RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2025/05/10/why-regime-change-in-iran-is-becoming-inevitable/

he Islamic Republic of Iran is facing unprecedented pressure from both within and outside its borders. Internally, economic collapse, widespread political disillusionment, and mass rejection of religious authoritarianism have profoundly weakened the regime’s legitimacy. Externally, Iran’s regional influence is diminishing as its proxies suffer military defeats and diplomatic isolation. Although the precise timing is uncertain, the convergence of these pressures makes regime change in Iran increasingly likely. For Western policymakers, this is not the time for short-term crisis management—it is the time to prepare for a democratic transition.

Internal Fault Lines
Popular Rejection of the Regime

Forty-six years after the Islamic Revolution, Iranian public sentiment has turned sharply against the ruling elite. A 2022 survey by the Group for Analyzing and Measuring Attitudes in Iran GAMAAN found that nearly 90% of Iranians do not support the Islamic Republic as a system of governance. Additionally, 73% of respondents favor the separation of religion from politics—directly opposing the regime’s theocratic foundations. Calls for secular democracy and respect for human rights transcend ideological boundaries. Opposition comes from a wide range of constituencies—women’s rights activists, students, laborers, ethnic minorities, monarchists, secular republicans, and even traditional religious groups. The 2022–2023 “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests, sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini while in morality police custody, revealed a society no longer willing to endure repression. The Islamic regime is increasingly unable to enforce its compulsory hijab law, as millions of Iranian women openly defy it. At the same time, hardline factions within the regime are pressuring authorities to crack down and strictly implement the law. Yet the regime finds itself paralyzed—unable either to grant women the freedom to choose their clothing or to return to the mass arrests and repression of earlier years. The gulf between state and society has grown irreparably wide. Reform is no longer seen as a viable option. Today, the Iranian people themselves pose the greatest threat to the regime’s survival—more so than any external actor.

Economic Collapse and Systemic Corruption

https://mexiconewsreport.com/index.php/2025/05/10/the-tragic-story-of-ivan-morales-corrales/

The tragic story of recently-murdered Ivan Morales Corrales displays the power and ruthlessness of a Mexican drug cartel.

Ivan Morales Corrales was a Mexican federal agent.

On May 1st, 2015, Morales was part of a secret mission in Jalisco state to capture Nemesio Ruben “El Mencho” Oseguera Cervantes, leader of the Cártel Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG).

There were five helicopters on the mission. The one Morales Corrales was in was hit by RPGs and crashed and burned. Of the 18 persons on board the aircraft 9 survived.

Morales survived but was horribly burned, with second and third degree burns over 70% of his body, after which he underwent 15 reconstructive surgeries.

In December of 2015, Morelos received the Police Medal of Merit from then-President Enrique Pena Nieto.

2015 – President Pena Nieto and Ivan Morales Corrales. Source: Univisión

In September of 2024, Morelos was in the U.S. where he testified in the trial of
Ruben Oseguera González  “El Menchito”, the son of “El Mencho”.

El Menchito had actually given the order to attack the helicopter and was later arrested in Mexico and extradited to the United States.

On March 7th, 2025, El Menchito was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment for international drug trafficking.

On April 30th, 2025, nearly 10 years after the attack on the helicopter, Morales and his wife were ambushed and shot to death in Temixco, state of Morelos.

So the CJNG got its revenge on a brave Mexican who had already suffered greatly in the Cartel War.

https://pjmedia.com/david-solway-2/2025/05/09/separation-or-collapse-which-comes-first-n4939639

The province of Alberta has a legitimate grievance with the ROC (Rest of Canada).

According to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, since the inception of Canada’s equalization program in 1957, which sees the wealthier provinces subsidizing their less fortunate counterparts, Alberta has made a net contribution of $67 billion, $2.9 billion alone in 2021 — which in turn represents only a portion of the province’s immense financial contribution to federal coffers and the governments and residents of other provinces. 

The Fraser Institute notes that the equalization drain represents “just a small part of the province’s outsized contribution to confederation in recent years.” It calculates that “the gap between Albertans’ contribution to federal revenues and federal expenditures plus transfers to the province, totalled $20.5 billion annually in 2017/18. And this measure excludes Albertans’ disproportionate cumulative contribution to the Canada Pension Plan, which on net totalled $2.9 billion in 2017.”

Albertans had voted in a referendum to abolish the system of equalization payments to other provinces. Speaking of transfer payments, it was former Premier Jason Kenney who made that issue a referendum question. Alberta voted yes, an affirmative totally ignored by Ottawa and the rest of the country.

Meanwhile, the Liberals are doing everything in their power to eviscerate Alberta’s energy industry, the source of its prosperity and a major contributor to Canada’s overall solvency, by shutting down pipeline projects, banning tanker activity along the coast of British Columbia, and levying anti-emission, net-zero protocols designed to strangle the province’s economic output. The cognitive dissonance is appalling. 

Obviously, it is not only Alberta and Saskatchewan that are at risk, but the rest of the country as well, as the Liberal administration under Mark Carney moves to effectively collapse the country’s economic output. Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, and now the UK are the models for a Canadian makeover. Debt, deficit, money printing, and capital flight are the inevitable results of the net-zero fantasy. Canada is intent on committing economic suicide.

As emeritus professor of economics Steve Ambler points out, “Private investment in Canada was already hemorrhaging under the Trudeau administration. Even larger federal deficits under the new Liberal administration, and its continued emphasis on managing the economy from the top down by administrative fiat, will not improve the situation. Instead, investment funds will continue to migrate to the US where tax rates and the business climate in general are more advantageous.” Indeed, an internal government report from Policy Horizons Canada warns of a “near-collapse of Canada’s economy, trigger[ing] a mental health crisis and more grassroots approaches to housing and food—including families foraging and hunting wildlife for food.”  

