Welcome to the W³P Daily News Open Thread.
Post whatever you got in the comments section below.
This feature will post every day at 6:30am Mountain time.
Friday, April 3, 2026
Our 'Ally' France Just Made Another Incredible Move Regarding the Strait of Hormuz
The Gulf countries were trying to advance a resolution drafted by Bahrain in the United Nations Security Council that would allow the use of force to defend their shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.
The resolution:
"[A]uthorizes member States, acting nationally or through voluntary multinational naval partnerships, with advance notifications to the Security Council,” to use all necessary means “to secure transit passage and to deter attempts to close, obstruct or otherwise interfere with international navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.”
Now that would seem simple, and primarily defensive, to be able to protect yourself and get through.
Bahrain’s foreign minister, Abdullatif bin Rashid Al Zayani, told a session of the Security Council on Thursday that “Iran’s aggressive intentions” toward its Arab neighbors were “treacherous” and “preplanned,” and violated international law. He said Iran had targeted civilian structures such as airports, water stations, seaports and hotels.
Iran signaled on Thursday that it intended to continue to oversee shipping traffic through the critical Strait of Hormuz, even after the war.
But the effort was effectively stymied on Thursday by three countries. You could probably guess two of them - Russia and China. But the third was ridiculous: France. They opposed any authorization of military action or use of force, according to a diplomat and a senior U.N. official.
The actual vote on the resolution, which was drafted by Bahrain with the support of the Arab countries in the Persian Gulf, is expected to be scheduled for Friday. But it remained unclear whether extra hours of diplomacy would bring the three veto-holding countries on board.
Macron said use of force was "unrealistic" because it would "take an inordinate amount of time" and expose people to threats from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
I don't like to use pejoratives, but throughout writing this, I kept thinking of the term "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" when it comes to France. How do you behave this way, with such a weak-kneed response to dealing with a terrorist regime, even when your own interests are involved? And they don't even want to authorize the Gulf states to be able to defend themselves, because...it might be violent. Unbelievable. Of course, the Gulf states don't need the U.N. to act. It should be a world effort, but the U.N. is so ineffective, I wouldn't bet they can get this through.
Trump Zings Macron - but Macron's Iran Response Is the Real Joke
There was also a coalition meeting of nations, including some of our European allies.
A 41-nation virtual call, chaired by the U.K., saw jabs at Iran for “trying to hold the global economy hostage,” fresh talk of sanctions, and a promise to up diplomatic pressure over the continued blockage of the vital trade artery.
But the gathering made plain they wanted a ceasefire before they would consider going further.
They did say they would reject the effort by Iran to potentially collect tolls for letting ships through, so I suppose that's something if they stick to it.
A readout of the meeting, provided by the U.K. side, said participants agreed to turn up international heat, including through the UN, to send clear and co-ordinated messages to Iran to permit unimpeded transit passage through the Strait of Hormuz and to comprehensively reject the imposition of tolls on vessels which seek to pass through.”
President Donald Trump may be thinking that if he gets the objectives of Operation Epic Fury done and/or they agree to a ceasefire, this coalition can then act. This is not a complicated process if you have the will to put it into place; it should be an international effort to keep it clear. The only question is, do they have the will?
We're All Focused on Iran, but FBI Reports China Just Pulled Off a 'Major' Cyber Intrusion
Iran has taken up most of the headlines in recent weeks, but that doesn’t mean China and Russia still aren’t out there looking for any opportunity to undermine the United States. The Chinese Communist Party, in particular, still remains our most important potential geopolitical threat.
They like to steal our technology secrets, they like to spy, and they like to hack our information systems. Now the Federal Bureau of Investigation is warning Congress of a “major incident” involving cyber intrusion.
The FBI last week deemed a recent China-linked cyber intrusion into a sensitive agency surveillance system a “major incident,” meaning it poses significant risks to U.S. national security, according to one congressional aide and two U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter.
The bureau first told Congress on March 4 that it was investigating suspicious activity on an internal agency system that contained “law enforcement sensitive information.” The FBI did not publicly identify who was behind the activity at the time, but POLITICO previously reported that China is suspected.
