텔레그램 10분 핵심 원문 · 2026.10.09 10:00

[원문 유형] Tele-news 주요채널 텔레그램 원문 묶음
[범위] Tele-news 주요채널
[묶음 주기] 10분
[통합 구간] 2026-10-09T00:50:00+00:00 ~ 2026-10-09T01:00:00+00:00
[작성 기준] 아래 글은 서로 다른 채널·작성자의 독립 원문을 수송 편의상 하나의 시간 구간으로 묶은 것이다. 서로 다른 출처의 사실·판단·전망을 하나의 합의나 결론으로 합치지 말고 채널별 귀속을 보존한다. 같은 사건을 다루더라도 공통 이슈 키만 재사용하고, 출처별 사실·해석·반응·전망은 각각 남긴다. 외부 링크와 첨부는 실제 원문으로 사용하고, 텔레그램 문구는 발견 경로·보조 설명으로 구분한다. 시간흐름순 정리는 원문 게시 순서와 각 출처의 판단 강도·조건을 보존한다.

===== 통합 원문 1 / 9 =====
[채널] Macrotrader - 금융치료
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:51:03
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/slsyphus/10893
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
오픈AI 연환산 매출 관련 이슈 정리

: 오픈AI 9월 말 연환산 매출이 약 500억 달러라는 보도. 앞서 9월 29일 보도된 700억 달러 근접 수치보다 낮은 수준으로AI 수요 성장에 대한 우려 촉발

: 다만 차이의 원인은 매출 인식 방식. 앤스로픽과 오픈AI는 클라우드 파트너를 통한 판매 매출을 다른 방식으로 인식

→ 앤스로픽은 클라우드 파트너 판매액 전체를 매출 인식하는 Gross 방식

→ 오픈AI는 일부 파트너(Azure) 판매에서 자사 귀속분만 인식하는 Net 방식. 다만 오픈AI의 모든 클라우드 파트너에 동일한 방식이 적용되는지는 확인되지 않음

: 차이는 올 초 연환산 매출 비교 과정에서 이미 알려진 내용이며, 기존 보도된 오픈AI의 7월 약 400억 달러와 9월 약 700억 달러는 두 기업을 동일 기준으로 비교하려는 투자자들의 조정 과정에서 산출(Gross 기준 조정치)

: 9월 수치는 후속 보도에서 약 680억 달러로 구체화

: 오픈AI 투자자 자료에 제시된 Net 기준 연환산 매출은 7월 약 300억 달러, 9월 약 500억 달러

Gross / Net
→ 7월 400억 달러 / 300억 달러
→ 9월 680(700)억 달러 / 500억 달러

: 7월 대비 9월 매출 성장률은 Net +67%, Gross + 70%. Gross 대비 Net 매출 차이는 7월 25%, 9월 약 26%

(3분기 전체 연환산 매출 성장률 +77%, 엔터프라이즈 부문 +107% 보도)

: 4월 오픈AI CRO 데니스 드레서는 내부 메모에서 앤스로픽 매출이 클라우드 파트너 수익배분을 Gross로 인식하면서 부풀려졌다고 주장

: 당시 앤스로픽 연환산 매출 300억 달러 중 80억 달러가 회계처리 방식에 따른 차이이며, Net 기준으로는 약 220억 달러라는 설명. Gross 대비 차이 26.7%로 유사

(참고) 오픈AI의 Net 기준 연환산 매출 추이
2월 말 250억 달러
7월 약 300억 달러
9월 말 약 500억 달러

https://t.me/Samsung_Global_AI_SW

===== 통합 원문 2 / 9 =====
[채널] Donald J. Trump 🇺🇸
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:51:46
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/realDonaldTrump_en/11028
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
🗽👀 How Trump defied the ‘experts’ — and pushed the UN toward post-Oct. 7 peace: https://nypost.com/2026/10/08/opinion/how-trump-defied-the-experts-and-pushed-the-un-to-post-oct-7-peace/ truthsocial.com
[truthsocial.com] https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/117408209620927226

[외부 원문 1]
[URL] https://nypost.com/2026/10/08/opinion/how-trump-defied-the-experts-and-pushed-the-un-to-post-oct-7-peace/

[제목] How Trump defied the ‘experts’ — and pushed the UN toward post-Oct. 7 peace

President Trump addresses the United Nations General Assembly in New York City on Sept. 23, 2026. ZUMAPRESS.com
Pure evil.
There were no other words I could conjure on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas terrorists murdered 1,200 innocents, raped an untold number, ravaged entire villages in southern Israel and took 251 hostages back to Gaza — including American citizens, women, children and the elderly.
Three years later, the terrorists and their Iranian patrons have definitively failed.
The hostages are home.
The Abraham Accords are accelerating.
Regional partners are helping shape Gaza’s future.
And thanks to President Donald Trump, the same United Natons that was part of the problem in 2023 now has an opportunity — indeed, a mandate — to be part of the solution.
The UN’s moral inversion in the wake of Oct. 7 was surreal.
Senior leaders trafficked in caveats, equivocation, legitimization and delay — all while failing to rein in the special rapporteurs whose “independent expertise” they routinely invoke.
Take Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinan territories who rationalized Oct.

7 as a response to Israeli “oppression” — then used her UN role to target American companies like Microsoft, Caterpillar and Palantir for doing business in Israel.
Or consider Reem Alsalem, the rapporteur charged with combating violence against women, who denied that rape even occurred during the Hamas onslaught.
Special Rapporteur Tlaleng Mofokeng, ostensibly focused on health, declared that “Hamas are not terrorists” and defended the legitimacy of its “armed struggle,” while other rapporteurs led demands for arms embargoes, economic blockades and sanctions against Israel.
All this after employees from UNRWA (the UN agency entrusted with aiding Palestinians) participated in the horrors of Oct. 7.
This was the moral absurdity: While innocent hostages from Israel and roughly 25 other UN member states were still being starved and beaten underground in Gaza, parts of the institution founded to promote peace and human rights were parroting Hamas’ talking points and denying the nature of the atrocities.
They falsely attacked Israel and its partners, and confidently predicted that the regional peace architecture President Trump had built would collapse.

The world’s “experts” were wrong about all of it.
They were poor historians, but even worse prophets: The Abraham Accords survived Oct. 7, the Gaza war and the conflict with Iran.
Better yet, they are still expanding.
Get opinions and commentary from our columnists
Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter!
Thanks for signing up!
Hamas and its Iranian backers were wrong, too.
The Oct. 7 attacks were meant to fracture Israel from the region and breathe new life into Tehran’s Axis of Terror.
They backfired spectacularly: New governments in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq are casting off the Iranian yoke and turning Westward, and Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” is in shambles.
Just this summer I visited various allies in the Gulf.
At the height of the conflict with Iran, I sat in a restaurant in Abu Dhabi and heard Hebrew from diners at nearby tables — while Israeli Iron Dome batteries and personnel were helping defend Emirati skies from Iranian missiles.
A generation ago, that scene would have been impossible.
The same might be said of our efforts here at the UN, where we just convened members of the Abraham Accords for their first reunion since the first Trump administration.

The next day we hosted a ministerial summit between Morocco and Israel , where the two nations agreed to expand direct flights, elevate their diplomatic missions to embassies and move forward on new investment and tax agreements.
Those once-unlikely regional partnerships have given us a way forward in Gaza, where it once seemed there were only two options — Hamas could rule Gaza and continue its terror, or the IDF could stay in Gaza indefinitely.
President Trump put forward a third option: bring the hostages home, keep Hamas out of government, demilitarize Gaza, establish a technocratic Palestinian administration and bring Arab and international partners along for security and reconstruction.
We took that to the United Nations, where Security Council Resolution 2803 passed without opposition.
It endorsed the president’s plan, welcomed the Board of Peace and authorized an International Stabilization Force to secure Gaza, support vetted Palestinian police, protect civilians and humanitarian operations and prevent terrorist infrastructure from being rebuilt.
The results are now measurable.
All 251 hostages are home, and the cease-fire, while tenuous, has held.

The Board of Peace has 28 member countries, the ISF has completed its pre-deployment assessment and $17 billion has been pledged for reconstruction.
Much work remains, including the full decommissioning of Hamas and other armed groups — but there is now a framework where none existed before.
Oct. 7 was meant to destroy the possibility of a different Middle East.
Many within the UN accepted that premise; some even propagated it — staining the good work that can be done under its auspices.
In the 1,096 days that followed, President Trump has proved those voices wrong at every turn, corralling even naysaying institutions like the UN to advance what was once thought impossible in the Middle East: peace.
Mike Waltz is the US ambassador to the United Nations.

[외부 원문 2]
[URL] https://nypost.com/2026/10/08/opinion/how-trump-defied-the-experts-and-pushed-the-un-to-post-oct-7-peace/
[제목] How Trump defied the ‘experts’ — and pushed the UN toward post-Oct. 7 peace

President Trump addresses the United Nations General Assembly in New York City on Sept. 23, 2026. ZUMAPRESS.com
Pure evil.
There were no other words I could conjure on Oct.

7, 2023, when Hamas terrorists murdered 1,200 innocents, raped an untold number, ravaged entire villages in southern Israel and took 251 hostages back to Gaza — including American citizens, women, children and the elderly.
Three years later, the terrorists and their Iranian patrons have definitively failed.
The hostages are home.
The Abraham Accords are accelerating.
Regional partners are helping shape Gaza’s future.
And thanks to President Donald Trump, the same United Natons that was part of the problem in 2023 now has an opportunity — indeed, a mandate — to be part of the solution.
The UN’s moral inversion in the wake of Oct. 7 was surreal.
Senior leaders trafficked in caveats, equivocation, legitimization and delay — all while failing to rein in the special rapporteurs whose “independent expertise” they routinely invoke.
Take Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinan territories who rationalized Oct. 7 as a response to Israeli “oppression” — then used her UN role to target American companies like Microsoft, Caterpillar and Palantir for doing business in Israel.

Or consider Reem Alsalem, the rapporteur charged with combating violence against women, who denied that rape even occurred during the Hamas onslaught.
Special Rapporteur Tlaleng Mofokeng, ostensibly focused on health, declared that “Hamas are not terrorists” and defended the legitimacy of its “armed struggle,” while other rapporteurs led demands for arms embargoes, economic blockades and sanctions against Israel.
All this after employees from UNRWA (the UN agency entrusted with aiding Palestinians) participated in the horrors of Oct. 7.
This was the moral absurdity: While innocent hostages from Israel and roughly 25 other UN member states were still being starved and beaten underground in Gaza, parts of the institution founded to promote peace and human rights were parroting Hamas’ talking points and denying the nature of the atrocities.
They falsely attacked Israel and its partners, and confidently predicted that the regional peace architecture President Trump had built would collapse.
The world’s “experts” were wrong about all of it.
They were poor historians, but even worse prophets: The Abraham Accords survived Oct.

