Dutch court upholds arms exports to Israel despite acknowledging ‘grave risk’ of genocide

A Dutch appeals court on 6 November confirmed the dismissal of a case filed by pro-Palestinian organizations demanding that the Netherlands end arms exports to Israel and cease trade with Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.

In its written judgment, the court said it was not within the judiciary’s authority to dictate such measures, stating that the decision lies with the government.

The plaintiffs argued that as a signatory to the 1948 Genocide Convention, the Dutch state is obliged to take all available steps to prevent genocide, citing Israel’s ongoing mass killing of civilians in Gaza. 

The court agreed that the Netherlands holds that legal obligation and acknowledged “a grave risk” that Israel is committing genocide.

However, the judges maintained that the government already evaluates the risk of human rights abuses before approving military exports and noted that some applications have been denied.

The court also upheld an earlier ruling from December last year that sided with the Dutch state, which claimed it had taken sufficient precautions and halted certain shipments.

The pro-Palestine groups had alleged that Dutch companies supplied Israel with radar systems, F-16 components, warship equipment, police dogs, surveillance cameras, and software. 

The government countered that it has stopped most arms exports to Israel and now only authorizes deliveries of parts used in defensive systems such as the Iron Dome.

Israel has rejected all accusations of genocide, despite a UN inquiry officially announcing it in mid-September, insisting its Gaza campaign targets Hamas.

The appeals court concluded that the pro-Palestine organizations failed to demonstrate that the state systematically neglects its obligations when assessing export risks and therefore could not justify a blanket ban on arms or dual-use items.

Despite their public condemnations of Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, European nations remain the largest buyers of Israeli-made weapons, purchasing over $8 billion worth last year, according to Bloomberg

Demand is projected to grow further as NATO members prepare to raise defense spending to five percent of GDP by 2035.

The move is heavily dependent on Israel’s deeply integrated defense industries, including Elbit Systems, Rafael, and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI).

Keep reading

FIREWORKS! “DO NOT ANSWER THAT!” – Fulton County Board of Elections Chair LOSES IT When Member Asks “Do We Have the 2020 Ballots?”

During an tense exchange at a Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections meeting on Friday, boardmembers had a revealing argument over the 2020 elections records, including ballots, which are now subject to a Department of Justice investigation as well as previous Georgia State Election Board subpoenas. 

The only question is: where are the ballots?

This was asked by the lone Republican boardmember, Julie Adams, sparking a heated debate.

Chairwoman Sherri Allen immediately interjected when Adams asked Elections Director Nadine Williams, “Do we have the 2020 ballots?”

Miss Williams, Do not answer that. That is a matter that is currently, I believe, in litigation as well. And Ms. Adams, you well know that as well,” Allen shot back before Adams defended her right to ask the question.

Williams contempously told Adams, “As you’ve been told several times, the ballots are in the possession of the Clerk of Superior Court. She continued, “They are physically in the Clerk of Superior Court warehouse and secured in that location. They have been there for five years.”

When Adams stated that she was told the ballots were in the County’s posession at the warehouse, Williams accused her of lying, stating, “ Nobody told you that. They are in the clerk’s posession.” Chairwoman Allen then shut the debate down, arguing that the matter is before the court and the public will just have to wait for their ruling “soon.”

The board faced numerous public comments about the outstanding questions surrounding the 2020 election and ongoing investigations by the DOJ. Prior to the exchange over 2020 ballots, Julie Adams had questioned whether decisions about the subpoenas and 2020 election are subject to backroom executive session discussions. Sherri Allen had refused to hold any further public discussion or actions on the 2020 election subpoenas when Adams asked the golden question.

Keep reading

The Fraud That Won’t Die: Obamacare’s Endless Deceptions

While the government shutdown continues and health-care reform remains gridlocked, Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) burdens taxpayers with out-of-control costs. For more than a decade, Obamacare has been riddled with systemic fraud that has been denied by Democratic Party bureaucrats, ignored by much of the media, and paid for by weary taxpayers.

Built on lies including “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” Catholics continue to bitterly recall the duplicitous role that Sr. Carol Keehan, CEO of the Catholic Healthcare Association, played in passing Obamacare—despite the pushback by the Catholic bishops because of its inclusion of abortion funding and the contraception mandate. Sr. Keehan’s mendacious shepherding of the health-care program was rewarded with a silver signing pen from President Obama.