The term “major incident” is no accident; it’s very specifically defined by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the Department of Homeland Security agency tasked with protecting the nation’s cyber infrastructure. A major incident is serious enough that it must be reported to Congress very quickly:
Major Incidents
FISMA requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to define a major incident and directs agencies to report major incidents to Congress within 7 days of identification. Agencies should comply with the criteria set out in the most recent OMB guidance when determining whether an incident should be designated as major.
The impacted agency is ultimately responsible for determining if an incident should be designated as major and may consult with CISA to make this determination. Additionally, if CISA determines that an incident meets the criteria for High (Orange) on the Cyber Incident Severity Schema, it will suggest that the agency designate that incident as a major incident.
Under Presidential Policy Directive 41 (PPD-41) - United States Cyber Incident Coordination, all major incidents are also considered significant cyber incidents, meaning they are likely to result in demonstrable harm to the national security interests, foreign relations, or economy of the United States or to the public confidence, civil liberties or public health and safety of the American people.
What does it mean, though? Authorities are tight-lipped, but China may have gotten their hands on some serious intel:
The determination suggests the hackers successfully compromised swathes of sensitive data stored directly on FBI systems, likely marking a major counterintelligence coup for China...
Cynthia Kaiser, the former deputy assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division, said she is not aware of the FBI making any such determination on a hack affecting its own systems since at least 2020.
While our attentions are focused on Iran for the time being, China is still out there, looking for any edge it can get.
“This incident is yet another stark reminder that the threat from sophisticated cyber adversaries like China has not gone away — in fact, it’s growing more aggressive by the day,” said Sen. Mark Warner (D-V.A.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Conrad Black: The goals of the war against Iran are now within reach
Originally published in Spanish... translation by AI ... Some errors in syntax
The sending of at least 5,000 US Marines and airborne troops to the Middle East constitutes a clear warning to the various groups that still make up the Iranian regime: the United States and Israel are about to economically suffocate the country and turn it into a practically uninhabitable zone, unless credible spokespersons, responsible for the regime's behavior, commit to ending Iran's nuclear ambitions and its support for international terrorism.
It is an extraordinary manifestation of the uniqueness of the Trump era that animosity toward the president in the United States and in some parts of Western Europe and Canada is such that those who suffer from irrational hatred toward Trump have already come to claim that the war against Iran has been a failure.
According to the usual criteria, this conclusion is not only erroneous but an act of manifest folly. Iran lacks air and navy defenses, except for a few coastal boats with outboard motors that seem like a militarization of the regatta of any yacht club in the interior of North America.
Iran does not have an effective air force, and the number of missiles and drones it fires daily has fallen by 85 to 90 percent since the war began four weeks ago.
The first two levels of the high command have been killed and more than 10,000 national military targets destroyed, and the United States has suffered eight combat casualties (although five other people died in an accident unrelated to the combat).
President Trump he has made it clear that if Iran does not accept before April 6 the basic conditions of a verifiable abandonment of its nuclear military program and an absolute and permanent suspension of all aid to identifiable terrorist organizations, the United States and Israel will take the island of Kharg and confiscate the millions of barrels of oil stored there.
In addition, they will take necessary measures on Iran's southern coast to ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz, dismantle the country's entire power grid and oil production and refining facilities, close ports, and begin economic strangulation. total of Iran. All of this will require Iran's military presence, and they have already arrived.
While this occurs, the United States and Israel will continue their strategic bombing raids, including using drones to attack Revolutionary Guard checkpoints and eliminate other tactics used to intimidate the Iranian population.
The goal is to increase the pressure for as long and with the intensity necessary to destroy the heinous and theologically perverted tyranny that has been imposed on Iran and that has been the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world for 47 years.
With a minimum of objectivity, it is evident that, far from being the quagmire and stagnation proclaimed by the anti-Trump media in the United States and other countries, what has happened has, in fact, been the most unequal war in history. modern authentic states.
This excludes simple power takeovers in which barely a shot was fired, such as the german occupation of Denmark in 1940 or even the seizure of power by the United States of Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega in 1989, where 23 American soldiers died.
