The recruitment videos posted on YouTube and X racked up more than 5 million views combined in their first day. The outreach comes as CIA Director John Ratcliffe has vowed to boost the agency's use of intelligence from human sources and its focus on China, which has recently targeted US officials with its own espionage operations. The videos are “aimed at recruiting Chinese officials to steal secrets,” Ratcliffe said. “China is intent on dominating the world economically, militarily, and technologically,” he said. “Our agency must continue responding to this threat with urgency, creativity and grit, and these videos are just one of the ways we are doing this.” The more than two-minute-long videos are of cinematic quality and feature scenes of Chinese Communist Party insiders, luxury automobiles and glittering skyscrapers, as narrators share their growing disillusionment with the system they have served. Last year, the CIA posted online instructions in Korean, Mandarin and Farsi detailing steps that potential informants can take to contact US intelligence officials without putting themselves in danger. The CIA posted similar instructions in Russian three years ago. The San Francisco-based personal finance company said that Taiwan topped the list of 16 nations it chose for budget travelers because US tourists do not need visas and travelers can easily have a good meal for less than US$10. A bus ride in Taipei costs just under US$0.50, while subway rides start at US$0.60, the firm said, adding that public transportation in Taiwan is easy to navigate. The firm also called Taiwan a “food lover's paradise,” citing inexpensive breakfast stalls The survey results, which were released on Wednesday in a report titled “Sovereignty, Security, & US-China Relations: Chinese Public Opinion,” showed that 55.1 percent of respondents agreed or somewhat agreed that “the Taiwan problem should not be resolved using force under any circumstances,” while 24.5 percent “strongly” or “somewhat” disagreed with the statement. The amendments would bring the legislation in line with systems found in other countries such as Japan and the US, Legislator Chen Kuan-ting said Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Chen Kuan-ting (陳冠廷) has proposed amending national security legislation amid a spate of espionage cases. The proposal, which aims to enhance interagency vetting procedures and reduce the risk of classified information leaks, would establish a comprehensive security clearance system in Taiwan, he said. The China Coast Guard has seized control of a disputed reef near a major Philippine military outpost in the South China Sea, Beijing's state media said, adding to longstanding territorial tensions with Manila. Beijing claims sovereignty over almost all of the South China Sea and has waved away competing assertions from other countries as well as an international ruling that its position has no legal basis.

A Trump official spoke of an “autism registry” then walked it back. A Trump official spoke of an “autism registry” then walked it back. An especially concerning aspect of the initiative was revealed when National Institutes for Health (NIH) Director Jay Bhattacharya stated during a presentation that the National Institutes for Health would be “developing national disease registries, including a new one for autism.” After autistic people and advocates raised concerns, however, the Department of Health and Human Services quickly issued a statement to clarify that it is not creating an autism registry. This word had especially caused alarm among civil rights and disability advocates. Historically, government registries were used to subject disabled people to human rights violations at the hands of the state, including forcible sterilization and institutionalization. Forced sterilization of disabled individuals without consent is still legal in some states. In a similar statement to CBS News, the Department of Health and Human Services described the project as a “real-world data platform” that will “link existing datasets to support research into causes of autism and insights into improved treatment strategies.” After the Department of Health and Human Services' assertion that it is not in fact creating an autism registry, many disability justice organizers asserted the walk-back was a matter of semantics only and said their privacy concerns persisted over the National Institutes for Health data aggregation plans. Other social media users questioned if such a project would be possible due to HIPAA and informed consent requirements for human subjects research. There are many registries already at the National Institutes for Health for various health conditions, but these registries are generally de-identified — they are not permitted to contain information that could be used directly (either alone or in combination) to identify individuals. Multiple autism registries specifically also exist, although not at the federal level. These lists are managed by several U.S. states and private foundations. Community concerns surrounding the new autism research initiative were focused on the aggregation of health information across many sources, such as pharmacies, medical records, genetic testing and data from consumer products like smartwatches. There are large de-identified datasets at the National Institutes for Health and elsewhere that include the “real-world” health data of millions of Americans generated by various sources linked together, including data from health records, insurance claims and consumer product use. Health product companies with offerings ranging from wearable devices to period-tracking apps regularly monetize user data by receiving compensation for granting researchers access to “anonymized” user information, such as for training AI models. Centralized datasets and shared data have vast benefits for research and medical care, but health data fragmentation avoids the privacy risks inherent when linking datasets containing private health information. Even with high de-identification standards, privacy advocates are still wary. “Real world” data is regularly used via an “opt-out” model