Blog

Hamas dissolves Gaza ‘Emergency Committee’ ahead of power transfer to technocrats

The Hamas terrorist group has reportedly dissolved its “Emergency Committee,” which has governed the Gaza Strip, signaling that it is preparing to transfer authority to the United Nations-backed technocratic National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG).

Officials added that Hamas has completed all administrative steps necessary to transition control to the technocratic committee under a framework heavily brokered in Cairo, Egypt, describing the decision as evidence of its commitment to Gaza’s redevelopment after years of wars and destruction.

“The head of the government’s emergency committee Mohammed al-Farra has officially submitted his resignation,” Ismail al-Thawabta, general director of the Hamas-run Government Media Office said at the news conference on Monday.

The move appears to mark a significant political shift within Hamas, which has run Gaza since it forcibly seized control from rival Palestinian movement Fatah in 2007.

Nonetheless, it is unclear whether the shift—which was announced by a lower-level official—would lead to any meaningful change over time.  

Al-Thawabta emphasized that “only technical and professional staff” would remain in their positions in an effort to manage the day-to-day functioning of the civilian population.

The general director referred to them as “public employees who are ready to work under the responsibility of the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza.”

The NCAG, led by Palestinian technocrat Ali Shaath, was established under the framework of the Board of Peace, an international oversight body formed following the ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel in early 2026.

A Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem called the development “a positive step forward on the path to implement the ceasefire deal.”

In a post on X, the Board of Peace said it had “taken note” of Hamas’s announcement saying that “ultimately, our assessment will be guided by actions, not promises, to meet the critical needs of the people of Gaza.”

Keep reading

SBA, USDA To Combat ‘Regulatory Abuse’ Lawfare Aimed At Farmers And Ranchers

The Small Business Administration (SBA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have signed a memorandum to counter lawfare targeting rural communities, ranchers, farmers, and small businesses.

Lawfare refers to the strategic use of legal proceedings to hinder targets. The SBA’s agreement with the USDA gives producers a “direct line to report the regulations and rules driving up costs and impacting productivity,” the agency said in a July 2 statement.

It also enables the SBA and the USDA to “identify broader patterns of regulatory abuse to advance lasting deregulatory reform.”

The USDA will run a centralized portal that will receive lawfare complaints involving federal agencies, which will be shared with the SBA’s Office of the National Ombudsman. Any complaint involving the USDA will be handled by the department, while other complaints will be referred by the SBA to the appropriate agencies.

Under the agreement, the SBA is authorized to analyze complaint data to identify recurring lawfare practices, enforcement, or regulatory issues that are assessed as abusive or disproportionate. This is expected to provide insight that would guide deregulatory action for broader reforms.

In a July 2 X post, SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler said the agreement between the USDA and the SBA lets “producers get back to what they do best: feeding, clothing, and fueling America.”

“Family farms should not have to spend time and resources they don’t have fighting crushing regulations or costly legal battles waged by radical anti-ag ‘environmentalists,’ whether they are inside or outside the government,” she said.

In its statement, the SBA said the memorandum is in line with a January 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump, “Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.”

Trump said in the order that the “ever-expanding morass” of complicated federal regulations was creating “substantial restraint” on economic growth and hampering the country’s global competitiveness.

For each new regulation issued by any agency, Trump ordered that at least 10 previous regulations be identified for elimination.

Commenting on the memorandum, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said: “This partnership with the SBA creates clear pathways for redress, ensures fairness in enforcement, and demonstrates that Washington stands with, not against, the hardworking Americans who sustain our country.

“Through the USDA Lawfare Portal and interagency collaboration, we are delivering real protection under the Farmer and Rancher Freedom Framework.”

The Farmer and Rancher Freedom Framework is a plan aimed at protecting and preserving American agriculture while ending “onerous regulations” and the weaponization of government against ranchers and farmers, according to a Feb. 11 statement from the USDA.

The plan seeks to defend farmers and ranchers from politically motivated enforcement actions, protect agricultural lands from unnecessary federal projects, and remove burdensome rules that stifle productivity.

It also seeks to reform environmental laws to strike a balance between conservation and common sense.

