Welcome to Sterling Cooper, Inc.
  • CALL US: +1-866-285-6572
  • CALL US: +1-866-285-6572
LOGO
  • INCREASE YOUR REVENUES
    50%-100% - FREE EVALUATION
  • WEF 2025 GLOBAL
    RISKS REPORT
  • CAPITAL GAINS
    TAX DEFERRED
  • INCORPORATE
    NOW FOR $39
  • RESEARCH
    REPORTS
  • ENGULF &
    DEVOUR
  • Home
  • Services
    • Selling a Business
    • Buying a Business
    • Public Relation
    • Cooper consulting
    • Advertising
    • Publishing
    • Web and IT Services
    • Loans
  • Seller
  • buyer
  • Advertising
  • Publishing
  • M&A Due Diligence
  • Blog
  • Contact
LOGO

Category Archives: Uncategorized

CHINA HAS REAL ROBOTS, AND OUR EXECUTIVES ARE INTIMIDATED BY THEIR PRESENCE EVERYWHERE!

Western executives who visit China are coming back terrified

Robotics has catapulted Beijing into a dominant position in many industries

Pictured: ZEEKR’s Intelligent Factory in Ningbo, China. The country is now viewed as a leader in advanced robotics

“It’s the most humbling thing I’ve ever seen,” said Ford’s chief executive about his recent trip to China.

After visiting a string of factories, Jim Farley was left astonished by the technical innovations being packed into Chinese cars – from self-driving software to facial recognition.

“Their cost and the quality of their vehicles is far superior to what I see in the West,” Farley warned in July.

“We are in a global competition with China, and it’s not just EVs. And if we lose this, we do not have a future at Ford.”

The car industry boss is not the only Western executive to have returned shaken following a visit to the Far East.

Andrew Forrest, the Australian billionaire behind mining giant Fortescue – which is investing massively in green energy – says his trips to China convinced him to abandon his company’s attempts to manufacture electric vehicle powertrains in-house.

“I can take you to factories [in China] now, where you’ll basically be alongside a big conveyor and the machines come out of the floor and begin to assemble parts,” he says.

“And you’re walking alongside this conveyor, and after about 800, 900 metres, a truck drives out. There are no people – everything is robotic.”

Other executives describe vast, “dark factories” where robots do so much of the work alone that there is no need to even leave the lights on for humans.

“We visited a dark factory producing some astronomical number of mobile phones,” recalls Greg Jackson, the boss of British energy supplier Octopus.

“The process was so heavily automated that there were no workers on the manufacturing side, just a small number who were there to ensure the plant was working.

“You get this sense of a change, where China’s competitiveness has gone from being about government subsidies and low wages to a tremendous number of highly skilled, educated engineers who are innovating like mad.”

High-tech transformation

It’s also a far cry from the cheap “Made in China” goods that many Westerners have associated with the “workshop of the world” in the past, underscoring how much cash has been poured into upgrading China’s industrial processes.

Far from being focused on low-quality products, China is now viewed as a leader in rapidly-growing, high-value technologies such as electric vehicles (EVs), batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, drones and advanced robotics.

A big part of that transformation is down to the country’s focus on automation – which has been encouraged by the ruling communist government and heavily supported with state subsidies, grants and local government policies.

Figures recently released by the International Federation of Robotics (IFR) show this has led to a dramatic and high-tech transformation of China’s industrial base over the past 10 years.

Between 2014 and 2024, the number of industrial robots deployed in the country rocketed from 189,000 to more than two million.

These can typically include everything from robot arms used for welding, assembly and loading, spider robots used for high-speed “pick and place” movements and overhead gantry robots for precision tasks such as 3D printing.

The overall number of robots added in China last year was 295,000, compared to 27,000 in Germany, 34,000 in the US and just 2,500 in the UK.

And while it would be easy to put this disparity down to population size alone, China also blows its western rivals out of the water when it comes to robot density. It now boasts 567 robots for every 10,000 manufacturing workers, compared to 449 for Germany, 307 for the US and 104 in the UK.

More automation is seen by many as good for productivity, the all-important measure of how much an economy gets out of what it puts in.

Many analysts also note that China’s growing share of worldwide manufacturing gives it increasing leverage over global supply chains – and would make it a formidable opponent in a war.

But alongside Beijing’s stated desire to dominate industries of the future, Rian Whitton, an expert at Bismarck Analysis, says increased automation is also an attempt to mitigate the impact of the country’s ageing population.

“China has quite a notable demographic problem but its manufacturing is, generally, quite labour-intensive,” he says.

“So in a pre-emptive fashion, they want to automate it as much as possible, not because they expect they’ll be able to get higher margins – that is usually the idea in the West – but to compensate for this population decline and to get a competitive advantage.”

As part of its so-called Made in China programme, local authorities have offered large tax breaks that reimburse firms for a fifth of their spending on industrial robots. This is under a policy known as “jiqi huanren” – which translates to “replacing humans with machines”.

Western manufacturers in trouble

But this technology, coupled with the vast output of Chinese manufacturers, spells serious trouble for traditional Western brands.

The most visible sign of this upheaval is on our roads, where Chinese-made electric and hybrid cars are taking a growing share of sales.

In Britain, Shenzhen-based BYD multiplied its September sales by a factor of 10 this year – overtaking far more established brands such as Mini, Renault and Land Rover.

But unlike the “tragic” cars once mocked by Jeremy Clarkson and his colleagues on Top Gear, BYD’s recent efforts have been praised for both their low prices and their well-appointed interiors.

“The most striking thing about their automotive industry is the pace and the speed with which it operates,” says Mike Hawes, the chief executive of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT).

“They can develop and execute models in probably half of the time most European car makers can.”

Sander Tordoir, the chief economist at the Centre for European Reform, a think tank, says Europe and Britain must try to boost their own deployment of robotics if they want to keep up with the pace of innovation in China – while also keeping their manufacturing industries alive.

‘Robotics, if deployed well, can lift economic productivity greatly,’ says the chief economist at the Centre for European Reform 

“Robotics, if deployed well, can lift the productivity of your economy greatly. And if China is extremely good at it, then we should try to catch up because, like China, a lot of Europe is ageing,” he says.

“The second reason to care is because the robotics sector is high value and has spillovers for the military industrial sector, so the fact that China may be ahead is also significant from a security standpoint.

“I think the debate is about how to use industrial policy to build competitive markets, and that will inevitably include some support to offset China’s distortions and advantages, which are not all market-driven.”

Britain is falling behind

The risk, however, is that “we don’t create the new, or we trap workers in the old instead of trying to leap forward,” Tordoir warns, pointing to the tendency of politicians to prevent ageing steel and car factories from closing instead of encouraging the creation of newer, high-tech jobs for workers to move to.

But Britain’s record on robots is poor and it has struggled to add more than a few thousand per year, despite already having less than half as many as France.

Last year, UK robot additions fell by 35pc.

Whitton, at Bismarck Analysis, argues that Britain, which has lagged other countries in productivity growth, should focus on trying to improve its competitiveness by incentivising the adoption of more robotics as well as machine tools.

He says this would have a bigger impact than past tax-breaks designed to boost research and development spending and plant machinery adoption.

“It doesn’t appear that dilly dallying around tax changes is doing a hell of a lot,” says Whitton.

“But I see the Government throwing billions of pounds each year at completely speculative rubbish like green hydrogen or to fulfil renewable [energy] obligations contracts and I just think, ‘Well, why not five billion a year in grants for capital equipment?

“That would arguably get a bigger bang for our buck than a lot of the energy-related industrial policies we pursue.”

Counter-intuitively, Whitton says countries which had more automation during the first “China shock” of the 2000s – which flooded the world with cheap goods – managed to hold on to a greater share of industrial jobs.

“People talk a lot about how automation will lead to job losses,” he adds. “But actually, the job losses are going to be disproportionately in the countries that don’t automate.”

In other words, failing to modernise will almost certainly lead to more dark factories in the West. But the kind where no work at all is happening.

This entry was posted in CHINA, ROBOTS, Uncategorized on October 14, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

CHINA AGAIN BEATS USA WITH THE TALLEST BRIDGE IN THE WORLD!

The world’s tallest bridge is the Huajiang Grand Canyon Bridge in Guizhou Province, China, standing approximately 2,050 feet (625 meters) above the Beipan River.