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/05/09/the-british-elites-have-capitulated-to-islamo-censorship/

Does freedom of speech include the right to blaspheme? In 21st-century Britain, you’d have thought the answer would be ‘yes, obviously’. Our last blasphemy conviction was in 1977. England’s blasphemy law was abolished in 2008, having been a dead letter for decades. The centuries-long struggle for free speech in this country, as in so many others, was built on defaming gods, kings, clerics, prophets. Without the right to blaspheme, there is no right to speak freely. But in this identitarian age, what was once taken for granted is fast melting into air.

In Britain, in 2025, whether or not you should be able to criticise a religion, mock its practices, burn its texts, is an alarmingly live issue. And when I say ‘a religion’, you know which one I’m talking about. This debate has lit up again this week, following the charges brought against Hamit Coskun for burning a Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London in February. His one-man protest against the Islamist turn of Turkey under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been chalked up as a religiously motivated public-order offence, drawing the condemnation of shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick and causing an X feud between two MPs. Rupert Lowe – the member for the Very Online right – condemned our backdoor blasphemy laws, while Adnan Hussain – one of the so-called Gaza independents who rode a wave of sectarian, anti-Israel bile into parliament at the last General Election – accused Lowe of singling out Muslims under the guise of freedom of speech.

Hussain’s arguments are as banal as they are illiberal. Free speech isn’t absolute, ackshually. Those who claim to care about Koran-burners are really just racists. Do you know who also burned books? Hitler! What most sticks in the craw is how depressingly pedestrian they are – not simply among the ‘Gaza independents’, but also the liberal elites, who long ago sacrificed genuine liberalism on the altar of multiculturalism. It is their cowardice and relativism that has brought us to this point: where the old Christian blasphemy laws may be long gone, but informal Islamic blasphemy laws are fast taking shape, with hate-speech laws refashioned to forcefield a faith from criticism.

Those shocked to see a case like Coskun’s haven’t been paying attention. Ever since the Rushdie affair, we have witnessed an unholy alliance between Islamist censors, a cowardly political establishment and an increasingly identitarian left. The first protest against The Satanic Verses, Salman Rushdie’s ‘blasphemous’ novel which earned him the Ayatollah’s fatwa and almost cost him his life, was not on the subcontinent or in the Middle East, but in Bolton on 2 December 1988. While this movement never succeeded in getting Rushdie’s novel banned in Britain, or extending Britain’s blasphemy laws to cover Islam, it put the fear of Allah into anyone who dared publish a book, display a cartoon or make a statement that some perma-outraged prick, claiming to speak on behalf of Muslims, might deem to be offensive or heretical. This haunts us to this day, as the still-disappeared Batley school teacher or the recent – mercifully foiled – attempts to murder ex-Muslim Hatun Tash show.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/nigeria-sharia-based-discrimination-against-christians/

Christians in Nigeria are murdered almost daily through indiscriminate attacks led by Muslims. Nigerian Christian women are abducted, raped, gang-raped and sexually abused on a widespread scale. Violence is only one of the many forms of persecution that Christians in Nigeria face. They are also subjected to systematic, Sharia-based discrimination, a situation which is particularly routine in the majority-Muslim northern states.

One of the methods used to silence Christian voices utilizes the deadly blasphemy laws. In many cases, Muslim mobs take the law into their own hands and execute Christians who they accuse of blasphemy.

In 2022, for instance, Deborah Samuel Yakubu, a second-year Christian college student, was stoned and burnt to death by a mob of Muslim students in Sokoto, Nigeria, after being accused of blasphemy against Islam.

The Council on Foreign Relations reported:

Ms. Yakubu was thought to have ‘blasphemed’ Islam and Prophet Muhammad after a voice note that she left on a WhatsApp group responding to another student’s post on the theme of Islam rubbed her colleagues the wrong way. After forcibly extracting her from a safe room where the school authorities had hoped to hide her, a mob comprising Ms. Yakubu’s colleagues struck her repeatedly with stones and clubs before eventually setting her lifeless body on fire, all the while shouting “Allahu Akbar” (God is great).

Footage of the killing would later appear on various social media platforms.

A Nigerian analyst said:

Christians have to be very careful in discussions with Muslims as their words can easily be used against them. Christians have been killed when they were accused of speaking ill of Muhammad or Islam. Many opinions spoken by Christians are deliberately misconstrued and regarded as blasphemous. In several instances mobs have killed Christians for simply preaching in public or expressing opinions on issues.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21590/the-next-pope

Some Catholics who are sensitive to the Holy See’s influence on international affairs may be hoping for a Pope who exercises decisive moral clarity in condemning brutal behavior, whether in Africa, China or elsewhere.

Pope Francis seemed to be infrequent in his condemnation of Islamist atrocities and when he did condemn them, he would be quick to criticize those who equated the religion of Islam with violence. Mass murders of Catholics and other Christians by Islamists take place daily in Nigeria, Mozambique, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

There are heroic candidates among the “Papabiles” (Papal possibles) such as the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, who offered himself in exchange for the hostages seized by the Gaza terrorist group Hamas.

Although the Vatican’s reason for being is to guide souls to God, its pronouncements on secular affairs not only have a profound impact, literally, on the lives of millions of Catholics, but on preserving the Judeo-Christian values upon which civilization is built, as well.

While the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics wait prayerfully for the elevation to the papacy of the 267th pope, successor to the Christ-appointed St. Peter, most of the rest of humanity may be wondering what impact the new pontiff could have on global affairs.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership, which did not send a representative to the funeral of Pope Francis, has cause to be attentive. If this week’s Papal Conclave selects Philippines Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, the Archbishop of Manila, CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping would have reason for concern.