In the history of states with substantial military forces exchanging fire over a period of more than a few weeks, there has never been such a crushing strategic defeat of one side by the other as in this conflict.
Not even the Six-Day War in 1967, in which Israel seized the Sinai, West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, managed to defeat the forces of Egypt, Syria and Jordan to the extent that the United States and Israel They have defeated Iran in the last month.
As with most issues related to media coverage of the Trump administration, readers should be alert to absurd and false claims about the status of their initiatives.
The United States' allies in NATO, for the most part, are undecided about whether this war is a matter of interest to the NATO, even though the Iranians have proven to have missiles capable of reaching London and Paris, and only US intervention has prevented such missiles from carrying nuclear warheads.
It is a characteristic phenomenon of this war that a clear understanding of its objectives —and the need to achieve them— is perversely hampered by the psychiatric inability of the current American president's fanatical detractors to accept its success.
Western victory in the war on terrorism, the creation of conditions that allow lasting peace in the Middle East and end the terrorist dispute over Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, and the return of the ancient land of Persia to the group of civilized nations of the world, are highly desirable objectives and are now within reach.
The withdrawal of Iran, Venezuela- Cuba and Syria as Russian-Chinese allies, and US control of more than half of China's current oil supply, are altering the international correlation of forces in favor of the democratic West.
Whether survivors of the crumbling Iranian regime reconsider and opt for peace, or Americans and Israelis subdue the remnants of that regime, whether on April 6, these benefits will become evident. Hence the importance of the United States strengthening its expeditionary force in the Middle East with mobile ground attack capabilities.
https://www.elepoch.com/opinion/conrad-black-los-objetivos-de-la-guerra-contra-iran-estan-ahora-al-alcance-de-la-mano-58054
No, Bondi Was Not Fired for Leaking to Swalwell
The Daily Mail has written a rather explosive story saying Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired because she leaked or gave a heads up to Eric Swalwell about the FBI re-reviewing the investigative files about him [STORY HERE].
Without discussing the motive or background, the story itself just doesn’t make sense.
What most people probably don’t know is that former FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Counterintelligence Division, Joseph Pientka III, currently works for Congressman Swalwell [CITATION].
FBI Agent Peter Strzok’s former partner, Joe Pientka, works for Eric Swalwell. Now, remember Joe Pientka’s very high security job inside the FBI Counterintelligence office? [REMINDER]
Because of his former role, Joe Pientka has deep ties to senior agents inside the current FBI, the type of agents who would know the inside details of any Swalwell investigative activity.
[SIDENOTE: Following the ridiculous Russiagate, and after the hand-off to Robert Mueller, Joe Pientka was transferred to the FBI San Francisco field office; hence, the regional alignment with Swalwell [CITATION]. Sometime in mid 2019, Joseph Pientka was promoted by FBI Director Christopher Wray and transferred to the San Francisco FBI Field Office where he showed up on their web page. END SIDENOTE]
Bondi wouldn’t need to tip off Swalwell. Pientka, currently working for Swalwell, would already know the ins/outs of every detail therein. [It’s a red herring]
FBI Director Kash Patel couldn’t start to review (or re-review) Swalwell activity without triggering one of those inside contacts aligned with Pientka.
If Trump was shaped to think Bondi had something to do with an FBI leak about Swalwell, (which I doubt), the shaping would be an intel operation to manufacture that narrative, (which I still doubt).
Learn the networks, then see with clear eyes.
The same intel networks which would, if accurate, stimulate such shaping, are the same intel networks who would posit shaping with The Guardian, using allies in GCHQ to create plausible deniability for a domestic narrative engineering effort, to remove DNI Tulsi Gabbard. That’s how they roll.
Don’t worry. DNI Tulsi Gabbard has an angel on her shoulder.
The Guardian is to the British GCHQ (Govt Communication Headquarters) as the Washington Post is to the CIA.
So, in summary: With Joe Pientka currently working for Eric Swalwell, there’s a direct FBI pipeline through Pientka to Swalwell, and subsequently no need for Bondi to leak or share anything.
FBI Director Kash Patel still doesn’t have his arms around this agency.
Moving on….