🏗️ Key Facts About the Huajiang Grand Canyon Bridge

  • Location: Guizhou Province, southwestern China
  • Height: 2,050 feet (625 meters) above the Beipan River
  • Length: Nearly 10,000 feet (3,048 meters), with a main span of about 5,000 feet
  • Opened: September 28, 2025
  • Previous Record Holder: Duge Bridge (also in Guizhou), which stands 1,854 feet above the river
  • Purpose: Cuts travel time across the canyon from 2 hours to just 2 minutes, boosting regional connectivity and tourism

🚀 Engineering & Tourism Highlights

  • Design: Suspension bridge with two lanes in each direction
  • Tourist Features:
    • High-speed glass elevator to a café atop one of the towers
    • Glass walkway 1,900 feet above the river
    • Planned bungee jumping platform
  • Strategic Impact: Part of China’s infrastructure push to alleviate poverty and improve access in mountainous regions

 

This entry was posted in CHINA, Uncategorized on October 5, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

GREATEST POVERTY IN AMERICA, WHY ARE WE SENDING AID TO OTHER COUNTRIES WHEN WE NEED IT HERE! WASHINGTON D.C. OUR CAPITAL IS THE POOREST AREA! SHAME ON CONGRESS!!!!

Extreme Poverty in America by State

WASHINGTON D.C

Key Takeaways

  • Millions of Americans are extremely impoverished, with Washington D.C. seeing 10.3% of its population earning $8,160 or less in 2024, the highest rate in the country.
  • Louisiana (9%), Mississippi (8.5%), and New Mexico (8.2%) fall next in line, compounded by low wages and comparatively limited economic opportunity compared to other states.

In 2024, 6% of the U.S. population lived in extreme poverty, equal to 20.4 million people.

While there are different definitions of extreme poverty, this is represented as those earning less than $8,160 in annual income, or half of the poverty line. As the federal budget makes cuts to food assistance and healthcare, levels of extreme poverty run the risk of worsening even further.

This graphic shows the share of each state living in extreme poverty in 2024, based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Washington D.C. Has the Highest Level of Extreme Poverty

Last year, more than one in 10 residents of the nation’s capital lived in extreme poverty.

Share of Population Living in Extreme Poverty in 2024
District of Columbia 10.3%
Louisiana 9.0%
Mississippi 8.5%
New Mexico 8.2%
Kentucky 7.6%
West Virginia 7.6%
Alabama 7.4%
Arkansas 7.4%
Oklahoma 7.2%
New York 7.0%

Extreme poverty threshold represents total income before taxes and tax credits, excluding housing assistance and other noncash benefits.

Going further, economic hardship disproportionately impacts people of color in Washington D.C., with one in three black children living in poverty between 2019 and 2023, on average.

As we can see, Southern states also rank among the most impoverished. In Louisiana, 9% of residents live in extreme poverty, and on average, 18.9% lived below the poverty line between 2021 and 2023.

Meanwhile, 7% of New York’s population are extremely impoverished, equal to an estimated 1.4 million people.

On the other end of the spectrum is New Hampshire with the lowest rate nationally, at 3.9%. The Granite State benefits from a stable job market, low unemployment, and a strong education system. Paired with relatively affordable healthcare, these factors contribute to higher living standards for its residents, reducing the risk of poverty.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on October 5, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

KRISTIE NOEM FAST TRACKED MILLIONS OF DISASTER AID FUNDS…AND QUESTION? DOES THE USA HAVE THE BEST LOOKING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, COMPARED TO THE UGLY, UGLY ONES APPOINTED BY OBAMA AND BIDEN???

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, center, speaks with Mayor Teresa Heitmann of Naples, Florida, and City Manager Gary Young on a damaged historic pier in the city on Aug. 29. Credit: Tia Dufour/Department of Homeland Security

Kristi Noem Fast-Tracked Millions in Disaster Aid to Florida Tourist Attraction After Campaign Donor Intervened

The DHS chief has been widely criticized for slowing down FEMA’s response after natural disasters. Texts and emails obtained by ProPublica point to an effective way to get help faster: have one of Noem’s big donors make the ask.

For months, the complaints have rolled in from parts of the country hit by natural disasters: The Federal Emergency Management Agency was moving far too slowly in sending aid to communities ravaged by floods and hurricanes, including in central Texas and North Carolina. Many officials were blaming Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, whose agency oversees FEMA.

“I can’t get phone calls back,” Ted Budd, the Republican senator from North Carolina, told a newspaper this month, describing his attempts to reach Noem’s office. “I can’t get them to initiate the money. It’s just a quagmire.” The delays were caused in part by a new policy announced by DHS that requires Noem’s personal sign-off on expenses over $100,000, several news outlets reported.

But records obtained by ProPublica show how one locality found a way to get FEMA aid more quickly: It asked one of Noem’s political donors for help.

The records show that Noem quickly expedited more than $11 million of federal money to rebuild a historic pier in Naples, Florida, after she was contacted by a major financial supporter last month. The pier is a tourist attraction in the wealthy Gulf Coast enclave and was badly damaged by Hurricane Ian in 2022.

Frustrated city officials had been laboring for months, without success, to get disaster assistance. But just two weeks after the donor stepped in, they were celebrating their sudden change of fortune. “We are now at warp speed with FEMA,” one city official wrote in an email. A FEMA representative wrote: “Per leadership instruction, pushing project immediately.”

Along with fast-tracking the money, Noem flew to Naples on a government plane to tour the pier herself. She then stayed for the weekend and got dinner with the donor, local cardiologist Sinan Gursoy, at the French restaurant Bleu Provence, according to records and an interview with the Naples mayor. This account is based on text messages and emails ProPublica obtained through public records requests.

Noem’s actions in Naples suggest the injection of political favoritism into an agency tasked with saving lives and rebuilding communities wiped out by disaster. It also heightens concerns about the discretion Noem has given herself by personally handling all six-figure expenses at the agency, consolidating her power over who wins and loses in the pursuit of federal relief dollars, experts said.

Jeffrey Schlegelmilch, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University, said that politics has long been a factor in federal disaster relief — one study found that swing states are more likely to get federal help, for example. But “I’ve not heard of anything this egregious — a donor calling up and saying I need help and getting it,” he said, “while others may be getting denied assistance or otherwise waiting in line for help that may or may not come.”

In a statement, DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said, “This has nothing to do with politics: Secretary Noem also visited Ruidoso, NM” — where floods killed three people in July — “at the request of a Democrat governor and has been integral in supporting and speeding up their recovery efforts.”

“Your criticizing the Secretary’s visit to the Pier is bizarre as she works to fix this issue for more than 1 million visitors that used to visit the pier,” McLaughlin added. She did not answer questions about the donor’s role in expediting the funding or Noem’s relationship with him. Reached by phone, Gursoy said “get lost” and hung up. He did not respond to detailed follow up questions.

Noem has been criticized for creating a bottleneck at FEMA. When the floods hit Texas this summer — ultimately killing over 100 people — it took days to deploy critical search-and-rescue teams because Noem hadn’t signed off on them, according to CNN. Budd, the Republican senator, said this month: “Pretty much everything Helene-related is over $100,000. So they’re stacking up on her desk waiting for her signature.”

Noem has denied there were delays in the Texas flood response and has defended her expense policy, saying it has saved billions of dollars. “Every day I get up and I think, the American people are paying for this, should they?” she recently said. “And are these dollars doing what the law says they should be doing? I’m going to make sure that they go there.”

Once a sleepy fishing town, Naples is now home to CEOs and billionaires (a property listed for $295 million recently made headlines as the most expensive home in the U.S.). The city is known as an important stop for Republican politicians raising money, and Noem has held multiple fundraisers in the area. State credit card records suggest she visited Naples at least 10 times during her last four years as South Dakota governor.

Noem’s top adviser, Corey Lewandowski, also appears to own a home in Naples near the city’s pier, according to property tax records. Lewandowski is an unpaid staffer at DHS serving as Noem’s de facto chief of staff. (Media reports have alleged the two are romantically involved, which they have both denied.) Lewandowski told ProPublica that he was not involved in the pier decision and that he was not in Naples during Noem’s visit.

For the first seven months of the Trump administration, the pier reconstruction was in bureaucratic purgatory. The city had long been struggling to secure the regulatory approvals it needed to start building, and emails suggest Trump’s wave of federal layoffs had made the process even slower. “These agencies are undergoing significant reorganizations and staff reductions,” a city official told a frustrated constituent in early August. That “sometimes means starting over with new reviewers — something we’ve faced more than once.”

McLaughlin said “both past FEMA and the City bear responsibility” for the delays. She listed “several failures” since the process started in 2023, including “FEMA staff changing up” and indecision by the city government.

By this summer, Naples officials were getting desperate. In June, one tried to enlist Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., to press FEMA to move ahead. “We were told yesterday that Secretary Noem would have to ‘personally’ approve the Pier project before FEMA funding would be obligated,” the city official wrote to the senator’s staff. The Naples mayor, Teresa Heitmann, also personally wrote to FEMA. Heitmann said she was “perplexed” by the delays and begged the agency for guidance.