Keep reading

Muslim Goes Viral Shouting, ‘This Is the Islamic Republic of New Yorkistan… Mamdani’s New York,’ Claims ‘Islam Will Be in Every Household’

A popular Muslim streamer said the quiet part out loud as he celebrated Egypt’s victory over Australia on Friday in the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

The streamer in question is 27-year-old Nicolas Kenn De Balinthazy, who goes by his username “Sneako” on social media.

Balinthazy, a New York City native, was filmed celebrating in the streets with a group of fans after the aforementioned victory, but decided to inform viewers, “This is the Islamic Republic of New Yorkistan.”

“Islam will be in every household, Inshallah [God willing]. The whole world is Muslim. Welcome to Mamdani’s New York,” he said in a reference to New York City Democratic Mayor Zohran Mamdani, the first Muslim to hold the office.

“You see this city? You see how it looks? Inshallah, your city looks just like this too.”

Keep reading

2028 Democrat Presidential Hopeful Exposes Party Civil War Against Its Socialist Wing

Gov. Josh Shapiro sat down with Dana Bash on CNN’s State of the Union this weekend and said the quiet part out loud: his party is being overrun by its socialist and far left flank.

Bash pressed Shapiro on Darializa Avila Chevalier, who won the Democratic congressional primary in New York’s 13th congressional district last month while running as an open socialist.

Chevalier’s platform includes abolishing prisons, opening the borders, ending deportations, and granting mercy even to violent criminals. 

Bash also noted that Chevalier attended a pro-Palestinian rally on October 8, 2023, one day after Hamas terrorists slaughtered, raped, and kidnapped their way across southern Israel.

According to Bash, that rally featured antisemitic rhetoric defending the attack. Bash asked Shapiro how he feels, as a Democrat, about someone with those views heading to Congress.

Shapiro tried to have it both ways.

“Well, her district voted for her,” he said. But that statement also came with a convenient disclaimer. “But I have profound differences from that particular candidate, based on the citations that you read there. And she’s not someone who, you know, seemingly, I would agree with on many things, or that we share similar values. She ran on the Democratic ticket, I guess as a socialist; her voters in that district determined that she was the one they wanted representing them.”

Note the hedge. Shapiro was describing someone who wants to shield violent criminals from deportation and who reportedly stood in solidarity with people cheering a massacre of Jews. Yet, the strongest word he could summon was “seemingly.”

Bash followed up by asking what Chevalier’s win says about the Democratic Party. Here Shapiro dropped whatever remained of the diplomatic pretense. “I think that what our party has to go through, that will be very healthy, and something that we’ve not really done since the 1992 elections, is to have a battle over what we believe in,” he said.

Keep reading

Muslim Teen Filmed Himself Stabbing Orthodox Jew in Switzerland – Faces One Year in Prison Max

A Muslim teen in Switzerland filmed himself stabbing an Orthodox Jew in Zurich in 2024.

The teen was 15 at the time of the attack and wished to die a “martyr” or religious killer for Allah.

He faces one year in prison despite being charged with multiple counts of attempted murder.

At the time of the attempted murder, local police said it was not clear what drove the Muslim boy to target the Jewish man but the crime may have been motivated by antisemitism.

YNet News reported:

A juvenile court in Zurich is currently hearing the case of a Muslim teenager, now 17, accused of carrying out an antisemitic stabbing attack against an ultra-Orthodox Jewish man in the city on March 2, 2024.

Prosecutors have charged him with multiple counts of attempted murder and planning a massacre at a synagogue, but due to his age at the time of the attack, 15, the maximum sentence the court can impose is one year in prison.

During the hearing, the judge sought to understand how the defendant became a supporter of Islamic State, how he planned the attack and what his attitude toward the victim is today. The defendant refused to answer any of the questions, repeatedly replying, “No comment.” Due to his silence, the court relied on statements he made during the investigation. According to those statements, his goal was to be killed by police after the attack in order to die as a “martyr” and reach paradise.

Keep reading

From Healing to Harm

Medicine is fundamentally oriented toward healing. Physicians have cured diseases, alleviated pain, extended life expectancy, and expanded collective self-understanding beyond what was conceivable a century ago. Few professions have contributed more to human well-being. However, medicine also confers significant power. Physicians influence individual behavior, shape public policy, direct scientific research, and, particularly during crises, wield considerable authority within society. This power can be beneficial, yet it also risks transforming confidence into unwarranted certainty and rendering authority resistant to challenge.

