Huge Uptick In Israeli Airstrikes On Gaza Since Trump Hailed ‘Historic’ Hamas Deal

Middle East regional media has reported a huge uptick in Israeli military attacks in the Gaza Strip since President Trump announced a “historic” agreement which Hamas finally signed on to

The agreement would result in a phased complete disarmament of Hamas and the handing over of governance to newly proposed National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) – a body designed to replace both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.

However, fighting has persisted, with Al Jazeera reporting that at least 19 Palestinians killed on Saturday in Israeli attacks and that the total deal toll from the weekend is now 26 people, including women and children.

Israel continues to express skepticism in the face of Washington’s recent optimism:

Despite Hamas agreeing to a phased disarmament, Israel’s government says it has “serious security concerns” about the plan, and there has been strong resistance from Israeli politicians to the deal.

The continued bombardment of Gaza, contributing to Israel’s continued breaches of October’s “ceasefire” agreement, will likely threaten Trump’s peace plan and exacerbate the already dire humanitarian situation for Palestinians in the enclave.

Reuters had on Sunday reported an entire day of fresh IDF bombardment on Gaza.

“Israeli airstrikes hit Gaza for a second straight day on Sunday, killing at least 18 Palestinians, medics said, ​despite U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of a breakthrough in efforts to implement last year’s ceasefire agreement,” Reuters wrote.

“From dawn, Israeli warplanes hit Gaza City in the north, the central city of Deir ‌al-Balah and the southern area of Khan Younis, causing the biggest daily death toll in weeks, according to Palestinian health officials,” it added. 

Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen issued the Netanyahu government’s view on Sunday: “In the deal we signed with the United States, our stance is that Hamas must be dismantled. This is the first thing ⁠that must happen.” 

Cohen expressed that Israeli is “very skeptical” that Hamas would actually disarm. And PM Netanyahu’s office said: “The most important concern for Israel is that nothing can happen ​before Hamas completely and truly disarms.”c

So while the US and regional leaders are busy celebrating and hailing the plan, the proverbial devil will be in the details and in the process – and needless to say a lot could go wrong.

Keep reading

The Ceuta Operation: Washington Wrote the Script in March, Morocco Ran It in July

Seventy-two bodies came out of the water at Tarajal, and the sea kept giving some of them back through the weekend. They drowned in sight of Europe, in the fourteen-kilometer channel where the Mediterranean meets the Atlantic, reaching for a seven-square-mile scrap of Spain on the African shore. Most were young men. Some were children. They died over three days at the end of July, crushed against a breakwater barrier or pulled under while swimming around it, and within forty-eight hours of the last of them entering the water more than forty-eight thousand of the living had turned and walked back into Morocco.

Between fifty and sixty thousand people crossed into Ceuta in seventy-two hours. The enclave holds about ninety thousand. In three days its population rose by seventy percent and then drained away, a tide come in and gone out on command. Spain’s prime minister called the crossing an attack and a violation of the country’s territorial integrity, and sent in the army.

Tides do not take instruction. States do. A crowd of sixty thousand does not gather the way weather gathers. It gathers because people are told where and when, because they travel, some of them from the far side of a country, because they arrive together, and because the security apparatus of one of the most heavily policed states in North Africa elects not to stop them. Each of those is a decision, and the decisions were Rabat’s to make.

The men who died did not come from the towns nearest the fence. They came from across Morocco, converging on Fnideq, the border town facing Ceuta, because the summons to gather there ran ahead of them across the social networks in the days before. Moroccan outlets described the convocation without embarrassment: an intense digital campaign calling young men to the border, Facebook groups passing along the swimming route around the barrier, people arriving from every part of the country within hours. None of it was concealed. In a state whose services read the networks as closely as any in the region, none of it went unseen.

The proof that this was a decision, and not a flood, lies eleven months back. In September 2024 the identical summons went out, the same calls, the same crowds, the same town, and Moroccan riot police dispersed them night after night until the attempt broke apart. The border held that year because Rabat had decided it would hold. The apparatus that closed it in 2024 did not evaporate before July 2026. It stood aside. At the fence last week, reporters from the Ceuta daily El Faro watched Moroccan soldiers wave the men through, and set down the obvious: a crossing on this scale was impossible unless the cordons let it happen. The Spanish police unions used a harder word than passivity. They called it blackmail, a pressure operation proper to a hybrid war.

Then the kingdom proved what it had chosen not to do. The moment Rabat judged the operation finished, it assembled overnight a fleet of buses and carried the crowds out of Fnideq to cities across the country, quickly and without incident. A government that can charter a bus fleet on a Friday night to empty a border town could have closed the road into it on the Wednesday. It did not close the road. The passivity was not weakness. It was the weapon.

