in February 2020. The wordfreq project appears on the list as well, flash-frozen from a time before AI contamination made its methodology untenable.

The site accepts submissions of other pre-AI content sources through its Tumblr page. Graham-Cumming emphasizes that the project aims to document human creativity from before the AI era, not to make a statement against AI itself. As atmospheric nuclear testing ended and background radiation returned to natural levels, low-background steel eventually became unnecessary for most uses. Whether pre-AI content will follow a similar trajectory remains a question.

Still, it feels reasonable to protect sources of human creativity now, including archival ones, because these repositories may become useful in ways that few appreciate at the moment. For example, in 2020, I proposed creating a so-called "cryptographic ark"—a timestamped archive of pre-AI media that future historians could verify as authentic, collected before my then-arbitrary cutoff date of January 1, 2022. AI slop pollutes more than the current discourse—it could cloud the historical record as well.

For now, lowbackgroundsteel.ai stands as a modest catalog of human expression from what may someday be seen as the last pre-AI era. It's a digital archaeology project marking the boundary between human-generated and hybrid human-AI cultures. In an age where distinguishing between human and machine output grows increasingly difficult, these archives may prove valuable for understanding how human communication evolved before AI entered the chat.

Car companies aren't accustomed to making vehicles that can only be used once. //

An experimental reusable rocket developed by the research and development arm of Honda Motor Company flew to an altitude of nearly 900 feet Tuesday, then landed with pinpoint precision at the carmaker's test facility in northern Japan.

The accomplishment may not sound like much, but it's important to put it into perspective. Honda's hopper is the first prototype rocket outside of the United States and China to complete a flight of this kind, demonstrating vertical takeoff and vertical landing technology that could underpin development of a reusable launch vehicle.

While Tuesday's announcement by Honda was unexpected, the company has talked about rockets before. In 2021, Honda officials revealed they had been working on a rocket engine for at least two years. At the time, officials said a small satellite launch vehicle was part of Honda's roadmap.

The rocket Honda talked about in 2021 could put a payload of up to 1 metric ton into low-Earth orbit. It's not clear if Honda is still aiming for this sector of the launch market. Company officials then committed to supporting internal development work until about 2025 or 2026, when it would make a "go" or "no go" decision on whether to finish the project and field an operational rocket.

Most Americans have probably never heard of the European Union’s (EU) recently passed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). According to the EU, the “aim” of the CSDDD “is to foster sustainable and responsible corporate behaviour in companies’ operations and across their global value chains. The new rules will ensure that companies in scope identify and address adverse human rights and environmental impacts of their actions inside and outside Europe.” //

As my colleagues Justin Haskins and Jack McPherrin note in a recent Heartland Institute Policy Study outlining the CSDDD:

It is not hyperbolic to say the CSDDD is one of the most economically restrictive and nakedly authoritarian laws in the history of western democratic civilization. The directive attempts to globally institutionalize sweeping ESG objectives by mandating practices for large companies doing business in the European Union, regardless of whether those companies are headquartered in the EU. Even worse, the CSDDD forces those companies to impose the same standards on many of the businesses operating within their global supply chains— fundamentally transforming all social and economic activity around the world. It is one of the gravest threats to freedom that Americans face today.

Under the CSDDD, all U.S. businesses, from multinational corporations to small family farms, would have to adhere to the EU’s environmental regulations that prioritize the mass adoption of expensive and unreliable so-called green energy while restricting the production of abundant, affordable, and reliable fossil fuel energy.

In essence, the CSDDD “is a transition plan for climate change mitigation aligned with the 2050 climate neutrality objective of the Paris Agreement as well as intermediate targets under the European Climate Law,” says the EU. //

ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods explained on Fox News’ Special Report recently that the EU’s CSDDD represents a non-tariff trade barrier that Trump is intent on eliminating as his team negotiates with EU officials.

Woods also recommended that Congress draft legislation that deems the EU’s CSDDD irrelevant to U.S. businesses. I highly suspect that Trump would sign such a bill with gusto.

“Our democracy cannot very well function if individual judges issue extraordinary relief to every plaintiff who clamors to object to executive action,” U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil said in her ruling on Monday. “It is not the role of a district court judge to direct the policies of the Executive Branch first and ask questions later.”

Those are the words many observers of the ongoing judicial coup have wanted to hear from a federal judge since the first wave of injunctions from tyrannical district court judges started coming down early in the Trump administration’s tenure, blocking the president elected by the American people to do what they elected him to do.

