US makes ‘final offer’ to Iran as Vance leaves Pakistan with no deal (PHOTOS, VIDEOS)
Marathon talks in Islamabad ended without an agreement, with Washington and Tehran blaming each other for the deadlock
https://www.rt.com/news/638013-us-iran-war-talks/
23 years ago today in Gaza, British photographer Tom Hurndall was shot in the head by an Israeli sniper while trying to protect Palestinian children.
Humanity will never forget him
https://twitter.com/Lowkey0nline/status/2043013927362044177?s=20
Iran in the Nazi New Order, 1933–1941
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00210862.2016.1217636?src=recsys
He spent years investigating Opus Dei, a Catholic group accused of a vast conspiracy of abuse. Then Pope Leo asked to meet
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/06/opus-dei-gareth-gore-pope-leo
GMO Wheat Sprayed With Chemical 166 Times More Toxic Than Glyphosate
The U.S. government recently approved HB4 wheat, genetically engineered to tolerate glufosinate, a highly hazardous herbicide banned in the European Union due to unacceptable risks to reproduction. Glufosinate, considered to be 166 times more toxic than glyphosate, is linked to premature birth, miscarriage, stillbirth, skeletal birth defects and autism-like behaviors in offspring.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/gmo-wheat-sprayed-chemical-166-times-more-toxic-glyphosate/
Court Knocks Down Verizon Cell Tower: ‘This Is Why It’s Important to Have a Strong Wireless Ordinance’
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/court-knocks-down-verizon-cell-tower-strong-wireless-ordinance-pennsylvania/
What does it mean to call someone a cardboard cutout?
cardboard cut-out (plural cardboard cut-outs) A piece of card that has been cut into a particular shape, especially the shape of a person with that person depicted on it. (figuratively) A character in a movie, book, or other work who is depicted as inauthentic, generic or one-dimensional.
Six months into the “greatest first 6 months of a Presidency in American history”, hundreds of millions of regular Americans who are still recovering from the previous five years of draconian COVID measures and the cartoonishly Bolshevik Biden administration, now find themselves looking around, asking “according to whom?”
“Six months to blow the cred.”
What has the Trump DOJ done to earn such lofty praise?
Have they sought justice or prosecuted anyone for COVID?
No.
Have they remunerated small businesses and families who were financially crushed due to the catastrophic socioeconomic consequences of the “15 days to slow the spread” and “essential businesses/workers” bullshit?
No.
Have they “released the files” on JFK or Jeffrey Epstein?
No.
Have they done anything to combat the global child sex trafficking and pedophilia blackmail albatrosses hanging around America’s geopolitical and intelligence necks?
No.
Have they done anything to curb the bribery, election fraud and other means of illegal foreign influence exerted over our politicians to serve the best interests of foreign nations and to the detriment of the American people?
No.
Have they cut foreign spending and begun investing American tax dollars into checks notes America and supporting the American people who elected them?
No.
Have they managed to avoid getting the United States into any new wars in the Middle East on behalf of Israel?
Lol. Nope.
Okay, so… what the hell HAVE they done so far?
Welp. They’ve largely picked up where the Biden administration left off… going absolutely INSANE over “protecting Jews” and literally nobody else from some supposedly overwhelming number of cases of “rising antisemitism” in the United States of America.
https://decentfijc.substack.com/p/what-is-president-trumps-doj-doing
The first requirement for admiralty jurisdiction, which is based on the location of the incident, is satisfied if the tort arises on the high seas or on other navigable waters of the United States.7 Prior to Congress’s enactment of the Extension of Admiralty Jurisdiction Act of 1948, the Supreme Court had held that some claims arising from injury or damage to property caused by a vessel on navigable waters did not fall within admiralty jurisdiction when they were consummated on land (e.g., collision of a ship with a bridge).8 In the Extension Act,9 Congress enlarged admiralty jurisdiction to encompass many of these claims. The Court implicitly upheld that expansion of admiralty jurisdiction as within constitutional limits10 when determining that the jurisdiction ecompassed a tort that arose when a longshoreman slipped on loose beans that spilled from negligently packed cargo on a dock during a vessel’s unloading.11 In addition to Congress’s expansion of admiralty jurisdiction, the Court has maintained a few historical exceptions to a strict situs test for maritime jurisdiction.12 However, even with such congressional and judicial guidance, it may occasionally be difficult to distinguish maritime torts from land-based torts. For example, the Court held that admiralty jurisdiction did not extend to an injury caused by defective pier-based equipment that a dock worker suffered when unloading a vessel; thus, the worker had to resort to state law for a remedy.13
The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on the second factor, which asks whether the tort bears a significant relationship to a traditional maritime activity, may also raise complex interpretive questions. For example, in Executive Jet Aviation v. City of Cleveland, a jet aircraft departing a Cleveland airport collided with seagulls, crashed, and sank into the navigable state territorial waters of Lake Erie.14 The owners of the aircraft sued a federal air traffic controller and others for negligence, seeking to invoke the admiralty jurisdiction of the federal courts.15 The Court held that, in addition to establishing that the commission or consummation of the wrongful act took place on navigable waters,16 the plaintiffs had to show that the tort bore a significant relationship to traditional maritime activity.17 Because a land-based aircraft’s flight between two locations within the United States’s continental boundaries did not possess such a relationship, the Court held that federal courts could not exercise admiralty jurisdiction.18 However, the Court’s opinion in Executive Jet suggests that Congress may have some flexibility to expand admiralty jurisdiction to encompass claims like those at issue in the case by enacting laws that, for example, enlarge the concept of a traditional maritime activity.19
In other cases, the Supreme Court has determined that admiralty jurisdiction exists because a case involves a traditional maritime activity. For example, the Court upheld the exercise of admiralty jursidiction over a collision between two private pleasure boats on navigable waters—even though pleasure boating was not exclusively a commercial activity—because such a collision could impact maritime commerce.20 For similar reasons, the Court held that a dredging company’s vessel was engaged in a traditional maritime activity when it damaged an underwater freight tunnel while performing maintenance work.21
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S2-C1-12-6/ALDE_00013654/#:~:text=Maritime%20torts%20include%20injuries%20to%20people%20that,water%20may%20not%20fall%20within%20admiralty%20jurisdiction