rather than the explicitly “opt-in” nature of human subjects research requiring the informed consent of study participants. This new autism research “real-world data platform” is more representative of the norm than a stark deviation, but that doesn't mean there's no cause for concern. News that diagnosis data from health records would be incorporated into the new autism “real world data platform” led many late-identified autistic adults to express regret at having pursued a formal diagnosis — or relief that they hadn't. But some autistic advocates, including Devon Price, a social psychologist who writes about autistic liberation, point out the inherent privilege in ever having a choice as to whether to be identified as autistic on official documents, including lists maintained by government agencies. There are many additional reasons to be alarmed by the new autism research initiative taking shape under Kennedy, who has already tapped David Geier, a discredited vaccine researcher, to be a key player in his new autism research initiative. The comments made by Kennedy at a press conference on April 16 drew harsh criticism from autistic people, advocates and caregivers. The framing of this reported increase in autism prevalence as an “epidemic” was widely criticized. Citing examples from the press release and Kennedy's comments, they write: “Language framing Autism as a ‘chronic disease,' a ‘childhood disease' or ‘epidemic' distorts public understanding and undermines respect for Autistic people.” Many autistic self-advocates condemned these falsehoods by pointing to the reality that they themselves do pay taxes, write poetry, have been married for years, and much more. Autistic writer Collette Grimes also noticed our community trending toward “propping up our most successful, six-figure earning spokespeople,” and had similar concerns, writing, “I can't help but feel that measuring autistic people by our productivity does more harm than good.” Grimes goes on to argue that these community reactions only serve to uphold the very same capitalist hierarchies of worth at the heart of the ableist beliefs underpinning not only these specific comments by Kennedy but also the material systemic oppression of all disabled people. These appeals to respectability also reify the very same divisions within our community that are being pushed by Kennedy and his allies. This comment reflects renewed public discussion about returning to the previous diagnostic schema when Asperger's was given as a separate diagnosis to those autistic people without an intellectual disability or language delay. Separating the autistic community — whether by labeling some as having “profound autism” or giving “level 1” autistic people a different diagnosis altogether — could allow the Department of Health and Human Services to undermine efforts of these individuals to obtain accommodations and simultaneously enable it to justify further infringement on the autonomy of autistic people with higher levels of support needs. As we resist these attacks on our community, autistic people with more autonomy must organize in solidarity with those who are nonspeaking, have an intellectual disability, are more disabled, or are otherwise more marginalized, and work to end abusive practices including seclusion and restraint, dangerous pseudoscientific “cures” and electric shock therapy to which institutionalized and other autistic people with high support needs are especially vulnerable. Solidarity with our transgender autistic community members is also crucial. In the U.S., the fact that autistic youth are more likely to be trans is cited in at least two state laws that ban gender-affirming care for minors. It's notable that in the 400-page report on released on May 1 by the Department of Health and Human Services on gender dysphoria in youth, autism is mentioned six times, including a cited quote that recommends “extended diagnostic periods” when autism is suspected or diagnosed — a euphemism for delaying and/or denying life-saving medical care. Earlier this month in Idaho, police killed Victor Perez, an autistic teenager with cerebral palsy. The hypothetical fears of a potential loss of autonomy, privacy, and other basic rights expressed by many late-identified autistic people reflect the present reality for many autistic people who can't mask their autism, work, live independently, or otherwise have a high level of engagement with services and the state. Disability justice teaches that we must center the needs of community members who are currently most impacted by intersecting forms of oppression, not just fight to maintain our own relative privileges. Rather than validate ideas that tie our worth to our productivity, we all must affirm the humanity of autistic people who have higher support needs. The strength of the autistic community depends on us acting in solidarity with our most disabled members as we strive for liberation for all. We've borne witness to a chaotic first few months in Trump's presidency. Over the last months, each executive order has delivered shock and bewilderment — a core part of a strategy to make the right-wing turn feel inevitable and overwhelming. But, as organizer Sandra Avalos implored us to remember in Truthout last November, “Together, we are more powerful than Trump.” Indeed, the Trump administration is pushing through executive orders, but — as we've reported at Truthout — many are in legal limbo and face court challenges from unions and civil rights groups. And communities across the country are coming together to raise the alarm on ICE raids, inform neighbors of their civil rights, and protect each other in moving shows of solidarity. Please, if you find value in what we do, join our community of sustainers by making a monthly or one-time gift. Lizzie Chadbourne is a multiply disabled public health researcher studying the impacts of minority stress and stigma on the health of LGBTQ people and their relationships. Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day. Help us meet our basic publishing costs by the end of April. Make a tax-deductible one-time or monthly gift to Truthout today.

