James' World 2

.

Is it possible that our esteemed 47th “Great Businessman”, “get coal miner’s jobs back” President, is a batshit crazy scam artist?  Are there bats in the belfry at the second white house, Mar-A-Largo?  Can we get a definitive answer, so already great America won’t  be the laughing stock of the world?

 I recently watched the Armageddon  movie and the USA lead the charge to solve the problem.   I want to know where do we go from here? This crazy man won’t shut up, look at what happened in the ‘House of Represenatives’. Do they want to gain power for themselves while destroying America. if we arn’t very careful  America will suffer a ‘Red Dawn’. check out the movie which could be our furture!

Beware America!

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

It was a stunning threat that promised to eliminate Iranian civilization, delivered with all the casual callousness that has become President Trump’s preferred style of communication.

“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.”

And that is what passed as a normal Tuesday-morning update from the Trump White House: a warning of mass destruction and what international law would define as war crimes, blithely delivered on Truth Social, posted alongside ads for bullet-shaped pens, patriotic hats, and a gala dinner at Mar-a-Lago.

“However, now that we have Complete and Total Regime Change, where different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail, maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS?” Mr. Trump wrote in his message. “We will find out tonight, one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World.”

The message arrived two days after Mr. Trump marked Easter Sunday by calling on the Iranians to end its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz: “Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell — JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah,” he wrote.

In the minds of the president and his supporters, the post is all part of Mr. Trump’s chaotic negotiation style, intended to prompt an end to his self-inflicted conflict and persuade Tehran to open the strait. Some of the president’s advisers saw Mr. Trump’s escalating rhetoric as a negotiating tactic that suggested he was more interested in finding a way out of the war than following through with a devastating attack.

On Tuesday evening, Mr. Trump had toggled back to diplomat mode, announcing that he had agreed to a proposal by Pakistan that calls for a two-week cease-fire and the immediate opening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The president said that the United States would work on finalizing an agreement with Iran. “It is an Honor to have this Longterm problem close to resolution,” he wrote.

Even for Mr. Trump, who has a long history of comments that fly far beyond the pale, his latest comments bear the mark of an impulsive leader who is used to getting his way through coercion and unpredictability, but who is not getting his way now.

Alex Wellerstein, a historian who studies nuclear conflicts, said that even if Mr. Trump does not carry out the extent of his threat, the president’s violent rhetoric damages his credibility as a negotiator and his country’s standing in the world.

“You’re talking about a world that largely increasingly sees the United States as unhinged and dangerous, and not a reliable partner,” he said, “where all of the countries that typically align with democracy and freedom are on the other side of the United States.”

Some of Mr. Trump’s most fervent supporters have joined the usual chorus of critics in recent days. Tucker Carlson, the right-wing podcaster, said that the president’s Easter message had “shattered” the holiest day on the Christian calendar.

“It is vile on every level,” Mr. Carlson said on his podcast. “It begins with a promise to use the U.S. military, our military, to destroy civilian infrastructure in another country, which is to say to commit a war crime, a moral crime against the people of the country, whose welfare, by the way, was one of the reasons we supposedly went into this war in the first place.”

The president responded by calling Mr. Carlson a “low I.Q. person,” and continuing on with his war. Ever a reality television producer, Mr. Trump is trying to program this war like he does everything else — through cliffhangers and wait-and-see diplomacy. As such, Mr. Trump created an 8 p.m. Eastern deadline Tuesday for Tehran to comply. Mr. Trump announced “a double sided CEASEFIRE” about 90 minutes before his self-imposed deadline.

Americans have seen versions of this playbook before: Mr. Trump makes increasingly escalatory threats, secures some semblance of a deal, and walks away declaring victory. In January, Mr. Trump threatened to send in U.S. forces to capture the Danish territory of Greenland. He settled for an agreement to increase the number of American troops there.

With Iran, though, there is still little evidence that Mr. Trump is going to ultimately get what he wants. Ebrahim Zolfaghari, a spokesman for the Iranian military, has said that Iran would retaliate “crushingly and extensively” if its civilian infrastructure were attacked.

Even with a cease-fire, Mr. Trump is far from achieving his larger strategic objectives.

The president’s increasingly violent messaging betrays a degree of frustration that he has not gotten what he wanted after pushing back an earlier deadline to barrage the country’s infrastructure. His threats to level power plants, oil installations, and bridges have seemed to have the opposite effect on some Iranians, who have formed human chains around points of infrastructure that support civilian life.

Even some people who have supported Mr. Trump in the past see his strategy on Iran, to the extent that there is one, as damaging and dangerous.

