US Democrat Party Leaders are Jaundiced Cowards

[Read the ABC report at the end of this post]

Under the GOP-MAGA umbrella there are scores of heavily armed radical right-wing, racist, white supremacist, survivalist, extremist and terrorist groups that are never ostracized or rejected by the "mainstream" republican establishment. Donald Dumb even called them "decent people". I am talking about gangs like the KKK, Proud Boys, the Patriot Movement, Michigan Militia, the NRA, Oath Keepers, Three Percenters, Boogaloo Bois, Patriot Prayer, Aryan Nations, the Atomwaffen Division, etc.... whose neo-Nazi members proudly march down the streets of American cities, weapons pointed at people, without being bothered by police and the government and are not even criticized by the Republican establishment.

No one in the Republican party renounces or denounces these sociopathic terrorists (Timothy McVeigh bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995, killing 167 Americans) nor does the leadership of the Republican party tell these groups to leave the GOP and create their own party. 

For some reason, the Republican party has created for itself an aura of entitlement by monopolizing the notion of "patriotism", a fake one to be sure, but one that is wrapped by the flag and other superficial slogans and imagery that belong to nationalism rather than patriotism. In contrast, the Democrat party always seems to be apologetic and insecure, as if willingly fitting the GOP's description of the Democrats as being "less-Americans" simply because it embraces immigrants and people of different races, creeds and backgrounds, whereas the Republicans are largely a white Anglo-Saxon protestant party.

For those who don't know the difference: Patriotism is love of one's country, pure and simple. Nationalism is hatred of other countries and peoples which, by default, suggests love of one's country. A patriot is someone who loves his country without hating other peoples and countries. A nationalist is someone who must hate others to prove he loves his country. 

REPUBLICANS AND THEIR MAGA AND WHITE CHRISTIAN SUPREMACIST AFFILIATES ARE NOT PATRIOTS. THEY ARE NATIONALISTS WHO CONFLATE HATE FOR OTHERS WITH LOVE FOR COUNTRY.

In contrast, the Democrats do play into the GOP's dirty game of having to constantly defend their patriotism. The fact that Democrats include in their ranks Catholics, Blacks, immigrants and disaffected minorities of all brands has constituted the central accusation by Republicans that the Democrats are not "pure" Americans. What the Democrats fail to do is assert their patriotism with more fervor; they always seem to be on the defensive because their patriotism is not coupled with hatred of others. But they are naive in assuming that a timid, apologetic, and centrist posture is their key to fighting the Republicans. AND THAT IS because they are trapped by the Republicans into a defensive posture.

Just as Republicans and the GOP embrace hard-right radical extremists - they still defend their own barbarians for attacking Congress in the insurrection of January 6, 2021 - the Democrat party must embrace more hard-left groups. What's good for the Republican goose must be good for the Democrat gander!

Around the world, people who do not understand the internal dynamics of US politics always see the Republicans as the "real" Americans. This is perhaps because the Republicans are interventionists and warmongers who launch useless and deadly wars - which they never win, but that is less important for ignorant outsiders who see Republicans as "stronger" than Democrats - By waging wars ands beating their chest like apes and other primates, Republicans are more visible to the rest of the world.

And now, faithful to their assumed weakness and succumbing more to the GOP-inflicted guilt of being "less Americans", traditional establishment Democrats, like James Carville below, are playing their GOP-assigned role as weak centrists by demanding that progressive candidates who label themselves as Socialist Democrats and who are winning one victory after another from within the party, leave the party and start their own. By telling the progressive Democrats they do not belong to the party and that they should leave the party and start their own, Carville is falling into the GOP trap. He is accepting of a GOP that embraces right wing radicalism, but is rejecting a Democrat party that embraces everyone, even hard-left constituents. Carville has apparently not learned anything from the past decade of a Trump-dominated GOP.

And that is why the American people who denounce Trump's Republican party by and large find the Democrats not up to par, not a sufficient counterpart.

Mr. Carville: Use the progressive members of your party to rally the troops and signal to the GOP that the Democrats are as entitled Americans as the GOP claims to be. You need to fight dirty just like the GOP always does, especially after it was hijacked by Donald Dumb.

=====================================================
James Carville says Mamdani-backed candidates should form separate party


Alicia Sitz
Thu, June 25, 2026

(NewsNation) — Democratic socialist candidates made major gains in elections across the country Tuesday night.

Three candidates gaining the most attention are Democratic socialists Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier, and progressive Democrat Brad Lander. All of them were backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani in what was considered a major test of his political influence and the strength of the city's progressive movement overall.

"We are showing there is a new path for politics in our city and in our country," Mamdani said. "We are showing that last June, a year ago tomorrow, was not an anomaly. It was not the end. It was the beginning."