Progressive economist Gerald Epstein says global capitalists may no longer see the US as a “safe haven” under Trump. Progressive economist Gerald Epstein says global capitalists may no longer see the US as a “safe haven” under Trump. The first 100 days of Donald Trump's second presidency have brought about big, destructive changes in U.S. society and culture as well as on the environment. They have also caused real damage to the economy, which has gone on reverse on almost all fronts since Trump took office. By talking out of both sides of his mouth on tariffs, Trump has managed in a very short time to harm U.S. businesses, weaken the dollar and compel investors to dump U.S. government bonds. No wonder why he has the lowest 100-day approval of a president in 80 years. The interview that follows has been lightly edited for clarity. Polychroniou: Trump's erratic reciprocal tariffs represent an unprecedented shift in U.S. trade policy and are having dramatic impacts on both the U.S. and global economies. And isn't this bad news for the average U.S. consumer and a slam for the working-class voters that support Trump? Gerald Epstein: Trump's tariffs are creating havoc in the world economy and for U.S. businesses, consumers and workers. With respect to the issue of uncertainty, economists of many stripes, from John Maynard Keynes to Milton Friedman, have argued that for capitalism (and capitalists) to prosper, uncertainty must be held in check. Mainstream economists extol the economic importance of consumers, but we have known from at least the time of Marx that it is investment (what Marx called “accumulation of capital”) that underpins the system. But since most useful investment is relatively long lasting and requires significant upfront expenses, capitalists are reluctant to make such commitments when uncertainty is through the roof, as it is now. The result is not only a likely reduction in investment in plants, equipment and technology, but, through a downward multiplier process, a reduction in demand and employment spread throughout the economy. The first is the massive, indeed prohibitive level of tariffs on China, in combination with high tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Together, these countries account for more than one-third of U.S. trade, so the tariffs are obviously extremely disruptive to their economies and ours. If Trump wants to reshore manufacturing production and jobs, he is making that goal more difficult by slapping tariffs on products that these firms will have to use to produce their newly onshored final goods like cars. Together, these policies are tanking expected corporate profits in the U.S., threatening unemployment for U.S. workers and slashing plans for corporate investment. As a result, financial investment into the U.S. is less profitable and riskier. Hence, there is less demand for U.S. dollars to invest in the U.S. This is one main reason why the value of the dollar is going down and shows a direct connection between Trump's tariffs and the dollar. And this relates to a possible disruption of the trust by global capitalists in the United States as a “safe haven” in times of trouble and turmoil. Trump has gone to war with the U.S. Federal Reserve and would have liked to be able to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell over interest rates. Second, why is the Fed holding interest rates steady? The Trump administration either wants to completely control international organizations for its own purposes or wants to destroy them. Trump's bumbling tariff war creates big problems for the Fed: The war creates pressures for both inflation and recession. This immobilizes the Fed because it has no good policy option: Increasing interest rates could fight inflation but will make recession worse; lowering interest rates would cushion the recession but could increase inflation by keeping demand high. So, the Fed is just holding steady until events become clearer. Part of the reason they are selling bonds is because they are worried about higher inflation which makes these bonds less valuable in real terms. But another reason — and the one that really got investors and economists' attention — is the concern that they are selling off bonds because of a loss of confidence in the U.S. economy and the U.S. dollar as a “safe haven” in a turbulent world. Could the U.S. dollar lose global reserve currency status on account of Trump's tariff war? The U.S. dollar is unlikely to completely lose its global reserve currency status now, largely for two reasons: One is inertia. Much of the rest of the world already has a lot of business of various kinds connected to the dollar: their foreign exchange reserve holding; the financial trades they make with derivatives and other financial instruments; their offshore financial activity — for example, in London, that often does not even involve U.S. financial institutions but nonetheless is denominated in dollars; and so on. But Europe is not only decentralized and lacks a unified economic and military strategy, but it is also being undermined by the same forces that Trump is unleashing — economic uncertainty and an emboldened Russia. But just because the U.S. dollar is unlikely to completely lose its status in the coming period does not mean that the dollar's role won't significantly decline in some areas, especially in the case of the official role of reserve holdings and in trade within a growing Chinese economic bloc in Asia and inside the EU. When the dollar fell and U.S. government interest rates went up in the wake of the recent market tariff kerfuffle, many commentators suggested that the dollar's safe haven “exorbitant privilege” was at risk: that Trump was wrecking a valuable U.S. advantage. I believe that this privilege is real and important, even though it has often been difficult to assess because it has been so secure. Now we are witnessing a “natural experiment” in the disruptions caused by Trump and his trade adviser, Peter Navarro. Will the rest of the world be able to benefit from this loss of “privilege?” If chaos ensues as a result in the short-to-medium run, it seems unlikely. If China or Europe seize the moment, then they might be able to benefit and capture some of this privilege. The best thing would be for the international community to issue more international “currencies,” such as the special drawing rights issued by the IMF, and transition to a more global currency that could spread these privileges around. But this is unlikely to happen as long as the U.S. is around to block these institutions from stepping out on their own. It seems pretty clear that the Trump administration either wants to completely control international organizations for its own purposes or wants to destroy them. Since these are such big and powerful institutions, the Trump administration will first try to control them and manipulate them so as to pursue its own agenda of slashing investments in preventing and adapting to climate change, slashing programs to help support women economically, and so on. As such, countries in the rest of the world will have to make one of the following choices: (a) give in to Trump's destructive demands; (b) align with China and wrest control of these institutions that way or (c) develop a truly third way to control these institutions themselves. But, in my view, resisting Trump and Trumpism should be the first order of business. We've borne witness to a chaotic first few months in Trump's presidency. Over the last months, each executive order has delivered shock and bewilderment — a core part of a strategy to make the right-wing turn feel inevitable and overwhelming. But, as organizer Sandra Avalos implored us to remember in Truthout last November, “Together, we are more powerful than Trump.” Indeed, the Trump administration is pushing through executive orders, but — as we've reported at Truthout — many are in legal limbo and face court challenges from unions and civil rights groups. Efforts to quash anti-racist teaching and DEI programs are stalled by education faculty, staff, and students refusing to comply. And communities across the country are coming together to raise the alarm on ICE raids, inform neighbors of their civil rights, and protect each other in moving shows of solidarity. It will be a long fight ahead. Please, if you find value in what we do, join our community of sustainers by making a monthly or one-time gift. Currently, his main research interests are in U.S. politics and the political economy of the United States, European economic integration, globalization, climate change and environmental economics, and the deconstruction of neoliberalism's politico-economic project. He has published scores of books, including Marxist Perspectives on Imperialism: A Theoretical Analysis; Perspectives and Issues in International Political Economy (ed. ), and over 1,000 articles which have appeared in a variety of journals, magazines, newspapers and popular news websites. Many of his publications have been translated into a multitude of languages, including Arabic, Chinese, Croatian, Dutch, French, German, Greek, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish and Turkish. His latest books are Climate Crisis and the Global Green New Deal: The Political Economy of Saving the Planet (with Noam Chomsky and Robert Pollin as primary authors, 2020); The Precipice: Neoliberalism, the Pandemic, and the Urgent Need for Radical Change (an anthology of interviews with Noam Chomsky, 2021); Economics and the Left: Interviews with Progressive Economists (2021); Illegitimate Authority: Facing the Challenges of Our Time (an anthology of interviews with Noam Chomsky, 2023); and A Livable Future Is Possible: Confronting the Threats to Our Survival (an anthology of interviews with Noam Chomsky, 2024). Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day. Help us meet our basic publishing costs by the end of April. Make a tax-deductible one-time or monthly gift to Truthout today.

Australia's return of a left-leaning government follows Canada's similar sharp swing towards Mark Carney's Liberal Party, another governing party whose fortunes were transformed by Trump. While Australia wasn't facing the same threats to its sovereignty as Canada, Trump's global tariffs and policy swings have undermined Australians' trust in the US, according to recent surveys. A clearly emotional Albanese took the stage to cheers just before 10 p.m. local time to thank Australians for choosing a majority Labor government, defying predictions both major parties would lose seats. In conceding defeat, Dutton said he accepted full responsibility for the election loss. “Our Liberal family is hurting across the country tonight,” Dutton said. US Secretary of State Rubio called Australia a “valued ally” while UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said “long-distance friendships can be the strongest.” Despite criticism that he had been unable to get Trump on the phone, Albanese said they had shared “warm” conversations in the past and he saw no reason not to trust him. Canberra remains a staunch ally of Washington, despite Trump's tariffs threat. But analysts say his chances were badly damaged by policy misses and reversals, and weighed down by Trump's wrecking-ball approach to the global order. After Trump's April 2 “Liberation Day” announcement, Albanese called a press conference and, flanked by his foreign and trade ministers, said: “This is not the act of a friend.” In contrast, Dutton struggled to shake off comparisons to Trump by his opponents, not just because some policies appeared to have been inspired by the US leader. In the last three years, Albanese has been credited with improving relations with China, leading to the lifting of tariffs imposed during his predecessor's term. His government has also repaired relations with Pacific Island nations, in part to prevent Beijing from filling a leadership vacuum. Within Australia, Albanese's government has been widely criticized for not being aggressive enough in efforts to tame rising living costs during a period of high global inflation. Related