They finally came from Vyskocil, a Trump appointee serving in New York, when she dismissed a case from teachers unions attempting to get the court to “commandeer,” as she put it, $400 million in federal grants and contracts to Columbia University. The Trump administration canceled the funding because of the school’s inability to handle pro-Palestine protests and violence on its campus.

“With no apparent sense of irony, lawyers for an organization called ‘Protect Democracy’ insist that a district court judge should order the Executive Branch immediately to restore the flow of taxpayer dollars to an elite university, which funding Defendants represent is inconsistent with the priorities of the duly elected President of the United States,” Vyskocil added. //

Vyskocil dismissed the case because the unions had no standing to sue, and Columbia University is “conspicuously absent” from the case as a plaintiff. //

She then went through the litany of bizarre counts against the Trump administration from the unions that did not describe any more than a tenuous relationship to the funding cuts at best. The unions even argued that the fact that they chose to spend money to oppose potential (yes, potential, not real) action from the Trump administration meant they had standing.

An organization “cannot spend its way into standing simply by expending money to gather information and advocate against the defendant’s action,” the judge wrote, quoting the Supreme Court.

Teachers unions, and universities for that matter, apparently believe they are entitled to federal funding and that any cut is a constitutional impossibility representing some kind of free speech violation. But as Vyskocil soberly pointed out in her second appeal to the fact that elections have consequences, the cuts are often made simply because the president — and the people who elected him — have priorities that differ from those of the unions and universities.

It has long been clear that the leftist activists who succeeded in getting “Juneteenth” added as a federal holiday meant to strip Independence Day of some of its moral and historical significance. The timing of Juneteenth, only a fortnight and change before the Fourth of July, is intended to usurp some of the Fourth’s glory. At the same time, the theme of the new holiday is designed to suggest that slavery, rather than liberty, is the defining feature of our founding. It’s an attempt to make 1776 vie with 1619, with the abolition of slavery being portrayed as our real moment of independence, in place of the moment when we actually proclaimed our independence and declared that “all men are created equal.” //

Per the Office of Personnel Management, the official name of the holiday to be observed on June 19 is “Juneteenth National Independence Day.” The official name of the holiday to follow 15 days later is “Independence Day.” It could hardly be clearer that Juneteenth was intended to compete with, and partially marginalize, the Fourth of July.

America does not need, should not have, and does not legitimately have, two Independence Days. Designating Juneteenth as “National Independence Day” intrudes upon our actual Independence Day. It suggests that Americans’ freedom doesn’t really trace to the Declaration of Independence but rather to the Emancipation Proclamation — or, more exactly, to awareness of that proclamation (more than two years after it was issued). It also suggests that our actual Independence Day doesn’t apply to all Americans. //

PBS writes, “Juneteenth commemorates when the last enslaved African Americans learned they were free.” This, however, is false. After Juneteenth, which marks the moment when federal troops arrived in Galveston, Texas in June 1865 and announced that all slaves in Texas were free, people were still held in slavery in Delaware and Kentucky, border states unaffected by the Emancipation Proclamation. //

Only Congress and the states, through the passage of a constitutional amendment, had the power to end slavery on a national basis.

This fact, and the fact that slavery remained in existence in Delaware and Kentucky after Juneteenth, likely would have been raised in the Senate had it bothered to engage in a genuine debate over whether Juneteenth should be a federal holiday. Instead, that body, which once prided itself on its vigorous deliberations, passed the Juneteenth bill under a unanimous consent agreement in the wake of the George Floyd riots, an act of true irresponsibility and political cowardice.

Since Juneteenth marked the end of slavery in Texas, rather than the end of slavery in the U.S., it a much more sensible holiday for Texas than for the U.S. as a whole.

On a national basis, a date truly worth commemorating would be December 6, the day on which the 13th Amendment was ratified, marking our constitutional triumph over an inherited evil that clashed with our founding principles. On that day in 1865, Americans successfully amended their Constitution to read, “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude … shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” That is a day, and those are words, worth celebrating.

Congress should make December 6 a federal holiday to celebrate America’s abolition of slavery, while eliminating Juneteenth as a federal holiday and thereby confirming that we have but one Independence Day.

President Trump’s vision for the Middle East is bold: bring Gulf states into the U.S. ecosystem through trade, investments, and partnerships; align Arab nations with Israel; isolate Iran, eliminating its nuclear enrichment capability; shift attention to countering China. He believes Qatar, lured by economic deals, will join the Abraham Accords and normalize ties with Israel — a grand coalition with the capitalist West.

It’s audacious. But is it realistic?

