Worker X

And here it is: This is exactly why the Democrats have shut down the U.S. government: One of the most shocking whistleblowers in the history of whistleblowing: Whistleblower inside the Biden–Kamala administration: “I couldn’t believe that we were giving these people Social Security cards and U.S. passports, free medical, free housing, free food — free everything.” Whistleblower: “They were incentivized to qualify illegals for long-term disability so they could receive Social Security for life — basically, ‘set for life.’” “They wanted us to identify them in such a way that they would qualify for long-term Social Security disability. And once they qualify, it’s for life — they’re essentially set up permanently.” “That doesn’t sound like a refugee to me. Just being honest, that sounds like someone planning to stay here forever.” “They instructed us to talk to the ‘clients’ — because once they arrive, they’re called clients — and ask if they had recurring headaches, lower back problems, or anything else that might qualify them for long-term disability.” “Yes, it is insanity. But in order to get Social Security disability benefits, don’t you need a Social Security number? Well, we were told that one of the first steps was signing them up for Social Security.” Q: “This is unbelievable. So they come over here, get a Social Security number, and become legal?” Answer: “Correct.” 📝 A deliberate strategy by Democrats to use government handouts at taxpayers' expense as bribes to encourage a voter invasion.

🗣️ "America is no longer the leader of the free world!" The free world 👇

The Tiananmen Square video you never saw.

There is certainly no strategy...... right.... right?

Fuck Y-Combinator. Fuck every VC firm that doesn’t have a single Trump supporter in a GP role. Fuck all of these traitors and parasites who hate America and Americans.

Walking by The Thames after this morning’s tv appearance and I’ve resisted posting about this terrorist supporting camp in London, but I really think something should be said now. Terrorist flags, anti Israel crap and this has been here for months and months. How long would an encampment flying British and English flags last before the Met Police and Sadiq Khan closed it down? I’ll tell you how long: five minutes. This shows everything you need to know about this city, the police, the mayor and the government.

Not the legend you remember. Hugh Jackman stars in THE DEATH OF ROBIN HOOD, in theatres June 19.

A strong Canada that prioritizes hard power over rhetoric benefits us all. Unfortunately, Canada has failed to make credible progress on its defense commitments. DoW is pausing the Permanent Joint Board on Defense to reassess how this forum benefits shared North American defense. 1/3

Food for thought. Trump, Hormuz and the End of the Free Ride For half a century, Western strategists have known that the Strait of Hormuz is the acute point where energy, sea power and political will intersect. That knowledge is not in dispute. What is new in this war with Iran is that the United States, under Donald Trump, has chosen not to rush to “solve” the problem. In Hegelian terms, he is refusing an easy synthesis in order to force the underlying contradiction to the surface. The old thesis was simple: the US guarantees open sea lanes in the Gulf, and everyone else structures their economies and politics around that free insurance. Europe and the UK embraced ambitious green policies, ran down hard‑power capabilities and lectured Washington on multilateral virtue, secure in the assumption that American carriers would always appear off Hormuz. The political class behaved as if the American security guarantee were a law of nature, not a contingent choice. Their conduct today is closer to Chamberlain than Churchill: temporising, issuing statements, hoping the storm will pass without a fundamental reordering of their responsibilities. Trump’s antithesis is to withhold the automatic guarantee at the moment of maximum stress. Militarily, the US can break Iran’s residual ability to contest the Strait; that is not the binding constraint. The point is to delay that act. By allowing a closure or semi‑closure to bite, Trump ensures that the immediate pain is concentrated in exactly the jurisdictions that have most conspicuously free‑ridden on US power: the EU and the UK. Their industries, consumers and energy‑transition assumptions are exposed. In that context, his reported blunt message to European and British leaders, you need the oil out of the Strait more than we do; why don’t you go and take it? Is not a throwaway line. It is the verbalisation of the antithesis. It openly reverses the traditional presumption that America will carry the burden while its allies emote from the sidelines. In this dialectic, the prize is not simply the reopening of a chokepoint. The prize is a reordered system in which the United States effectively arbitrages and controls the global flow of oil. A world in which US‑aligned production in the Americas plus a discretionary capability to secure,or not secure, Hormuz places Washington at the centre of the hydrocarbon chessboard. For that strategic end, a rapid restoration of the old status quo would be counterproductive. A quick, surgical “fix” of Hormuz would short‑circuit the dialectic. If Trump rapidly crushed Iran’s remaining coastal capabilities, swept the mines and escorted tankers back through the Strait, Europe and the UK would heave a sigh of relief and return to business as usual: underfunded militaries, maximalist green posturing and performative disdain for US power, all underwritten by that same power. The contradiction between their dependence and their posture would remain latent. By declining to supply the synthesis on demand, and by explicitly telling London and Brussels to “go and take it” themselves, Trump forces a reckoning. European and British leaders must confront the fact that their energy systems, their industrial bases and their geopolitical sermons all rest on an American hard‑power foundation they neither finance nor politically respect. The longer the contradiction is allowed to unfold, the stronger the eventual synthesis can be: a new order in which access to secure flows, Hormuz, Venezuela and beyond, is explicitly conditional on real contributions, not assumed as a right. In that sense, the delay in “taking” the Strait, and the challenge issued to US allies to do it themselves, is not indecision. It is the negative moment Hegel insisted was necessary for history to move. Only by withholding the old guarantee, and by saying so out loud to those who depended on it, can Trump hope to end the free ride.

