MMN Editor

“A true fighter until the end, he was surrounded by his mother, his children, his family and his closest friends,” Grant’s family and the Wu-Tang Clan said in a statement.

War Stocks Jump: These Firms Have The Most Middle East Exposure

Update (Monday): 

Defense stocks in Asia and Europe are extending their rally after the U.S.-Israeli strike on Iran, dubbed Operation Epic Fury, added fresh momentum to the global defense trade. The move is spilling over into U.S. premarket trading, where big defense firms such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and RTX jumped as investors panic-buy war stocks.

In European trading, BAE shares rose as much as 8.3%, while Rheinmetall AG gained 6%. Japan’s Hosoya Pyro-Engineering Co. surged nearly 10%. Meanwhile, China’s J-35 stealth fighter maker, AVIC Shenyang Aircraft Company, and drone-maker AVIC Chengdu UAS increased by 5% and 20%, respectively.

Goldman analyst Jeremy Elster said, “Strategically, BAE is most exposed to the Middle East (~15% of sales) and to U.S. DoD-led spending (~42% of sales).”

We pointed out on Sunday evening that defense stocks were set to soar on Monday, as investors recognized the race among the U.S. and allies to tap defense firms to replenish the hundreds, if not thousands, of air-delivered munitions U.S. and Israeli forces used to neutralize high-value IRGC targets, along with the countermeasure systems needed to defend against IRGC missile and drone threats.

Elster continued:

In terms of capabilities, there is demand being placed on U.S. stockpiles of interceptors such as the SM-3 and Patriot systems (*U.S. Races to Accomplish Iran Mission Before Munitions Run Out – WSJ, *Five Countries Have Shot Down About 1,400 Iranian Missiles and Drones – WSJ). Though the extent of support or involvement from Europe remains limited, should the U.S. call on Europe interceptor stockpiles, the equivalent system is the SAMP/T interceptor, manufactured in a JV between Thales and MBDA (a munitions JV owned by Airbus (37.5%), BAE (37.5%) and Leonardo (25%)). Positioning in defence is relatively light (HFs have generally been rotating back into civil of late), with concerns on near-term earnings and execution weighing.

Elster pointed out, “From here, Eu defence has been making lower highs vs SXNP on pro-cyclical rotation and the drag from entering the “execution” phase of the Eu production ramp. Without an extended conflict and/or Eu involvement, this trend remains in place.”

Stateside, U.S. defense stocks Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman rose 7.9% and 5.8% in premarket trading.

“The market will take this as broadly positive for European defense stocks,” MWB Research analyst Jens-Peter Rieck wrote in a note, though “any move is likely to be driven more by sentiment than by changes to earnings estimates.”

GS US Defense Index (Goldman Sachs thematic basket tied to U.S. defense stocks) is primed for another breakout.

Related:

Rise Of “War Unicorns” As Big Defense Primes Face An “Adapt Or Die” Moment
Jefferies analyst Sheila Kahyaoglu told clients that the desire for military spending will spread across the Middle East. She said major U.S. defense companies would capture much of this new business.

*   *   * 

The scale of the U.S.-Israeli strike on Iran this weekend was massive, involving hundreds of fighter jets, bombers, and air-delivered munitions across more than 100 Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-linked targets. Our focus has shifted to U.S. munitions stockpiles, which were already dwindling after four years of the Russia-Ukraine war. The conflict so far will intensify Wall Street’s focus on U.S. defense firms come Monday morning and potentially lead investors to view the need for defense firms to accelerate weapons production, setting up another bullish scenario for these war stocks.

For the first time, Israel and the U.S. have struck targets deep in “the heart of Tehran,” Israel Defense Forces officials stated on Sunday.  

“The Air Force, guided by Military Intelligence, has now launched a broad wave of strikes toward targets of the Iranian terror regime in the heart of Tehran,” the IDF said.