Heitmann had long been paying expensive Washington consultants to help her city navigate the process. But she was “feeling increasingly helpless,” she later said, until she had the idea that would finally put her project on the fast track. On July 18, the mayor emailed a Google search to herself: “Who is the head of Homeland security?” She was going to go straight to Noem.

Heitmann determined that her best bet for getting Noem’s attention was Gursoy. A Naples cardiologist, Gursoy has no obvious experience working with the federal government; much of his online footprint centers on his enthusiasm for pinball. But Gursoy gave Noem at least $25,000 to support her campaign for governor in 2022. That was enough to put him near the top of Noem’s disclosed donor list. (In South Dakota, campaign contributions remain relatively small.)

On planning documents for the 2024 Republican National Convention obtained by ProPublica, the Florida doctor is listed as an attendee affiliated with the delegation from South Dakota, a state he has no apparent connection to besides his support for Noem. Heitmann told ProPublica that Gursoy introduced her to Noem at a political event at a private home in Naples while Noem was governor.

“Hello it’s Teresa,” the mayor texted Gursoy in early August. “I really need your help.” She explained the tangle of bureaucracy she’d been contending with. “FEMA is holding us up,” Heitmann wrote. “Kristi Noem could put some fire under the FEMA employees slacking.”

Gursoy responded: “Okay. I will get on it.”

The next week, on Aug. 11, the doctor gave Heitmann an update. “Kristi was off for a few days for the first time in a long time, so I left her alone,” he said. “I just txted her now.” Within 24 hours, he had exciting news. He told the mayor to expect a call from Noem’s “FEMA fixer” shortly.

The identity of the “fixer” is not clear, but by Aug. 27, Naples officials were seeing a “flurry of activity” from Noem’s agency. That day, a FEMA staffer told the city that “FEMA is intending to expedite the funding” for the pier. “Secretary Noem took immediate action when I reached out to ask for help,” the mayor soon posted on Facebook.

Kristi Noem Secretly Took a Cut of Political Donations

Two days later, Noem flew to Naples. Her schedule listed a 30-minute walk-through at the pier with the mayor, followed by a nail salon appointment and dinner at Bleu Provence, which serves wagyu short ribs and seared foie gras. Noem then stayed through the weekend at the four-star Naples Bay Resort & Marina. Heitmann told ProPublica she wasn’t at the French dinner but Gursoy was. “I didn’t ask her to come, but she showed up,” the mayor told the local news. “I was very impressed.”

Before she left town, Noem posted about the Naples pier on Instagram. She was finally getting the project back on track, she said. “Americans deserve better than years of red tape and failed disaster responses,” Noem wrote. “Under @POTUS Trump, this incompetency ends.”

PROPUBLICA IS A DEMOCRATIC MOUTHPIECE AND CONSTANT COMPLAINER….THEY BASICALLY HATE SMART WOMEN THAT TRUMP HAS APPOINTED, INSTEAD OF THE UGLY, AND STUPID ONES APPOINTED BY OBAMA, BIDEN AND OTHER “DUMBOCRATS”.

This entry was posted in Government, Illegals, Uncategorized on September 28, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

RUSSIAN SOLDIERS, WHO WANT TO LEAVE THE WAR ZONE, ARE SIMPLY SHOT, WHAT A GREAT WAY TO MOTIVATE TO JOIN THE MILITARY!

Photo: Russian forces firing on their own soldiers as they try to leave their positions (Getty Images)© RBC-Ukraine

Ukrainian intelligence has once again intercepted communications of the Russian military, in which a commander orders fire on his own troops, according to a post by the Defense Intelligence of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense on Telegram.

Soldiers of the Defense Intelligence intercepted another conversation of the Russian military in the Donetsk region. The Russian commander orders the execution of subordinates who try to retreat from their positions.

386442-e806-4584-9d76-9f8661e04cdd” size=”_2x_1y” part=””>

“There’s no way to retreat, none! No one is retreating anywhere, d*** it! I’m telling you again, d*** it: if anyone tries to run off, f****** shoot them. We are moving only forward, f****** h***, only forward, d*** it,” the Russian commander says.

In addition, Ukrainian intelligence emphasized in their post that the Russian troops will face just retribution for every crime committed against the Ukrainian people.

Defense Intelligence interception

Earlier, we reported that Ukrainian intelligence intercepted a conversation of the Russian forces in which they admitted to maiming their own soldiers when they tried to flee the battlefield. From the conversation, it appears that their comrade with broken limbs would be used as “bait” for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

The Defense Intelligence of the Ministry of Defense previously published a conversation in which a relative of one of the Russian military revealed that out of 25 Russian soldiers in the war against Ukraine, only two remained alive.

In February 2022, Vladimir Putin’s invasion plan backfired.
Current Time 0:02
/
Duration 19:28

Earlier, Ukrainian intelligence released a conversation of Russian invaders in which a commander of an enemy unit orders his subordinates

In addition, the Defense Intelligence published a recording of the Russian military’s conversations in which a Russian commander in the Novopavlivka direction orders his subordinates to force Ukrainian soldiers to surrender and then kill them.

PUTIN IS SURE WINNING THE HEARTS OF HIS PEOPLE!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on September 26, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

THE TRUTH HURTS, GREAT SIGN OUTSIDE RESTAURANTANT!

People are irate about a cowboy’s very blunt sign as they try to remove it — BIG mistake

eople are irate about a cowboy’s very blunt sign as they try to remove it — BIG mistake

A Florida seafood restaurant owner was so fed up with what he’d seen that he got off the fence for the first time to share exactly how he felt by posting four blunt phrases on the sign outside his business.

Not concerned with who he would offend, he got more than he expected when certain people saw it, but the cowboy had a surprise for them.

People are irate about a cowboy's very blunt sign as they try to remove it — BIG mistake

William “Bill” Davis has been in the business of serving the people of Sarasota the freshest seafood around and providing friendly customer service for years at Barnacle Bill’s Seafood Restaurant. Being in a public business, Bill said he’s always kept his opinions to himself but couldn’t do it anymore after seeing what Democrats were trying to do.

The conservative didn’t want any liberals telling him how to live, so he put a special message on his marquee. To say that it didn’t go over well with those who have different political views is a bit of an understatement. When those who oppose his sentiments tried to retaliate, it backfired on them.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on September 23, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

$1 TRILLION PAY PACKAGE FOR MUSK!!!!

Tesla Board Proposes Musk Pay Package Worth as Much as $1 Trillion Over Decade

CEO would receive shares in tranches dependent on milestones including $8.5 trillion market cap

Elon Musk at Trump's inauguration.

The proposed pay deal for Elon Musk is set to go to a shareholder vote in early November. Photo: chip somodevilla/Reuters

  • Tesla’s board asks investors to approve a new pay package for Elon Musk, potentially worth $1 trillion over 10 years.

  • The maximum payout, a 12% stake, hinges on Tesla reaching an $8.5 trillion market cap and other business goals.

  • Shareholders will vote Nov. 6 on the proposal, which could raise Musk’s stake to 29% and boost his voting power.

An artificial-intelligence tool created this summary, which was based on the text of the article and checked by an editor. Read more about how we use artificial intelligence in our journalism.

  • Tesla’s board asks investors to approve a new pay package for Elon Musk, potentially worth $1 trillion over 10 years.

    board is asking investors to approve a new pay package for Chief Executive Elon Musk that could be worth as much as $1 trillion over the next decade.

The proposed arrangements could see Musk, already the world’s wealthiest individual, awarded various installments of shares dependent on Tesla hitting a series of milestones, according to a financial filing published Friday.

The maximum payout would represent a 12% stake in the company, contingent on milestones including Tesla reaching a market capitalization of $8.5 trillion. At that market value, such a stake would be worth slightly more than $1 trillion. Tesla’s current market value is just over $1 trillion.

“Retaining and incentivizing Elon is fundamental to Tesla…becoming the most valuable company in history,” Tesla Chair Robyn Denholm said in a letter to investors. The package was “designed to align extraordinary long-term shareholder value with incentives that will drive peak performance from our visionary leader.”

The proposal would lift Musk’s stake in the electric-vehicle maker to as much as 29% if all of the targets are met, according to the filing, also boosting his voting power.

Tesla shares rose 2% in premarket trading Friday.

Tesla robotaxi driving on a city street.

Among the proposed goals is a major expansion of Tesla’s robotaxi service, which is currently available in Austin. Photo: joel angel juarez/Reuters

In addition to market-cap milestones, payouts would depend on Musk hitting business and financial targets. These include delivering 20 million Tesla vehicles and a million robots, as well as putting a million robotaxis into commercial operation. A fourth product goal is for Tesla to secure 10 million subscribers for its Full Self Driving service.

The most challenging financial goal is for Tesla to generate $400 billion of adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. It reported $16.645 billion in adjusted Ebitda for 2024.

