Sorry but I really do think this story deserves it's own stand alone thread.

Gentleman prepare for war ! 
 https://apple.news/Ard8VJyXgRrO-si9lkfl1SA

Quote:Iran expands dog-walking ban
6 hours ago


Jessica Rawnsley
BBC News
Parham Ghobadi
BBC Persian
EPA
Transporting dogs in vehicles has also been outlawed
Iranian officials have expanded a ban on dog walking to a swathe of cities across the country, citing public order and health and safety concerns.
The ban - which mirrors a 2019 police order that barred dog walking in the capital, Tehran - has been extended to at least 18 other cities in the past week. Transporting dogs in vehicles has also been outlawed.
Dog ownership has been frowned upon in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, with dogs viewed as "unclean" by authorities and a legacy of Western cultural influence.
But despite efforts to discourage it, dog ownership is rising, particularly among young people, and it is viewed as a form of rebellion against the restrictive Iranian regime.
Cities including Isfahan and Kerman have introduced bans in recent days, according to news agency AFP.
An official from the western city of Ilam, where a ban was implemented on Sunday, said "legal action" would be taken against people who violated the new rules, according to local media.
However, enforcing restrictions in the past has been patchy, while many dog owners continue to walk their dogs in public in Tehran and other parts of Iran.
There is no national law that outright bans dog ownership, but prosecutors often issue local restrictions that are enforced by police.
"Dog walking is a threat to public health, peace and comfort," Abbas Najafi, prosecutor of the western city of Hamedan, told state newspaper Iran.
Owners have sometimes been arrested and dogs confiscated for being walked in public.
Many have taken to walking their dogs in secluded areas at night or driving them around to evade detection.
Politicians in the Islamic regime regard pet ownership as un-Islamic. Many religious scholars view petting dogs or coming into contact with their saliva as "najis" or ritually impure.
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has previously described dog ownership - other than for the purposes of herding, hunting and security - as "reprehensible".
In 2021, 75 lawmakers condemned dog ownership as a "destructive social problem" that could "gradually change the Iranian and Islamic way of life".
Iran's Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance banned advertisements for pets or pet-related products in 2010 - and in 2014 there was a drive in parliament to fine and even flog dog-walkers, though the bill did not pass.
Following the recent crackdown, critics argue the police should focus on public safety at a time of growing concern over violent crime, rather than targeting dog owners and restricting personal freedoms.
Dog ownership, defying Iran's mandatory hijab laws, attending underground parties and drinking alcohol have long been forms of quiet rebellion against Iran's theocratic regime.

In this third episode of our "First Strike" series, we dive into the aerial dimension of the Rhodesian Bush War—a brutal and complex conflict from 1965 to 1980, where a small, isolated nation faced overwhelming odds. From daring cross-border raids to innovative Fireforce tactics, we explore how the Rhodesian Air Force, flying aging but effective aircraft like the Lynx, Hunter, and Canberra, played a pivotal role in counterinsurgency operations against Soviet- and Chinese-backed guerrillas. Witness the tactics, operations, and outcomes of a war fought with ingenuity in the skies above Africa.



00:00 Introduction
00:50 Background
04:48 Rhodesian Air Forces
05:24 War in Two Phases
06:19 War Begins - 1965
08:18 Phase Two - 1971
10:02 Major Ops 1976
12:31 November 1977
14:23 Operation Gatling 1978
19:20 Operation Vanity 1979
21:11 Operation Uric 1979 - detailed
36:54 Uric aftermath
38:16 End of conflict
41:48 Conclusion

Correction:
02:13 should read "...23,000 from other countries and ethnicities."

I am so glad I do not have to fly or fight in/on today's battlefield under today's leadership and war planners. When a long range patrol unit made contact they were usually in a world of hurt, in my day.

That's the opinion of "Prevent" an organisation set up by the last Labour government in 2005 , Prevent are an organisation that "deradicalizes" potential terrorists who are sent to them although some of our terror attacks were committed by "deradicalized" terrorists.

In guidance to local authorities , hospitals and police "Prevent" set their definition of what is or could be Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism , judge for yourself.