Hey everyone, I finally landed properly on X — right after my response to Rheinmetall’s СЕО. Perfect timing to introduce myself. I’m Oleksandr Yakovenko, founder of TAF Industries — one of Ukraine’s largest drone manufacturers. In 2022, right after the full-scale invasion, money was never my goal. I founded the charity foundation to deliver critical supplies to over 200 military units. It was pure volunteer work. But charity wasn’t enough. The front needed effective and affordable ways to strike the enemy. So in late 2023 I launched TAF. What started as a wartime volunteer project has grown into industrial-scale production: strike drones, reconns UAVs, EW systems, interceptors and over 30 combat-proven solutions. We run our own R&D center, iterate weekly from real battlefield feedback, and operate a distributed network that survives under missile strikes. The future of warfare is cost-effectiveness. Not the most expensive platform, but the one that delivers maximum effect for minimum cost. The recent Iran conflict proved it again: cheap Shahed drones ($20k–50k) force billion-dollar air defenses to burn through multimillion-dollar interceptors. The math is merciless. We understand the concern of traditional monopolists earning billions on ineffective legacy platforms. Change is uncomfortable — Nokia and Kodak felt the same. Yet while they worry, we’re already moving forward: we’ve established a joint venture in Germany with local partner and are receiving the first orders, turning Ukrainian combat experience into European industrial capacity. I’m here not for profit margins, but to strengthen Ukraine’s defense, bring more soldiers home alive, and share real-war expertise through honest partnerships. Open to connecting with military professionals, defence experts, and serious international partners. Let’s talk — even with those who still believe it’s 1979.

Dear Mr. Armin Papperger, CEO of Rheinmetall, When you referred to Ukrainian drone manufacturers as “Ukrainian housewives with 3D printers” you revealed just how deeply the European defense establishment still fails to understand the nature of modern warfare. This is not about emotion. It is about battlefield reality. Here are the facts your industry refuses to acknowledge: In 2025 alone, Ukrainian drones carried out 819,737 confirmed strikes. They caused 90 percent of all Russian combat losses, more than all other weapons systems combined. TAF alone produces up to 100к FPV drones monthly. In any given 90-day period, my company’s products alone achieve more confirmed strikes than your entire fleet of equipment has across its full combat history in every conflict. And most importantly, I built this company and achieved these results in two years, not fifty. Think about that. Our drones generate more kinetic effect in three months than your flagship platforms have in half a century. Why? Because the battlefield has changed, and your business model has not. •Russian electronic warfare has made GPS-guided Western munitions such as Excalibur and GMLRS nearly ineffective. •Expensive and complex systems designed for wars with air superiority and traditional peer-to-peer combat have become easy prey for drones costing $500, attacking them from above. •The cost-to-effect ratio has been turned upside down: one 120 mm Rheinmetall shell or one anti-tank missile costs more than a dozen of our drones, and yet our drones still win. This is not a “Lego game.” It is industrial Darwinism in real time. We iterate every week. We print parts in basements and ship 100к strike systems per month, while your engineers still require three to five years and hundreds of millions of euros in certification costs for even a minor upgrade. The war in Ukraine is not a temporary anomaly. It is the first true drone-industrial war. And it has already proven that outdated European platforms, no matter how expensive or “serious” they may seem, are becoming less and less relevant unless they integrate the very technologies you mock. So when you say, “this is not innovation,” I hear something else: “We do not want to admit that the future is being written in Ukrainian workshops, not in Düsseldorf boardrooms.” #MadeByHousewives is trending for a reason. Because these “housewives” destroy more enemy equipment every month than entire European armies do in full campaigns. And they do it while your industry continues to sell 20th-century solutions at 21st prices. The invitation remains open, Mr. Papperger. Stop laughing at the kitchen table. Come and learn how tomorrow’s war is actually being fought. Because the next time someone asks, “Who needs tanks in the age of drones?”, the answer may be simpler than you think: Whoever still believes in 1979 will lose to whoever is building in 2026. With respect, but with facts, Oleksandr Yakovenko “Ukrainian housewives” Founder TAF