The filing also included a shareholder proposal for Tesla to invest in Musk’s artificial-intelligence startup, xAI. Musk has repeatedly mobilized his business empire to boost xAI, with SpaceX agreeing in July to invest $2 billion in it. Tesla’s board didn’t offer a recommendation on how investors should vote.

Musk floated the idea in July, writing on his social-media platform X: “If it was up to me, Tesla would have invested in xAI long ago.”

Shareholders are due to vote on the proposals on Nov. 6.

Tesla didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment Friday.

Musk’s 2018 pay deal was struck down by a Delaware judge, who said the process was deeply flawed and criticized the company’s board for a lack of transparency.

Tesla’s directors said the then-record stock-option deal, which amounted to more than $55 billion in compensation, was necessary to keep Musk focused on the carmaker amid a slump in sales and increased competition from overseas. He has run the company without a pay package since then, though last month the Tesla board approved a stock award for Musk that it tentatively valued at $23.7 billion.

Besides Tesla, Musk oversees xAI, SpaceX, Neuralink, X and the Boring Company.

In recent years, some Tesla investors started to question the CEO’s commitment to the company, as Musk dedicated more of his time and energy to political causes. In 2022, he completed a $44 billion takeover of Twitter. Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” spent an increasing amount of time posting on the platform.

Musk later cozied up to President Trump, donating vast sums to his election campaign and eventually acting as a close White House adviser.

That relationship eventually soured.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on September 5, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

WALL STREET LOVES THE CORPORATE BREAK UP, TIME FOR BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ALSO?

Wall Street is falling in love with the corporate breakup. Here’s why.

Big Food company shake-ups: Is it time to invest?

David Hollerith · Senior Reporter

This year is turning out to be a big one for breakups.

Whether by offloading a business unit, spinning out a corporate arm through an IPO, or carving up a Fortune 500 company, that means more fees for bankers and potentially improved returns for investors.

Through the end of July, US firms announced $725 billion in corporate breakup deals this year, according to the most recent data from Dealogic. That’s a 48% jump from last year’s level of divestiture activity over the same period.

“There’s a lot of companies staring at their portfolios and wondering, ‘Am I the best owner for these assets?'” Kevin Desai, head of PwC’s deals team, said in an interview.

Fodder for some of this year’s biggest splits: past mergers that no longer work. Those companies need a change, whether it’s to pay down debt, cut costs, or boost a lagging stock price, according to Desai.

“You’re not getting credit for being a large, diversified conglomerate anymore,” he added.

Shareholders shop for discounted products at the Kraft Heinz booth at the annual Berkshire Hathaway shareholder meeting in Omaha, Nebraska, U.S., May 4, 2019.   REUTERS/Scott Morgan
Big breakup: The Kraft Heinz booth at the annual Berkshire Hathaway shareholder meeting in Omaha, Neb.. REUTERS / Reuters

Earlier this week, Kraft Heinz (KHC) confirmed plans to end its megamerger consummated a decade ago that its largest shareholder, Warren Buffett, helped mastermind.

Meanwhile, Keurig Dr Pepper (KDP) unveiled plans to buy another coffeemaker, JDE Peets, for $22.7 billion, merging it with its coffee business to then spin out that entity via IPO.

Chemical company DuPont (DD) has agreed to sell its Kevlar and Nomex business to rival Arclin for $1.8 billion, the latest in its decade-long rightsizing effort.

Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) said it’s ending its debt-saddled combo back in June, just three years after its merger.

Over the first half of 2025, the average completed divestiture deal by US sellers, according to PwC data, has swelled to $512 million, more than twice the average for the same period over each of the past two years.

Some of the biggest separations have been within the food and beverage business, where executives and their boards are having to do some “self-reflection.” They are trying to adjust to shifting consumer tastes after years of higher grocery prices and a heightened aversion to processed foods.

“We recognize that the complexity of the business was actually leading to not driving the type of performance that we wanted to get to,” Kraft Heinz CEO Carlos Abrams-Rivera told Yahoo Finance’s Brian Sozzi. The breakup separates the company’s slower-growing American food business (hot dogs) from its international condiments and sauces division (ketchup).

“It really has been a thorough review of what essentially was the premise that we believed that there was unlocked value in the company that wasn’t truly being assessed appropriately outside,” he added.

FILE PHOTO: The Warner Bros logo is seen during the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity in Cannes, France, June 22, 2022.    REUTERS/Eric Gaillard/File Photo
Debt-saddled? The Warner Bros. Discovery logo is seen during the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity in Cannes, France, on June 22, 2022. (Reuters/Eric Gaillard/File Photo) · Reuters / Reuters

Keurig Dr Pepper is planning a two-step deal. First, it will acquire European coffeemaker JDE Peets for $22.7 billion and combine the beverage company with its own coffee business. Second, it will spin out that entity through an IPO, the company said last week.

Jif peanut butter maker J.M. Smucker (SJM) officially sold off two baked-good brands, Cloverhill and Big Texas, to JTM Foods for $40 million earlier this year. Those brands came with its $5.6 billion acquisition of Twinkie maker Hostess seven years ago.

Sony plans to spin off its financial services arm through an IPO in late September.

Major lender Citigroup (C) plans to ready itself for a spin-off of its Mexico consumer bank, Banamex, by the end of the year, though market conditions and regulatory approvals could push that to 2026, CEO Jane Fraser told analysts in July.

Longer-term stock underperformance compared to peers is one of the biggest reasons for a corporate split, and that can spur a need for action, especially when activist investors join the conversation.

Over the first half of 2025, the number of activist campaigns rose 16% compared to the five-year average. Compared to the past decade, activist investors waging campaigns have risen a sharper 44%, according to PwC.

This week, Elliott Investment Management, one of the most successful Wall Street firms at waging activist campaigns, took a stake in beverage giant PepsiCo (PEP).

The firm stopped short of calling for a divestment, but it has in past campaigns. US conglomerate Honeywell (HON) said earlier this year that it’s separating into three different companies, months after Elliott advocated for a breakup and disclosed a $5 billion stake in the firm.

Breakup activity, PwC’s Desai said, “will continue to pick up.”

“It is time to break up the failed conglomerate model that is holding back the value at Berkshire Hathaway as well!”, said c. Adam Jansen, CEO of consulting firm Sterling Cooper, Inc, www.sterlingcooper.info

 

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on September 5, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

PALESTINE IS A BEGGAR TERRORIST STATE GETTING WAY TOO MUCH ATTENTION, AND WHY???

French President Macron Rewards Terrorism, Whips Up Slaughter

by Guy Millière

HAMAS FIGHTERS
  • So, Macron actually regards these views — approving the October 7, 2023 massacre of Jews and continuing terrorism to displace Israel — as “legitimate aspirations”? Good to know.
  • Macron’s calls for an immediate ceasefire could save Hamas from destruction — exactly what Hamas and Qatar want.
  • France, the UK, Canada and Australia have to see that the terrorist state they are about to recognize has no borders, no internationally recognized territory, and meets no criteria of any kind as required in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (1933) for a state to be recognized.
  • “Article 80 of the UN Charter… preserves intact all the rights granted to Jews under the Mandate for Palestine, even after the Mandate’s expiry on May 14-15, 1948…. As a direct result of Article 80, the UN cannot transfer these rights over any part of Palestine… to any non-Jewish entity.” — Howard Grief, Esq., Algemeiner, September 22, 2011.
  • France, the UK, Canada and Australia also realize that Israel cannot stop the war without the return of all the hostages. What would they do if their citizens were held hostage? Or are they already?
  • If France, the UK, Canada and Australia are so committed to the creation of a Palestinian State, surely they will be happy to donate some of their plentiful land for it.
  • [A]pproximately 1,000 trucks were blocked for days because the United Nations refused to distribute the aid, leaving it to rot in the sun, even after Israel offered the UN military protection.
  • In November 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. The ICC accused them — not Hamas which stole most of the food — of crimes against humanity.
  • Hamas is an organization with straightforwardly unhidden genocidal goals:….
  • This continual demonization of Israel has sadly led to an increased hatred of Israel, a tiny country that, ironically, is fighting to protect the very countries defaming it. A thank you would be nice.
  • What is at stake now is not only Israel’s survival but the need for democracies to understand the central danger confronting them, and finally to start combatting it.
  • During the Second World War, all those grateful for the hard-won freedoms of the democratic world saw that the only way out was not compromise and submission, but the full destruction of the Third Reich — not giving it a “state.”
On July 24, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that he will officially recognize a “Palestinian State,” and publicized a letter he sent to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, praising his “courageous commitments”. Since the creation of the Palestinian Authority in 1994, Abbas has enthusiastically backed anti-Israeli terrorism; supported the erasure of Israel; and has a lavish, multi-billion dollar “pay-to-slay” program that funds the murder of Jews. Pictured: Macron meets with Abbas during the 79th Session of the UN General Assembly in New York on September 25, 2024. (Photo by Ludovic Marin/AFP via Getty Images)

July 24, 2025: French President Emmanuel Macron announces that he will officially recognize a “Palestinian State.” He publicizes a letter he sent to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, and praises his “courageous commitments”. In it, Macron emphasizes his desire to “fulfill the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people” and that “We must immediately implement a ceasefire, release all hostages and provide massive humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza,”⁠ Macron reportedly announced. He did not, however make recognizing a fictitious Palestinian state conditioned on any of that.