“Trump believes he is threatening Iran with destruction, but it is America that now stands in danger,” Joe Kent, the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center who resigned in March, wrote on X. “If he attempts to eradicate Iranian civilization, the United States will no longer be viewed as a stabilizing force in the world, but as an agent of chaos — effectively ending our status as the world’s greatest superpower.”

Several Republicans in Congress, who are absent from Washington during a two-week recess, criticized the president’s rhetoric, although many of them have stayed mum.

Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, a close ally of Mr. Trump’s, left room for the possibility that Mr. Trump was posturing: “I hope and pray that President Trump is just using this as bluster.”

Mr. Trump’s message also alarmed top Democrats, who quickly promised to force another vote on a resolution to rein in the use of the military in Iran.

“This is an extremely sick person,” Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, wrote on X after Mr. Trump sent his threat. “Each Republican who refuses to join us in voting against this wanton war of choice owns every consequence of whatever the hell this is.”

.

Tierney L. Cross/The New York Times

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of Eli Lilly’s once-daily pill orforglipron as a weight loss and obesity treatment this week was the fastest approval of a new medication in decades. Clinical trial results showed that the highest doses of the oral medication, which will be marketed as Foundayo, caused people to lose an average of 27 pounds after 72 weeks of treatment.

The new oral medication is the latest glucagonlike peptide 1 (GLP-1) drug in the rapidly expanding market. Foundayo is the second GLP-1 weight-loss pill to gain FDA approval; Novo Nordisk’s once-a-day Wegovy pill was approved in December 2025. Experts hope that having more options for these popular weight-loss and type 2 diabetes treatments will drive down costs and offer people more flexibility.

“Generally, it’s much easier to make pills and distribute them,” compared with injectable drugs, says Daniel Drucker, an endocrinologist at the University of Toronto, who has previously consulted for Eli Lilly. “That should be an advantage in really getting the drug to a much wider population.”

In the latest phase 3 trial of orforglipron, three doses of the drug were compared with a placebo in 1,613 people with type 2 diabetes who were overweight or had obesity. After 72 weeks, people on the six-milligram dose lost 5 percent of their body weight, those on 12 milligrams lost 7 percent, and those on 36 milligrams lost nearly 10 percent.

A clinical trial found a 25-mg dose of the Wegovy pill caused nearly 17 percent weight loss in 64 weeks. And in another clinical trial, injections of 15-mg doses of tirzepatide (the active ingredient in Eli Lilly’s weight-loss injectable Zepbound) resulted in an average of about 21 percent body-weight reductions after 72 weeks.

“It’s not as high of weight loss as tirzepatide and not as high as some of the things that we’ll see coming down the pipeline in the next six months to a year, but I think there’s room for all of those [medications],” says Deborah Horn, director of obesity medicine at UTHealth Houston, who led the most recent trial on Foundayo. (Horn consults for Eli Lilly.)

The various forms and levels of effectiveness of these drugs could provide more individualized treatments, she says. For instance, another recently completed trial by Eli Lilly investigated if people who were initially treated with an injectable GLP-1 drug could eventually transition to an oral version like Foundayo and still maintain the weight loss and health benefits. The results have been submitted for peer-reviewed publication.

“A lot of people are asking the question: ‘If I do these injectables for a year and get to a healthy place, could I transition to this oral medication and keep the weight off?’” Horn says. “That data will be available very soon.”

Foundayo works similarly to other GLP-1 drugs, such as semaglutide—the active ingredient in the injectable and pill forms of Wegovy. The new oral drug latches on to the receptors for the gut hormone GLP-1 to make people feel satiated and slow down stomach emptying, causing them to eat less and ultimately lose weight. The Wegovy pill and all currently available injectable versions of the drug are peptides, or short chains of amino acids, that are similar to the body’s GLP-1, whereas Foundayo is a nonpeptide small molecule. That comes with several advantages, Horn says.

Because Semaglutide is a peptide, it quickly degrades in the acidic environment of our stomach, Horn explains. The Wegovy pill has a special ingredient that shields it from some erosion, but people must still take it on an empty stomach to ensure it’s properly absorbed. As a nonpeptide, Foundayo can be absorbed through the gut without breaking down, and that means it can be taken anytime, regardless of when you eat, drink or take other medications.

Such small-molecule-based drugs are also generally easier and cheaper to manufacturer than peptides. “In terms of distribution, it gets rid of things like cold storage and plastics for [injection] pens,” Horn says.

In a press release about Foundayo’s approval, Eli Lilly listed the starting price for the drug at $25 per month for people who have commercial insurance and enroll in the company’s Foundayo savings card program. Out-of-pocket costs start at $149 per month and go up to $349 for higher doses, according to material an Eli Lilly spokesperson shared with Scientific American. Starting in July, the drug is expected to be available for $50 to eligible individuals on Medicare Part D—a federal prescription drug benefit program for adults who are aged 65 and older or have certain disabilities.