article Trump budget proposes $1 trillion for defense, slashes education, foreign aid, environment, health and public assistance Albanese first took office in the so-called “climate election” of 2022, with promises to cut Australia's carbon emissions and reach net zero by 2050. Despite a rapid rollout of renewable projects – enough to power 10 million homes – his government has been criticized for also approving new coal and gas projects. On Saturday, Albanese reiterated his commitment to climate action in contrast to the rolling assault inflicted by the new US administration on environment agencies and research. All Australians know “renewable energy is an opportunity we must work together to seize for the future of our economy,” Albanese said to cheers. The Liberal Party's loss means Dutton's plan to build seven nuclear plants at public expense won't move forward, a proposal critics said was a stalling tactic to extend Australia's reliance on fossil fuels. “Today's election result shows that Australians have comprehensively rejected the Coalition's Trumpist agenda of climate and nature destruction, and its plan to force dangerous nuclear on communities,” said David Ritter, CEO of Greenpeace Australia Pacific. Dutton's loss ends a long political career for the ex-police officer who held high-profile roles as minister for defense, immigration and home affairs in the former Coalition government. Dutton assumed the Liberal leadership after Morrison's election loss in 2022 and brought with him a reputation as a strongman of the party's right wing. But in the final week of campaigning, he seemed to again tap into Trump rhetoric, referring to Australia's national broadcaster and left-leaning newspaper The Guardian as “hate media.” In 2023, Dutton launched himself into contention as prime minister by successfully campaigning against the government's referendum on the Voice proposal, which included constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians. Dutton had called the Voice referendum divisive, because it proposed to give one group recognition over another. For the same reason, he said Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags would no longer be present at press conferences under his leadership – because all Australians should be united under one flag. As he claimed victory, Albanese made a deliberate attempt to cast himself as a “kinder” leader, in contrast to the model offered by an administration he accused his rival of emulating.

Reginald, a seven-year-old great dane from Idaho, and Pearl, a chihuahua from Florida, are both certified winners in their respective height titles by Guinness World Records. The fact that Reginald is the size of a small horse and Pearl is as small as an apple didn't stop them from getting along famously. “I was not expecting to once again have the record,” said Vanesa Semler of Orlando, Florida, owner of both tiny dogs. Guinness arranged the two-day meet-up between Pearl and Reginald – who also goes by Reggie and measures in at a whopping 3ft 3in (1 meter) – last month at his home in Idaho Falls. “For me, [it] was a huge, pleasant surprise from day one because Reggie is like Pearl, in bigger size,” she said. Reggie, for his part, might have been more interested in the Guinness film crew that accompanied Pearl than the tiny dog herself. “I would say he likes people a little bit more than he likes other dogs,” said Sam Johnson Reiss, his owner. Pearl's tiny size was also strange for the big boy. Reggie's super size was evident early on, especially on a dog park visit when he towered over other great danes despite being only nine months old. There might have been a little jealousy shown over toys and beds, but Reggie and Pearl found common ground during their two days roaming the Idaho farm together. “I think she found a good friend,” Semler said. Semler said Pearl is her prima donna, with the chihuahua even picking out the clothes she wants to wear every day by placing her paw on the outfits laid out before her. That comes in handy when news crews are lining up for interviews. “For us, she was always our diva,” Semler said. Pearl doesn't have the top diva title quite yet, with Reiss saying Reggie – who has a new Instagram account – has his own diva moments.

On this World Press Freedom Day, stand with those who bring you the truth. On this World Press Freedom Day, stand with those who bring you the truth. “How do we continue convincing our few remaining allies that journalists' work is important?” Last month, I was sitting on stage at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia, Europe's biggest journalism conference, when I heard this question from an audience member. “Point at who is killing journalists,” I suggested. Since then, two separate journalistic investigations found that Viktoriia was subjected to torture and abuse. Everything points to the fact that she was killed — whether they murdered her last Septmber, or slowly killed her through months of abuse, torture, and starvation. “If Russia, a huge authoritarian country, was so afraid of this small woman that they killed her in prison — all because she was a journalist,” I said, “then journalists must be doing something very important — something that the worst people of this world are really afraid of.” While I was speaking on that stage, I didn't yet know that Viktoriia's body was already in Ukraine. The body was missing a number of organs, including the brain, eyes, and trachea, and was initially marked as male. An impressive collaborative investigation by several newsrooms found the details of her imprisonment, and mentioned that the missing organs point to an attempt to hide the fact that she died from asphyxia. A few people on the Kyiv Independent's team knew Viktoriia. Viktoriia put herself in mortal danger by going into Russian-occupied territory because she believed that finding out the truth was worth the risk. One of her former colleagues said it was almost like she couldn't believe that something bad could happen to her because of how enormously important the