“Peace is possible,” he added, along with the notion that “Building a Palestinian state and ensuring its viability would ‘contribute to the security of all in the Middle East.”‘

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu replied that the decision “rewards terror” and would create ” a launch pad to annihilate Israel .”

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that Macron’s decision is “a slap in the face to the victims of October 7.”

Hamas, for its part, immediately congratulated Macron and said that his decision constituted “a positive step in the right direction.”

Macron appears either indifferent or unaware of the effect his announcement might have on the hostages that Hamas kidnapped and is still torturing and starving in its tunnels. He also seems unaware that even if Abbas, now in the 20th year of his four-year term, suddenly condemned the massacre of October 7, 2023, that for almost two years, the Palestinian Authority (PA) and its Fatah political wing wholeheartedly celebrated it.

Since the creation of the Palestinian Authority in 1994, Abbas has enthusiastically backed anti-Israeli terrorism; supported the erasure of Israel (as well as here, and here); has a lavish, multi-billion dollar “pay-to-slay” program that funds murdering Jews, and uses textbooks that incite children to murder Jews.

Does Macron actually think that financing anti-Israeli terrorism, supporting the eradication of Israel, and inciting children to kill Jews are “courageous commitments”?

Macron apparently has no interest in seeing what the real aspirations of Palestinian Arabs are. Recent polls show that 64% of Arabs living under the rule of the Palestinian Authority think that the “two-state solution” is “no longer practical”, 72% approve of the October 7 massacre, and 41% support an “armed struggle” (terrorism) to destroy Israel. So, Macron actually regards these views — approving the October 7, 2023 massacre of Jews and continuing terrorism to displace Israel — as “legitimate aspirations”? Good to know.

Macron acts as if he has no idea that, if elections were held today in the West Bank territories ruled by the Palestinian Authority, Hamas would win in a landslide — meaning that the state he is planning to recognize would be a terrorist state led by an organization dedicated to obliterating Israel? France, the UK, Canada and Australia also approved recognizing a terrorist state.

Macron says he wants “the release of all hostages,” but his announcement may well have doomed them. “Talks with Hamas fell apart on the day Macron made the unilateral decision that he’s going to recognize the Palestinian state,” Rubio stated. As soon as Macron’s decision was announced, Hamas broke off negotiations. Macron may have sentenced the remaining hostages to death.

After seeing the horrific images of starved, tortured, and skeletal hostages released by Hamas, Macron wrote: “Abject cruelty, limitless inhumanity: this is what Hamas embodies.” This observation, however, did not lead him to change his position or state any conditions.

Macron’s calls for an immediate ceasefire could save Hamas from destruction — exactly what Hamas and Qatar want.

Macron barely mentions the October 7th massacre, thereby conveniently omitting that it was the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. This “oversight” amounts to exonerating Hamas from the immensity of its crime. Macron’s declaration is not just “a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th”, it is a slap in the face to all the Israelis who still live in pain from the October 7th massacre; to all the families of hostages who know the horror of the treatment Hamas is still inflicting on the victims it still holds; to all the Israeli soldiers currently risking their lives to ensure there will never be another massacre, and to all the Israelis who want to see the threat of terrorism weighing on their country and them permanently erased.

France, the UK, Canada and Australia have to see that the terrorist state they are about to recognize has no borders, no internationally recognized territory, and meets no criteria of any kind as required in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (1933) for a state to be recognized.

France, the UK, Canada and Australia also must see that the United Nations can only recognize a state under very specific conditions that will likely not be met. Chapter II, Article 4 of the UN Charter states that the admission of a state to membership in the United Nations “shall be effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.”

France, the UK, Canada and Australia undoubtedly fathom that even if there were an affirmative vote in the General Assembly, the United States would immediately veto it. Even if the Democrats returned to power, it is not at all likely that they would support creating a genocidal, terrorist state.

France, the UK, Canada and Australia further know that Article 80 of the United Nations Charter makes it impossible to create a Palestinian state on the territory of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank without Israel’s agreement. Late Israeli lawyer Howard Grief noted:

“Article 80 of the UN Charter, once known unofficially as the Jewish People’s clause, which preserves intact all the rights granted to Jews under the Mandate for Palestine, even after the Mandate’s expiry on May 14-15, 1948.”

He added:

“As a direct result of Article 80, the UN cannot transfer these rights over any part of Palestine, vested as they are in the Jewish People, to any non-Jewish entity.”

France, the UK, Canada and Australia also undoubtledly realize that Israel cannot stop the war without the return of all of the hostages. What would they do if their citizens were held hostage? Or are they already?

After October 7, 2023, Israel has no choice but to resolutely oppose the creation of any terrorist state threatening it on its borders. If France, the UK, Canada and Australia are so committed to the creation of a Palestinian State, surely they will be happy to donate some of their plentiful land for it.

Macron wants to exert increased pressure only on Israel. He sees that a strong trend of hostility towards Israel has taken shape in the Western world, and he apparently enjoys playing the role of its figurehead.

France, the UK, Canada and Australia might also be joined by Portugal. Its Prime Minister Luis Montenegro has said he is leaning toward the “rapid recognition” of a Palestinian state.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul was more moderate but said:

“For Germany, the recognition of a Palestinian state comes more at the end of that process. But such a process must begin now.”

On July 21, the leaders of 31 countries issued a joint statement on “Occupied Palestinian Territories” that amounted to blood libel, stating that Israel practices “the inhumane killing of civilians, including children,” ignores the “most basic needs” of the inhabitants of Gaza, and denies them “essential humanitarian assistance.” Hamas – carefully not referred to as a terrorist organization or with any mention if its culpability — is mentioned exactly once.

A conference on the “question of Palestine,” co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia, held in New York in July, led to a joint declaration “urging collective action to end the war in Gaza and to achieve a just, peaceful, and lasting resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. The declaration — signed by 17 countries, the 22-member Arab League, and the entire European Union — stated that Hamas must transfer authority to the Palestinian Authority with a view to the creation of a “demilitarized Palestinian state” living side by side, in peace and security with Israel. When Israel left the Gaza Strip in 2005, the Gaza Strip was not supposed to become militarized or a terrorist entity. That happened anyway, and in all probability would happen again unless Israel stopped it again.

The population of the Gaza Strip voted for Hamas to come to power in 2006. In 2007, members of the Palestinian Authority, in a coup, were either expelled, taken prisoner or executed.

Israel is now being falsely accused of causing a famine in Gaza. Most commentators completely ignore that Hamas has constantly stolen food aid entering Gaza, then hoarded it and resold it at extortionist prices. These commentators also omit that at the entrance to Gaza, approximately 1,000 trucks were blocked for days because the UN refused to distribute the aid, leaving it to rot in the sun, even after Israel offered the UN military protection.

UNRWA, which employs Hamas members, uses fake Hamas figures and falsely accuses Israel of killing Palestinian Arabs seeking food. The fake figures released by UNRWA are then used worldwide to try to criminalize Israel further. Photos of an Arab child emaciated due to a genetic illness were presented, again falsely, as photos of a child dying of starvation because of Israel.

In November 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. The ICC accused them — not Hamas which stole most of the food — of crimes against humanity.

Hamas is an organization with straightforwardly unhidden genocidal goals:

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it” (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).
– 1988 Hamas Covenant, Preamble

“The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla [slave of Allah], there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.”
– 1988 Hamas Covenant, Article 7

“There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.”
– 1988 Hamas Covenant, Article 13

The October 7, 2023 massacre carried genocidal intentions that Hamas leaders did not even try to hide. Nevertheless, it is Israel that is slanderously accused of genocide. The well-documented reality is that the Israeli army does everything possible to avoid civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip. John Spencer, Chair of the Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, who has been embedded with the IDF in Gaza four times, has stated:

“There is no genocide in Gaza….Israel has taken extraordinary steps to limit civilian harm. It warns before attacks using text messages, phone calls, leaflets, and broadcasts. It opens safe corridors and pauses operations so civilians can leave combat areas. It tracks civilian presence down to the building level. I have seen missions delayed or canceled because children were nearby. I have seen Israeli troops come under fire and still be ordered not to shoot back because civilians might be harmed.”

