“On October 30, 1938 a very young Orson Welles pulled a clever stunt. He masterminded a live radio dramatization of H.G. Wells’s War of the Worlds, presented as if CBS was actually reporting on a Martian invasion. Although the program occasionally notified listeners that it was a dramatic presentation, not news, thousands of Americans panicked, packing churches, fleeing their homes, and jamming switchboards. Last weekend Citrini Research released a report — on Substack! — titled The 2028 Global Intelligence Crisis. The report, which rapidly went viral, laid out a scenario for economic and financial chaos caused by AI, written as if it were a retrospective published after the dire developments it projected. … There are two distinct questions about the huge reaction to a report that didn’t actually contain any news.” (02/26/26)
“The latest tranche of the Epstein Files has fleshed out the sheer scale of the billionaire’s reach and highlighted the fragility of good character.” (02/26/26)
“Innovative, low-cost weapons have destroyed sophisticated military systems that can be dramatically costlier to build and operate. Russian warships costing tens of millions of dollars have succumbed to semi-autonomous Ukrainian sea drones costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Even cheaper commercial drones have not only destroyed million-dollar tanks but have also performed missions that were once only possible with advanced military helicopters. Countering these drones can drain the defender’s coffers. … The barrier to entry for sophisticated, high-impact warfare is collapsing with the global availability of cheap, powerful, and adaptable commercial technology. This new reality leaves policymakers and citizens grappling with a set of profound challenges. Countries are confronting central issues around these novel strategic asymmetries and how to control the proliferation of advanced weapons when they are built from commercial components.” (02/26/26)
“In a market economy, a producer exchanges his product for money. He then exchanges the received money for the products of other producers. Alternatively, we can say that an exchange of something for something takes place by means of money. Things are, however, not quite the same once money is generated out of ‘thin air’ because of the expansionary central bank policies. Once money out of ‘thin air’ is employed, it sets in motion an exchange of nothing for something. This amounts to a diversion of resources from wealth generators to the holders of the newly generated money. In the process, wealth generators are left with fewer resources at their disposal, which in turn weakens their ability to grow the economy.” (02/26/26)
“The use of key security policy terms in public discourse is intended to suggest facts that serve to calm people down. However, there are many reasons for concern that could also trigger peace forces. Political scientist and historian Herfried Münkler called for a European atomic bomb as early as 2023. There is currently an increasingly heated debate about whether Germany should seek refuge under France’s nuclear protective shield in view of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. The leader of the Social Democrats in the European Parliament, Katarina Barley, also raised the issue of acquiring nuclear bombs as part of European armament in 2024. The German and French heads of government, Friedrich Merz and Emmanuel Macron, are also paving the way for talks on European nuclear armament and the extension of France’s nuclear umbrella, according to Merz in his speech at the Munich Security Conference in early 2026.” (02/26/26)
“With Donald Trump’s tariffs being ruled illegal, the government may be on the hook for up to $170 billion in refunds. Because Amazon helped conceal how much tariffs raised consumer prices, it will be easier for companies to hoard refunds for themselves.” (02/26/26)
“While developed nations are investing in military hardware, they increasingly lack the manpower for any future, high-intensity conflict. They could employ conscription, but these are also ageing societies. They have shrinking youth cohorts – the very demographic historically relied on in high-intensity conflict. At the margins of the war in Ukraine, we can see how the two sides are trying to cope with this reality – through the recruitment of foreign soldiers.” (02/26/26)
“As U.S. and Iranian negotiators prepare for more talks in Geneva, the White House is reportedly considering an initial, targeted military strike — with the possibility of broader action if Tehran refuses to accept demands for ‘zero enrichment’ of nuclear material. In his State of the Union address Tuesday, President Trump argued that last year’s U.S. strikes had ‘obliterated’ Iran’s program even as his administration continues negotiations now, without a clear objective. The strategic logic appears straightforward: strike first, demonstrate resolve, increase pressure and force Iran back to the table on American terms. Before momentum carries the country further down that path, the nation is owed clear answers. Decisions of this kind should not rest solely on tactical calculation; they require clarity about legal authority, strategic reality and risk.” (02/26/26)
“While the Pentagon has contracts with all the leading AI labs, Anthropic until this month was the only one contracted for AI use in classified settings: Claude was, for instance, reportedly involved in the operation to capture Nicolas Maduro. But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has grown unhappy with two elements of the DoD’s contract with Anthropic. One, Anthropic won’t let its AI be used to conduct mass surveillance of Americans. Two, it won’t let the DoD use it to operate autonomous weapons systems that can identify, track, and kill targets without direct human involvement. To the Defense Department, the idea that a contractor would be able to tie the military’s hands like this is outlandish …. Hegseth could simply drop Anthropic’s contract over this …. But he doesn’t really want to …. So instead, Hegseth has issued Anthropic an ultimatum: Change your policy, or we’re going to start getting nasty.” (02/26/26)
Source: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
by Marie McMullan
“When student journalism came under fire last year, those sparks caught the public’s attention. With the ousting of The Indiana Daily Student’s advisor and temporary ban on its print issues, the University of Alabama’s decision to close two student-run magazines, and sadly more, 2025 was a busy year for student press censors. But not all efforts to suppress student journalists are as eye-catching. To help understand how censorship can sneak into newsrooms, here are six signs to look out for …” (02/26/26)