The trucks belong in the record, and belong there carefully. Footage circulated of young men delivered toward the border in trucks while Moroccan agents looked on, and the footage became the crisis’s central image. Spain’s fact-checkers at Newtral could not geo-locate the main unloading clip to Ceuta and found AI-forged fakes moving in the same stream, while Moroccan state media labored to recast the same footage as an interception rather than a release. The clips are contested, and the contest is the evidence. Organized transport was filmed in the presence of the security forces, and a state apparatus moved in real time to govern how that transport was seen. The logistics and the management of the image ran on one clock. That is the signature of an operation, not a stampede.

The method had been set down in advance, in Washington, in the spring. On the twelfth of March, Michael Rubin, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, former Pentagon official, called on Donald Trump and Marco Rubio, through the Middle East Forum, to recognize Ceuta and Melilla as occupied Moroccan territory. Spain, he wrote, “remains a colonial power, running colonies across the Strait of Gibraltar on the northern coast of Morocco.” The grievance he named was not colonial injustice. It was that Sánchez had just recalled Spain’s ambassador from Israel and kept silent on Iran. Recognition would right a historical wrong, Rubin argued, on the model of Trump’s first-term recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over the Western Sahara, the transaction that bought Rabat’s signature on the Abraham Accords. The enclaves were the nearest lever, and he pulled it.

Four days on, he turned from Washington to Rabat. Morocco should gather, he wrote, send bulldozers to the border, and enter the two enclaves unarmed to raise the flag, the 1975 Green March run a second time, when Hassan II walked 350,000 civilians into the Spanish Sahara. And he answered the one objection that matters before anyone could raise it. An assault on the enclaves would not summon NATO, because Article 6 of the alliance treaty excludes territory south of the Tropic of Cancer. “Neither Ceuta, Melilla, nor the Canary Islands would trigger a NATO response,” he wrote, “just as NATO would not need respond to an attack on Hawaii or Puerto Rico.” A former Pentagon man had put the method on the page, unarmed masses moving on the fences, and priced the alliance’s silence into it beforehand. That is not opinion. It is a man who has thought through the morning after and wants it known the matter is in hand.

Keep reading

Watch Pete Buttigieg Fantasize About Finding Newer Ways to Tax People

Former transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg recently spoke to podcaster named Steve Bartlett and spent part of the time talking about new ways to tax people after lamenting that people keep finding ways to hide their wealth from the government.

This really is a window into the mind of a Democrat politician. This is the way they think. They fantasize about what they could do with your money.

The government already takes in trillions of dollars and a huge portion of it is stolen through fraud. Instead of trying to figure out how to spend that money more responsibly, they just think about ways to get more of it.

Quotes via Kanekoa the Great:

“If we had a more reasonable rate of taxation on capital gains and corporate income, and made it harder to pass along inherited wealth…”

“We’d be out of this doom loop we’re in saying… We can’t possibly do something like fast trains here in the United States. Of course we can. This is the wealthiest economy in the world.”

“If we aren’t collecting a fair level of taxes, then of course we’re going to come up short when we’re trying to fund those things.”

Keep reading

Trafalgar Square Gets Diversity Barriers…

London’s most iconic public space has been turned into a fortified zone. 

Heavy steel and concrete barriers now ring Trafalgar Square, hemming in Nelson’s Column and the open plaza that once defined the heart of the capital. Critics are calling them exactly what they are: diversity barriers. The temporary metal structures clearly exist for one purpose only—to stop vehicles being driven into crowds.

Footage circulating this week shows the bright yellow and concrete-style anti-ram units lining the approaches to the square. Tourists and locals navigate filter gaps between the devices while Nelson looks down on a landscape redesigned for a threat the authorities refuse to name.

These are not temporary crowd-control fences for a one-off event. They form part of a growing pattern across Britain.

Just days earlier, similar devices appeared at a family beach event in Nottingham’s Market Square. Fifteen Husson H-Stop units blocked the entrances there, designed to tip a three-and-a-half-tonne truck travelling at 30 mph.

Councillors described them as an “additional safety measure” following advice from a multi-agency group that included counter-terrorism officers. Organiser James Mellors admitted they “don’t look very pretty” but insisted the high-footfall area required them.

Keep reading

There’s a Real Problem in Seattle, and With Its Clueless Mayor, It’s Hard to See Resolution

There’s been a real mess brewing in the city of Seattle, and things have just about reached a fever pitch.