All the same, the accusation of genocide against Israel is peddled not only by extremist groups supporting Hamas, but also by so-called human rights organizations such as Amnesty International. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez actually called the situation in Gaza “the greatest genocide this century has witnessed.” Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin used the term “genocide” to describe the situation in Gaza. On May 28, 2024 Spain, Ireland and Norway rushed to “recognize” a make-believe Palestinian state.

This continual demonization of Israel has sadly led to an increased hatred of Israel, a tiny country that, ironically, is fighting to protect the very countries defaming it. A thank you would be nice. It is this calumny that has led to an explosion in Europe of anti-Semitic acts.

Columnist Jonathan Tobin wrote:

“Jew-hatred is not merely back in fashion… it has been sanctioned by the intellectual, academic, legal and cultural establishments across the globe, which now regard anti-Zionism as a legitimate, even enlightened point of view, even though it is a prejudicial idea that denies rights to Jews—rights denied to no one else.”

The oldest hatred is not dead. It just has new excuses, new clothes.

In a speech delivered to Congress on July 24, 2024, Prime Minister Netanyahu described the slanderous accusations against Israel, plentiful for decades, and the resulting rise in anti-Semitism. He emphasized how precious the United States’ friendship with Israel was in these decisive circumstances. He added that Israel would fight and would not bend, but that there was a growing risk that democracies would not understand the extremist danger and the urgent need to defeat it.

What is at stake now is not only Israel’s survival but the need for democracies to understand the central danger confronting them, and finally to start combatting it.

During the Second World War, all those grateful for the hard-won freedoms of the democratic world saw that the only way out was not compromise and submission, but the full destruction of the Third Reich — not giving it a “state.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on September 1, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

BIDEN PENTAGON CHIEFS LIED ABOUT THE TALIBAN PARTICIPATION IN WITHDRAWAL FROM AFGHANISTAN!

Exclusive: U.S. generals ran cover for Taliban, despite violent attacks during bungled withdrawal

Generals Milley, McKenzie, and other Pentagon officials claimed the Taliban wasn’t attacking the U.S. during the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, then contended that the Taliban was businesslike and helpful during the chaotic and deadly evacuation that ensued. Neither narrative was true.

TALIBAN CELEBRATESChairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley and CENTCOM Commander Frank McKenzie repeatedly ran cover for the Taliban’s behavior in 2021, denying that the Taliban had carried out attacks against U.S. and NATO bases during the withdrawal and defending the Taliban’s behavior during the evacuation.

In the weeks after the fall of Kabul, U.S. military brass such as Milley and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin would repeatedly testify that the Taliban had broken every provision of the Doha Agreement but one — its vow not to attack U.S. and NATO forces.

In fact, the Taliban had also violated that provision, because the Taliban attacked U.S. and NATO bases in Afghanistan multiple times, both before and after President Joe Biden’s “Go-to-Zero” order, including attacks on Bagram Air Base when U.S. troops were still there. The Taliban’s official spokespeople would often take credit for the attacks too.

The GOP-led House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) final report from last year had a section about how “Taliban Attacks on U.S. Bases Continue[d]” during the U.S. military withdrawal in the spring and summer of 2021, but nowhere in that section nor anywhere else in the report did it include the key fact that Milley and McKenzie repeatedly and falsely claimed that these attacks hadn’t happened.

Multiple key Biden Administration officials also repeatedly praised the “businesslike” character of the Taliban during the non-combatant evacuation operation (NEO) at Hamid Karzai International Airport (HKIA), despite clear evidence that the Taliban was beating up some Americans and blocking some U.S. citizens from escaping Afghanistan, and in spite of overwhelming evidence that the Taliban was beating up and even executing some Afghans who wanted to flee Taliban rule. McKenzie played an especially key role in establishing this narrative, although Milley played his part too.

HFAC’s September report also made no mention of McKenzie’s insistence that the Taliban had been “very businesslike” and “very pragmatic” and made no mention of Milley’s claims that the Taliban was not interfering with the U.S. evacuation, nor did the report make any reference to other Biden Administration officials repeating this false “businesslike” mantra about the Taliban.

Biden issued a pardon to Milley on his last full day in office in January 2025. McKenzie and other military leaders were not pardoned. McKenzie is currently listed as the Executive Director for the Global and National Security Institute at the University of Southern Florida.

McKenzie did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent to him through his email at the school. Nor did he respond to prior Just the News reporting about him.

Milley did not respond to multiple requests for comment sent to him through Princeton University, where he was named a visiting professor last year, and through JPMorgan Chase, where he has been a senior adviser since 2024. Nor did he respond to previous Just the News reporting on him.

Taliban fires rockets at U.S. bases, but Milley and others deny it

Milley said on May 6, 2021 that “there have been no attacks against U.S. and coalition forces since the retrograde began on about 1 May, and that is also consistent for the past year.” This was incorrect, as the Taliban had conducted indirect fire attacks against U.S. and coalition bases earlier in the year and would soon carry out similar small attacks against U.S. and coalition forces during the retrograde.

A UAE-based English-language newspaper reported that “the Taliban fired two missiles on a coalition military base in Afghanistan’s Khost province” on March 30, 2021. The Afghan military’s Khost Protection Force said at the time that the “Taliban fired indiscriminate rocket missiles on the military headquarters of coalition forces in Khost city.” The Taliban contended that the Doha Agreement had been broken by the West and so “today these invaders were targeted.”

In fact, the Taliban violated every single promise it made in the Doha Agreement — not just breaking its vow to end its alliance with al-Qaeda, but also breaking its promise not to attack United States forces.

An Afghan news outlet similarly reported at the time that “a joint military base of foreign and Afghan forces in eastern Khost province was targeted in a rocket attack by Taliban insurgents.” And another Afghan outlet reported on social media that “the Taliban launched a missile attack on the base of the joint forces in Khost.”

The Taliban itself even touted the attack on the forces stationed at the airport in Khost city, with Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid tweeting on March 30, 2021 that “a large number of rockets were launched in the vicinity of the center of Khost province on the old airfield of that province, which is the main center of the enemy’s mercenary forces. The missiles hit specific targets, and as a result, the enemy suffered heavy losses in life and property.”

Despite these reports, Milley later told the Senate on September 28, 2021 that “the one [provision of the Doha Agreement] that was met was the most important one — which was do not attack us or the coalition forces, and they did not.” Milley repeated this argument to the House the following day. Austin also wrongly claimed in September 2021 that “the only thing that they lived up to was that they did not attack us.”

The Pentagon inspector general said in a mid-August 2021 report that, from April through June that year, the Taliban “were believed to have executed a few ineffective indirect fire attacks in the direction of U.S. or NATO bases.” The Pentagon watchdog stated that the “Taliban Conducted Limited Attacks on Coalition Bases.”

Some of the Taliban attacks on U.S. and coalition bases in 2021 happened prior to Biden’s Go-to-Zero order. The watchdog report said that “the Taliban fired rockets toward a coalition military base in Khost province in the early morning of April 2. …. Additionally, the Taliban fired rockets at an airport in Khost where U.S. troops were based. U.S. forces responded by conducting clearing operations in the vicinity of the base.”

The Pentagon inspector general also said that “on April 7, 2021 the Taliban launched another rocket attack, this time against Kandahar air base, where several hundred U.S. troops were still based at the time.” The Afghanistan Times reported that on that day Afghan provincial officials said that the “Taliban unleashed a barrage of rockets at the Kandahar airport” and that “six rockets hit the airport.”

The Taliban yet again touted the attack on a base where U.S. forces were located, with the Taliban spokesman tweeting that “Kandahar airbase, a key enemy military center, targeted with multiple missiles noon hours today. Missiles have hit targets, causing heavy human & material losses.”

Confronted with facts, the Pentagon waffles

A reporter told then-Pentagon spokesman John Kirby on April 7, 2021 at a press briefing that the Taliban had attacked Kandahar Airfield and Camp Chapman, and asked Kirby what the U.S. military was doing to stop these Taliban attacks on U.S. and NATO troops. Kirby said that “we condemn today’s attack on Kandahar Airfield” which he said was still home to several hundred U.S. and coalition personnel.

The Pentagon spokesman added that “while the attack resulted in no casualties or damage, the Taliban’s decision to provoke even more violence in Afghanistan remains disruptive to the opportunity for peace.”

The reporter then noted Kirby still hadn’t said what the U.S. military was doing about the Taliban’s attacks against U.S. and coalition forces. Kirby said that “we always have the right of self-defense for our troops” but said that “our focus right now is on supporting a diplomatic process here to try to bring this war to a negotiated end.”

Kirby said that “I’m not prepared today to give an assessment of this attack as balanced against the Doha Agreement, okay?” when asked whether the Taliban attack against the Kandahar Airfield aimed at U.S. forces there was a violation of the agreement.