7, the Gaza war and the conflict with Iran.
Better yet, they are still expanding.
Get opinions and commentary from our columnists
Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter!
Thanks for signing up!
Hamas and its Iranian backers were wrong, too.
The Oct. 7 attacks were meant to fracture Israel from the region and breathe new life into Tehran’s Axis of Terror.
They backfired spectacularly: New governments in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq are casting off the Iranian yoke and turning Westward, and Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” is in shambles.
Just this summer I visited various allies in the Gulf.
At the height of the conflict with Iran, I sat in a restaurant in Abu Dhabi and heard Hebrew from diners at nearby tables — while Israeli Iron Dome batteries and personnel were helping defend Emirati skies from Iranian missiles.
A generation ago, that scene would have been impossible.
The same might be said of our efforts here at the UN, where we just convened members of the Abraham Accords for their first reunion since the first Trump administration.
The next day we hosted a ministerial summit between Morocco and Israel , where the two nations agreed to expand direct flights, elevate their diplomatic missions to embassies and move forward on new investment and tax agreements.

Those once-unlikely regional partnerships have given us a way forward in Gaza, where it once seemed there were only two options — Hamas could rule Gaza and continue its terror, or the IDF could stay in Gaza indefinitely.
President Trump put forward a third option: bring the hostages home, keep Hamas out of government, demilitarize Gaza, establish a technocratic Palestinian administration and bring Arab and international partners along for security and reconstruction.
We took that to the United Nations, where Security Council Resolution 2803 passed without opposition.
It endorsed the president’s plan, welcomed the Board of Peace and authorized an International Stabilization Force to secure Gaza, support vetted Palestinian police, protect civilians and humanitarian operations and prevent terrorist infrastructure from being rebuilt.
The results are now measurable.
All 251 hostages are home, and the cease-fire, while tenuous, has held.
The Board of Peace has 28 member countries, the ISF has completed its pre-deployment assessment and $17 billion has been pledged for reconstruction.
Much work remains, including the full decommissioning of Hamas and other armed groups — but there is now a framework where none existed before.

Oct. 7 was meant to destroy the possibility of a different Middle East.
Many within the UN accepted that premise; some even propagated it — staining the good work that can be done under its auspices.
In the 1,096 days that followed, President Trump has proved those voices wrong at every turn, corralling even naysaying institutions like the UN to advance what was once thought impossible in the Middle East: peace.
Mike Waltz is the US ambassador to the United Nations.

===== 통합 원문 3 / 9 =====
[채널] Korean Alpha
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:52:23
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/korean_alpha/883734
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[연계된 텔레그램 원문]
[원문 게시물] https://t.me/korean_alpha/883667
Ethos

세일 진행했던 WHUF 토큰은
⏰ 10월 9일 00시 자동 언락 진행될 예정

Coinbase Spot 예정되어 있음

CA : 0xeeee77bC7e82c0d4166d52F58239D4c5Bf41eeee

퍼블릭 토큰 세일가 : $4.2 (FDV 42M)
초기 유통량 : 약 23.5%
체인 : BASE
😄 https://x.com/ethos_network

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
Ethos, $WHUF 근황

세일가 : $4.2 ㅠㅠ

[외부 원문 1]
[URL] https://x.com/ethos_network
[제목] Ethos (@ethos_network) on X

[첨부 보고서 원문]
[상세 페이지] https://x.com/ethos_network

[PDF 원문] https://ethos-foundation.org/disclosures.pdf
[파일명] disclosures.pdf
[페이지 수] 5

[PDF 1페이지]
Ethos Network — $WHUF Standardized Disclosures — September 2026 — page 1
Standardized Disclosures
Ethos Network — $WHUF Token
September 2026
The following disclosure is intended to provide an overview of the
Ethos protocol, the $WHUF token, and the terms on which $WHUF
was sold. It does not purport to be complete or to contain all the
information a person may consider relevant in deciding whether to
acquire, hold, or use $WHUF. Nothing in this disclosure should be
read as a statement about the future of the Ethos protocol or the price
or performance of the $WHUF token. Please read Section 9 (Risks)
carefully.
Table of contents
1. Project information
2. Token information
3. Token distribution
4. Airdrop
5. Token sale information
6. Conflicts of interest
7. Market makers and liquidity
8. Security
9. Risks
1 The content in this disclosure has been provided by Ethos Token Ltd., a British
Virgin Islands company and wholly owned subsidiary of the Ethos Foundation
(Cayman Islands), which conducted the $WHUF token sale, and is for general

informational purposes only. Ethos Token Ltd. is not affiliated with Coinbase,
Inc. or any of its affiliates, and Coinbase is not responsible for the content of this
disclosure. Coinbase does not make any representations or warranties, express or
implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the information
provided, including any external links to third-party content, and Coinbase is not
liable for any errors in the content or for any actions taken in reliance on this
content.
1. Project information
Ethos Network is an onchain reputation protocol on Base
(Ethereum L2). It lets people build verifiable reputations the same
way they would offline — through the vouches of others — but
with economic weight behind every signal. Users stake tokens to
vouch for people they trust, write public reviews of any wallet
address, and link their social identities to their onchain accounts. If
someone vouches for a bad actor, their staked tokens can be
slashed, so trust signals are expensive to fake. The result is a public
credibility graph that anyone — traders, communities, applications

— can use to judge whether a counterparty is trustworthy before
transacting with them. The protocol has been live since January
2025. Traction: 500,000 unique monthly website visitors; 10,000
monthly active users of the Ethos Chrome extension (showing
Ethos scores directly in X, Farcaster, and other apps); 8,000
monthly active contributors (~3,000 daily); 55,000 total vouches
(min 0.01 ETH); 40,000+ accounts and 700,000+ onchain reviews.
Executive officers, directors, and material contributors
• Trevor Thompson — Co-Founder and CEO, Ethos Network Inc.
(“Ethos Labs”, the development company)
• Benjamin Walther — Co-Founder and CTO, Ethos Network Inc.
• Dzidzai Shaun Musuka — Director, Ethos Foundation (Cayman
Islands, IC-434955) and Ethos Token Ltd. (BVI, no. 2209979)
• Miro Kirov — Designer, Ethos Labs
• Sean Waters — Development, Ethos Labs
• Seth Gholson — Development, Ethos Labs
• Vitalii Saienko — Development, Ethos Labs
Entities
The Ethos Foundation, a memberless Cayman Islands foundation
company with a sole independent director, owns the protocol IP
and stewards the network.

Ethos Token Ltd., a BVI company
wholly owned by the Foundation, conducted the token sale and is
the counterparty to sale participants under the Token Sale Terms &
Conditions. Ethos Network Inc. (Delaware) is the development
company, engaged by the Foundation under a Master Services
Agreement (Section 6). Ethos Network Inc. holds no equity in the
Foundation and no board seat.
Third parties and affiliates contributing materially to
the protocol and/or token
None. The protocol and the $WHUF token contract were designed
and developed in-house by Ethos Network Inc. under its services
agreement with the Ethos Foundation; no third-party development
shop or contractor designed the token. Security audits were
performed by Guardian and Sherlock (Section 8).
2. Token information
Purpose and utility. $WHUF is the native asset of the Ethos
reputation protocol: it is staked to vouch for other participants
(with slashing risk); reputation markets are denominated in
$WHUF, which is required to trade on a participant’s reputation;
protocol
fees
(attestations,
vouch
initiation,
comments,
upvotes/downvotes, and other interactions) are paid in $WHUF;

human verification requires $WHUF to process; and active
vouchers earn $WHUF from the contributor rewards pool. All of
these utilities are live. $WHUF-based vouching is live (replacing
the ETH-based vouching in operation since January 2025).
$WHUF-denominated reputation market trading pairs go live on
October 8, 2026, when tokens become transferable. No other token
changes are planned.
Rights; distinction from equity. The token confers no ownership,
voting, dividend, profit-sharing, or governance rights in any entity,
and no entitlement to protocol revenue — protocol fees, including
fees on reputation markets, are burned, not distributed. Equity
holders of Ethos Network Inc. hold conventional shareholder rights
in the development company and receive nothing by virtue of the
token; token holders receive protocol utility only. The only
economic mechanics are the deflationary fee burn and the utility
demand created by vouching, fees, and rewards.
Token dynamics

[PDF 2페이지]
Ethos Network — $WHUF Standardized Disclosures — September 2026 — page 2
• Circulating supply at launch: all sale and bonus tokens were

distributed at TGE (September 8, 2026) but locked while the
30-day price guarantee window runs; they become transferable
when it closes on October 8, 2026 — effectively “day 0” of the
token’s tradeable life, at which point the float is approximately
23.5% of supply (sale 20% + bonus 1.39% + Treasury liquidity
2%, after the TGE burn). The lock on sale and bonus tokens is
enforced by the token contract: following a contract upgrade
executed on September 28, 2026 (Section 8), the addresses of all
sale and bonus recipients are recorded in a publicly verifiable,
append-only
on-chain
lock
list
(WhuffieLockList,
0x740466F2d7cAc4661f00aaB4Cb05a12ae198651b; addresses
can be added only by the EthosOwner 3-of-5 multi-sig and there
is no function to remove one) and cannot transfer until October
8, 2026 at 15:00 UTC, when the lock releases automatically by
hard-coded timestamp. Foundation-controlled allocations are
not subject to this lock; the Treasury liquidity allocation (2%) is
delivered to the market makers ahead of the trading start under
the loan agreements in Section 7, so that liquidity is in place

from the first trade. Those tokens are counted in the day-0 float
above.
• Total supply: 10,000,000 $WHUF minted at genesis; 60,530.73
unawarded referral-bonus tokens were burned in the genesis
transaction, leaving 9,939,469.27 $WHUF. Supply is fixed; no
minting function exists.
• Deflationary mechanics: protocol fees are burned (standard
ERC-20 burn, contract-enforced, automated). No inflationary
mechanics.
• Issuance over time: fixed at deployment; contributor rewards
use a continuous exponential decay model (emission rate
proportional to remaining pool balance), enforced at the
smart-contract level via the EthosRewards contract. The
Foundation can adjust the emission-rate parameter but cannot
exceed 100% of the remaining pool per year.
• Future issuances: none anticipated. No new token launches are
planned.
3. Token distribution
Category
% of
genesis
supply
Tokens
Unlock schedule
Token Sale
20.00%
2,000,000
Contract-locked for 30 days from
TGE; transferable October 8, 2026
(15:00 UTC)
XP, Validator &
Referral Bonus
(awarded)
1.39%
139,469
Contract-locked with sale tokens;
transferable October 8, 2026