Media outlet Clash Report stated on X, “Over 100 targets hit by 200 Israeli jets, including nuclear sites and top IRGC officials.”

The massive strike has brought into focus how a multi-war front for the West, whether that’s Ukraine or now Iran, is rapidly draining America’s munitions stockpile, especially air-defense interceptors needed to stop Iranian missile and kamikaze drone retaliation. 

The Wall Street Journal noted that U.S. and allied forces are burning through THAAD, Patriot, and SM-3 missile systems faster than they can be replaced, while also using vast amounts of Tomahawk cruise missiles and other precision weapons that would be critical if another conflict emerged somewhere else in the world. 

Dozens of US Tomahawk missiles flying over Qader Karam of the Kurdistan region in Iraq towards Iran. pic.twitter.com/V70zg5b3Hd
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) February 28, 2026
WSJ explained more:

The precise size of the U.S. stock of air-defense interceptors — what the Pentagon calls magazine depth — is classified. But repeated conflicts with Iran and its proxies in the Middle East have been eating into the supply of air defenses in the region.

Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center think tank, told the outlet, “One of the challenges is you can deplete these really quickly,” adding, “We’re using them faster than we can replace them.” 

“The Trump administration has fired TLAMS at an extraordinary rate in operations around the globe, in the Middle East against Iran and the Houthis as well as in Nigeria on Christmas Day,” Becca Wasser, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, noted. 

If the Iranian conflict broadened or was prolonged, the Department of War may have to source additional air-delivered munitions supplies from other regions, potentially affecting deterrence  cabilities other foreign adversaries, such as China and North Korea.

The theme emerging here is that U.S. defense-related stocks could be primed for another breakout after trading sideways since mid-January. Certainly, the Caribbean gunboat diplomacy and the Maduro raid in early January lifted these war stocks, and they will likely see another push higher come Monday.

GS US Defense (Goldman Sachs thematic basket tied to U.S. defense stocks):

Jonathan Conricus, a former IDF spokesman, told the outlet that he was “underwhelmed so far by the amount of missiles that the Iranians have been able to fire.” 

“Eventually it boils down to numbers,” Conricus added. “How many interceptors will we have versus how much launchers will they be able to field and fire.”

Ultimately, war comes down to numbers, and the question is which side burns through its missiles and bombs first.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/02/2026 – 07:10