Biden’s Go-to-Zero order came a week later, and the Taliban’s sporadic attacks against the U.S. and NATO continued.

Reality sets in at the Pentagon

The Pentagon watchdog cited media reports which said that “an explosion inside Bagram Airfield on May 1 killed one and wounded 24 Afghan personnel.” The Defense Intelligence Agency also said that “the Taliban launched two rocket attacks against coalition forces at Kandahar Airfield on May 2.”

U.S. military spokesman Colonel Sonny Leggett said on May 1, 2021 that “Kandahar Airfield received ineffective indirect fire this afternoon” and that, in response, “U.S. Forces conducted a precision strike this evening, destroying additional rockets aimed at the airfield.”

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid again defended the Taliban attack against the U.S., tweeting that day that the Taliban could “take every counteraction it deems appropriate against the occupying forces.” An Afghan news outlet reported the same day that Afghan security officials in Parwan province said that “one person was killed, and 24 others were wounded in an explosion while security force members were offering prayers at a mosque inside Bagram base.” The security chief for Parwan police headquarters said that all the casualties were Afghan security forces.

Kirby repeatedly downplayed the significance of the attacks from the Taliban, even as he acknowledged at least some of the attacks which occurred.

The Pentagon spokesman said on May 3, 2021 that “what we’ve seen are some small, harassing attacks over the course of the weekend” but that “we’ve seen nothing thus far that has affected the drawdown.” Kirby said again on May 13, 2021 that “we have seen small harassing attacks” from the Taliban, but said the attacks “have not had an impact on the retrograde.”

Despite the well-founded reports of attacks circulating for three months, General Austin “Scottie” Miller also wrongly claimed on June 7, 2021 that the Taliban hadn’t attacked the U.S. during the retrograde: “To date — and it’s to date — we have not seen that.” When asked about the Doha Agreement’s condition that the Taliban not attack U.S. forces, Miller later admitted to HFAC that the Taliban conducted “at least a couple indirect fire attacks” on U.S. forces.

Biden admin maintains wishful thinking, denying attacks happened

Derek Chollet, who would go on to be Austin’s chief of staff, later told HFAC that the Taliban were “meeting the most important condition” of the Doha Agreement in 2021, “which was they were not shooting at U.S. military forces in Afghanistan.” This was said long after news outlets and even Pentagon staff acknowledged the attacks.

Chollet, who was serving as the Counselor of the U.S. Department of State and was a top advisor to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, told HFAC that he did “not recall” assessing whether the Taliban met any of its other obligations under the Doha Agreement because “the most important thing on our minds was we did not want the Afghan war to resume — against us.”

Ross Wilson, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan in 2021, later told HFAC that “the Talibs had absolutely met their commitment not to attack American forces, personnel, or installations. It’s not an unimportant thing to me, and I think also to the American people.”

Like Chollet, Wilson said that he couldn’t recall any Taliban indirect fire attacks directed against on U.S. bases in 2021, but said maybe there had been “misfires” by the Taliban.

Milley and McKenzie bend the meaning of “attacks”

Milley was asked during an appearance before HFAC in March 2024 whether the Taliban stopped attacking the U.S. military in 2021, and the language of the military commander shifted from claiming that the Taliban had not attacked U.S. forces to suddenly arguing that the Taliban had not carried out any “lethal attacks” on U.S. troops in 2021.

“They, well, yes. Lethal attacks. They committed to not doing that. There were some attacks, but they committed to not conducting lethal attacks and by my memory I don’t think there was a lethal attack on U.S. forces from February 2020 onward,” Milley said during the HFAC hearing.

Redefining the word “attacks”, Milley added that “There were some attacks. The issue was a lethal attack — really that’s the fundamental piece. And there was also some specifics about no VBIEDs [vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices] in the cities. … I think it says no attacks on U.S. and coalition forces. I can tell you in conversation with Zal Khalilzad what you’re talking about is lethal attacks really […] But the idea of not attacking coalition or U.S. forces, I would say largely that was adhered to by the Taliban.”

During his 2024 book tour, McKenzie then claimed again — despite the evidence — that the Taliban never attacked U.S. forces in 2020 and 2021: “The Taliban had about seven things that they were supposed to do. They didn’t do six of them, but one they did very well and scrupulously, in fact — they did not attack American forces in Afghanistan anymore.”

Zalmay Khalilzad, the former special representative for Afghan reconciliation, later told HFAC that the Taliban never admitted to carrying out any of these attacks, but characterized the Taliban’s words thusly: “Because you are violating the agreement, killing so many of us, sometimes local commanders, out of anger, may have done something, but it’s not something authorized by the military committee or by Commander Yaqoob or the political leadership. And so, if there is something that’s happened, we will investigate and get back to you, but it’s not authorized. But I am telling you that your violations … is creating a situation which has a lot of anger. We are losing a lot of people.”

Biden admin praises Taliban’s “businesslike” approach

McKenzie described the U.S. evacuation effort at the end of August 2021, saying: “We had gone from cooperating on security with a longtime partner and ally to initiating a pragmatic relationship of necessity with a longtime enemy. … The Taliban had been very — very pragmatic and very businesslike as we have approached this withdrawal.” He added: “I will simply say that they wanted us out. We wanted to get out with our people and with our — and with our friends and partners. And so for that short period of time, our issues — our view of the world was congruent, it was the same.”

Just the News previously reported on how McKenzie turned down a Taliban offer in Doha in mid-August 2021 which potentially would have allowed the U.S. military to secure Kabul and conduct the NEO free from Taliban interference.

Biden national security adviser Jake Sullivan soon echoed McKenzie’s “businesslike” remarks and said that the Taliban have “been businesslike in their approach with us, not because they’re nice guys — they’re not — but because they’ve had an interest along with us to make that evacuation mission run smoothly.”

McKenzie again testified in late September 2021 that “it was a very pragmatic, businesslike discussion” with the Taliban when coordinating security at HKIA with them.

National Security Council spokeswoman Emily Horne said in early September 2021 that the Taliban “have been cooperative in facilitating the departure of American citizens and lawful permanent residents” from Kabul airport and “have shown flexibility” and “been businesslike and professional in our dealings with them in this effort.”

The Biden Administration repeatedly painted a rosy picture of the Taliban’s actions toward American citizens during the evacuation.

Austin claimed on August 18, 2021, that “the State Department, the Taliban are facilitating safe passage to the airport for American citizens, that is, U.S. passport holders.”

Biden repeated that notion in a White House press conference about how the Taliban was handling airport security, claiming that no Americans had been blocked from HKIA by the Taliban guards. “Let me be clear: any American who wants to come home, we will get you home,” Biden said on August 20, 2021, and he soon falsely insisted: “We have no indication that they haven’t been able to get — in Kabul — through the airport. We’ve made an agreement with the — with the Taliban. Thus far, they’ve allowed them to go through. It’s in their interest for them to go through. So, we know of no circumstance where American citizens are — carrying an American passport — are trying to get through to the airport.”

Facts come out, Biden’s admin goes into damage control mode

In reality, Americans had variously been beaten, threatened, beaten, blocked, and had their passports confiscated by the Taliban.

The New York Post and other media reported that “Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told members of Congress on a conference call Friday that Americans attempting to evacuate Afghanistan have been beaten by the Taliban, directly contradicting President Biden’s assertion that U.S. citizens were not being blocked from the airport.”

“We’re also aware that some people, including Americans, have been harassed and even beaten by the Taliban,” Austin reportedly said on the call. “This is unacceptable and [we] made it clear to the designated Taliban leader.” But Austin tried to downplay the Taliban violence, insisting that “with the exception of those cases … we continue to see Americans and appropriately credentialed Afghans continue to move through.”

Kirby, the Pentagon’s press secretary, also admitted that day that Biden had been wrong, and admitted that Afghan allies with proper paperwork had also been beaten up by the Taliban, but he worked to downplay that too, also saying he didn’t see it as a major issue.

“We have made it clear to the Taliban that these Afghans, with the proper credentials should be allowed through the checkpoint. And again… certainly we recognize that there have been multiple cases of Afghans — even some credentialed Afghans being assaulted, and beaten, and harassed, no question,” Kirby said. “But, by and large, those Afghans who have the proper credentials — and we have made it clear to the Taliban what those credentials look like, what they are. By and large, they are getting through the checkpoint. And we have not seen that become a major issue.”

Nevertheless, Biden told reporters that day that “thus far, the Taliban have been taking steps to work with us so we can get our people out.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on August 25, 2021 that he hoped the Taliban “continue to cooperate” — even as he knew that the Taliban’s cooperation was problematic.