(15:00 UTC)
Team
28.94%
2,894,000
12-month cliff (25% unlocks at
cliff), then monthly unlocks over
36 months (48 months total)
Early Supporters
11.06%
1,106,000
6-month cliff (25% unlocks at
cliff), then monthly unlocks over
18 months
Treasury
10.00%
1,000,000
8% (800,000): 12-month cliff,
then monthly over 24 months; 2%
(200,000) liquidity portion, loaned
to market makers and delivered
ahead of the October 8, 2026
trading start (Section 7)
Category
% of
genesis
supply
Tokens
Unlock schedule
Ecosystem
Development
5.00%
500,000
Foundation discretion; no more
than 10% of the pool in the first 12
months, remainder approximately
linear thereafter
Bounties
5.00%
500,000
Foundation discretion; released as
bounty programs are awarded; no
more than 10% of the pool in the
first 12 months
Contributor Rewards
18.00%
1,800,000
Continuous exponential decay
emission (rate proportional to
remaining pool), enforced by the
EthosRewards contract
Burned at TGE
(unawarded referral
bonus)
0.61%
60,531
Permanently removed from
supply, September 8, 2026
Total (genesis)
100.00%
10,000,000
Supply after burn: 9,939,469

Estimated token release schedule
The chart below shows the estimated cumulative released supply
by category over the 48 months following TGE, based on the
unlock schedules above and the contract-enforced contributor
rewards emission curve. Bounties and Ecosystem Development are
shown at their scheduled or assumed pace and are released only as
programs are awarded. Actual released supply will be lower to the
extent protocol fees are burned.
• Unlocked at day 0 (October 8, 2026): approximately 2,339,469
$WHUF (23.5%) — sale, awarded bonus, and Treasury
liquidity. All other allocations are locked for at least six months
(Early Supporters) or twelve months (Team, Treasury core),
with all scheduled unlocks complete by September 2030.
• Staking of locked tokens: locked and unvested tokens are not
eligible for staking (vouching). Only unlocked tokens can be
vouched and earn contributor rewards.
• Vesting enforcement: locked and vesting allocations are
custodied in dedicated 3-of-5 Safe multi-sigs per category under
the
Ethos
Foundation’s
Treasury,
Custody
and
Key
Management Policy.

Vesting is administered by the Foundation,
which releases unlocked tokens from the relevant multi-sig on a
monthly basis in accordance with the published schedule; no
tokens can be released ahead of schedule without a Foundation

[PDF 3페이지]
Ethos Network — $WHUF Standardized Disclosures — September 2026 — page 3
board resolution. Exception: Contributor Rewards tokens are
held and emitted directly by the EthosRewards smart contract
— no separate Safe or multisig.
• Insider benefit from Foundation allocations: Ecosystem
Development and Bounties allocations are at Foundation
discretion for ecosystem grants and contributor bounties. The
Foundation does not intend to distribute more than 10% of
either the Ecosystem Development pool or the Bounties pool
(50,000 $WHUF each) in the first 12 months following TGE.
These allocations do not fund salaries or ongoing development
that benefits the team. Team members and employees are not
eligible for Ecosystem Development or Bounties distributions.
• Treasury (8% locked portion) funds long-term protocol
stewardship by the Foundation; the 2% liquidity portion is

loaned to the market makers disclosed in Section 7 and
delivered to them ahead of the October 8, 2026 trading start, as
required by the loan agreements.
Prior funding rounds
• Pre-seed (equity, Ethos Network Inc.) — April 2024 —
~US$2.3M
• Seed (equity, Ethos Network Inc.) — May 2025 — ~US$2M
• Both equity rounds were wholly private placements; all
investors were accredited. Pre-seed and seed investors received
token grants from the Early Supporters allocation (11.06% of
supply), subject to a 6-month cliff (25% unlocks at the cliff) and
monthly unlocks over the following 18 months. Sale
participation by any such investor was on the same public terms
as all other bidders.
• Public token sale — September 1–4, 2026 — US$8.4M:
2,000,000 $WHUF (20% of supply) sold via English auction on
Sonar at a uniform clearing price of US$4.20/token (US$42M
FDV) to 1,404 KYC-verified wallets globally (Section 5).
Payments or grants in tokens to any entity associated with a
centralized exchange: none.
4. Airdrop
There is no airdrop. The project distributed bonus tokens
exclusively to sale participants through two mechanisms, both of

which required capital commitment in the auction and are not free
distributions:
• XP Bonus Pool (1% of supply, 100,000 tokens): sale
participants who accumulated meaningful XP through genuine
protocol contribution received a pro-rata bonus determined by
the formula: bonus = (purchase × XP^0.1) / total_weights ×
pool_value. Capital commitment is the dominant factor; XP
provides a meaningful but modest edge. A minimum XP
threshold ensured only users with genuine contribution history
were eligible. Additionally, wallets holding Ethos Validator
NFTs that participated in the sale received a base bonus
allocation from the same pool. Sale participation (and therefore
Sonar KYC/sanctions screening) was required.
• Referral Bonus Pool (1% of supply, 100,000 tokens): sale
participants who referred new bidders received a bonus equal to
a percentage of the referred person’s settled purchase amount,
paid in $WHUF at clearing price. Bonuses were paid only where
both the referrer’s and the referred person’s bids cleared;
refunded bids generated no referral bonus in either direction.
The percentage was determined by the referred person’s Ethos

score at auction close (scores below 1,300 earned no bonus;
rates scaled continuously from 3% at 1,300 to 10% for scores of
2,000 and above). A participant had to place a bid (minimum
$100 USDC) before receiving a referral link. Single-layer only
— no multi-level chains.
Both pools were subsets of the 2% Bonus Pool allocation (200,000
tokens) at genesis, split evenly between XP/Validator and Referral.
Distribution occurred at TGE; tokens become transferable with the
sale tokens when the 30-day price guarantee window closes. There
is no separate claim process. Neither mechanism constitutes an
airdrop: both required capital commitment in the auction, and all
recipients passed Sonar’s KYC and sanctions screening.
Outcome at TGE. The XP and Validator bonuses used the full
100,000 tokens. Referral bonuses awarded totalled 39,469.27
tokens; the unawarded balance of the referral pool, 60,530.73
tokens (0.61% of genesis supply), was minted to the Foundation
and burned in the same genesis transaction on September 8, 2026,
consistent with the protocol’s policy of removing unallocated and
fee tokens from supply rather than retaining them.

Total supply
after the burn is 9,939,469.27 $WHUF; no further minting is
possible.
5. Token sale information
A public token sale was conducted September 1–4, 2026 as an
English auction via Sonar and settled at a uniform clearing price of
US$4.20/token (US$42M FDV): 2,000,000 tokens (20% of supply)
sold for US$8.4M to 1,404 wallets; TGE September 8, 2026;
tokens unlock October 8, 2026.
• Sale opening and close: September 1, 2026 13:00 UTC to
September 4, 2026 17:00 UTC.
• Size and price: 2,000,000 tokens (20% of supply); uniform
clearing price determined by competitive bidding; price floor
US$0.10/token
(US$1M
FDV);
maximum
price
cap
US$9.90/token (US$99M FDV). Minimum bid US$100 USDC.
Clearing price US$4.20/token.
• Determination of price: every successful bidder paid the same
clearing price regardless of their maximum bid. The clearing
price is the highest price at which cumulative demand filled the
2,000,000 tokens offered.
• Jurisdictions: open to KYC-verified participants globally,
excluding OFAC-sanctioned jurisdictions and China. US
persons were not excluded; the token was offered strictly as a

non-security in the sale on Sonar.
• Oversubscription: bids at or above the clearing price were filled
in full except at the marginal price tier, where allocation was
first-come, first-served by bid time; bids below the clearing
price were refunded in full. The auction did not clear at the cap.
• Restrictions on tokens sold: tokens were distributed at TGE but
locked; they become transferable when the 30-day price
guarantee window closes. Purchasers who vouch their tokens
within that window are eligible for a price guarantee: 85% of
purchase price (US$3.57/token at the US$4.20 clearing price;
the 90% tier applied only if the auction had cleared at or above
US$75M FDV and was not triggered). Redeemable October 8,
2026 – October 8, 2027 (USDC settlement via Ethos Token

[PDF 4페이지]
Ethos Network — $WHUF Standardized Disclosures — September 2026 — page 4
Ltd., the sale entity and a subsidiary of the Ethos Foundation,
off-market); participants may unstake at any time, which forfeits
the guarantee on the unstaked tokens.
6. Conflicts of interest
The Ethos Foundation has entered into a Master Services

Agreement and Statement of Work No. 1 (both dated July 27,
2026) with Ethos Network Inc. (the development company) for
protocol development, operation and maintenance, on a cost-plus
basis (documented cost base plus a 10% service margin; third-party
costs reimbursed at cost). No compensation under this agreement is
paid in tokens; all compensation is in fiat/USDC. Trevor
Thompson is CEO of Ethos Network Inc. and a co-founder; the
agreement was approved by the Foundation’s independent board.
There are no other related-party transactions involving the token or
equity between entities in the corporate structure (Ethos
Foundation, Ethos Token Ltd., or Ethos Network Inc.). Corporate
services agreements exist with registered-office providers (ICS
Ltd. in Cayman; Harkom Corporate Services Limited in BVI) in
the ordinary course.
7. Market makers and liquidity
The Ethos Foundation has entered into token loan agreements with
the following market makers, with the following loan sizes and
durations.
Contracted market
maker
Loan size
(WHUF)
% of
supply
Duration of
loan
Structure
GSR
100,000

1.0%
18 months
Token loan
Tophash Digital
100,000
1.0%
12 months
Token loan
Both loans are drawn from the Treasury liquidity allocation (2% of
supply) disclosed in Section 3 and are delivered to the market
makers before trading begins on October 8, 2026 (made possible
by the transfer-lock upgrade described in Sections 3 and 8). Tokens
are returned at the end of each loan term. GSR provides liquidity
on centralized exchange trading pairs; Tophash Digital provides
liquidity on centralized exchange trading pairs and on Base
decentralized
exchange
pools.
No
other
market-making
arrangements exist, no cash retainers are paid, and no tokens have
been sold to market makers at a discount. The previously
contemplated Arrakis DEX vault arrangement was not entered into.
8. Security
• Previous incidents: none. The protocol has operated on Base
since January 2025 with no hacks or security incidents
involving the protocol or its contracts.
• Audits: the upgraded Ethos protocol contracts, including the
$WHUF token contract (EthosWhuffie.sol), have been audited
by Guardian (audit window June 9–25, 2026; final report July 9,