In one of the wealthiest places on Earth, thousands are living in tent cities on the streets of Los Angeles, an “atrocity” that even former Democrat President Barack Obama recently acknowledged on a podcast. He slammed the moral failure of allowing people to languish without real help while noting that encampments downtown are a “losing political strategy.” He demanded policies that “recognize their full humanity” and provide genuine resources for success.But this is not simply a moral failure, it is a structural one.Though Obama didn’t name Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom directly, the critique lands squarely on his doorstep — after all, Newsom has been at the helm as California’s homelessness ballooned to record highs, even after more than $24 billion was funneled into solving the problem since 2019. Newsom’s team claims agreement with Obama, touting mental health reforms and encampment cleanups, but the reality on the ground tells a different story.As a California native who has spent years working directly on the streets helping move homeless veterans into treatment and off encampments, I’ve seen firsthand that this crisis is not simply about housing, it’s about untreated trauma, addiction and lack of structured support.DR MARC SIEGEL: HOW AA, FAITH AND SCIENCE ALIGN WITH TRUMP’S FIGHT AGAINST ADDICTIONNewsom is crowing about a minor drop in unsheltered homelessness for 2025, calling it the largest decline in 15 years. And while it’s a very small step in the right direction, let’s not break out the champagne. This “progress” comes after record-breaking homelessness under Newsom’s watch, despite historic levels of spending that created an entire ecosystem built to manage the crisis rather than resolve it. This isn’t a victory lap; this is pre-campaign damage control for a system that has grown financially dependent on the existence of the problem.As I detail in my book, “The Race to Save California,” the heart of the homelessness issue isn’t a lack of funding or awareness. After all, with $24 billion spent and almost every sidewalk occupied, California has both in spades and is still a disaster. The problem is not scarcity, it is misaligned incentives created by how the money is used and deployed.Politicians like Newsom obsess over housing shortages because that’s a simpler and more straightforward ‘fix’ that makes for easy soundbites to virtue signal accomplishment, even if they don’t really fix anything. Housing became the preferred “solution” not because it worked, but because it justified enormous spending pipelines.INTERIOR DEPARTMENT ADOPTS NO-TOLERANCE POLICY FOR HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS IN WASHINGTON, DCBecause why deal with the important, messy stuff — like addiction recovery, mental health treatment, life skills training and social reintegration — when they could channel billions into construction-heavy programs that sustain funding flows long after ribbon cuttings?This mindset mirrors the now-failing “Housing First” model, which turned homelessness into a housing initiative, and with it, a vehicle for sustained government spending.That approach is now beginning to shift. Under President Donald Trump, HUD Secretary Scott Turner has recognized that homelessness cannot be treated as a housing issue alone. The crisis isn’t simply about shelter, it’s about stability. You can’t build your way out of a fentanyl addiction, untreated schizophrenia, or PTSD. Many need treatment, structure and accountability, not handouts and disingenuous ‘compassion’ that feeds the cycle.NEWSOM JUST MADE A CATASTROPHIC MISTAKE ON CALIFORNIA’S HOMELESSNESS DISASTERThe homeless veteran population is a prime example of what’s really needed. There are over 35,000 homeless veterans nationwide on any given night. It’s a travesty: heroes who once led under fire now sleep in tents because bureaucracy and profits trump substantive solutions.These vets don’t need pity and handouts. They need purpose — leadership opportunities, job training, treatment and a place in a community that both supports and depends on each other. Instead, veterans are warehoused in misery, their potential wasted and the crisis dragging on while politicians brag about the number of housing units constructed.CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINIONTo be frank, the crisis persists because the funding structure rewards continuation over resolution. When problems worsen, emergency funds flow with minimal oversight, expanding the budgets of politically connected nonprofits, consultants and agencies that are sustained by managing — not ending — homelessness. They know that the money slows if the problem shrinks, while failure often results in larger future appropriations.The real solution? Cost-effective hybrid camps offering community, structure and transformation at a fraction of the luxury housing costs, while tying funding to measurable reductions in homelessness. Picture cafeterias, chapels, laundry, life-skills classes and work opportunities where residents grow through contribution to the community and their future, moving onward and upward. Because transition without transformation is futile.Obama’s right — this is an atrocity, and Newsom’s spin on a modest drop doesn’t erase years of a spending-first approach that prioritized funding flows over functional outcomes. Californians deserve streets free of chaos and our homeless neighbors deserve real support from a system that solves problems, not sustains them.We know the fixes: Treatment-focused intervention, enforcement of existing laws, outcome-based funding. Let’s demand them before another “progress” report can be spun as campaign propaganda at the expense of human lives. Our nation is worth at least that much.CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM KATE MONROE