mission to find out the truth was. For Russia, it meant killing Viktoriia to discourage others from finding out the truth about its treatment of Ukrainian civilians in the occupied territories. That truth — the persecution, forced Russification, torture and killings — doesn't fit well into Russia's narrative that claims they are liberating these territories. These revelations could be especially damaging to Russia now that ceasefire negotiations are underway, and where it unfortunately appears the U.S. is ready to recognize Russian control over occupied Ukrainian territories — completely disregarding the fate of the millions of Ukrainians living there. Russia tried to silence Viktoriia Roshchyna — instead, it proved her right. Oppression of press freedom is by far not limited to Russia — the latest Press Freedom Index, released every year by Reporters Without Borders for World Press Freedom Day on May 3, shows an alarming picture. In Ukraine, it was especially felt earlier this year, when the new U.S. administration abruptly ended USAID projects around the world. In Ukraine, U.S. grants funded many media outlets, including small front-line newspapers and prominent teams behind anti-corruption investigations. Grants like those cut came without interference in the content produced by the media — allowing them to maintain independence while paying their bills. The Kyiv Independent itself is one of very few independent media outlets that wasn't affected by the U.S. grant cuts because we are lucky enough to be backed by our readers. As I'm writing this on World Press Freedom Day, looking at the dispiriting assessments of the state of free press globally, I keep coming back to them. That gives me a ray of hope in the otherwise gloomy landscape — our community reminds me that press freedom has enough champions for the truth to not be subdued. If you're reading this, consider supporting free press today. If you can, donate to a Ukrainian newsroom. There are many who can't afford to pay for the news — and every donation means that people in any circumstances can have access to truthful information. If you can't afford a subscription or donation, those aren't the only things you can do to show your support. My inbox is a curious mix of “Die, Ukrainian propagandists. Russia will win!” and “You're doing a great job, thank you so much!” — but there are many, many more of the latter kind.

A leading immunologist warned of a “post-herd-immunity world”, as measles outbreaks affect communities with low vaccination rates in the American south-west, Mexico and Canada. I think the measles outbreak proves that,” said Dr Paul Offit, an expert on infectious disease and immunology and director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. As of 1 May, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported 935 confirmed measles cases across 30 jurisdictions. Risk of measles is considered high in the Americas, and has grown 11-fold compared with 2024. Only slightly behind, data released earlier this week from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and WHO also noted that measles cases across Europe were up tenfold in 2024 compared to 2023. That data also indicated that the 2024 measles cases in Europe followed a seasonal pattern, which was not previously noted in 2021 through 2023. Of the European cases, which reportedly hit 35,212 for 2024, 87% were reported in Romania. “This virus was imported, traveling country to country,” said Leticia Ruíz, the director of prevention and disease control in Chihuahua, Mexico, according to the Associated Press. Many cases are in areas with large populations of tight-knit Mennonite communities. Mennonite teaching does not explicitly prohibit immunization, according to an expert in the religion. However, as some in the Mennonite community in Texas resist assimilation and speak a dialect of Low German, community members may have limited contact with public health authorities, leading to lower vaccination rates. Immunologists fear the rate of infection of such diseases – and the unnecessary suffering they bring – will increase as the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, spreads misleading claims about vaccines and vaccine-preventable diseases, undermines public confidence in vaccines' benefits, threatens to make some vaccines less accessible, guts public health infrastructure and pushes leading vaccine experts out of the department. “Here, Robert F Kennedy Jr is exactly who he has been for the last 20 years. Although Kennedy has tepidly endorsed the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine to prevent measles, he has also made false and inflammatory claims about the vaccine. Just this week, Kennedy told a crowd that it contains “aborted fetus debris”. The rubella vaccine, like many others, is produced using decades-old sterile fetal cell lines derived from two elective terminations in the 1960s. Get the most important US headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning Kennedy's health department also stated this week that it would implement new safety surveillance systems and approval requirements for vaccines, but did not provide any specifics about the design. Experts said running certain trials, such as for a decades-old vaccine like MMR, would be unethical because it could expose people to a dangerous disease when an intervention is known to be safe. There, he made misleading claims about measles treatment, including that the antibiotic clarithromycin and steroid budesonide had led to “miraculous and instantaneous recovery”. There is no cure for the viral disease and it is not considered “treatable” by leading physicians' groups, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). “There is no cure for measles, and it can result in serious complications. Measles kills about one in 1,000 children who become infected with the disease, and has similar rates of brain swelling, called encephalitis, that can result in lifelong disability. Measles infection suppresses the immune system, which can lead to other infections.