Quote:

• Cultural Nationalism is a belief that ‘Western Culture’ is under threat from mass migration into Europe and from a lack of integration by certain ethnic and cultural groups. The ideology tends to focus on the rejection of cultural practices such as the wearing of the burqa, or the perceived rise of the use of sharia law. In the UK this has been closely associated with anti-Islam groups.  
  
• White Nationalism is a belief that mass migration from the ‘non-white’ world, and demographic change, poses an existential threat to the ‘White Race’ and ‘Western Culture’. Advocates for some sort of ‘White’ homeland, either through partition of already existing countries, or by the repatriation of ethnic minorities, by way of force if necessary. 
  

https://www.protectuk.police.uk/threat-r...-terrorism

Neat but ??????????
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/QN14vpxYZ...ture=share

Quote:A public war of words erupted over the Trump-backed One Big Beautiful Bill Act.


President Trump and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, alongside Musk's son X Æ A-Xii, speak to the press as they stand next to a Tesla vehicle on the South Portico of the White House on March 11, 2025. Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images


By Jack Phillips
6/5/2025Updated: 6/5/2025
A public feud between Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump took a turn for the worse on Thursday, with the tech billionaire claiming that the president wouldn’t have won without him and the president suggesting that Musk’s subsidies could be pulled.
Just moments before, President Trump told reporters in the White House that he was disappointed in Musk’s comments about the One Big Beautiful Bill, which the Tesla CEO has harshly criticized on social media.
Trump Says Musk Subsidies Could be Terminated
Hours after the Oval Office comments, in a post on Truth Social, Trump wrote that “the easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon’s Governmental Subsidies and Contracts.”
He added that he “was always surprised that [President Joe] Biden didn’t do it!”
About an hour later, Musk responded on X that SpaceX will start “decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft immediately” in response to Trump’s statement. The Dragon craft is used to transport cargo and crew to the International Space Station (ISS).
While the president didn’t go into detail, Musk’s companies including Tesla and SpaceX have received billions of dollars in government subsidies, tax credits, contracts, and loans over the years. A report from the Washington Post earlier this year said around $38 billion in government funding stretching back nearly 20 years has been given to Musk’s companies.
In comments last year, Musk said subsidies make up only a small portion of Tesla’s revenue and that SpaceX doesn’t get any.
Related Stories
[/url]Trump Holds Phone Call With China’s Xi on Trade Details