2026). Results: 0 Critical, 0 High, 5 Medium (3 resolved, 2
acknowledged), 17 Low, 34 Informational across 28 contracts
and 2,227 SLOC. Confidence ranking: 4/5 (High Confidence).
The
full
audit
report
is
published
at
https://ethos-foundation.org/audit/2026-07-09.pdf.
Earlier
protocol versions passed three Sherlock audit competitions
(November–December 2024) and an ongoing bug bounty
program is in place.
• Transfer-lock upgrade (September 2026): the token contract’s
original all-or-nothing transfer lock was replaced with a
per-account lock bound to a non-upgradeable, append-only lock
list
(WhuffieLockList,
0x740466F2d7cAc4661f00aaB4Cb05a12ae198651b, owned by
the EthosOwner multi-sig) so that market-maker inventory can
be delivered before trading starts while sale and bonus tokens
remain locked until October 8, 2026 at 15:00 UTC; the unlock is
automatic at that timestamp and the owner multi-sig can only
unlock earlier, never later. The change (EthosWhuffie.sol,
WhuffieLockList.sol and related interface/error files, 70 SLOC,
commit 92f8e0424235) was reviewed by Guardian on

September 25, 2026: 0 Critical, 0 High, 0 Medium, 0 Low, 5
Informational (all acknowledged); confidence ranking 5/5 (Very
High). Report: https://github.com/GuardianAudits/Audits/blob/
main/Ethos%20Network/2026-09-25_Ethos_Network_WHUF_
Transfer_Lock.pdf. The upgrade was executed by the
EthosOwner 3-of-5 multi-sig on September 28, 2026 (tx 0xe9e4
81580315d64f87f7f5669bc3015a64475023a0171b1a16404a244
6b9949a);
the
new
implementation
is
0xc18b56EBEecE70628945C6bB02313f81a62695E6.
•

Token
contract:
0xeeee77bC7e82c0d4166d52F58239D4c5Bf41eeee
(Base).
Standard ERC-20, 10,000,000 minted at genesis (9,939,469.27
after the TGE burn), fixed supply, no minting function, standard
burn function. No transfer tax or rebasing at the token level.
Transfers from sale and bonus recipient addresses are
contract-locked until October 8, 2026 at 15:00 UTC (see
Transfer-lock upgrade above); vouching, unvouching and
protocol fee payments remain available to locked holders.
• Protocol permissions: contract roles are held by dedicated Safe
multi-sigs on Base. EthosOwner (3-of-5) holds the contract

owner role — contract upgrades, critical parameter changes, and
ownership
transfers
require
three
of
five
signatures.
EthosAdmin (3-of-5) is limited to operational actions:
pause/unpause, invite management, and non-critical parameters.
Allocation wallets are 3-of-5 Safe multi-sigs with a documented
signer registry and hardware-wallet security policies (except
Contributor Rewards, which are held and emitted by the
EthosRewards contract directly).
• No single key can mint tokens, redirect fees, or seize user
balances: minting does not exist in the token contract, fees are
burned by contract, and no administrative role can transfer
tokens held by users.
9. Risks
Key risks relating to the token sale, the Ethos Foundation and its
affiliates (including Ethos Token Ltd. and Ethos Network Inc.), the
$WHUF token, and the underlying technology include the
following. This list is not exhaustive.
Sale- and market-related risks
• Market volatility: $WHUF may experience significant price
volatility, particularly after the October 8, 2026 unlock. The
30-day lock and low initial float (~23.5%) may amplify early

price movements. No assurance is given as to any future price,
liquidity, or market for the token.
• Liquidity risk: the ability to buy or sell $WHUF depends on
trading activity on centralized and decentralized exchanges.

[PDF 5페이지]
Ethos Network — $WHUF Standardized Disclosures — September 2026 — page 5
Limited liquidity may make it difficult to execute trades without
significant price impact. The market-making arrangements in
Section 7 are not guarantees of liquidity and may be terminated.
• Listing and delisting risk: any exchange listing of $WHUF is at
the exchange's discretion, and there is no guarantee that a
listing, once obtained, will be maintained. Delisting could
materially reduce the ability to trade the token.
• Trading platform and exchange insolvency risk: neither the
Foundation nor Ethos Token Ltd. operates, controls, or is a
party to transactions on any exchange. Exchanges may suspend
trading, become insolvent, or cease operations, potentially
resulting in loss of access to tokens.
• Price guarantee program risk: the price guarantee (85% of
purchase price, US$3.57/token) is a contractual repurchase right

against Ethos Token Ltd., a subsidiary of the Ethos Foundation,
and depends on that entity maintaining sufficient USDC
reserves. It is conditional on continuous vouching (forfeited by
unvouching, reduced by slashing), is time-limited to October 8,
2027, and settlement may take up to 30 days. It is not a market
guarantee, is not insurance, and carries counterparty risk.
Entity-related risks
• Early-stage entities: the Ethos Foundation and Ethos Token Ltd.
were established in 2026. There is no assurance that either will
continue operating successfully or deliver its planned
contributions to the protocol.
• Regulatory and legal risk: the legal characterization of $WHUF
and of the price guarantee under securities, commodities, or
consumer-protection laws is uncertain and may differ across
jurisdictions. Adverse regulatory action, enforcement, licensing
requirements, or changes in law affecting the Ethos Foundation
(Cayman), Ethos Token Ltd. (BVI), or Ethos Network Inc. (US)
could require changes to structure or operations, affect the
token’s distribution or exchange availability, or restrict its use in

particular jurisdictions. A MiCA-format whitepaper has been
notified in connection with EU availability; the token may be
treated differently by other regulators.
• Operational and financial risk: failures in the entities’ internal
processes, personnel, key management, or reserves could
disrupt token operations, the price guarantee, or the release of
locked allocations.
• Key-person and dependency risk: the protocol operates
autonomously onchain, but front-end development, ecosystem
support, and Foundation administration currently rely on a small
team at Ethos Labs and a sole Foundation director.
• Reputational risk: negative publicity, alleged misconduct, or
security incidents could damage confidence in the protocol and
reduce adoption.
Token- and technology-related risks
• No rights against any entity: $WHUF does not represent
ownership of, or an interest in, the Ethos Foundation, Ethos
Token Ltd., Ethos Network Inc., or any other entity, and (other
than the contractual price guarantee held by eligible sale
participants) creates no contractual relationship between any
holder and any entity.

• Smart contract risk: bugs or vulnerabilities in the token or
protocol contracts (vouching, slashing, rewards emission,
reputation markets, verification bonds) could result in loss of
staked
tokens
or
manipulation
of
reputation
data,
notwithstanding audits. Audits are point-in-time reviews and
may not detect novel attack vectors, economic exploits, or
issues introduced by future upgrades. Contracts are upgradeable
via a 3-of-5 multi-sig; compromise or loss of signer keys is a
risk mitigated but not eliminated by thresholds and
key-management policy.
• Slashing risk: vouched tokens are intentionally at risk — users
who vouch for bad actors can lose part of their stake. This is a
design feature with real financial consequences for holders who
vouch.
• Adoption and network-effect risk: the credibility graph’s
usefulness depends on continued participation. If adoption
stalls, demand for the token’s utility (vouching, fees, markets,
verification) may be limited, burns will be minimal, and
contributor rewards per participant will compress as total
vouched supply grows.
• Dependency on Base: the token and protocol operate on Base,

an optimistic rollup with a sequencer operated by Coinbase;
sequencer outages, rollup-level failures, or changes to Base
could affect protocol availability and the ability to transfer,
vouch, or trade tokens.
• Private key, wallet, and fraud risk: holders are solely responsible
for safeguarding their private keys; loss of credentials results in
permanent loss of tokens. Holders are exposed to phishing,
impersonation of the Ethos team or Foundation, counterfeit
tokens, and fraudulent claim sites. Ethos will never ask for seed
phrases and does not conduct airdrops.
• Unlock and concentration risk: the team allocation is 28.94% of
supply, mitigated by a 12-month cliff (25% unlocks at the cliff)
followed by monthly unlocks over the following 36 months —
48 months in total; total VC exposure is approximately 1.12%
of supply. As locked team, investor, and treasury tokens are
released into circulation they may introduce additional selling
pressure.
• Monetary policy risk: no new tokens can be minted and fees
cannot be redirected (both contract-enforced). The only
adjustable monetary parameter is the contributor rewards

emission rate, which the Foundation may change within a hard
contract ceiling; such changes could affect reward expectations.
• Tax risk: the tax treatment of purchases, bonus tokens,
contributor rewards, burns, slashing, and price guarantee
redemptions is uncertain and varies by jurisdiction. Holders are
solely responsible for understanding and complying with their
own tax obligations.
• Unanticipated risks: additional risks, or unexpected
combinations of the risks above, may arise.

===== 통합 원문 4 / 9 =====
[채널] 주붕이의 리포트읽기 🔕
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:54:03
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/jubung/7752
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
===
🌍 글로벌 매크로

🔑 핵심 지표 (금리/환율/달러)
ㅤ🇺🇸 미국채 10년 (금리): 5.23 (▼ -0.87%)
ㅤ💵 달러 인덱스 선물: 102.11 (▼ -0.13%)

💱 주요 환율 (FX)
ㅤ🇰🇷 원/달러: 1,344.07 (🔺 +0.37%)
ㅤ🇯🇵 엔/원 (1엔): 8.48 (🔺 +0.08%)
ㅤ🇪🇺 유로/달러: 1.12 (🔺 +0.16%)
ㅤ🇨🇳 달러/위안: 6.70 (➖ 0.00%)

📉 시장 심리 & 코인
ㅤ😨 VIX (공포지수): 15.41 (🔺 +2.19%)
ㅤ🪙 비트코인: 81,820 (▼ -1.75%)
ㅤ💎 이더리움: 2,479 (▼ -3.66%)

🇺🇸 미국 지수 선물 (Futures)
ㅤ🇺🇸 S&P 500 선물: 7,831 (▼ -0.27%)

ㅤ🇺🇸 다우 존스 선물: 51,584 (🔺 +0.26%)
ㅤ🇺🇸 나스닥 100 선물: 31,020 (▼ -1.22%)
ㅤ🇺🇸 러셀 2000 선물: 2,821 (🔺 +0.32%)

🌏 한국 & 아시아
ㅤ🇰🇷 코스피: nan (➖ 0.00%)
ㅤ🇰🇷 코스닥: 898 (▼ -2.34%)
ㅤ🇹🇼 대만 가권: 49,806 (▼ -0.03%)
ㅤ💾 필라델피아 반도체: 12,623.71 (▼ -3.39%)
ㅤ🇯🇵 니케이 225: 68,531 (▼ -2.15%)
ㅤ🇨🇳 상해 종합: nan (➖ 0.00%)
ㅤ🇭🇰 홍콩 항셍: 24,130 (▼ -0.62%)