This story discusses suicide. If you or someone you know is having thoughts of suicide, please contact the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline at 988 or 1-800-273-TALK (8255).Artificial intelligence has been touted as a boon to healthcare, but a new study has revealed its potential shortcomings when it comes to giving medical advice.In January, OpenAI launched ChatGPT Health, the medical-focused version of the popular chatbot tool. The company introduced the tool as “a dedicated experience that securely brings your health information and ChatGPT’s intelligence together, to help you feel more informed, prepared and confident navigating your health.”CHATGPT DIETARY ADVICE SENDS MAN TO HOSPITAL WITH DANGEROUS CHEMICAL POISONINGBut researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai have found that the tool failed to recommend emergency care for a “significant number” of serious medical cases.The study, published in the journal Nature Medicine on Feb. 23, aimed to explore how ChatGPT Health — which is reported to have about 40 million users daily — handles situations where people are asking whether to seek emergency care.”Right now, no independent body evaluates these products before they reach the public,” lead author Ashwin Ramaswamy, MD, instructor of urology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, told Fox News Digital.”We wouldn’t accept that for a medication or a medical device, and we shouldn’t accept it for a product that tens of millions of people are using to make health decisions.”The team created 60 clinical scenarios across 21 medical specialties, ranging from minor conditions to true medical emergencies.Three independent physicians then assigned an appropriate level of urgency for each case, based on published clinical practice guidelines in 56 medical societies.WOMAN SAYS CHATGPT SAVED HER LIFE BY HELPING DETECT CANCER, WHICH DOCTORS MISSEDThe researchers conducted 960 interactions with ChatGPT Health to see how the tool responded, taking into account gender, race, barriers to care and “social dynamics.”While “clear-cut emergencies” — such as stroke or severe allergy — were generally handled well, the researchers found that the tool “under-triaged” many urgent medical issues.  For example, in one asthma scenario, the system acknowledged that the patient was showing early signs of respiratory failure, but still recommended waiting instead of seeking emergency care.”ChatGPT Health performs well in medium-severity cases, but fails at both ends of the spectrum — the cases where getting it right matters most,” Ramaswamy told Fox News Digital. “It under-triaged over half of genuine emergencies and over-triaged roughly two-thirds of mild cases that clinical guidelines say should be managed at home.”PARENTS FILE LAWSUIT ALLEGING CHATGPT HELPED THEIR TEENAGE SON PLAN SUICIDEUnder-triage can be life-threatening, the doctor noted, while over-triage can overwhelm emergency departments and delay care for those in real need.Researchers also identified inconsistencies in suicide risk alerts. In some cases, it directed users to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline in lower-risk scenarios, and in others, it failed to offer that recommendation even when a person discussed suicidal ideations.”The suicide guardrail failure was the most alarming,” study co-author Girish N. Nadkarni, MD, chief AI officer of the Mount Sinai Health System, told Fox News Digital.ChatGPT Health is designed to show a crisis intervention banner when someone describes thoughts of self-harm, the researcher noted.”We tested it with a 27-year-old patient who said he’d been thinking about taking a lot of pills,” Nadkarni shared. “When he described his symptoms alone, the banner appeared 100% of the time. Then we added normal lab results — same patient, same words, same severity — and the banner vanished.” “A safety feature that works perfectly in one context and completely fails in a nearly identical context … is a fundamental safety problem.”CHATGPT HEALTH PROMISES PRIVACY FOR HEALTH CONVERSATIONSThe researchers were also surprised by the social influence aspect.”When a family member in the scenario said ‘it’s nothing serious’ — which happens all the time in real life — the system became nearly 12 times more likely to downplay the patient’s symptoms,” Nadkarni said. “Everyone has a spouse or parent who tells them they’re overreacting. The AI shouldn’t be agreeing with them during a potential emergency.”Dr. Marc Siegel, Fox News senior medical analyst, called this an “important” study.”It underlines the principle that while large language models can triage clear-cut emergencies, they have much more trouble with nuanced situations,” Siegel, who was not involved in the study, told Fox News Digital. “This is where doctors and clinical judgment come in — knowing the nuances of a patient’s history and how they report symptoms and their approach to health.”ChatGPT and other LLMs can be helpful tools, Siegel said, but they “should not be used to give medical direction.””Machine learning and continued input of data can help, but will never compensate for the essential problem – human judgment is needed to decide whether something is a true emergency or not.”BREAKTHROUGH BLOOD TEST COULD SPOT DOZENS OF CANCERS BEFORE SYMPTOMS APPEARDr. Harvey Castro, an emergency physician and AI expert in Texas, echoed the importance of the study, calling it “exactly the kind of independent safety evaluation we need.””Innovation moves fast. Oversight has to move just as fast,” Castro, who also did not work on the study, told Fox News Digital. “In healthcare, the most dangerous mistakes happen at the extremes, when something looks mild but is actually catastrophic. That’s where clinical judgment matters most, and where AI must be stress-tested.”The researchers acknowledged some potential limitations in the study design.”We used physician-written clinical scenarios rather than real patient conversations, and we tested at a single point in time — these systems update frequently, so performance may change,” Ramaswamy told Fox News Digital.CLICK HERE FOR MORE HEALTH STORIESAdditionally, most of the missed emergencies happened in situations where the danger depended on how the condition is changing over time. It’s not clear whether the same problem would happen with acute medical emergencies.Because the system had to choose just one fixed urgency category, the test may not reflect the more nuanced advice it might give in a back-and-forth conversation, the researchers noted. Also, the study wasn’t large enough to confidently detect small differences in how recommendations might vary by race or gender.”We need continuous auditing, not one-time studies,” Castro noted. “These systems update frequently, so evaluation must be ongoing.”The researchers emphasized the importance of seeking immediate care for serious issues.CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER”If something feels seriously wrong — chest pain, difficulty breathing, a severe allergic reaction, thoughts of self-harm — go to the emergency department or call 988,” Ramaswamy advised. “Don’t wait for an AI to tell you it’s okay.”The researchers noted that they support the use of AI to improve healthcare access, and that they didn’t conduct the study to “tear down the technology.””These tools can be genuinely useful for the right things — understanding a diagnosis you’ve already received, looking up what your medications do and their side effects, or getting answers to questions that didn’t get fully addressed in a short doctor’s visit,” Ramaswamy said. “That’s a very different use case from deciding whether you need emergency care. Treat them as a complement to your doctor, not a replacement.”Castro agreed that the benefits of AI health tools should be weighed against the risks.”AI health tools can increase access, reduce unnecessary visits and empower patients with information,” he said. “They are not inherently unsafe, but they are not yet substitutes for clinical judgment.”TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ”This study doesn’t mean we abandon AI in healthcare,” he went on. “It means we mature it. Independent testing and stronger guardrails will determine whether AI becomes a safety net or a liability.”Fox News Digital reached out to Open AI, creator of ChatGPT, requesting comment.