Criminal activity has reached an all-time high within the city, thanks to an inept Mayor, Katie Wilson, who can’t seem to figure out how to benefit her police department more. But then came a terrifying act – a mass shooting during the Bite of Seattle food event – on Sunday evening that has managed to leave three dead and a toddler wounded.

The police have acted quickly enough to apprehend a suspect, but they are still investigating the matter. But the shooting has led to a series of questions, namely surrounding then police chief Shon Barnes.

Apparently Barnes had been traveling at the time of the shooting, as he had just taken a trip from Chicago and was visiting the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives in Dallas. 

Of course, officers are allowed to visit events such as this, but apparently Barnes took criticism of his out of town visit the wrong way.

During a press conference earlier this week, Barnes actually got into a confrontation with a reporter who kept pressing him about his being out of town, insisting he was dedicated to his city. It’s clear the pressure had gotten to him, and he simply needed to contain himself before he did something he regretted.

Now, I don’t personally know the history of Barnes, though it sounds like it might have been a bit troubled. But rather than work with him to try and put the pieces together on what happened and, more importantly, trying to keep it from occurring again, Mayor Wilson instead decided to give him a choice – resign or be fired. 

Which is a horrible decision. It’s true that the shooting was a tragedy, and the press conference did not do Barnes any favors. But to come to such a drastic decision and leave the city with even more questions? It just shows how absolutely flawed Wilson’s leadership is.

Barnes chose to resign, with Wilson saying, “I’ll say this decision was not solely due to the events of Sunday. Multiple factors figured into this decision and into the conversation that the Chief and I had.”

But a different resolution couldn’t have been made? Suspension? An investigation into the matter? It sounds like Wilson’s just trying to save face with her voter base, rather than standing behind the police and trying to right the wrongs.

Again, I can’t speak on Barnes’ record, I just can’t help but think Wilson doesn’t “get it” when it comes to doing what’s right for the city. And I’m not the only one who thinks this.

City Council President Joy Hollingsworth and council members Bob Kettle, Dan Strauss and Debora Juarez made a joint statement following the resignation. “Having cycled through four police chiefs in just two and a half years, our priority must be stability, not further disruption. The people of Seattle deserve reliable leadership, especially as we close out a busy summer of public events.”

That says everything you need to know right there. Four police chiefs in less than three years. That means Wilson has butted heads with every single one of them, potentially wiping out any plans to give them the support they deserve.

What’s more, a letter penned by the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle and the Seattle NAACP noted that Barnes “should not be made a scapegoat for the complex challenges of public safety.”

So you’ve got a troubled police chief who didn’t even get a chance to validate himself for his actions and a mayor who can’t see eye to eye with, well, anyone in law enforcement. It’s a real mess, and the people of Seattle deserve far better.

There is light at the end of the tunnel here, and that’s with Deputy Chief Andre Sayles, who has stepped into the role of interim chief. It sounds like he’s good with Seattle police as a whole, with Kent Loux, President of the Seattle Police Officers Guild, noting he’s a “good pick.”

Now we just need Wilson to settle down and actually work with the police to make things good again. Between not addressing the shooting for several hours (which, surprise, she blamed the police for when it was clearly her fault) and dismissing a police chief before he even had a chance to figure out a proper resolution, I have zero faith in her at the moment. All we can hope is that she’ll work with Sayles and actually move forward in giving the police the support they need.

Because, otherwise, we’ll be looking at number five in a long line of police officials that Wilson can’t stand, and we have no idea who she’ll pick next.

Keep reading

SURPRISE! Zohran Mamdani’s Universal ‘Free’ Childcare Program Projected to Cost Billions More Than Planned

Zohran Mamdani’s universal and ‘free’ childcare program in New York City is now being projected to cost billions more than originally planned.

Who could have predicted such a thing?

Only a leftist could devise a government-run program that costs billions of tax dollars and have the nerve to call it free. It’s a concept that is completely lost on the media.

In this case, no one should be surprised that the price tag keeps going up.

The New York Post reports:

Mamdani’s universal childcare plan will cost taxpayers billions more than planned as costs balloon: report

Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s universal childcare plan will cost 50% more than he advertised, according to a new study.

The proposed program is estimated to cost a whopping $9 billion annually, approximately with an average cost per child roughly $27,000, according to the report from the Center for New York City Affairs, a nonpartisan research organization affiliated with the New School.

“An estimated $8.7 to $9.3 billion would be needed annually to fund universal child care in New York City,” the report, which was released on Monday, states.