💢 원자재 & 귀금속
ㅤ🛢️ WTI 유가: 91.03 (🔺 +3.12%)
ㅤ🏗️ 구리: 6.57 (▼ -0.35%)
ㅤ🥇 국제 금: 4,172.40 (🔺 +0.77%)
ㅤ🥈 국제 은: 59.90 (▼ -0.01%)
ㅤ🫘 대두: 1,286.50 (▼ -0.85%)

===== 통합 원문 5 / 9 =====
[채널] Korean Alpha
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:56:04
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/korean_alpha/883735
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
많은 사람들이 속터져하는 모나드는
사실 가격 관리가 매우 잘되고 있는 코인

우리 모나드도 Plasma처럼 카드 하나 내자

===== 통합 원문 6 / 9 =====
[채널] Donald J. Trump 🇺🇸
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:56:09
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/realDonaldTrump_en/11029
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
🗽👀 Trump’s men at the United Nations: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/magazine-features/4684766/trump-administration-push-reform-united-nations/ truthsocial.com

[truthsocial.com] https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/117408226875989984
[Trump's team of United Nations reformers] https://washingtonexaminer.com/magazine-features/4684766/trump-administration-push-reform-united-nations

[외부 원문 1]
[URL] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/magazine-features/4684766/trump-administration-push-reform-united-nations/
[제목] Trump's team of United Nations reformers

Advertisement
After eight years, Democrats still can’t understand the management style of President Donald Trump . That continued confusion was on display at a recent hearing on Capitol Hill discussing successful reform efforts at the United Nations enacted by the president’s team serving in New York at the U.S. Mission to the U.N. Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) scoffed at Trump’s decision to nominate Ambassador Jeff Bartos to the body, confronting Bartos directly: “As I understand it, you had no prior government service, no diplomatic experience, and nothing really to recommend you to serve in this role, because you’re a real estate lawyer.”
The U.S. mission account on X reveled in the challenge, posting the clip with the caption, “Actually, the Rep.

from Nevada is right! [Bartos] is not a career politician. He’s bringing a business leader’s resolve to reforming the UN.”
Stay informed. Stay ahead.
Join Washington Examiner for unlimited access to the news, analysis, and commentary that matter most.
See Options ›
Already a member? Log in
Despite the acrimonious nature of the hearing, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz and Bartos have an unlikely defender in their work in Congress: Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA). Fetterman told the Washington Examiner that they are “doing a great job holding the organization accountable.” Fetterman’s friendship with Bartos has a fascinating origin story: They were opponents in a race for lieutenant governor. The two formed what observers called a “political bromance” and led Fetterman to introduce Bartos at his confirmation hearing, declaring, “Jeff is a native of PA, a good friend, and has the skills and determination to bring integrity back to the United Nations on behalf of our great country.”
Advertisement
Mike Waltz, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, left, and Jeff Bartos, representative to the U.N.

for management and reform, during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., July 22, 2026. (Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Rather than dispatch another career diplomat steeped in the customs and etiquette of international organizations, Trump has assembled an unlikely leadership team. At its head is Waltz, the former Green Beret and congressman. Alongside him is Bartos, a Pennsylvania businessman nominated as deputy ambassador for management and reform. Between them, they represent an unusual combination of experiences for an institution traditionally populated by foreign policy professionals: One spent years leading soldiers in combat, and the other spent decades building businesses, managing employees, balancing budgets, and asking uncomfortable questions whenever an organization ceased to perform as it should.
Jonathan Schanzer, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, has known Bartos since the two were in college. He told the Washington Examiner, “It was his dogged determination to enter politics, and his successful team approach in Pennsylvania, that ultimately earned him a seat at the table” at the U.N.

Neither man speaks about the U.N. quite the way diplomats usually do, which is perhaps the secret to their success.
Advertisement
Listening to the pair testify before the House Foreign Affairs Committee in late July, Waltz spoke repeatedly about mission, while Bartos returned again and again to leadership, execution, incentives, and accountability. They sounded less like ambassadors explaining American foreign policy than executives conducting a turnaround.
“My charge from President Trump is to help the U.N. realize its potential,” Waltz told lawmakers. “We are getting the United Nations back to basics, back to maintaining the peace and maintaining security around the world.” He argued that the organization had “tried to become all things to all people” while its budget had tripled over the past 25 years. “I don’t think we’ve seen a tripling of peace break out around the world.”
During our conversation immediately after the hearing, Bartos talked far less about geopolitics than about organizational behavior. He described the U.N. not as a uniquely broken institution but as one suffering from problems familiar to anyone who has spent time trying to rescue a struggling company.

Advertisement
“What wasn’t there before we got to post was the leadership,” he told the Washington Examiner . “The Trump administration has brought the leadership that so many reform advocates have been yearning for for their entire careers.”
An experiment is now unfolding inside the U.N. It is not simply an effort to trim budgets or eliminate redundant programs. It is a test of a broader proposition: whether one of the world’s oldest and most complicated bureaucracies can be revived by applying the habits of successful businesses — clear missions, disciplined leadership, aligned incentives, and relentless execution — to an institution that many had long ago concluded was simply too large and dysfunctional to reform.
If Waltz supplies the strategic vision, Bartos is the one responsible for translating philosophy into management. Ask him what he’s proudest of, and he doesn’t begin with reform or speeches before the General Assembly. Instead, he starts talking about troop reimbursements, procurement formulas, pension obligations, warehouse logistics, and the caloric requirements for peacekeepers stationed in some of the world’s most dangerous places.

It is not glamorous work, nor is it the sort of thing that typically generates headlines. It is, however, the work that determines whether a bureaucracy actually functions.
Advertisement
Throughout our conversation after the hearing on Capitol Hill, Bartos repeatedly returned to the same idea: Large institutions often fail for reasons that have little to do with ideology and everything to do with incentives. Organizations reward the behavior they encourage. If employees are compensated regardless of performance, performance inevitably suffers. If managers cannot remove poor performers, mediocrity becomes institutionalized. If nobody regularly asks whether a process still serves its original purpose, the process itself eventually becomes the purpose.
Those observations are hardly revolutionary in the private sector. Yet Bartos argues they have too often been absent from discussions about the U.N., where debates tend to revolve around diplomacy rather than management.
The administration ‘s reforms, therefore, begin with questions that sound almost mundane. Why are troops receiving rations based on approximately 4,600 calories a day when modern military standards suggest significantly less would be sufficient?

Why does the U.N. continue maintaining compensation and pension structures that have largely disappeared from both government and private industry?
Individually, none of those changes transforms the institution. Together, Bartos believes, they begin changing something far more important than a balance sheet — they begin changing expectations.
The same philosophy underlies a series of larger reforms already underway. Over the past year, the administration has led efforts that have reduced roughly 4,000 civilian positions across the U.N. system and helped secure more than $1 billion in budget reductions. In an organization where virtually every meaningful decision requires the agreement of 193 member states, even incremental reforms represent unusually difficult victories. As Waltz reminded lawmakers during the hearing, “We cut [the budget] by $1 billion over the last six months alone. And by the way, that requires consensus of all 190 countries to agree on every line of the budget.”
“Consensus” is worth emphasizing because it challenges the caricature often offered by both supporters and critics of the Trump administration.

The United States cannot simply dictate reforms to the U.N. Every significant change requires persuading governments that frequently disagree on nearly everything else. Bartos speaks about that process less as political combat than as relationship-building. “Honor your word,” he told lawmakers. “Do what you say you’re going to do.” Reform, he insists, depends less on confrontation than on earning credibility over time.
It would be easy to mistake all of this for an exercise in austerity if not for another part of Bartos’s job — one that has taken him thousands of miles from conference rooms in New York.
Earlier this year, he traveled to the northeastern corner of the Central African Republic, not far from the Sudanese border, where hundreds of thousands of refugees have fled atrocities committed during Sudan’s brutal civil war. There, he watched humanitarian workers from multiple U.N. agencies operate camps providing food, clean water, medical care, sanitation, and shelter to families who had escaped violence that the U.S. has described, in parts of the conflict, as genocide.

Bartos speaks about that trip with an admiration that borders on reverence.
“I’ve never been around a group of people who are risking their lives for total strangers at that scale,” he told the Washington Examiner . “They’re not leaving hell to get to a hotel in Ibiza. They’re leaving hell to get to something slightly better than hell.”
That experience complicates the simplistic narrative that the administration’s approach to the U.N. is merely one of aggression. Both Waltz and Bartos argue that reform is intended to strengthen precisely these kinds of operations by eliminating duplication elsewhere. During the hearing, Waltz described consolidating warehouses, logistics, and administrative support across aid agencies so that a greater share of humanitarian funding reaches victims rather than supporting what he called a nongovernmental organization industrial complex. “We are putting the U.N. on a diet,” he said. “A healthier U.N. is a more useful U.N.”
For Bartos, there is no contradiction between admiring the humanitarian workers he met in Africa and aggressively pursuing bureaucratic reform in New York.

Quite the opposite. The people risking their lives in refugee camps deserve an institution that works as efficiently as they do.
For all the attention paid to billion-dollar budget reductions and management reforms, Bartos insists those victories represent only the beginning of the project.
The culture change in how diplomacy is conducted and messaged at the U.S. mission is notable, too. Take an event that happened this summer. Over the Fourth of July weekend, aboard the USS New York during the Navy’s celebration of America’s 250th anniversary, former Israeli hostage Alon Ohel joined singer-songwriter John Ondrasik of Five for Fighting in an emotional musical performance organized with the assistance of the U.S. mission.
Of the event, Ondrasik told the Washington Examiner, “It was his will and passion that brought my Freedom 250 performance … to be. I can’t think of a better person to join Mike Waltz at the U.N. and bring some sanity to an organization long overdue for a reboot.”
“The financial reforms,” Bartos told the Washington Examiner , “are actually the easier part.”

The harder part, the real challenge, will be changing the culture.
One example has come to symbolize that challenge more than any spreadsheet ever could.
While the U.S. was pushing through budget reforms and restructuring peacekeeping operations, another part of the U.N. continued generating headlines for altogether different reasons. Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur focused on the so-called occupied Palestinian territories, repeatedly drew condemnation from the U.S. and several allied governments for statements they viewed as antisemitic and for rhetoric they argued blurred the distinction between Israel and Hamas. Rather than distancing itself, the institution continued allowing Albanese to operate under the U.N. banner.
For Bartos, the issue is not merely Albanese herself — it is what her continued prominence says about institutional incentives.
“It’s impossible for me to reconcile that the same organization risking their lives working in Central Africa with one that allows a lunatic like Francesca Albanese to put on the U.N. uniform and spew her vile, anti-American, anti-West, anti-capitalist, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel vitriol.” In the private sector, he argued, “your brand would be destroyed.”