For more than 25 years, Qatar — a tiny Gulf emirate with roughly 300,000 citizens and 12 percent of the world’s natural gas — has used its obscene wealth as a geopolitical weapon to buy global power. The goal? Control the narrative, shape Western discourse, and whitewash its radical Islamist agenda behind a diplomatic mask.

Qatar’s American and Global Influence
This isn’t conjecture. It’s a sophisticated, calculated, and well-funded campaign. As The Free Press exposed in “How Qatar Bought America,” the influence Qatar gained in the U.S. has no modern parallel. Doha, Qatar’s capital, has spent nearly $100 billion propagandizing U.S. institutions — Congress, universities, media organizations, think tanks, and corporations. It has transformed Middle East studies programs into Muslim Brotherhood indoctrination mills, radicalizing students against America, Israel, and Jews. //

Qatar is hardly moderate. It is ideologically aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood — a transnational Islamist movement bent on establishing Muslim world dominance via a global caliphate under Sharia law. Its strategy is simple: ignite chaos, then offer to fix it — for a price. It wants to appear indispensable to all, but accountable to none. //

The Saudis, for all their flaws, have cracked down on the Brotherhood, opened to Israel, and eased some of their hardline policies. Qatar has done none of that.

In 2017, President Trump noted that the nation of Qatar “has been a funder of terrorism at a very high level.” //

American presidents must stop mistaking money for loyalty or diplomacy for morality. Hosting U.S. troops doesn’t grant absolution. Economic deals don’t erase terror ties.

If Trump’s visit becomes just a PR win for Doha, the message is damaging: buy enough jets, host enough troops, grease enough palms, and anything is forgiven.

Qatar is not a confused ally. It is a highly sophisticated player with a clear, dangerous agenda. That agenda is not ours.

President Trump has the leverage. He must use it — not to flatter, but to demand accountability. Insist on transparency. Force real change.

If he doesn’t, Qatar’s friendship will remain exactly what it has always been: a polished performance masking something far darker.

Dieter Schultz NtxTwenty6
9 minutes ago

There is little reason to accept the increased risk of a non stealth (non bomber), turbo prop aircraft like a C-130.

As someone has pointed out here, as long as we have undisputed, and unchallenged, control of the Iranian skies it doesn't matter whether we use a B-2 stealth aircraft or a C-130.

It may be more esthetically pleasing to use a B-2 but using a C-130 has one thing that using the B-2 can never have... the deniability that the US conducted the mission.

The implication isn't exactly subtle. Iran is now claiming it has a nuclear weapon to launch at Israel or U.S. positions in the Middle East. What that actually amounts to is a pretty big question, and there are two ways to look at this.

Firstly, I think you have to take this seriously. When a nation led by Islamist lunatics says they are going to launch a nuke, that's not something you can just write off as rhetoric. No doubt, Israeli and American forces are on high alert, and all possible countermeasures are ready to be used.

This does seem to put to bed the idea claimed by isolationists that the entire case against Iran is manufactured and that they had no intention of developing a nuclear weapon. As the vice president, who is the furthest thing from a warhawk, explained on Tuesday, the intelligence they've seen is clear, and even if it weren't, there is no other reasonable explanation for the levels of enrichment Iran has sought and achieved. //

What we do know is that given this latest threat, there's no way this war can end with a negotiated settlement that allows Iran to keep its nuclear program. That has to be completely off the table at this point, and all indications from President Donald Trump are that it is. The job must be finished, and Iran's nuclear threat taken off the board for good. //

Ashram, the Black Knight
3 hours ago edited
Gee, didn't Iran claim that their interests in nuclear research didn't include the development of a weapon because it was against their religion?

Now they are basically admitting that was a lie.

How surprising.

The poll, which was prepared by GrayHouse for the Senate Republican Committee, showed MAGA far from being fractured, with a staggering 80 percent of Trump voters voicing their support for the U.S. providing Israel with offensive weapons in its efforts to destroy Iran's military and nuclear capabilities.

That's not all. Poll results show that 83 percent of Trump voters support the strikes on Iran's nuclear program, with 72 percent supporting the U.S. taking "direct military action" to prevent Tehran from developing its nuclear capabilities. //

Perhaps the most telling bit of information to emerge from this new poll is how MAGA feels about relying on diplomatic efforts to resolve the escalating conflict. In short, they're against it, with 73 percent stating they don't trust Tehran to keep their end of any diplomatic deal. This is the number that shatters the narrative that one side of MAGA supports diplomacy while the other side is in favor of military action. MAGA, it seems, is united in its determination that ensure that Iran does not develop and use nukes, and they're behind the president taking all necessary action to stop them. The schism that some X users love to talk about simply doesn't exist.