Power itself is not inherently dangerous; the greater risk lies in excessive certainty.

The most significant ethical failures in medicine rarely stem from malicious intent. More commonly, they arise from overconfidence, hasty decision-making, and the belief that challenging circumstances necessitate drastic measures. The transition from beneficence to harm is seldom abrupt; it typically unfolds gradually, propelled by good intentions and increasing confidence in one’s own judgment. Numerous troubling episodes in medical history were initiated by individuals who sincerely believed they were acting appropriately.

The authority of medicine is grounded in general trust. Patients disclose their most profound concerns to physicians, trusting that truth, compassion, and respect will be prioritized. Society grants physicians special privileges, with the expectation that their expertise will be exercised judiciously and with humility. Perfection is not expected; rather, honesty, acknowledgment of uncertainty, and a commitment to continual reassessment are essential. These responsibilities are foundational to contemporary medical ethics and research regulations.¹⁻⁵ Yet, uncertainty is uncomfortable.

Uncertainty is broadly uncomfortable for patients, governments, the public, and physicians alike. During crises, this discomfort intensifies. Emergencies such as pandemics or wars generate a collective demand for definitive answers, even in the absence of sufficient information. Leaders may feel compelled to project confidence, while experts experience pressure to alleviate public anxiety. The inherent uncertainty of scientific inquiry can, under these conditions, become particularly difficult to tolerate.

In these situations, medicine faces a big risk: mistaking confidence for real knowledge.

Scientific progress is driven not by consensus, but by the continual questioning of established ideas, the challenging of prevailing norms, and the willingness to adapt in response to new evidence. Experienced physicians have witnessed the abandonment of once-celebrated treatments. Medical paradigms have shifted repeatedly; interventions once embraced have been discarded, and regulations once considered immutable have been revised. These changes do not signify failure; rather, they demonstrate the ongoing vitality of scientific inquiry.⁶⁻⁸

Science moves forward because of doubt, not because everyone agrees.

Throughout medical history, episodes abound in which certainty yielded to humility. Bloodletting persisted for centuries under the mistaken belief that its rationale was sound. Frontal lobotomy, initially regarded as a breakthrough and recognized with a Nobel Prize, was later discredited due to its harmful consequences. Hormone therapy for postmenopausal women was widely adopted until large-scale studies raised concerns about its safety and efficacy. Certain antiarrhythmic drugs, intended to prevent sudden cardiac death, were subsequently found to increase risk in some populations. Numerous critical care practices once deemed reasonable have since been revised or abandoned.

These stories do not mean science is incompetent. Instead, they remind us to stay humble. They show that our knowledge can change, and we should remember that we might not see the whole picture. Being willing to question ourselves is not a weakness in medicine; it is one of its greatest strengths.⁶⁻⁸

When physicians become convinced of their infallibility, significant risks emerge. Excessive certainty can gradually suppress intellectual curiosity, diminish openness to alternative perspectives, and reduce receptivity to novel ideas. Over time, leaders may disregard criticism, transforming constructive debate into perceived disloyalty and rendering uncertainty a subject to be concealed rather than discussed.

Crises make ethical challenges even more complicated. Emergencies change what we see as right and wrong. Things that once seemed extreme can suddenly feel necessary. Societies accept restrictions and actions that would have been unthinkable just months before. Sometimes these changes are justified because emergencies do require action. The real ethical question is not whether we should adapt in a crisis—we must. The question is where adaptation ends, and ethical erosion begins.¹,²,⁴,⁹

Historical evidence indicates that emergencies frequently concentrate power among a limited group and reduce opportunities for dissent. In times of crisis, themes of urgency, unity, and rapid action dominate discourse. While these responses are understandable, they can oversimplify complex issues, obscure uncertainty, and marginalize alternative viewpoints. Paradoxically, periods that most require wisdom and humility may instead foster overconfidence and increased centralization of authority.

Keep reading

Tyrant Gavin Newsom Panics: Threatens to Prosecute Anyone Helping President Trump Secure Fair Elections – Pushes New Felony Law to Criminalize Ballot Scrutiny Before Certification

In yet another desperate power grab, radical Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is warning that anyone who dares help President Trump protect election integrity in California will be prosecuted.

He’s now moving forward with legislation to make it a FELONY to seize ballots before they’ve been certified by his hand-picked state and county officials.