Now working alongside Bartos at the U.S. mission, former deputy special envoy to combat antisemitism Ellie Cohanim captured that frustration after Bartos publicly criticized Albanese’s recent open letter declaring that “America is subjugated by the Jewish lobby.” “Ladies & Gentlemen,” Cohanim wrote on the controversy, “welcome to the UN & the woman whom [Bartos] has rightfully slammed as a ‘lunatic.'” She contrasted Albanese’s continued standing within the institution with U.S. efforts to confront terrorism and secure the release of hostages, asking how an organization created to preserve peace had reached a point where such rhetoric could coexist with its stated mission.
That tension, between the institution’s ideals and some of the voices it elevates, illustrates why Bartos believes the next phase of reform will be immeasurably more difficult than the first.
Just days after our conversation, a controversy erupted at the U.N. when the French and American missions faced off about the very reforms Bartos had testified about days earlier. The U.S.

mission posted a clip of Bartos testifying about how the “U.N. human rights system has been losing credibility for decades.” The French mission posted that clip, declaring, “The U.S. used to be a beacon of human rights. Not anymore. Today, it stands alongside North Korea, Nicaragua, Mali & Russia, isolated. And the world no longer listens to it.”
The next day, the American delegation staged a walkout during France’s remarks, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee ominously posted, “This is disappointing and shows just how opposed some are to sorely needed UN reform,” specifically naming Volker Turk, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights. “Without real and systemic change, the U.S. will be forced to reconsider its entire relationship with the UN.”
Asked afterward whether the clash with France and the controversy with Turk changed his assessment of the challenge ahead, Bartos suggested the real battle had barely begun.
“By slashing the U.N.’s budget and cutting over 4,000 bureaucratic posts over the past six months, we have made consequential and durable reforms to the U.N.’s spending problem.

While we continue to work every day on additional fiscal reforms, we are focused on reforming and repairing the institutional rot that former U.N. Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan eloquently called out in his Nov. 10, 1975, General Assembly speech. Stay tuned.”
‘MAKE THE UN GREAT AGAIN?’ NOT WITH THESE WOKE FRONT-RUNNERS TO LEAD IT
Moynihan’s address has become one of the defining speeches in the history of American diplomacy at the U.N. Speaking after the General Assembly adopted its infamous resolution equating Zionism with racism, he accused the institution of abandoning truth for politics and warned that an organization founded to defend liberty was instead lending legitimacy to authoritarianism and prejudice. Bartos shared that he reads it monthly, using it as a reference for what the U.S. mission is trying to accomplish 51 years later.
Bartos believes the budget battles were the easy part. Cutting spending required persuading member states to embrace better management. Repairing an institution whose incentives, culture, and moral credibility have eroded over decades will require something far more difficult.

If the administration’s first test was whether it could make the U.N. run more efficiently, its greatest test still lies ahead: whether it can persuade the institution to remember what it was created to stand for.
Bethany Mandel (@bethanyshondark) is a homeschooling mother of six and co-host of The Mom Wars podcast.

[외부 원문 2]
[URL] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/magazine-features/4684766/trump-administration-push-reform-united-nations/
[제목] Trump's team of United Nations reformers

Advertisement
After eight years, Democrats still can’t understand the management style of President Donald Trump . That continued confusion was on display at a recent hearing on Capitol Hill discussing successful reform efforts at the United Nations enacted by the president’s team serving in New York at the U.S. Mission to the U.N. Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) scoffed at Trump’s decision to nominate Ambassador Jeff Bartos to the body, confronting Bartos directly: “As I understand it, you had no prior government service, no diplomatic experience, and nothing really to recommend you to serve in this role, because you’re a real estate lawyer.”

The U.S. mission account on X reveled in the challenge, posting the clip with the caption, “Actually, the Rep. from Nevada is right! [Bartos] is not a career politician. He’s bringing a business leader’s resolve to reforming the UN.”
Stay informed. Stay ahead.
Join Washington Examiner for unlimited access to the news, analysis, and commentary that matter most.
See Options ›
Already a member? Log in
Despite the acrimonious nature of the hearing, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz and Bartos have an unlikely defender in their work in Congress: Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA). Fetterman told the Washington Examiner that they are “doing a great job holding the organization accountable.” Fetterman’s friendship with Bartos has a fascinating origin story: They were opponents in a race for lieutenant governor. The two formed what observers called a “political bromance” and led Fetterman to introduce Bartos at his confirmation hearing, declaring, “Jeff is a native of PA, a good friend, and has the skills and determination to bring integrity back to the United Nations on behalf of our great country.”

Advertisement
Mike Waltz, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, left, and Jeff Bartos, representative to the U.N. for management and reform, during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., July 22, 2026. (Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Rather than dispatch another career diplomat steeped in the customs and etiquette of international organizations, Trump has assembled an unlikely leadership team. At its head is Waltz, the former Green Beret and congressman. Alongside him is Bartos, a Pennsylvania businessman nominated as deputy ambassador for management and reform. Between them, they represent an unusual combination of experiences for an institution traditionally populated by foreign policy professionals: One spent years leading soldiers in combat, and the other spent decades building businesses, managing employees, balancing budgets, and asking uncomfortable questions whenever an organization ceased to perform as it should.
Jonathan Schanzer, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, has known Bartos since the two were in college.

He told the Washington Examiner, “It was his dogged determination to enter politics, and his successful team approach in Pennsylvania, that ultimately earned him a seat at the table” at the U.N.
Neither man speaks about the U.N. quite the way diplomats usually do, which is perhaps the secret to their success.
Advertisement
Listening to the pair testify before the House Foreign Affairs Committee in late July, Waltz spoke repeatedly about mission, while Bartos returned again and again to leadership, execution, incentives, and accountability. They sounded less like ambassadors explaining American foreign policy than executives conducting a turnaround.
“My charge from President Trump is to help the U.N. realize its potential,” Waltz told lawmakers. “We are getting the United Nations back to basics, back to maintaining the peace and maintaining security around the world.” He argued that the organization had “tried to become all things to all people” while its budget had tripled over the past 25 years. “I don’t think we’ve seen a tripling of peace break out around the world.”

During our conversation immediately after the hearing, Bartos talked far less about geopolitics than about organizational behavior. He described the U.N. not as a uniquely broken institution but as one suffering from problems familiar to anyone who has spent time trying to rescue a struggling company.
Advertisement
“What wasn’t there before we got to post was the leadership,” he told the Washington Examiner . “The Trump administration has brought the leadership that so many reform advocates have been yearning for for their entire careers.”
An experiment is now unfolding inside the U.N. It is not simply an effort to trim budgets or eliminate redundant programs. It is a test of a broader proposition: whether one of the world’s oldest and most complicated bureaucracies can be revived by applying the habits of successful businesses — clear missions, disciplined leadership, aligned incentives, and relentless execution — to an institution that many had long ago concluded was simply too large and dysfunctional to reform.
If Waltz supplies the strategic vision, Bartos is the one responsible for translating philosophy into management.

Ask him what he’s proudest of, and he doesn’t begin with reform or speeches before the General Assembly. Instead, he starts talking about troop reimbursements, procurement formulas, pension obligations, warehouse logistics, and the caloric requirements for peacekeepers stationed in some of the world’s most dangerous places. It is not glamorous work, nor is it the sort of thing that typically generates headlines. It is, however, the work that determines whether a bureaucracy actually functions.
Advertisement
Throughout our conversation after the hearing on Capitol Hill, Bartos repeatedly returned to the same idea: Large institutions often fail for reasons that have little to do with ideology and everything to do with incentives. Organizations reward the behavior they encourage. If employees are compensated regardless of performance, performance inevitably suffers. If managers cannot remove poor performers, mediocrity becomes institutionalized. If nobody regularly asks whether a process still serves its original purpose, the process itself eventually becomes the purpose.

Those observations are hardly revolutionary in the private sector. Yet Bartos argues they have too often been absent from discussions about the U.N., where debates tend to revolve around diplomacy rather than management.
The administration ‘s reforms, therefore, begin with questions that sound almost mundane. Why are troops receiving rations based on approximately 4,600 calories a day when modern military standards suggest significantly less would be sufficient? Why does the U.N. continue maintaining compensation and pension structures that have largely disappeared from both government and private industry?
Individually, none of those changes transforms the institution. Together, Bartos believes, they begin changing something far more important than a balance sheet — they begin changing expectations.
The same philosophy underlies a series of larger reforms already underway. Over the past year, the administration has led efforts that have reduced roughly 4,000 civilian positions across the U.N. system and helped secure more than $1 billion in budget reductions.

In an organization where virtually every meaningful decision requires the agreement of 193 member states, even incremental reforms represent unusually difficult victories. As Waltz reminded lawmakers during the hearing, “We cut [the budget] by $1 billion over the last six months alone. And by the way, that requires consensus of all 190 countries to agree on every line of the budget.”
“Consensus” is worth emphasizing because it challenges the caricature often offered by both supporters and critics of the Trump administration. The United States cannot simply dictate reforms to the U.N. Every significant change requires persuading governments that frequently disagree on nearly everything else. Bartos speaks about that process less as political combat than as relationship-building. “Honor your word,” he told lawmakers. “Do what you say you’re going to do.” Reform, he insists, depends less on confrontation than on earning credibility over time.
It would be easy to mistake all of this for an exercise in austerity if not for another part of Bartos’s job — one that has taken him thousands of miles from conference rooms in New York.

Earlier this year, he traveled to the northeastern corner of the Central African Republic, not far from the Sudanese border, where hundreds of thousands of refugees have fled atrocities committed during Sudan’s brutal civil war. There, he watched humanitarian workers from multiple U.N. agencies operate camps providing food, clean water, medical care, sanitation, and shelter to families who had escaped violence that the U.S. has described, in parts of the conflict, as genocide.
Bartos speaks about that trip with an admiration that borders on reverence.
“I’ve never been around a group of people who are risking their lives for total strangers at that scale,” he told the Washington Examiner . “They’re not leaving hell to get to a hotel in Ibiza. They’re leaving hell to get to something slightly better than hell.”
That experience complicates the simplistic narrative that the administration’s approach to the U.N. is merely one of aggression. Both Waltz and Bartos argue that reform is intended to strengthen precisely these kinds of operations by eliminating duplication elsewhere.