That’s $3 billion more than the mayor previously said his ambitious universal free childcare program would cost.

Hizzoner promised on the campaign trail that his plan to make childcare free for children from 6 weeks old to five years old regardless of family income would cost about $6 billion per year and be paid for by taxing the state’s wealthiest earners.

The $3 billion gap identified in the study was largely tied to teacher pay, with the Center for NYC Affairs estimating some 23,000 new childcare workers will need to be hired, mainly for infants and children under three years old.

Keep reading

Scamdani and the Truth About City-Owned Grocery Stores

Some of my earliest memories are from a grocery store.

My mother, and later her sister, worked at a locally owned Key Market running the deli department. Baked goods, hot meals, sliced meats and fresh salads, and the best donuts you ever tasted made from scratch every day — it was a kid’s paradise. She would sometimes take me to work on Saturdays, and I’d help, doing everything but slicing the meat (age-restricted because it’s dangerous). It was fun for me, and I learned things I would not have learned watching cartoons.

Later, just before I married and became a military wife, I worked at my local Kroger regional office supporting loyalty card and marketing issues for, gosh, I guess it was about 200 stores. I learned a lot about the grocery business.

All this is to say: I know the difference between grocery economics and political theater.

Scamdani’s ever-evolving store plans

Zohran Mamdani, New York’s newest Hizzoner, ran largely on a pledge to create city-owned grocery stores, and today he’s working to fulfill that promise. Sort of. The idea was to decrease prices for consumers by removing the “gouging” profit model.

Some of his campaign promises included:

  • “Grocery prices are out of control. The cost of eggs and milk has skyrocketed. Some stores are even using dynamic pricing, jacking up the cost over the course of the day depending on what they can get away with. It doesn’t need to be this way. I’m Zohran Mamdani, and as mayor, I will create a network of city-owned grocery stores. It’s like a public option for produce. We will redirect city funds from corporate supermarkets to city-owned grocery stores, whose mission is lower prices, not price gouging.”
  • “I’m Zohran Mamdani, and as mayor, I will create a network of city-owned grocery stores. It’s like a public option for produce.”
  • “We will redirect city funds from corporate supermarkets to city-owned grocery stores, whose mission is lower prices, not price gouging.” (This one is especially rich, as you’ll see.)
  • “Last month, we announced that we would fulfill a campaign promise: that we would lower prices by creating a network of city-owned grocery stores, one in each borough. In these stores, prices will be cheaper.”

Sounds great. So last month, he announced the reality: a limited core basket including produce, meat, seafood, milk, bread, yogurt, and a few other things to be priced 30% below “typical retail,” whatever that really means, in city-owned and subsidized stores run by private for-profit operators. Operators are entitled to price everything outside the core basket at whatever they like. The discounted “basket” will be subsidized by the city. The city covers capital, rent, and property tax. And users, as announced today, will be required to prove residency with a “library card” style identification.

As Darth Vader said, the deal has been altered. Pray he does not alter it further.

Keep reading

California Democrats Overwhelmingly Back Billionaire Tax Ahead of High-Stakes November Ballot

California’s proposed billionaire tax cleared a major political hurdle on Sunday after winning the endorsement of the California Democratic Party.

The endorsement provides fresh momentum to the initiative just months before voters decide the measure at the ballot box.

The proposal secured the 60 percent threshold required for the party’s endorsement during a meeting of hundreds of Democrat officials in San Diego.

The approval came despite fierce opposition from some of the state’s most prominent Democrats.

If endorsed by voters in November, the measure would impose a one-time 5 percent tax on Californians with a net worth of at least $1 billion, affecting roughly 200 of the state’s wealthiest residents.

The endorsement is a significant victory for supporters after months of infighting within the Democratic Party.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra have both publicly opposed the proposal, warning it could encourage wealthy taxpayers to leave the state.

The initiative was placed on the ballot by the Service Employees International Union United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW), which claims the tax will raise an estimated $100 billion.

The money will be primarily used to offset healthcare funding reductions enacted by the Trump administration.

“This endorsement puts to rest the idea that California Democrats are not united by the billionaire tax—they are,” said Dave Regan, president of SEIU-UHW.

The measure has drawn support from far-left Democrats, including Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna, who argue California’s wealthiest residents should contribute more to fund healthcare programs.

Keep reading

Dems’ Open Border Policy Is A Form Of Hybrid Warfare—Against The American People

The invasion last week of the Spanish city of Ceuta by some 60,000 Moroccans, mostly young military-age men, was a useful demonstration of how mass migration and indeed entire populations can be weaponized and deployed in what amounts to hybrid warfare against sovereign nations.