This is the same Gavin Newsom who has spent years resisting basic election security while California’s system remains wide open to abuse.

In a video statement posted on social media, Newsom warned that anyone who assists President Donald Trump in what he described as interference with California’s elections would face prosecution under state law.

Newsom: Let me speak directly to anyone considering helping President Trump interfere with our election or our count: If you violate California’s laws, if you interfere with our voters, tamper with our ballots, or meddle in our election, you will be prosecuted. It doesn’t matter who gave the order.

That’s why I’m moving forward with new legislation that would make it a felony to seize ballots before the vote has been certified by state and county officials.

We will be the wall he cannot get past because we believe that, once an election is decided, the winner governs for everyone. That’s the architecture of American liberty.

Donald Trump—he doesn’t believe in that architecture.

Keep reading

The Looming Shadow of the “Useless Class”

Harari’s Warning: A New “Useless Class” Emerges

In influential circles tied to global institutions, a chilling phrase has entered the conversation: the rise of a “useless class.” Historian and World Economic Forum advisor Yuval Noah Harari has repeatedly warned that rapid advances in artificial intelligence and automation will render vast numbers of people economically irrelevant. In his book Homo Deus and various public statements, Harari describes this emerging group not merely as unemployed but as unemployable, stripped of meaningful contributions to the economic and political systems that define modern power.

Superfluous People: What Happens When AI Replaces Humanity

He has pointed out that in the 21st century, the central economic question may become what to do with “superfluous people” once algorithms outperform humans in most tasks. This is not abstract futurism. It reflects observable trends: AI already displaces roles in manufacturing, transportation, customer service, coding, analysis, and creative fields. Entire professions face obsolescence. When millions cannot secure stable employment, societies risk labelling them burdens rather than citizens with inherent worth.

Echoes of “Useless Eaters”: From Nazi Eugenics to Modern Efficiency

This language echoes darker historical precedents. The term “useless eaters” originated in early 20th-century eugenics and Nazi propaganda, where authorities deemed the disabled, elderly, or unproductive as drains on resources unworthy of life. Those regimes justified sterilization, euthanasia, and gruesome experiments on living humans deemed irrelevant, using economic and efficiency as grounds. While today’s discussions avoid explicit calls for elimination, the underlying logic of sorting human value by productivity should alarm anyone who values individual dignity.

Schwab’s Fourth Industrial Revolution: Mass Redundancy Ahead

Harari’s warnings align with broader elite conversations about technological disruption. Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, has addressed the Fourth Industrial Revolution and its potential to create redundancy for many workers. The concern is real: without robust adaptation, large segments of the population could become dependent on state or corporate systems, vulnerable to control.

Georgia Guidestones: The Elite Blueprint for Drastic Population Cuts

This feeds into visions of a restructured world. The Georgia Guidestones, a controversial monument erected in 1980 in Georgia and later destroyed, laid out ten guiding principles for humanity. Its first commandment declared: “Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.” That explicit target of drastic population reduction (over 90%) has fueled suspicions about long-term agendas among some influential figures who see overpopulation as a crisis. It underscores a mindset that prioritizes global limits over unfettered human flourishing.

15-Minute Cities and Depopulation: Easier Rule Over Fewer Subjects

Critics argue that depopulation pressures, whether through policy, technology, or subtle incentives, serve a strategic purpose. A smaller global population would make centralized rule far simpler for oligarchs and technocrats. Concepts like 15-minute cities, promoted as sustainable urban planning where residents access work, food, healthcare, and leisure within a short walk or bike ride, illustrate the point. Proponents highlight reduced emissions and convenience. Yet skeptics see them as prototypes for contained zones: easier to monitor, restrict movement within or between, and enforce compliance through digital systems and surveillance. In a depopulated world with AI handling production, the need for expansive human labor and freedom of movement diminishes. Elites could manage compact, dependent populations more effectively, where dissent or excess can be easily isolated.

AI Job Apocalypse: Creating the Perfect Storm of Control

The fusion of AI-driven job loss and these control-oriented frameworks paints a grim picture. Displaced workers, stripped of purpose and economic agency, risk being recast as “useless” burdens in the eyes of systems optimized for efficiency. Harari himself has noted the profound inequality this could create, with a small elite of data owners and tech masters holding unprecedented power over the masses.