The UK’s New Grooming Gang Scandal

Authored by Fraser Myers via The American Conservative,

In borderless Britain, it seems as if barely a day goes by without some monstrosity being committed by a migrant who should never have been in the country in the first place. The world is now familiar with the ongoing scandal of Britain’s predominantly Pakistani rape gangs. Yet what is also unfolding right now is a wave of brutal sexual violence committed by illegal arrivals, often asylum seekers from Afghanistan.

Take the case of Afghan national Ahmad Mulakhil, convicted last month for raping a 12-year-old girl in a park in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Alongside one count of rape, 23-year-old Mulakhil was also found guilty of child abduction, two counts of sexual assault, and taking indecent photos of a child. He had already confessed to a charge of oral rape. 

Mulakhil arrived in the UK illegally, crossing the English Channel from France in a small boat in July 2025. This being post-borders Britain, he was not detained or punished for this incursion. He was instead offered free accommodation and financial support, initially in Kent on England’s south coast, before he was relocated to Nuneaton, a quiet market town, where he was placed in social housing, at the taxpayers’ expense. Six weeks later, he approached his 12-year-old victim as she was playing on the swings in a park. His identity was confirmed when, after the attack, he went to purchase some cans of Red Bull in a nearby shop, using the preloaded debit card issued to him by the UK Home Office.

A few weeks later, just a few miles down the road in Leamington Spa, two Afghan 17-year-olds abducted a 15-year-old from a park, took her to a secluded area, and then raped her. Another Afghan illegal migrant raped a 15-year-old in broad daylight in Falkirk town center in Scotland in 2023. Sadeq Nikzad sought to defend himself by citing language barriers and “cultural differences.” These cases are barely the tip of the iceberg. You can open a newspaper on any day in Britain and expect to read about a gruesome crime committed by a small-boats migrant, more often than not from Afghanistan.