Intensifying the pressure today on an already overburdened health-care system, the influx of several million undocumented immigrants has pushed government-funded health care to a breaking point. According to an October 2024 CBO report to Rep. Jodey Arrington, federal and state governments spent $27 billion on Emergency Medicaid for noncitizens ineligible for full Medicaid coverage between 2017 and 2023. In 2023, the estimated cost of health care for undocumented immigrants in the United States was approximately $3.8 billion, specifically for Emergency Medicaid services.

Hospitals are bound by law to provide emergency services to undocumented patients under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), enacted in 1986. This is a federal law that requires hospitals to provide emergency medical care to all individuals, regardless of immigration status or ability to pay. Under EMTALA, any hospital that receives Medicare funding must conduct a medical screening exam for anyone who arrives at the emergency department and must provide stabilizing treatment for emergency medical conditions, including active labor. This mandate applies to undocumented immigrants as well as uninsured citizens and legal residents—and most of us strongly support the provision of this care to all on an emergency basis.

Unfortunately, such care is costly. According to the Trump administration, the estimated cost of emergency health care in 2024—including labor and delivery and postnatal care of the mothers and newborn babies—of undocumented immigrants in the United States rose 142 percent from the year before to an astonishing 9.1 billion dollars of taxpayer funds to pay for the emergency health care of those in the country illegally. Between 2020 to 2024, Medicaid taxpayer health-care dollars provided to illegal immigrants tripled.

Though critics argue that the Trump administration’s numbers are inflated, few challenge the fact that the nation’s hospitals are facing a fiscal crisis. In January 2024, Dr. Donna Lynne, CEO of Denver Health, publicly voiced concern over the financial strain caused by uncompensated care for undocumented individuals. Speaking at a finance and governance committee meeting, she stated, “Where do you think the migrants are getting care? They are getting care at Denver Health…It’s going to break Denver Health in a way that we didn’t even anticipate.” Her remarks highlighted the hospital system’s mounting fiscal challenges, noting that Denver Health treated over 8,000 undocumented immigrants in 2023, accounting for approximately 20,000 visits. Uncompensated care costs surged from $60 million in 2020 to $136 million in 2023.

Keep reading

Comey’s Daughter Reportedly Sought To Cut Deal With Epstein To Smear Trump

The former cellmate of Jeffrey Epstein claimed that James Comey’s prosecutor daughter offered the billionaire pedophile a deal to implicate President Donald Trump.

Maurene Comey, who recently resigned as the walls closed in on her notorious FBI father, began serving in 2016 as assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.

That put her front and center in the investigations of Epstein and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell after Epstein was arrested in July 2019.

While detained in New York’s Metropolitan Correctional Center, Epstein was assigned to a cell with Nicholas Tartaglione, a former police officer who was serving time for kidnapping  and quadruple murder.

Tartaglione was convicted of killing a man he suspected of stealing some $250,000 in drug money, as well as his nephews and a family friend who “were in the wrong place at the wrong time,” prosecutors said, according to the New York Post.

During the month that Epstein was incarcerated before his apparent suicide, Tartaglione claimed in a recent pardon application that his cellmate had the opportunity to save his skin by throwing the sitting president under the bus.

“Prosecutors … told Epstein that if he said President Trump was involved with Esptein’s crimes he would walk free. in a petition to be pardoned,” according to the Post, which said it had obtained a copy of the filing.

“Epstein told me that Maurene Comey said that he didn’t have to prove anything, as long as President Trump’s people could not disprove it,” the pardon application added.

“According to Maurene Comey, the FBI were ‘her people, not his [President Trump’s].’”

Maurene Comey’s father was forced out of his role as FBI director roughly two years prior. However, questions have continued to swirl about the dubious loyalties of officials including then-Attorney General William Barr and then-FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Even so, questions about Tartaglione’s credibility may outweigh the suspicions against the Deep State.

Keep reading

Nancy Pelosi’s Stock Market Return Rate During Her Time in Congress is INSANE

Nancy Pelosi is finally retiring from congress and she is doing so as an extremely wealthy woman.