Euthanasia Explosion: From Terminally Ill to Depressed, Mentally Ill, and Children

Compounding these concerns is the rapid expansion of euthanasia laws across several nations. What began as a limited option for the terminally ill has broadened dramatically to encompass the depressed, mentally ill, and even children. In Canada, Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) has surged since its introduction in 2016. By 2024, there were 16,499 reported MAiD provisions, accounting for over 5 percent of all deaths in the country, with cumulative totals nearing 76,000. Cases increasingly include individuals with non-terminal conditions, disabilities, and vulnerabilities tied to poverty or isolation. In the Netherlands, total euthanasia deaths reached 9,958 in 2024, a 10 percent rise from the prior year. Psychiatric cases alone jumped to 219 from 138 in 2023, with a sharp increase among younger people under 30. Belgium and other jurisdictions show similar patterns of extending to minors. This normalization risks categorizing those with chronic illness, depression, or mental health challenges as burdens on the system. It reinforces the “useless eaters” logic by offering death as a solution to suffering that could instead prompt investment in care, community support, and human dignity. Such policies align conveniently with broader depopulation narratives, reducing pressure on resources while framing elimination as compassion.

Keep reading

Federal Court Rules Against Amish Families in Religious Exemption Case — Will Supreme Court Have the Last Word?

A federal court last week ruled against a group of Amish parents who sought religious exemptions from school vaccination requirements for their children — a ruling that legal experts suggest may lead to a U.S. Supreme Court showdown that could determine the future of religious exemptions nationwide.

In its ruling in Miller v. McDonald, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said New York State’s law eliminating religious exemptions from school vaccination requirements is “neutral and generally applicable,” doesn’t discriminate against specific religious practices and furthers the state’s interest in protecting the public from disease.

The plaintiffs, a group of parents and representatives of Amish schools in New York, sued New York’s Department of Health and Department of Education in 2023, alleging the state’s law barring religious exemptions violates the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause under the First and 14th Amendments.

The parents face $118,000 in fines for noncompliance with the state’s vaccination requirements.

Last week’s decision was the second time the 2nd Circuit ruled against the plaintiffs. The same court previously dismissed the suit in 2024, upholding a decision by another federal court earlier that year.

In December 2025, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the 2nd Circuit, asking it to review constitutional questions arising out of a separate ruling, Mahmoud v. Taylor, in 2024. In that case, the Supreme Court found that parents have the right to request an exemption for their children from LGBTQ curriculum on religious grounds.

According to The Washington Post, last week’s ruling in Miller v. McDonald may “set the stage for a potential Supreme Court battle over vaccine mandates,” citing legal experts who suggested the court is likely to accept the case for review on constitutional grounds and in light of the Mahmoud v. Taylor decision.

Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University professor of health law and an outspoken vaccine proponent, told the Post he expects the Supreme Court to “reverse the appellate court’s decision” if it chooses to review the case.

A review could result in a ruling that would “allow religious vaccine exemptions nationwide,” the Post reported.

The Post reported last month that the Supreme Court has signaled that it “may be open to a constitutional claim based on the lack of a religious exemption for vaccine mandates in New York.”

A Supreme Court ruling in favor of the Amish plaintiffs would be “the anti-vaccine movement’s biggest win,” the Post wrote.

Keep reading

ABC’s Hostin: American Flags All Over the Community Make Me Feel Unsafe

Monday on ABC’s “The View,” co-host Sunny Hostin said she felt “unsafe” when a community has American flags “all over.”

Hostin said, “You know, I think unfortunately in this country, people have different lived experiences. So while some may have a lived experience like this, it is the best country in the world. And while there’s some stuff that goes on, you know, other things are OK. That, for me, was a defining image of modern America for black Americans, defining. Patriot Front is a white nationalist organization founded in 2017 after the deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. You know what, they promote an ultra nationalist ideology that focuses on creating a white ethno-state in the United States with the ultimate goal of reshaping American society to align with their vision of racial and cultural homogeneity. As a black woman, I’m sitting there in my country, and that’s the type of fear I have to experience.”

She added, “When I walk into a community and I see American flags all over the community and I suddenly feel unsafe because there is a section of this country that has co-opted the American flag and they equate being an American or an American flag with white supremacy. And that should never be ever the symbol of white supremacy.”

Keep reading