Eli Lilly’s announcement lists several tablet doses, starting at 0.8 mg and up to 17.2 mg—the pill with the maximum dosage of 17.2 mg is reported have an efficacy equivalent to the 36-mg dose tested in trials, according to the company spokesperson. Further information isn’t yet publicly available on the pricing of the various doses. The FDA’s news release about the approval describes a schedule that gradually increases doses over time—a titration scheme similar to that of other GLP-1 drugs that helps the body adjust to the medication, Drucker explains. “We’ve seen with every single one, if you start too high and increase the dose too quickly, you get sick,” he says.

Similar to other GLP-1 medications, Foundayo causes nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and other gastrointestinal side effects. In the recent trial, participants on the highest 36-milligram dose had about a 2 percent greater risk of a serious adverse event, compared with those given a placebo. Rates of treatment discontinuation—most commonly from gastrointestinal symptoms—were higher, at 6 to 10 percent, depending on the dose, for those who received the pill, compared with a rate of 4 percent for those who received the placebo. The trials find Foundayo to be very safe, but Drucker notes that people should continue to keep a watchful eye on any new drug.

For peptide-based GLP-1 drugs, “we have 21 years of safety data,” he says. “Whenever we have a new medicine, we always restart the clock in terms of safety.”

In a response to Scientific American’s request for comment, the Eli Lilly spokesperson said that the FDA reviewed the company’s “robust clinical data package” and that the approval establishes “Foundayo’s strong safety and efficacy profile.”

Foundayo and other weight-loss drug candidates in the works could increase supply and help with affordability of GLP-1 drugs overall—though that might take some time, Horn says. “I don’t think we’re at very, very inexpensive yet, but I think we will get there as more and more GLP-1s and other medicines become available.”

.

Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

“Believe women” was the defining message of the #MeToo movement. Today, there’s a new one: Erase women.

The Trump administration’s attack on diversity, equity, and inclusion has rolled back decades of progress for women, who now face a widening gender pay gap and narrowing employment protections. In the process, discussions about women have become a third rail, a toxic topic that is too politically charged to touch. Companies, universities, law firms, and cultural institutions are all expunging references to “women” and “gender,” even under the most benign circumstances.

The Trump administration has defined “illegal D.E.I.” as “programs, initiatives, or policies that discriminate, exclude or divide individuals based on race or sex.” But in practice, President Trump’s allies have questioned whether women deserve a place in the workforce at all. They have blamed women for last year’s California wildfires and slammed the conservative Supreme Court justice Amy Coney Barrett as a “D.E.I. hire” for a ruling they didn’t like. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is purging the military of senior female officers after complaining that the armed forces had become “effeminate.” Women’s names have disappeared from museums, parks, monuments, and even the Arlington National Cemetery.

Terrified of being the administration’s next target, organizations are descending into the realm of the absurd. A researcher focused on maternal health removed references to gender-based discrimination in order to receive federal funding. A medical trade publication warned scientists to avoid words such as “female” and “women” in grant applications. After Senator Ted Cruz of Texas released a list of supposedly “woke” National Science Foundation grants last year, ProPublica found that some were included merely because their project descriptions included words like “female,” as in a female research scientist, or “diversify,” as in the biodiversity of plants.

It’s a fun-house mirror moment. For more than a decade, while reporting on women in the workplace, I’ve seen my inbox clogged with companies boasting about their work championing female employees. But most firms I contacted for this piece begged me to keep them out of it. At a recent event about working women, I asked a room of human resources executives whether their firms’ diversity efforts were continuing, and every hand shot up. When I asked who would talk about it publicly, almost every hand quickly went down. Executives say they fear not just the administration, but also right-wing activists and misogynistic trolls who might target them.

Even companies with excellent track records in promoting women don’t want to mention it. In a recent Harvard Business Review article, the sociologists Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev identified several initiatives available to all employees that can actually be more effective than D.E.I. programs in boosting outcomes for marginalized groups. They highlighted the successes of IBM’s formal mentorship programs, Walmart’s training academy, and Gap’s family-friendly scheduling options. All three companies recorded increases in the percentage of women and people of color in senior roles.

Just don’t ask IBM, Walmart, or Gap to elaborate on those impressive findings. I did. All declined.

It may seem perfectly reasonable, even admirable, for companies to keep their mouths shut as they continue to advance diversity goals. After all, nobody wants to be a target. In previous years, too many companies went overboard, with lots of cheap talk about diversity and not enough action. The problem is that silencing the conversation risks undoing years of progress at a time when women are still underrepresented in business and public life. As women are erased from the narrative, injustices against them go unnoticed.