During her 40 years in congress, her stock market return rate was 16,930 percent. Read that again. 16,930%

That is beyond stunning. People can spend their entire career working on Wall Street and not get that kind of return. It’s just the sort of thing that has spurred rumors of insider trading, and/or taking advantage of information gleaned by working in congress.

Pelosi is now worth over $280 million dollars. Not a bad haul for a public servant.

FOX News reports:

Pelosi earned more than $130 million in stock profits, return of 16,930%, during time in Congress: report

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and husband Paul Pelosi have raked in more than $130 million in stock profits over the course of her congressional career, a report said.

That’s a return of 16,930% over nearly four decades representing California, according to the New York Post.

The figure comes as Pelosi, 85, announced this week she will not be seeking re-election after completing her current term in 2027…

Before entering office in 1987, Pelosi and her husband reported between $610,000 and $785,000 in stocks in their portfolio, the Post said, citing a financial disclosure form.

Those stocks reportedly included Citibank and companies that are no longer publicly traded.

Over time, that portfolio has soared in value to $133.7 million today, the Post reported, citing estimates from Quiver Quantitative.

The newspaper said the profit of 16,930% exceeds the 2,300% that the Dow Jones had during the same time period.

Pelosi’s talents for investing are really unmatched, aren’t they?

Keep reading

Report: Ilhan Omar ‘in Collection Proceedings’ for Her Student Loans, Is Seeking to ‘Bully’ Her Way Out of Payments

For most Americans, a U.S. lawmaker with onerous student loan debt pushing for debt forgiveness would be viewed as a conflict of interest.

For at least one U.S. representative, it’s apparently a non-issue — and the American Accountability Foundation is livid about it.

According to the Daily Wire, Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar has been accused by the watchdog group over a number of issues.

In a scathing letter sent to House Speaker Mike Johnson, American Accountability Foundation President Thomas Jones outed Omar’s dubious finances — and “bully” reputation.

“We are writing today to share serious concerns about abuse of office and abuse of government loans by a member of the House of Representatives, Representative Ilhan Omar,” Jones said.

According to Jones, Omar is actually in collection proceedings on her federally guaranteed student loans.

Citing her financial disclosures, Jones called out the fact that Omar “currently has between $15,001 and $50,000 in outstanding loans.”

Jones noted, “As you know, these loans are guaranteed by the United States Government and Representative Omar’s default would shift the cost of her student loans onto the U.S. taxpayer.”

“The fact that someone making $174,000 as a Member of Congress cannot pay their student loans is unconscionable and embarrassing.”

Jones wasn’t done, however, as he had more issues with Omar than just the poor stewardship of her money.

“Adding insult to injury, there are credible claims that she is using her influence as a Member of Congress to bully the Department of Education into not collecting the past-due payments,” Jones wrote. “We have promulgated a Freedom of Information Act request for correspondence from Representative Omar to fully understand the scale of her abuse of office.”

To ensure that the Treasury Department will not be on the hook for Omar’s defaulted student loans, Jones demanded a drastic move from Mike Johnson.

“We are calling upon you to instruct the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives to impound Representative Omar’s Congressional salary and pay it out to Nelnet, the servicer of her federal student loan, until such time as her payments are current.”

The Daily Wire posted the whole letter online, which can be read here.

Social media naturally had a field day with this news, especially those who are fed up with Omar’s far-left rhetoric.

But the discourse over Omar’s finances did not originate with this inquiry.

Keep reading

Grand Jury Subpoenas Brennan, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok in Russiagate Investigation

Subpoenas are flying in the Russiagate investigation in South Florida.

In July, it was reported that former FBI Director James Comey and John Brennan were under FBI investigation over their involvement in Russiagate.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe referred Brennan and Comey for prosecution over the summer.

US Attorney in the Southern District of Florida Jason Reding Quiñones is in charge of the investigation.

On Friday, Fox News reported that a federal grand jury subpoenaed John Brennan, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page and former FBI counterintelligence special agent Peter Strzok

Peter Strzok was fired from the FBI in 2018 for violating bureau policies after he launched the ‘Crossfire Hurricane‘ Trump-Russia probe in July 2016.

Strzok and his paramour Lisa Page discussed an “insurance policy” to keep Trump out of office.

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office…that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected…but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok text messaged to Page in an Aug. 15, 2016 exchange, referring to Andrew McCabe.