Be among the first to get it. A Russian Su-30 fighter jet was destroyed by a sea drone strike carried out by Ukraine's military intelligence, marking the first time a sea drone takes down a jet, Ukraine's military intelligence said on May 3. The strike was carried out by Group 13, a special unit within HUR, using a Magura sea drone equipped with a missile warhead. "This is the world's first destruction of a combat aircraft by a naval drone," the statement read. The Kyiv Independent can't independently confirm the Ukrainian intelligence report. The multi-role Su-30 fighter, valued at approximately $50 million, was reportedly hit in midair and crashed into the sea. The operation was conducted in coordination with Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) and the country's defense forces, according to the intelligence agency. Ukraine had previously used the Magura V5 drone to down two Russian Mi-8 helicopters on Dec. 31, 2024, in what was then considered a world-first drone strike on airborne targets from the sea. Overnight on May 3, local Russian officials claimed that a Ukrainian drone attack on Krasnodar Krai injured four people, and damaged homes and a grain terminal in Novorossiysk. A state of emergency was declared in the city, while the Russian Defense Ministry claimed that over 170 Ukrainian drones and several naval drones were intercepted across Crimea and the Black Sea.

It reminded me of something else I once saw, but we'll get to that. By the time Mr. Poilievre appeared on election night, several seats were still in flux, but it was clear that Canada's next government would be Liberal. But Mr. Poilievre did not arrive on the stage in that room full of blue to deliver a concession speech. “It will be an honour to continue to fight for you and to be a champion of your cause as we go forward,” Mr. Poilievre told the party that had chucked its past two leaders out a window after a single election loss. He emphasized that Canadians had voted for “a razor-thin minority government, a virtual tie in the vote count,” though by morning, that wouldn't be the case. “Conservatives will work with the Prime Minister and all parties with the common goal of defending Canada's interests and getting a new trade deal that puts these tariffs behind us, while protecting our sovereignty and the Canadian people,” Mr. Poilievre said. It‘s hard not to wonder what might have changed if he had. He outlined how the loss was really a win if you looked at it right, telling his fellow Tories that they had “much to celebrate,” gaining more than 20 seats and landing the largest share of the popular vote since Brian Mulroney's 1988 landslide. He must have known, even as he said it, that he had lost his own Carleton riding to a newbie Liberal and wouldn't be returning to the House of Commons himself, at least not right away. There was another time when that sprawling suburban-rural region on the edge of Ottawa voted for an upstart and turfed a political veteran. The day after that election, in 2004, CPAC interviewed a panel of newly elected MPs, and the host began by introducing the Conservative rookie who had just toppled Liberal cabinet minister David Pratt as “a bit of a giant killer.” And there sat 25-year-old Mr. Poilievre, with chubby cheeks, owlish glasses and a too-big suit jacket. Canadian voters had just handed a bedraggled Liberal government a fourth-term minority, and the newly united Conservatives under Stephen Harper had come up short of expectations. When the host asked about this, that freshman version of Mr. Poilievre instantly framed that loss as a victory, too: It was the best popular vote a centre-right party had achieved since 1988, he said, and they'd gained more seats than anyone else. He argued that this new Parliament needed to democratize things, because there had been a corrosive concentration of power in the Prime Minister's Office. And he wanted to “give people the right to fire their members of Parliament by petition if they break their word,” which he would propose in a private member's bill. Earlier this year, Mr. Poilievre told Jordan Peterson that he's never changed his mind on anything. And it is certainly some kind of remarkable that the same points he was raising in teenage letters to the editor or an undergraduate essay about becoming prime minister are, almost verbatim, how he fought this election campaign to try to land that job in real life. But it‘s not quite true that all of his ideas are bolted to the floor. Sometimes, it seems, we grow in ways that surprise even us. The real message that the present-day Mr. Poilievre wanted to bring home on election night was the idea he underlined over and over again: A big shift doesn't happen all at once, and you have to be patient enough to let it unfold. In that inky postmidnight hour, when they were still tallying the ballots but the answer that counted was already clear, Mr. Poilievre was trying to persuade his party that this result, in all its hijacked strangeness, was a down payment on a victory deferred. He was good for the rest if they would just wait a while and put their knife-sharpening kits away. This wasn't something 25-year-old Pierre Poilievre had given attention to in that long-ago interview. Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Canadian PM's meeting with Trump could prove an awkward affair. Trump's apparent designs on Canada, which appeared to begin with a social media post calling Carney's predecessor Justin Trudeau “governor Trudeau”, weighed heavily on the country's election. Next week's meeting between Carney and Trump at the White House could well be an awkward affair. But Canadian statehood might not be such a great idea for our home and native land. Absorbing Canada would double the amount of territory America would have to defend, however, while only increasing its population by about 12 per cent. According to the global firepower index, America has almost 20 times the number of active duty servicemen that Canada deploys and spends about 22 times more on its military budget. Canada, long a beneficiary of America's leading role in both Nato and North American continental defence, ranks roughly on par with Argentina and Algeria. With extended Atlantic, Pacific, and Arctic coastlines, and vastly extended proximity to Russian and Chinese forays in those regions, a supersized America would have to stretch its existing resources to stand on guard with relatively little help from its new citizens. It would also face the financial burden of having to care for them. Canada's economy is in the doldrums of a long-term economic slump, with cost of living, housing affordability, and opportunities for financial advancement fading for younger Canadians. Since 2010, Canadian growth has languished at European levels, averaging at about 1.6 per cent annually, compared to over 2 per cent for the United States, with nothing even close to US levels of high-tech innovation. The mercy mission of taking over Canada's flagging economy would mean a disproportionately higher number of welfare payments going out to our new fellow citizens, with likely more to come as Canada's expensive social services are harmonised with American policies and priorities. For Trump, adding Canada's politics anywhere outside of staunchly conservative Alberta would also be a disaster. This is the case even within its Conservative Party, which claims to be a “big tent” accommodating both national populists and so-called “Red Tories”, who – in line with the British rather than the American political concept of “Red” – lean far enough Left on economic and social issues that they would fit more comfortably within the US Democratic Party than among Republicans. If Canada were to enter the US as one large state, in other words, it would almost certainly elect Democrats or politicians aligned with Democrats to the expanded US Congress. Matters would be even worse in the House of Representatives, where at current levels there would be one new congressman for roughly every 780,000 Canadians, or at least 51 new legislators, most if not all of whom would also likely be Democrats or Democrat-aligned. In the tight congressional balance Republicans now face, it would be like adding a second California, whose population is of roughly equal size. Trump could be having an extended joke that has seriously unnerved America's northern neighbours. Paul du Quenoy is president of the Palm Beach Freedom Institute

MOSCOW, May 3. /TASS/. The International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) has granted neutral status to 43 Russian athletes, according to FIG documents reviewed by TASS. As of May 3, 17 of these athletes specialize in rhythmic gymnastics. They include Alexandra Khabibullina, Vladislava Nikolayenko, Varvara Toporova, Arina Yankovskaya, Arina Kovshova, Diana Chugunikhina, Arina Tkachuk, Ulyana Janus, Viktoria Chumakova, Anastasia Ivanova, Milena Bukina, Polina Semyonova, Kseniia Savinova, Karolina Pakhtusova, Maria Borisova, Alexandra Borisova, and Anna Vakulenko. An additional 14 athletes compete in artistic gymnastics: Maria Agafonova, Alena Glotova, Zlata Osokina, Ilya Zaika, Daniel Marinov, Vladislav Polyashov, Kirill Prokopiev, Grigory Klimentev, Angelina Melnikova, Lyudmila Roshchina, Anna Kalmykova, Kseniya Zelyaeva, Ranel Safiullin, and Leyla Vasilyeva. In trampoline gymnastics, neutral status was granted to Yana Lebedeva, Angela Bladtseva, Kirill Kozlov, Danila Kasimov, Sofia Alyaeva, Arina Kalyandra, Sergey Finichenko, Mikhail Zalomin, Mikhail Yuryev, Galina Begim, Maxim Didenko, and Alexandra Lyamina. Additionally, 30 Belarusian athletes received neutral status. Earlier, TASS reported that Russian athletes in artistic and rhythmic gymnastics would not participate in upcoming FIG tournaments, despite obtaining neutral status. This decision was attributed to numerous unjustified and biased refusals to grant neutral status to certain athletes.

US President Donald Trump is pressuring the Mexican government to crack down on Mexican cartels, blaming them for fomenting America's drugs crisis. He's threatened tariffs and even military strikes. Mexico has sent hundreds of troops to the state of Sinaloa, where a war rages between two factions of the infamous Sinaloa Cartel, putting civilians at risk. CNN's Isobel Yeung visits the region – speaking to a member of the Sinaloa cartel, meeting families impacted by the violence and seeing the work soldiers are doing to destroy drug production in the rural countryside. © 2025 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.

Judicial Watch, an advocacy group, filed the $30 million wrongful-death suit in 2024 on behalf of Babbitt's estate and her husband, Aaron Babbitt. After the hearing, Judge Ana C. Reyes ordered both sides to submit a status report by May 6, the court's docket shows. Babbitt, 35, an Air Force veteran who lived in the San Diego area, came to Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, to support Trump, who was still serving his first term in office. At the time, the president and many of his supporters were alleging that his loss in 2020 may have been a result of a “rigged” election. The proposed settlement follows several actions that Trump and his new administration have taken regarding Jan. 6 cases since his return to the White House early this year. Dozens of police and protesters were hurt during the Capitol breach. No police officers died that day, despite initial reports to the contrary. Videos and photos show Babbitt wearing a Trump flag tied around her neck like a cape, as many other Trump supporters did that day. Past government officials, including former FBI director, Christopher Wray, have denied such accusations. The Epoch Times received no immediate response to requests for comment from the Justice Department, Judicial Watch, and Capitol police.