Already, incidents that in years past would have prompted public outrage are being met with silence. Just last month, in a stunning reversal, the United States for the first time in 70 years refused to sign off on the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women’s annual principles, an anodyne set of statements including a reaffirmation of its “commitments to gender equality” and a call to repeal “gender discriminatory provisions.” A U.S. representative to the U

My guess is that you haven’t heard about this historic repudiation. It’s not your fault: It got almost no public attention.

Firms are even cutting funding for employee resource groups — affinity groups centered on women, ethnic and racial minorities or L.G.B.T.Q. communities — despite the fact that many aren’t in the administration’s cross hairs. In previous years, companies “would brag about what they’re doing,” Shelley Correll, a sociologist at Stanford University, told me. Now, companies are “canceling E.R.G.s that aren’t illegal,” she says. It’s “an overreaction to what even Trump is asking them to do.”

As a result, last year, an annual report on women in the workplace found that women have “less career support and fewer opportunities to advance.” One previous champion of women’s advancement, Meta’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, now says companies need more “masculine energy.”

Other marginalized groups have also been targeted. In the wake of George Floyd’s murder in 2020, corporations jumped to make grand statements and pledge billions of dollars to combat discrimination. Most of those efforts, including initiatives to boost female employees, turned out to be empty platitudes or just plain failures.

The erasure of women from the national narrative has long been a key strategy authoritarian leaders use to destroy democracies. In Turkey, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has declared that women aren’t equal to men. In Russia, some forms of domestic violence have been decriminalized. And in Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government has urged women to focus on childbearing, not its large pay gap. A primary feature of the “autocrat’s playbook” is “reversing progress on gender equality and women’s rights,” the Harvard scholars Erica Chenoweth and Zoe Marks have written.

Now, women’s rights are eroding in the United States. The Trump administration has called for resurrecting “traditional” nuclear families where the mother is a homemaker. JD Vance argued that having more women in the workforce results in “unhappier, unhealthier children.” The administration recently sued a Coca-Cola distributor for hosting a women’s retreat, alleging it discriminated against men. Trump allies have even suggested stripping women of the right to vote.

When women mobilize, countries are more likely to be egalitarian democracies. That’s why authoritarians fear women. The rest of us shouldn’t.

.

Tara Booth

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://www.nytimes.com/

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Summary

.

From space

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article (differs slightly:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

As they traveled back toward Earth following a solar eclipse and a communications blackout, President Trump called the space capsule to praise the four astronauts on their success.

On the sixth day, 248,655 miles from Earth, four people ventured farther from home than any human being who has ever lived.

Embraced by the moon’s gravitational pull, four astronauts accelerated Monday afternoon on a path to swing around the lunar far side, five days after launching on the Artemis II mission from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

President Trump calls the Artemis II astronauts after their historic journey.

President Trump spoke with the astronauts of the Artemis II mission hours after their spaceship swung around the far side of the moon and took them farther from Earth than any humans on Monday.

“You’ve made history and made all America really proud,” Mr. Trump said, and later acknowledged the contribution of the Canadian member of the mission, Jeremy Hansen.

Jared Isaacman wrapped up the Q&A by thanking the astronauts for taking us to the moon with them. “We are just honored to be a part of that,” Reid Wiseman said.

When asked how this mission change’s humanity’s future among the stars, Victor Glover, the mission’s pilot, said he had huge expectations for what’s coming next.

Isaacman next asked what thoughts filled the astronauts’ minds when they were out of contact. The mission specialist, Jeremy Hansen, said they were so busy that they just tried to do a good job collecting science observations. But Reid Wiseman added they had a a brief moment eating maple cookies to celebrate Canada’s participation in Artemis II.

Isaacman then asked what were some words that come to mind when the astronauts try to wrap their minds around this very unique experience.

Christina Koch said, “Humility,” talking about all the people who came before.

Next question: what advice would you pass on to the Artemis III mission, which is to orbit the Earth and test docking with lunar landers in 2027. The pilot, Victor Glover, says they’ve been taking notes to pass on. How the astronauts pack is apparently very important. He also brought up the troubles with the toilet. Isaacman, in response, acknowledged, “We definitely have to fix some of the plumbing.”“What inspires you?” is the next question to the crew. Wiseman, noting he is now over 50, says it all comes back to family.

Reid Wiseman, the mission commander, said, “We’ve got to explore. We’ve got to go farther.”“I’m not ready to go home,” Christina Koch said, who noted how much fun she’s having in spite of the cramped quarters.

.

NASA’s Lunar Science Team at Johnson Space Center in Houston watching the Artemis II flyby of the Moon.Credit…Cassandra Klos for The New York Times

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________