“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40,” Strzok added.

Other profanity-laced text messages between Strzok and Page showed their contempt for Donald Trump.

Lisa Page was also fired.

Keep reading

Grassley, Durbin: DOJ blocking oversight of foreign intelligence courts

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ranking Member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) are urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) to amend its procedures for congressional attendance at Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR) proceedings ahead of the expiration of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) next April.

The current procedures, first established by the Biden administration in November 2024, and continued under the current administration, hinder congressional oversight and conflict with Section 5(d) of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA).

“The FISC Procedures, as drafted, comport with neither the plain language nor the spirit of RISAA, and raise numerous separation of powers concerns. As the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate’s primary committee of jurisdiction over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, we are troubled by the Department’s lack of transparency and failure to engage meaningfully with our committee as these procedures were developed. We request that the Department amend the FISC Procedures to comply with the Constitution and RISAA,” the lawmakers wrote.

RISAA – signed into law in April 2024 – requires DOJ to allow select members of Congress and designated staff to attend and conduct oversight of FISC proceedings. In November 2024, the Biden DOJ implemented a policy that requires members of Congress and their staff to agree to a series of arbitrary and inappropriate procedures before being allowed to attend FISC proceedings, which the Trump administration has maintained.

Some of DOJ’s policies and procedures include:

  • Prohibiting members of Congress from sharing information with other members of Congress and members of their staff;
  • Restricting members of Congress from requesting information or documentation from participants of FISC proceedings;
  • Allowing DOJ staff to remove congressional observers, including members of Congress, from FISC proceedings at any time and at the sole discretion of DOJ;
  • Allowing only a limited number of congressional observers to attend FISC proceedings at any one time;
  • Prohibiting designated staff from attending the same FISC proceeding as their specified member of Congress; and
  • Prohibiting note taking during proceedings, despite congressional staff’s ability to maintain classified notebooks.

Read Grassley and Durbin’s letter to DOJ HERE or below.

Keep reading

Mamdani: NYC Will Arrest ICE Agents. City in Danger of Trespassing Multiple Federal Laws.

In keeping with his Marxist campaign platform, New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani will apparently have his cops arrest Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

He didn’t use those words, but he did strongly imply it, as does his platform, which itself says he will put New York into rebellion and insurrection against the federal government.

Whether President Donald Trump will have Mamdani arrested if he interferes with ICE, as he promised in June, remains to be seen. But that might just happen. Mamdani’s campaign literature certainly seems to say he is willing to violate at least five federal statutes.

Mamdani’s Platform

Mamdani’s platform is clear on the immigration question: The city will harbor illegals and block ICE from arresting and deporting them. It vows to “end any cooperation” with the agency and “get ICE out of all city facilities.” That includes the city’s Rikers Island jail complex, which Mamdani plans to close anyway.

The reason: Cooperation “is not about making New York safer, but about tearing families apart and throwing our communities into disarray,” his website says:

The Mamdani administration will end this collaboration immediately and ensure all City-owned or City-leased facilities remain protected from Trump’s deportation efforts. The administration will also ensure that no City resources are used for immigration enforcement. … Overall, sanctuary laws make us safer, including by allowing undocumented people to talk to the police.

Mamdani promised to spend $165 million for illegals to get lawyers, and to “protect all personal data from other jurisdictions.” That means the city will not tell the government when it has arrested an illegal alien.

During his campaign, he vowed to “kick the ‘fascist ICE’ out of New York City.” The Big Apple, he said, will be “Trump Proof.”

Keep reading

History Will Not Be Kind to Dick Cheney

Dick Cheney died this week. He leaves behind a wretched legacy.

Cheney reached the pinnacle of his influence as George W. Bush’s vice president, a position from which he orchestrated the Iraq War and helped bring about one of the most intrusive pieces of legislation ever to have been leveled against the American people.

Democrats reflexively abhorred Cheney as veep, but as GOP voters became more averse to foreign intervention, he became a symbol of everything that is wrong with U.S. foreign policy. As Jack Kenny said in 2011, “[Cheney’s] impact on and, to a large extent, direction of foreign policy during the Bush presidency suggests that if he was and is a conservative, his is the kind of conservatism George Will described as believing that ‘government can’t run Amtrak, but it can run the Middle East.’”

Iraq Intervention: Why?