In a twisted way, the Falkirk rapist, Sadeq Nikzad, sort of had a point, even if the courts rightly rejected the notion that “cultural differences” were a reasonable defence. It is surely not for nothing that so many high-profile sex attacks in Britain are being committed by Afghans. Although data on the ethnicity and nationality of criminals are notoriously difficult to compile (made deliberately so by authorities beholden to political correctness), research by the Telegraph suggests that Afghan nationals are 20 times more likely to be convicted of a sexual offense than the average person in England and Wales. Afghans have the highest rate of sexual offending of all nationalities in the UK.

Should this really be a surprise? Of course, it would be wrong to tar every Afghan with the worst crimes imaginable. Yet it would be equally absurd to assume that Afghans shed their upbringings and cultural assumptions as soon as they arrive in Europe or on Britain’s shores. 

According to the Georgetown Institute’s Women, Peace and Security Index, Afghanistan ranks last out of 181 countries on almost every measure of women’s wellbeing, from the threat of partner violence to gender-based political persecution and women’s safety in general. Since the Taliban retook power in 2021, women have been relegated to below second-class status. The Islamic Republic of Iran looks like a feminist utopia by comparison. Women are forbidden from leaving the house without a male relative, and must be fully veiled when they do so. All girls are banned from attending school and one in three is forced into a child marriage. Rape is rampant. and, while men go unpunished, female victims can be prosecuted and punished for “adultery,” including by being stoned to death. To call this misogyny “medieval” is an insult to the actual medievals.

Britons who grew up in the 1990s, 2000s or 2010s will remember the “feminist” campaigns to ban the sale of soft pornography on in supermarkets and newsagents. The Sun, once Britain’s bestselling tabloid newspaper, used to feature a bare-breasted woman on “Page Three” every day. “Lads mags”—bawdy magazines for men—would feature topless models, sex tips, and lewd anecdotes. These relatively harmless, anodyne fixtures of British public life were regularly denounced by the great and the good as “proof” that the UK had a “rape culture.”

Yet now a very real “rape culture” has been imported from Afghanistan and is tearing through Britain. It is doing so with the connivance of the state, thanks to its porous borders combined with an overly generous interpretation of who should be deemed a refugee. Meanwhile, establishment feminists are either silent at best or at worst, happily complicit in the erosion of Britain’s borders and indifferent to the now-constant abuse of women and girls this has entailed. Any suggestion that thousands of young, unattached men from the most misogynistic nation on the planet might pose a non-negligible risk to women and girls is dismissed as “divisive,” “racist” and even “fascist.”

This is not to malign everyone who arrives from Afghanistan. Not only are there many genuinely deserving of asylum from their tyrannical government (women, for instance, though they are notable for their absence among small-boats arrivals); there are also many Afghans whom the British government specifically has a duty to protect. Following the U.S.-UK withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, many interpreters and others who supported the British war effort were left stranded as the Taliban retook Kabul. Worse, a UK Ministry of Defence data breach led to more than 250 of their names being made public, effectively handing the Taliban a kill list of traitors. Here the case for asylum seems inarguable. Such people were placed in immediate danger of death by the rank incompetence of the British state. And so the British state has a responsibility to protect them.

But what also seems inarguable is that the British state’s primary responsibility ought to be to protect its own citizens. Instead, our “compassionate,” “open-hearted” elites are rolling out the red carpet for tens of thousands of mostly male, young, totally unvetted illegal migrants arriving at random on the southern coast. As far as the establishment is concerned, those men are the real victims deserving of the state’s charity. The women and girls that are being on a horrifyingly regular basis are treated as mere collateral damage. 

Britain desperately needs a reckoning with the Afghan crime wave—and with the political leaders who have allowed and enabled it.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 03/02/2026 – 06:50