During the hearing, Waltz described consolidating warehouses, logistics, and administrative support across aid agencies so that a greater share of humanitarian funding reaches victims rather than supporting what he called a nongovernmental organization industrial complex. “We are putting the U.N. on a diet,” he said. “A healthier U.N. is a more useful U.N.”
For Bartos, there is no contradiction between admiring the humanitarian workers he met in Africa and aggressively pursuing bureaucratic reform in New York. Quite the opposite. The people risking their lives in refugee camps deserve an institution that works as efficiently as they do.
For all the attention paid to billion-dollar budget reductions and management reforms, Bartos insists those victories represent only the beginning of the project.
The culture change in how diplomacy is conducted and messaged at the U.S. mission is notable, too. Take an event that happened this summer. Over the Fourth of July weekend, aboard the USS New York during the Navy’s celebration of America’s 250th anniversary, former Israeli hostage Alon Ohel joined singer-songwriter John Ondrasik of Five for Fighting in an emotional musical performance organized with the assistance of the U.S.

mission.
Of the event, Ondrasik told the Washington Examiner, “It was his will and passion that brought my Freedom 250 performance … to be. I can’t think of a better person to join Mike Waltz at the U.N. and bring some sanity to an organization long overdue for a reboot.”
“The financial reforms,” Bartos told the Washington Examiner , “are actually the easier part.”
The harder part, the real challenge, will be changing the culture.
One example has come to symbolize that challenge more than any spreadsheet ever could.
While the U.S. was pushing through budget reforms and restructuring peacekeeping operations, another part of the U.N. continued generating headlines for altogether different reasons. Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur focused on the so-called occupied Palestinian territories, repeatedly drew condemnation from the U.S. and several allied governments for statements they viewed as antisemitic and for rhetoric they argued blurred the distinction between Israel and Hamas. Rather than distancing itself, the institution continued allowing Albanese to operate under the U.N.

banner.
For Bartos, the issue is not merely Albanese herself — it is what her continued prominence says about institutional incentives.
“It’s impossible for me to reconcile that the same organization risking their lives working in Central Africa with one that allows a lunatic like Francesca Albanese to put on the U.N. uniform and spew her vile, anti-American, anti-West, anti-capitalist, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel vitriol.” In the private sector, he argued, “your brand would be destroyed.”
Now working alongside Bartos at the U.S. mission, former deputy special envoy to combat antisemitism Ellie Cohanim captured that frustration after Bartos publicly criticized Albanese’s recent open letter declaring that “America is subjugated by the Jewish lobby.” “Ladies & Gentlemen,” Cohanim wrote on the controversy, “welcome to the UN & the woman whom [Bartos] has rightfully slammed as a ‘lunatic.'” She contrasted Albanese’s continued standing within the institution with U.S. efforts to confront terrorism and secure the release of hostages, asking how an organization created to preserve peace had reached a point where such rhetoric could coexist with its stated mission.

That tension, between the institution’s ideals and some of the voices it elevates, illustrates why Bartos believes the next phase of reform will be immeasurably more difficult than the first.
Just days after our conversation, a controversy erupted at the U.N. when the French and American missions faced off about the very reforms Bartos had testified about days earlier. The U.S. mission posted a clip of Bartos testifying about how the “U.N. human rights system has been losing credibility for decades.” The French mission posted that clip, declaring, “The U.S. used to be a beacon of human rights. Not anymore. Today, it stands alongside North Korea, Nicaragua, Mali & Russia, isolated. And the world no longer listens to it.”
The next day, the American delegation staged a walkout during France’s remarks, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee ominously posted, “This is disappointing and shows just how opposed some are to sorely needed UN reform,” specifically naming Volker Turk, the U.N.

high commissioner for human rights. “Without real and systemic change, the U.S. will be forced to reconsider its entire relationship with the UN.”
Asked afterward whether the clash with France and the controversy with Turk changed his assessment of the challenge ahead, Bartos suggested the real battle had barely begun.
“By slashing the U.N.’s budget and cutting over 4,000 bureaucratic posts over the past six months, we have made consequential and durable reforms to the U.N.’s spending problem. While we continue to work every day on additional fiscal reforms, we are focused on reforming and repairing the institutional rot that former U.N. Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan eloquently called out in his Nov. 10, 1975, General Assembly speech. Stay tuned.”
‘MAKE THE UN GREAT AGAIN?’ NOT WITH THESE WOKE FRONT-RUNNERS TO LEAD IT
Moynihan’s address has become one of the defining speeches in the history of American diplomacy at the U.N. Speaking after the General Assembly adopted its infamous resolution equating Zionism with racism, he accused the institution of abandoning truth for politics and warned that an organization founded to defend liberty was instead lending legitimacy to authoritarianism and prejudice.

Bartos shared that he reads it monthly, using it as a reference for what the U.S. mission is trying to accomplish 51 years later.
Bartos believes the budget battles were the easy part. Cutting spending required persuading member states to embrace better management. Repairing an institution whose incentives, culture, and moral credibility have eroded over decades will require something far more difficult. If the administration’s first test was whether it could make the U.N. run more efficiently, its greatest test still lies ahead: whether it can persuade the institution to remember what it was created to stand for.
Bethany Mandel (@bethanyshondark) is a homeschooling mother of six and co-host of The Mom Wars podcast.

===== 통합 원문 7 / 9 =====
[채널] Donald J. Trump 🇺🇸
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:56:34
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/realDonaldTrump_en/11030
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
🗽👀 Melania Trump makes history presiding over UN Security Council — remarking on Iran war deaths: https://nypost.com/2026/03/02/us-news/melania-trump-makes-history-presiding-over-un-security-council-acknowledges-challenging-times/ truthsocial.com

[truthsocial.com] https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/117408228489272278

[외부 원문 1]
[URL] https://nypost.com/2026/03/02/us-news/melania-trump-makes-history-presiding-over-un-security-council-acknowledges-challenging-times/
[제목] Melania Trump makes history presiding over UN Security Council — remarking on Iran war deaths

Melania Trump, in a historic first, gaveled the UN Security Council meeting into order on Monday but her message for the world’s children was overshadowed by the president’s attack on Iran.
The first lady acknowledged the attack in her remarks when she offered her condolences to the families of the soldiers killed in the fallout from Operation Epic Fury.
“My heartfelt condolences to the families who have lost their heroes, who sacrificed their lives for freedom, their bravery and dedication will always be remembered,” she said. “I extend my earnest wishes for a swift and smooth recovery to all those who have been injured. You are in my thoughts and prayers during these challenging times.

The US stands with all of the children throughout the world.”
4
Melania Trump presides over a UN Security Council meeting. Getty Images
It was an historic moment for Trump as she became the first presidential spouse to open the United States’ presidency of the UN Security Council, whose leadership rotates on a monthly basis.
The focus of the first meeting was on the first lady’s priorities: children, technology and education, which are all part of her Be Best initiative . Trump called the meeting to order and allowed the representatives of each country to address the topic. She spoke when it was the United States’ turn.
“The path to peace depends on us taking responsibility to empower our children through education and technology,” she said.
She also acknowledged the “challenging times” the world faces right now.
“The US stands with all of the children throughout the world,” she said. “I hope soon peace will be yours.”
4
Melania Trump became the first spouse to preside over a meeting of the UN Security Council.

Stephen Yang for NY Post
4
The meeting focused on the first lady’s priorities: Children, technology and education. Stephen Yang for NY Post
“Conflict arises from ignorance, but knowledge creates understanding, replacing fear with peace and unity,” Trump noted. “I implore you to build a future generation of leaders who embrace peace through education.”
Start your day with all you need to know
Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more.
Thanks for signing up!
Trump, who was accompanied by UN Ambassador Mike Waltz, was warmly received by the council members.
She called on each of them to speak as part of her duties for chairing the meeting. Referring to her as “Madam President,” they all thanked her for her personal interest in helping the children of the world.
4
Melania Trump and US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz (to her left) pose with ambassadors from other nations before a UN Security Council meeting.

AFP via Getty Images
Several mentioned her work as first lady.
“We commend your personal efforts as First Lady, with the launch of the fostering the Future initiative, as well as the adoption of the Take It Down Act,” the French representative told her. “France also would like to thank you for your mediation role that contributed to the return of several Ukrainian children that were forcibly transferred or deported to Russia.”
Trump closed out the two-hour meeting with her thanks to the representatives.
“Thank you. It was an honor to be with you on this historic day,” she said.

[외부 원문 2]
[URL] https://nypost.com/2026/03/02/us-news/melania-trump-makes-history-presiding-over-un-security-council-acknowledges-challenging-times/
[제목] Melania Trump makes history presiding over UN Security Council — remarking on Iran war deaths

Melania Trump, in a historic first, gaveled the UN Security Council meeting into order on Monday but her message for the world’s children was overshadowed by the president’s attack on Iran.

The first lady acknowledged the attack in her remarks when she offered her condolences to the families of the soldiers killed in the fallout from Operation Epic Fury.
“My heartfelt condolences to the families who have lost their heroes, who sacrificed their lives for freedom, their bravery and dedication will always be remembered,” she said. “I extend my earnest wishes for a swift and smooth recovery to all those who have been injured. You are in my thoughts and prayers during these challenging times. The US stands with all of the children throughout the world.”
4
Melania Trump presides over a UN Security Council meeting. Getty Images
It was an historic moment for Trump as she became the first presidential spouse to open the United States’ presidency of the UN Security Council, whose leadership rotates on a monthly basis.
The focus of the first meeting was on the first lady’s priorities: children, technology and education, which are all part of her Be Best initiative .

Trump called the meeting to order and allowed the representatives of each country to address the topic. She spoke when it was the United States’ turn.
“The path to peace depends on us taking responsibility to empower our children through education and technology,” she said.
She also acknowledged the “challenging times” the world faces right now.
“The US stands with all of the children throughout the world,” she said. “I hope soon peace will be yours.”
4
Melania Trump became the first spouse to preside over a meeting of the UN Security Council. Stephen Yang for NY Post
4
The meeting focused on the first lady’s priorities: Children, technology and education. Stephen Yang for NY Post
“Conflict arises from ignorance, but knowledge creates understanding, replacing fear with peace and unity,” Trump noted. “I implore you to build a future generation of leaders who embrace peace through education.”
Start your day with all you need to know

Morning Report delivers the latest news, videos, photos and more.
Thanks for signing up!
Trump, who was accompanied by UN Ambassador Mike Waltz, was warmly received by the council members.
She called on each of them to speak as part of her duties for chairing the meeting. Referring to her as “Madam President,” they all thanked her for her personal interest in helping the children of the world.
4
Melania Trump and US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz (to her left) pose with ambassadors from other nations before a UN Security Council meeting. AFP via Getty Images
Several mentioned her work as first lady.
“We commend your personal efforts as First Lady, with the launch of the fostering the Future initiative, as well as the adoption of the Take It Down Act,” the French representative told her. “France also would like to thank you for your mediation role that contributed to the return of several Ukrainian children that were forcibly transferred or deported to Russia.”

Trump closed out the two-hour meeting with her thanks to the representatives.
“Thank you. It was an honor to be with you on this historic day,” she said.