In this particular case, the reason for the deployment likely has to do with the Moroccan state’s longstanding irredentist claims in North Africa, which include the coastal enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla—the plazas de soberanía along the North African coast that have belonged to Spain for more than four centuries but which Morocco has claimed since its independence in 1956.

My friend Joshua Treviño has a useful recap of the relevant history of this simmering conflict over at National Review, but the upshot is that “the Moroccan political project has from the start been focused on what it perceives to be the completion of its full territorial control over Africa’s northwestern corner.”

Whatever the eventual outcome of the invasion—and to be clear, what happened in Ceuta should be understood as such—Rabat’s motivations are at least comprehensible in classical geopolitical terms. The Moroccan state believes those territories belong to Morocco, and is willing to deploy coercive, if irregular, force to reclaim them. Spanish authorities have responded in kind, deploying the military and declaring that all 60,000 migrant invaders will be removed.

Insofar as the conflict here is fundamentally one of state versus state—over territorial claims, no less—the crisis in Ceuta has a decidedly 20th-century character about it. But the use of migrants as an invasion force is something new, and gives it a pointed relevance both to our century and our situation in America, where migrant invasions along our southern border are not primarily the work of a hostile foreign state, but of the Democrat Party.

The shocking reality is that the party responsible for orchestrating and encouraging the illegal border-crossing of some 12 million foreign nationals into the United States during the Biden administration was not the Mexican state, nor even the cartels that function as proxies for Mexico’s ruling Morena party. Yes, the cartels and their smuggling networks profited greatly from illegal immigration from 2021 to 2025. And yes, Mexican officialdom was scandalously complicit in the mass human trafficking operation that ensued during that period.

But the primary responsible party came from within our country, not outside it. If what we suffered was an invasion (and it was), then it was an invasion that relied for its success on treachery. The gates were not battered down, they were opened from the inside. The first day he was in office, President Biden rescinded via executive order nearly every border policy the first Trump administration had put in place. Those policies had reduced illegal border crossings to near-historic lows, as they have again done in Trump’s second term.

What ensued after Biden did this is well-known. Incentivized by explicit, official promises from the Biden administration that there would be no real enforcement of our immigration laws, that if you got into the country you would be allowed to stay, record numbers of foreigners from every corner of the globe rushed over our border. In some cases, the rush created the potential for a humanitarian crisis. In September 2021, for example, some 15,000 Haitians crossed the Rio Grande and set up a massive encampment under a bridge near Del Rio, Texas. The shocking images of the encampment captured by news media forced the Biden White House to take swift action to break up the camp. But that was merely to control the PR narrative, not to stem the steady onrush of migrants over the border.

It’s important to understand that these were not policy blunders by the Democrats. It’s not as if they didn’t know what would happen if they loosened or removed entirely Trump’s border controls. They knew full well, and did it on purpose. If what Morocco did in Ceuta could rightly be considered an act of war against Spain, the same could be said for what the Biden administration did to the American people from 2021 to 2025.

What makes it more disturbing than what happened last week in Ceuta is that the Democrats, unlike Rabat, were pursuing irredentist claims not on behalf of the their own people but on behalf of the global south. They effectively launched a foreign invasion of the United States, the ultimate object of which is to wrest control of the country from its native inhabitants by overwhelming the country with illegal immigrants.

Keep reading

Author JK Rowling Drops the Mask on Trans Orthodoxy

Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling has faced constant attacks for standing up for women.  Some of those attacks have come from woke actors who launched their careers, raking in millions of dollars, starring in the Harry Potter franchise.

J.K. Rowling has long been a target of extreme hate and frequent death threats from trans activists and the woke mob for her unwavering belief that men cannot become women.

The Gateway Pundit has reported on the transgender community and their allies directing their rage against Rowling for the sin of expressing her personal opinions on transgender issues.

She took a public stand supporting researcher Maya Forstater after Forstater was let go from her job for making comments labeled as “transphobic.”  Social Justice Warriors branded Rowling a “TERF,” which stands for “trans-exclusionary radical feminist,” for doing so.

She triggered the SJWs again for daring to “misgender” the person behind a Twitter account allegedly tied to Luis Morales, also known as Synthia China Blast, convicted of murdering a 13-year-old child.

Trantifa’s attacks against Rowling have included threats of violence, including calling for her death by hanging.

On Saturday, Rowling pointed out the absurdity of what the trans community is expecting women and girls to confront in what should be safe spaces.

Keep reading