Ambassador John Bass, the lead State Department official for the evacuation, would later tell HFAC that “what I can recall are reports of Americans being beaten because the Talibs at a particular checkpoint would not recognize their documents, told them to go away,” and that “Americans who were beaten when they presented themselves with other members of their family at a Taliban checkpoint and the Talibs said, ‘Okay, you can go ahead, but everybody else has to move away,’ and in the course of either an argument or an effort to prevent that physical separation of a family unit, American citizens or family members were beaten.”

Ross Wilson, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, also told HFAC that the Taliban would turn away Americans seeking to evacuate from Afghanistan: “The Talibs were very difficult to deal with. … It often happened that — not ‘often’ — it happened that the Talibs turned away American passport holders.”

U.S. troops watched helplessly as the Taliban killed Afghan civilians

The Taliban carried out many acts of violence against Afghan allies attempting to flee Afghanistan, even murdering many of these Afghans, often within view of the Marines guarding the gates. The U.S. military’s rules of engagement (ROE) at HKIA forbid the Marines from intervening and stopping the Taliban’s murderous acts targeting civilians.

Lieutenant Colonel John Naughton said during the 2022 CENTCOM briefing that Marines reported seeing the Taliban turn away potential evacuees, beat up potential evacuees, and even shoot at potential evacuees, and “so as the chevron became largely impassible and potential evacuees became more and more desperate they began to seek out and utilize alternate ingress routes to bypass Taliban checkpoints.” Thus did the Taliban violence reduce security around the airport and make the crowds even more uncontrollable, increasing the ability of a suicide bomber to make his way to the gates.

The initial Abbey Gate investigation found that “the Taliban used excessive force which resulted in civilian evacuees seeking alternate routes to Abbey Gate to avoid Taliban checkpoints” and that “the change in routes dramatically increased the number of evacuees in the canal area at Abbey Gate between 25-26 August 2021.”

ARCENT investigators contended that the rules of engagement originally “authorized offensive engagement of the Taliban as a declared hostile force” but that “the Taliban became a temporary and tactically expedient partner force, armed, and near Service members at Abbey Gate.” ARCENT said that “this temporary and expedient partner used excessive force against the civilian population which was observed by certain service members attempting to conduct a NEO.”

Despite the Taliban murdering civilians within view of U.S. troops, ARCENT said that U.S. military commanders “constrained Service members’ authority under the ROE to stop the violence due to a justifiable concern of jeopardizing the mission and potentially incurring additional civilian casualties in what would escalate to open combat at the gate.”

ARCENT said that “under the ROE, service members understood they had the right to defend others only if they were verified AMCITS [American citizens] or coalition military forces.”

The ARCENT investigation also said that “Marines knew about the Taliban using excessive force” and that “several Marines, working near the chevron, stated they personally witnessed the Taliban shoot civilians.” The investigative report said U.S. military snipers “specifically described a vantage point from the west side of the sniper tower, looking down the outer corridor toward the chevron, where they could view an area controlled by the Taliban” and that the snipers said “it was at that location where they observed these shootings occur.” The report also said the command center at HKIA “received reports describing violence and excessive force that resulted in the death of civilians.”

ARCENT claimed that “any escalation by U.S. forces to intervene in Taliban use of excessive force would have created an unnecessary and definite risk to mission and risk to U.S. forces.” The U.S. military leaders at Abbey Gate “were aware that violence occurred,” ARCENT said, but these leaders “explained that “if U.S. forces engaged the Taliban, leaders assessed the situation would devolve into a firefight between U.S. forces and the Taliban. This almost certainly would have caused military and civilian casualties and jeopardized the mission to maximize the number of evacuees.”

Scott Mann’s book Pineapple Express recounted just one of the many instances of the Taliban murdering Afghan civilians at HKIA and U.S. forces being told not to intervene: “Major Ian Wookey … swallowed hard as he listened to a pilot who had just seen a civilian execution along the airport’s southwest perimeter wall. ‘Enemy is in the clear,’ the pilot said, almost by rote. ‘Permission to engage.’ The answer came back quickly. ‘Negative. Repeat, negative. Do not engage.’ Apaches were some of the most advanced weapons belonging to the most powerful military in the world, and now they could not fire on insurgents who were killing innocent people.”

One of the Marines who worked in the Joint Operations Center at Kabul airport admitted that “we were not tasked to look for Taliban shooting people, and because of the limited ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] assets, we did not really monitor the Taliban trying to kill people.”

Another Marine told investigators: “It was weird seeing Taliban in direct support of the battalion. We were basically told that if they shot at the crowd, we couldn’t do anything unless we saw an American passport holder in direct peril. We couldn’t engage or kill the Taliban unless we saw that. There was lots of weapons pointing for the duration, but we couldn’t engage, even if we saw executions, unless we saw a blue passport.”

Yet another Marine also said that “I saw humanity at its worst at HKIA. Coming out of Mosul, two clans were killing each other and that was pretty heinous, but this was way worse.” Another corpsman said that “it was hard to watch, like the Taliban beating a pregnant woman. But you just have to turn around and walk away.”

Sergeant Tyler Vargas-Andrews said that “we witnessed the Taliban beating and killing people — not just hitting them, breaking their faces, and bashing their skulls in.” The Marine sniper continued: “I saw them shoot at/around people. I saw them severely beat people, to unconsciousness or what I believed was death. I saw that and passed it up. We obviously have been going back and forth with the Taliban for decades, they are good at working around our RoEs. They would hit civilians with buttstocks and pipes until they fell and didn’t get up. That prompted me at one point, since I was routinely radioing this up to the chain of command, to ask if we were allowed to do anything about it. I was told that only if we saw Americans or ourselves being physically harmed, we were not allowed to do anything.” Vargas-Andrews said one night was particularly bad as he watched eight or nine civilians “beaten to the point of immobilization.” He said when he radioed that in “I was told to clear the net of radio traffic.”

Vargas-Andrews also described a recon patrol he and his fellow Marines conducted by climbing across rooftops to observe the Taliban position at the chevron. The Marine sniper said: “We got photos of the Taliban, the gear they were holding, and what they did to the civilians. … Up against the wall, they had 12-15 individuals flex cuffed against the wall. We saw the Taliban moving unconscious or lifeless bodies around. … I was trying to get pictures to either let us engage or get the task force commander to talk to the Taliban about what they were doing. The amount of brutality we saw over less than a two-week period, it was unsettling to see people get beaten senseless for no reason.”

State Department official Jayne Howell told HFAC that “the Taliban periodically would start, either at the very minimum, beating people with sticks, and in the worst cases, they were using live bullets and shooting at people in the crowd if they felt that the crowd was out of control.” She said she observed the Taliban violence with her own eyes, “It was terrible. It was chaotic. It was heartbreaking.” Howell also said that consular officers under her watch reported to her that they saw people being shot by the Taliban.

Despite all of this, HFAC’s report last year never mentioned how McKenzie and others claimed the Taliban had been “businesslike” during the chaotic — and sometimes murderous — evacuation.

  • Reporter’s disclosure

A quick word about this author (a disclosure I shared in my prior pieces on Milley and McKenzie). I co-authored a book — KABUL — on the withdrawal and evacuation from Afghanistan and, prior to joining Just the News, I worked as the senior investigator on the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC), specifically tasked with reviewing the bungled Afghan withdrawal.

I quit the committee in protest last August over disagreements with then-GOP Chairman Michael McCaul over how his investigation was run and over what was edited out of the drafts I wrote before HFAC’s final report was published last September.

In full disclosure, I have also been serving as an independent factfinder in Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s ongoing review of the Pentagon’s failings during the Afghan withdrawal, but I am participating in that exercise solely as a journalist. I’m not paid by any government agency and my participation is solely to help provide Just the News readers and the American public a better understanding of what led to such a disaster.

Related Articles

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on August 30, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

Post navigation

← Older posts

Recent Posts

  • CHINA HAS REAL ROBOTS, AND OUR EXECUTIVES ARE INTIMIDATED BY THEIR PRESENCE EVERYWHERE!
  • MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, SENATE AND STAFFERS WERE EXEMPT FROM BEING REQUIRED TO GET THE COVID “VACCINE”, YET SENILE BIDEN FORCED IT ON EVERYONE ELSE, INCLUDING MEMBERS OF THE MILITARY WHO WERE THEN DISCHARGED IF REFUSED!
  • ENTIRE WORTHLESS FEDERAL AGENCY WITH $100 MILLION BUDGET KICKED OUT!
  • TRUMPS PICK OF BEAUTY QUEENS FOR HIS APPOINTMENTS..IS MUCH IMPROVED OVER THE UGLIEST WOMEN IN THE WORLD PICKED BY BIDEN, CLINTON AND OBAMA! SOME WERE TOTALLY HIDEOUS
  • NEW MOVIE STOKES HATRED OF GOVERNMENT AND ICE, AND DOES NOTHING TO UNITE PEOPLE

Sterling Cooper, Inc. © 2023,  Privacy Policy