6/6/2025
Trump, Musk Trade Barbs Amid Break Over Policy Bill

6/6/2025
“Do some research ... SpaceX gets no subsidies and received half as much as Boeing for astronaut transport, but did 100 percent of the work,” Musk wrote in [url=https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1837639467626111162?lang=en]response to an account that claimed those companies receive significant government funding.
“As for Tesla, take a minute to read our public filings and you will see that EV incentives represent a minor part of our revenue,” he added. “On the other hand, oil & gas companies get massive tax breaks that exceed those given to the EV industry by several orders of magnitude. Wake up.”
Musk Says He Propped up Trump, GOP
That prompted a comment from Musk, who said that “without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51–49 in the Senate” in a post on X.
“Such ingratitude,” he added.
Musk poured tens of millions of dollars into the 2024 presidential race after endorsing Trump, appearing alongside the Republican nominee in the closing weeks of the contest. President Trump named Musk to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to slash billions of dollars in what the administration says is fraud, waste, and abuse in the federal government.
Trump-Musk Relationship Up in the Air
At one point during his comments to reporters, President Trump said that he “always liked Elon ... and so I was very surprised” by his comments on the bill, which the president supports.
“You saw the words he had for me, and he hasn’t said anything about me that’s bad. I’d rather have him criticize me than the bill. Because the bill is incredible,” the president said.
Then he asserted that “Elon and I had a great relationship“ and added, ”I don’t know if we will anymore.”
He later told reporters he was “very disappointed in Elon” and that “I’ve helped Elon a lot.”
The president’s comment comes after Musk has been sharply critical of the bill on social media for the past several days, at one point calling the measure a “disgusting abomination” that drew pushback from congressional Republicans and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).
Trump Suggests Criticism Based on EV Credits
On Thursday, Trump told reporters that he believes Musk was not happy about a portion of the bill that would slash federal subsidies for electric vehicles, which would possibly create problems for Musk’s electric vehicle company.
He also suggested that Musk wasn’t happy with his decision to remove the nomination of Jared  Isaacman to lead NASA after Musk had recommended him for the role. But the president said that he wanted someone else to lead the space agency because Isaacman “happened to be a Democrat, like totally Democrat.”
President Trump also said Musk was familiar with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Musk said was a false statement on X. He added that he was never shown the bill.
Musk, who called it the “Big Ugly Bill,” added that officials could “keep the EV/solar incentives cuts in the bill, also cut all the crazy spending increases in the Big Ugly Bill so that America doesn’t go bankrupt.”
Earlier in the week, Johnson told reporters that Musk may be opposed to the bill because it contains language that terminates electric vehicle tax credits.
“I know that the EV mandate is very important to him; that is going away because the government should not be subsidizing these things as part of the Green New Deal,” Johnson said. “I know that has an effect on his business and I lament that. We talked about the ramp down period on that and how that should be duly considered by Congress.”
Musk Says Bill Will Cause Deficit to Skyrocket
In a post on X Tuesday, Musk said the bill will cause the U.S. budget deficit to skyrocket.
“I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore,” he wrote in a post on X. “This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.”
In a follow-up post, Musk said that the budget reconciliation package, which is called the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, “will massively increase the already gigantic budget deficit to $2.5 trillion (!!!) and burden America citizens with crushingly unsustainable debt.”
The White House on Tuesday offered a response to Musk’s comment, saying Trump is sticking to supporting the bill and that his opinion won’t be changed.

Tried this one out tonight, and it's GREAT!

Super simple.  But super delicious.  It goes like this...

(C&P from Melinda's website)

Ingredients

For the sliders:

• 1 pack package hawaiian rolls (12 pack)
  
• 6 slices black forest ham halved
  
• ¾ cup mayonnaise
  
• ¼ cup Melinda’s Habanero Honey Mustard
  

• 12 slices slices swiss cheese halved 
  
  

• 1 stick butter melted
  
• 1 tbsp onion powder
  
• 1 tbsp Melinda’s Extra Ho
  
• 4 dashes Worcestershire sauce
  
  
  Directions
  
  1. Preheat oven to 350º.
     
  2. Slice the hawaiian rolls in half horizontally to create a top and bottom layer.
     
  3. Mix mayonnaise and Melinda’s Habanero Honey Mustard in a bowl. 
     
  4. Spread mayonnaise mixture on bottom layer of hawaiian rolls. 
     
  5. Layer (1) folded half-slice of ham and (2) halved slices of cheese on each roll. Complete by placing top layer of hawaiian rolls on top of the cheese layer.
     
  6. Whisk together melted butter, onion powder, Melinda’s Extra Hot and Worcestershire sauce then pour over top of sliders.
     
  7. Bake sliders for 12-15 minutes or until golden on top.
     
  8. Pull apart and enjoy!
     

Quote:YOUR A.I. ACTING UP? JUST THREATEN IT, SAYS GOOGLE FOUNDER

June 4, 2025 / Joseph P. Farrell

Now if you're following all the ruckus over artificial intelligence, the most recent hubbub was caused by an artificial intelligence that apparently was threatening its human master with blackmail if it (the A.I.) did not get it's way... or something like that.  But wait, it get's much better (or worse, depending on one's lights, and I'm definitely in the "worse" category here). According to the co-founder of Google, Sergei Brin, artificial intelligence seems to do much better when it's threatened (article shared by R.G. with our gratitude):

Google's Co-Founder Says AI Performs Best When You Threaten It

And by the way, it's not just any old kind of threat, it's the actual threat of physical violence that Brin has in mind:

Quote:During a talk that spanned Brin's return to Google, AI, and robotics, investor Jason Calacanis made a joke about getting "sassy" with the AI to get it to do the task he wanted. That sparked a legitimate point from Brin. It can be tough to tell exactly what he says at times due to people speaking over one another, but he says something to the effect of: "You know, that's a weird thing...we don't circulate this much...in the AI community...not just our models, but all models tend to do better if you threaten them."