===== 통합 원문 8 / 9 =====
[채널] 64비트사령부⚡️ 🇰🇷🇺🇸
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:57:15
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/BTCpentagon/9933
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
⚡️⚡️⚡️ 미국 “국정원, 한·미·일 회의 오지 마라”…아예 공문으로 통보

누군가가 한미동맹까지 찢어버린게 확실히 증명되네요~

https://n.news.naver.com/mnews/article/025/0003556788?sid=100

[외부 원문 1]
[URL] https://n.news.naver.com/mnews/article/025/0003556788?sid=100
[제목] [단독] 미국 “국정원, 한·미·일 회의 오지 마라”…아예 공문 통보

미국이 지난 6월 워싱턴에서 열린 한ㆍ미ㆍ일 실무회의를 앞두고 한국 국가정보원의 참석을 배제하겠다는 입장을 문서로 전달한 것으로 파악됐다. 미국이 동맹국 정보기관의 회의 참석을 거부하면서 이를 구두가 아닌 문서 형태로 전달한 것은 매우 이례적이다. 당시 미국 내에서 국정원의 이른바 ‘쿠팡 탄압’ 관여 의혹이 불거졌던 만큼, 미 측의 불만이 반영된 조치 아니냐는 해석이 나온다.
지난 7월 국가정보원에서 복원한 청사 앞 '정보는 국력이다' 원훈석. 연합뉴스
8일 복수의 정통한 소식통에 따르면 미국은 지난 6월 25~26일 워싱턴 D.C.에서 개최된 ‘제5차 북한 사이버 위협 대응 한ㆍ미ㆍ일 외교당국 간 실무그룹 회의’를 앞두고 국정원의 참석을 배제하겠다는 입장을 한국 측에 통보했다.

통보는 구두와 문서 두 가지 형태였다고 한다.
해당 회의에는 한ㆍ미ㆍ일 3국 외교당국과 관계 부처의 북핵ㆍ사이버 분야 담당자 등 60여 명이 참석했다. 북한의 해킹 등 사이버 위협 대응에서 핵심 역할을 하는 국정원을 콕 집어 배제한 것은 단순 회의 참석자 조정 이상의 의미가 있다는 관측이 나오는 이유다.
다만 미국은 국정원을 배제한 구체적인 사유는 설명하지 않았다고 한다. 다만 통지 시점이 7월 1일 미 하원 법제사법위원회의 쿠팡 관련 중간보고서 발표를 앞두고 있었다는 점은 눈에 띈다. 당시 미 의회와 행정부 안팎에선 국정원이 ‘쿠팡 탄압’에 관여했다는 인식이 팽배했다. 실제 법사위 보고서에는 “국정원(NIS)이 쿠팡에 대한 조사와 기기 회수를 압박했다”는 내용이 담겼다. 이에 국정원은 “일련의 과정이 국정원의 지시ㆍ명령에 의해 이뤄졌다는 쿠팡 측 주장은 명백한 허위”라고 반박했다. 미국의 국정원 배제 조치 역시 이 같은 양국 간 불편한 기류와 무관하지 않을 수 있다는 분석이다.
국정원은 당시 회의 참석 배제가 일회성 조치였으며, 현재 한ㆍ미 정보당국 간 협력에는 문제가 없다는 입장이다. 국정원 관계자는 “어느 나라건 국익의 차이로 종종 오해가 발생하기도 한다”며 “그것을 어떻게 적시에 풀어나가느냐가 중요한데, 현재 한ㆍ미 정보당국 간 오해는 없다”고 강조했다.
정부 일각에선 한ㆍ미 정보당국 간 잇따른 마찰의 배경에 이재명 정부를 바라보는 트럼프 행정부 안팎의 ‘친중 성향’ 의구심이 깔려 있다는 지적도 나온다. 미국은 지난 3월 정동영 통일부 장관의 북한 구성시 핵시설 관련 발언을 문제 삼아 한국에 대한 대북 영상정보 제공을 제한하고 있다. 정 장관 측은 “언론 등을 통해 공개된 정보였다”고 해명했지만, 미 측은 이를 받아들이지 않았다.
한편 국정원은 이날 이종석 국가정보원장의 방미와 미 중앙정보국(CIA) 고위급 방한단과의 면담이 무산됐다는 언론 보도에 대해 “허위 보도”라고 강하게 반박했다.

===== 통합 원문 9 / 9 =====
[채널] 하나 중국/신흥국 전략 김경환
[게시일시] 2026.10.09 09:57:47
[텔레그램 게시물] https://t.me/HANAchina/70104
[원문 수집 기준] 외부 링크가 있으면 링크를 따라 확보한 실제 본문·첨부 파일이 주 분석 원문이다. 텔레그램 게시물은 발견 경로와 보조 설명으로 보존하며 외부 원문과 구분해 반영한다.

[현재 텔레그램 게시물 본문]
>>트럼프, 더 이상 원유 가격 차트를 움직이지 못하다

•4월 트럼프의 위협 발언은 유가를 하루 만에 7% 급등시켰지만, 10월 이란에 대한 경고는 유가에 거의 영향을 미치지 못했음. 7개월 동안 트럼프가 미·이란 협상과 관련해 입장을 반복적으로 번복하면서 시장의 신뢰를 소진했음. 트레이더들은 해운 물동량 등 객관적인 데이터에 주목하기 시작했으며, 대규모 포지션 축소로 유동성이 급격히 부족해진 틈을 알고리즘 거래가 파고들었음. 실물 공급 등 객관적인 데이터가 정치적 수사를 대신해 원유 가격을 결정하는 새로운 기준으로 자리 잡았음

>特朗普“画不动”原油K线了 https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3783230#from=ios

[외부 원문 1]
[URL] https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3783230#from=ios
[제목] 特朗普“画不动”原油K线了 - 华尔街见闻

4月特朗普威胁表态曾推油价单日暴涨7%，10月再度警告伊朗却几乎纹丝不动。七个月间，特朗普反复就美伊谈判"出尔反尔"，耗尽市场信任。交易员转而锚定货运流量等硬数据，并大幅砍仓致流动性告急，算法交易趁虚而入。实物供应等“硬数据”正式取代政治修辞，成为原油定价新锚点。
原油市场对特朗普言论的敏感度正在系统性衰减。 曾经一句威胁伊朗的推文就能让油价单日暴涨7%，如今同类表态却几乎激不起任何波澜。据彭博对价格走势的分析，随着美伊冲突持续拖延，特朗普的言论对全球原油市场的影响力已显著减弱。

今年4月1日，特朗普在电视讲话中扬言将对伊朗发动打击，令其“回到石器时代”，油价随即在亚洲早盘飙升，最终收涨逾7%，突破每桶109美元。然而到了10月1日，特朗普再度警告伊朗"签署停火协议，否则将不复存在"，原油价格却几乎纹丝不动。 同样的威胁语言，市场反应天差地别。
据彭博10月8日报道，接受采访的原油交易员表示，他们已不再聚焦于白宫的修辞，转而更关注实物供应变化和货运流量等硬数据。与此同时，鉴于美国战争策略的高度不可预测性，交易员们也在主动压缩头寸规模。这一转变不仅影响能源市场，还将进一步模糊通胀前景，并对全球利率政策走向产生连锁影响。
从"一呼百应"到"脱敏"：七个月的信任消耗
在伊朗战争初期，特朗普的每一句话都牵动着原油交易员的神经。霍尔木兹海峡封锁的幽灵长期盘踞市场，作为最坏情景被反复定价。随着这一噩梦部分成真——过境该水道的航运几近停滞——全球能源市场遭受剧烈冲击。
然而在此后七个月里，特朗普多次暗示美伊外交谈判取得进展或即将达成协议，随后又迅速反转；他还抛出过对霍尔木兹海峡过境征费的构想，不到一天便宣告放弃。 反复横跳的政策信号，令交易员逐渐将其言论视为不可靠的价格指引。
“几个月来，头条新闻就像走马灯一样转个不停，”Again Capital合伙人John Kilduff表示，“现在交易这个市场，基本上是在玩地缘政治轮盘赌。我接触到的每个人都在缩小交易规模。”
Tortoise Capital Advisors LLC高级投资组合经理Rob Thummel也指出：
“白宫来回摇摆的表态，让交易员陷入了集体瘫痪。”
价格波动收窄，流动性告急
随着交易员退场观望，原油价格的日内波动幅度也在同步收缩。据彭博对日内价格走势的分析，当前每个交易日的高低价差已远小于战争初期水平，针对能源基础设施的打击减少也进一步压低了市场波动率。
更值得警惕的是流动性危机。 布伦特原油期货合约的未平仓量已跌至2025年3月以来的最低水平。市场深度的萎缩，意味着一旦出现突发事件，价格可能面临更剧烈的非理性波动。

当修辞驱动的波动性消退，市场有时反而沦为算法交易的猎场。商品交易顾问（CTA）等算法交易者以追踪动量为主要策略，往往会在双向行情中放大价格波动。尽管这类波动通常在当日交易结束前回归正常，但在此过程中可能造成实物市场与纸面市场的严重背离，并将传统投资者进一步挤出场外。
供应数据取代总统推文，成为新锚点
在特朗普言论失去定价权的同时，实物供应指标正在填补这一空白。交易员们将目光转向货运流量、管道数据等可实时追踪、可直接操作的硬指标。
JonesTrading Institutional Services LLC首席市场策略师Michael O'Rourke表示：
“总统说了很多话，而且他的立场变化相当频繁。经历几轮头条冲击之后，市场确实会产生脱敏效应，现在大家明显更关注实物流量数据，因为它是实时的、可操作的。”
即便是分析师群体，也坦言已难以为战争走向建立有效模型。摩根大通分析师在近期的研报中写道：
“ 我们根本不知道如何对结局进行建模。战争初期，我们以为自己知道。 ”
能源冲击外溢，宏观影响深远
此次伊朗冲突已引发史上最严重的石油供应冲击，叠加乌克兰对俄罗斯炼油设施的持续打击，全球多地零售燃油价格已升至历史高位。欧洲及其他地区的央行官员纷纷就能源成本飙升引发的顽固通胀表达担忧，油价走势也已深度嵌入债券市场和股票市场的定价逻辑。
在美国国内，高企的能源价格正给特朗普所在的共和党带来政治压力，11月中期选举前景因此蒙上阴影。
原油市场的能见度下降，将直接模糊全球通胀路径，进而影响各国央行的利率决策空间。 当市场最重要的价格信号之一陷入混沌，其外溢效应将远不止于能源板块本身。
尽管如此，多数交易员也承认，特朗普的表态并非可以完全忽视——他终究是军事部署和伊朗战争走向的最终决策者。但在获得来自白宫以外的更清晰信号之前，大多数投机者选择按兵不动，静待实物供应数据给出方向。