As vice president, Cheney was the loudest voice to advocate the invasion of Iraq. He broadcast the false narrative that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction with great zeal. But that wasn’t his first foray into Iraq, or the first time he led an invasion under a Bush. Cheney oversaw Operation Desert Storm in 1991 as secretary of defense under President George H.W. Bush. And in between Bush presidencies, when he wasn’t busy planning invasions into Iraq, Cheney worked as the CEO of Halliburton, one of the world’s largest oil companies.

It just so happens that Iraq is considered one of the top five oil-rich countries. And if it were up to Cheney, American soldiers would’ve been sent into other oil-rich Middle Eastern nations. According to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Cheney had grand plans to deploy American soldiers all over the Middle East. Kenny writes:

In his new book, A Journey: My Political Life, Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair recalls that Cheney wanted the United States to go to war not only with Afghanistan and Iraq, but with a number of other countries in the Middle East, as he believed the world must be “made anew.” “He would have worked through the whole lot, Iraq, Syria, Iran, dealing with all their surrogates in the course of it — Hezbollah, Hamas, etc.,” Blair wrote. “In other words, [Cheney] thought the world had to be made anew, and that after 11 September, it had to be done by force and with urgency. So he was for hard, hard power. No ifs, no buts, no maybes.”

Journalist and author Robert Parry also suspected these wider ambitions, which had been kept out of earshot of the American public. He wrote:

There have been indications of this larger neoconservative strategy to attack America’s — and Israel’s — “enemies” starting with Iraq and then moving on to Syria and Iran, but rarely has this more expansive plan for regional war been shared explicitly with the American public.

“Agency of the President”

Cheney once said, “Am I the evil genius in the corner that nobody ever sees come out of his hole? It’s a nice way to operate, actually.” This is related to the common perception that he was more powerful than the president. “At the minimum, Cheney was a co-equal to Bush and is widely understood to be perhaps the most effective vice president in history,” renowned left-wing journalist Seymour Hersh recently wrote. Kenny pointed out that one of the nicknames Cheney acquired as veep was “’Management,’ as in ‘Better check with management first.’” He wrote:

Former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas) described the free hand Cheney appeared to have in his dealings with Congress. “Dick could make a deal,” Gramm told [Barton Gellman], author of Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency. “He didn’t have to check with the president, not as far as I could tell. I’m sure at the end of the day, he would fill the president in on what happened. But Dick had the agency of the president.”

CFR Ties

While Cheney is rightly recognized, even by mainstream standards, as a negative influence on American policies, one important element that’s been widely overlooked in his ties to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a subversive foreign-policy think tank that we like to refer to as the “Deep State nervous system.” Cheney was a CFR life member. He served on its board of directors from 1987 to 1989 and again from 1993 to 1995, and was also its director at one point. Interestingly, he mentioned none of this in his 500-plus-page memoir, In My Time. In 2011, the former Wyoming lawmaker admitted during a visit to CFR headquarters that he had intentionally kept his ties to the organization a secret:

It’s good to be back at the Council on Foreign Relations. I’ve been a member for a long time, and was actually a director for some period of time. I never mentioned that when I was campaigning for reelection back home in Wyoming, but it stood me in good stead.

After his death, the CFR posted a warm tribute to him:

A steadfast steward of the Council, Cheney brought to our community the same seriousness of purpose, strategic insight, and commitment to public service that defined his distinguished career in government and the private sector. Cheney’s decades of leadership — as vice president of the United States, secretary of defense, member of Congress, and senior White House official — reflected a lifetime devoted to strengthening the United States’ national security and its role in the world. The Council is grateful to have counted Cheney as a member, director, and friend. We extend our deepest condolences to his family and loved ones.

Many would disagree with the CFR’s characterization. It’s difficult to see how sacrificing thousands of American lives and racking up debt to pay for overseas wars and fueling legislation that allows the government to spy on Americans have made the country stronger. Cheney was a key architect of the post-9/11 response. And as such, he helped finagle congressional approval for the PATRIOT Act, a wholly un-American piece of legislation that has greatly expanded the government’s ability to surveil Americans. He coordinated amendments with administration officials and reconciled the House and Senate versions. His chief of staff,  Scooter Libby, was also involved in high-level meetings about the act.

Keep reading