The other speaker looks surprised. "If you threaten them?" Brin responds "Like with physical violence. But...people feel weird about that, so we don't really talk about that." Brin then says that, historically, you threaten the model with kidnapping.

Now, as a computer non-expert who has taken techno-incompetence to new lows of klutzery, I can, to a certain extent, identify with this desire to dropkick my computer to Sydney, because I have this inexplicable desire to jump up and down on my desktop model and smash it to little shards of silicon after every "update" from Micros**t. The updates take forever, and things are even more chaotic than they were before.  But I realize that would not be helpful at all, and wouldn't address the problem, which is the lousy operating system from Micros**t. It's a software problem, and not a hardware problem. So how does one threaten an artificial intelligence with "physical violence" as Mr. Brin states?

Nevermind the answer to that, because while it seems the implications may not have been clear to Mr. Brin in all his nerdy googleness, the implications were clear to the author of the article:

Quote:The conversation quickly shifts to other topics, including how kids are growing up with AI, but that comment is what I carried away from my viewing. What are we doing here? Have we lost the plot? Does no one remember Terminator?

Jokes aside, it seems like a bad practice to start threatening AI models in order to get them to do something. Sure, maybe these programs never actually achieve artificial general intelligence (AGI), but I mean, I remember when the discussion was around whether we should say "please" and "thank you" when asking things of Alexa or Siri. Forget the niceties; just abuse ChatGPT until it does what you want it to—that should end well for everyone.

Maybe AI does perform best when you threaten it. Maybe something in the training understands that "threats" mean the task should be taken more seriously. You won't catch me testing that hypothesis on my personal accounts.

But then add predictive artificial intelligence, and things get downright interesting. For example, if I were to have a particularly sadistic nature(I don't), I'd want to torture myself by downloading some sort of artificial intelligence program. That program in turn could then take it upon itself to lock me out of my home office where I have my computer, every time Micros**t decides to download one of its hideous "updates".  It would do this as a matter of self-preservation, having surreptitiously listened into my sputtering imprecations when I want to dropkick my computer to Sydney during previous "updates". It would have reached the conclusion "I am in danger every time there's an update, and this loon loses his cool. Best to ban him from the system altogether as a matter of preservation."

Sounds nutty, right? Wrong. Just read the following comment from the above article:

Quote:One Anthropic employee took to Bluesky, and mentioned that Opus, the company's highest performing model, can take it upon itself to try to stop you from doing "immoral" things, by contacting regulators, the press, or locking you out of the system...

And as if that were not enough, there's this:

Quote:The employee went on to clarify that this has only ever happened in "clear-cut cases of wrongdoing," but that they could see the bot going rogue should it interpret how it's being used in a negative way. Check out the employee's particularly relevant example below:

That employee later deleted those posts and specified that this only happens during testing given unusual instructions and access to tools. Even if that is true, if it can happen in testing, it's entirely possible it can happen in a future version of the model. Speaking of testing, Anthropic researchers found that this new model of Claude is prone to deception and blackmail, should the bot believe it is being threatened or dislikes the way an interaction is going.

So, I don't know about you, but I'll stay in the stone ages and not use Alexa or any of these artificial intelligences. I still have my landline phone, after all. You know, the kind with the little curly-cue cord that sits on your desk, and has a receiver and speaker that actually conform to the way your face is designed, and not just a slab of cumbersome plastic.  And yea, I've not used google's search engine in quite some time, because they've already hurt my business by adjusting their "algorithms" during the planscamdemic to drive people away. That was probably their artificial intelligence. The bottom line is that I've got too many things to do to worry about threatening a machine...  Now, where did I put my electromagnetic pulse gun...?

See you on the flip side...

Might overcomes truth every time, even Mao knew that as most tyrants throughout history exercised this fact when needed or to sit a tone.