However, some in the Democratic Party believe success of the left could bring the party down.

Democratic strategist James Carville thinks some critics of Tuesday's results are being overly dramatic, calling their reactions "90% hysterical." But he told NewsNation's Elizabeth Vargas on Wednesday that he doesn't understand or appreciate these candidates' efforts to use the Democratic Party to advance their socialist ideals.

"All of these people hate Democrats," Carville told Vargas. "Why do you want to run as a Democrat? Start your own movement. If it's such a powerful, sweeping movement that's got momentum everywhere, then go ahead and be at the head of it. Don't use the Democratic Party to advance it."

Carville specifically called out Chevalier, saying Democrats shouldn't seat her if she wins in November. He said her views were against anything Democrats support.

"We believe in pluralism. She doesn't even believe in interracial dating," Carville said.

Carville referred to social media posts Chevalier published from 2018 to 2022. The posts included attacks on Democratic leaders, questioned the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and criticized interracial relationships.

Carville also called out the socialist movement's anti-Israel sentiment, saying it's not what the Democratic Party is about.

"You can be hugely anti the policies of the government of Israel. …But when you say, 'I don't think Israel should exist,' then I don't have room for you," Carville said. "When you start to write, 'They don't have to exist,' or you run against the concept of Jewish people, then you've got no place at my table."

While Carville said they are entitled to their opinions and that free speech protects them, having them seated in the Democratic caucus is not appropriate based on the party's values.

"We just don't want to be in the same political party with them."

NewsNation's Steph Whiteside and Jessica Kartalija contributed to this article.

======================================================

Can Democrat veterans running for Congress reclaim the patriotism narrative from the GOP?


OREN OPPENHEIM and GABY VINICK
Fri, June 26, 2026

Some of the military veterans running for Congress as Democrats in the 2026 midterms see themselves as part of the party's push to showcase itself as patriotic amid polling showing Democrats broadly feeling less proud of the country than Republicans.

An Ipsos poll conducted earlier this year found 63% of Republicans saying that the phrase "I feel proud to be an American" described them extremely well, compared to just 14% of Democrats. The same poll found 65% of Republicans saying the phrase "there's no place I'd rather live than the U.S." described them extremely well, compared to 19% of Democrats.

Houssein Hersi/AFP via Getty Images - PHOTO: Captain Nancy Lacore delivers a speech during a handover ceremony at the Camp Lemonier navy base in Djibouti, July 20, 2017.

One caveat: the discrepancy between Democrats and Republicans in the poll could be explained in part by Democratic opposition to the White House and its policies.

But those military veteran Democrats are campaigning in part on saying that patriotism isn't partisan, or that critiquing the government can itself come from having pride in the country and wanting it to improve.

"I think that's kind of silly to think that patriotism belongs to one particular party," said Nancy Lacore, a retired vice admiral and former Chief of Navy Reserve running for Congress in South Carolina after having been removed from her position by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in 2025.

"In my mind, patriotism isn't about, like, 'Oh, I got the biggest flag' or 'I'm cheering the loudest at events.' To me, patriotism is grounded in service, that you love your country enough to try to make it better, serve your country, strengthen it, uphold the Constitution."
'The most patriotic duty you have is to question'

In Florida's 13th Congressional District, Leela Gray, a retired Army brigadier general, is one of the Democrats running for the chance to flip a seat held by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna. Gray told ABC News, "I served in uniform for 30 years. I had no idea if people were an independent or a Republican or a Democrat. It didn't matter. What mattered was, could you trust the person next to you?"

U.S. Army - PHOTO: Brig. Gen. Leela Gray waits to be introduced as the guest speaker for the Sisters in Arms general session at Shaw Air Force Base, S.C., July 6, 2018.

Over in Kansas, two former service members are among the Democrats competing in a crowded field to unseat incumbent Sen. Roger Marshall.

State Sen. Patrick Schmidt is a former naval intelligence officer based in Topeka who still serves in the Army Reserve. He told ABC News he rejects the premise that Democrats need to "reclaim" patriotism: "We're all trying to figure out how do we communicate with more people, how do we meet more people, but I think I reject the idea that we've lost the plot."

John Hanna/AP - PHOTO: Kansas Democratic congressional candidate Patrick Schmidt answers questions during an interview with The Associated Press, Oct. 31, 2022, at his campaign headquarters in Topeka, Kansas.

Another Democrat in the race, Noah Taylor of El Dorado, is a former Army infantryman and counterintelligence analyst who co-founded the nonpartisan political advocacy group Leading Kansas.

"We stopped talking about the things that make America great, and being a patriot doesn't mean that you can't criticize this country. In fact, the most patriotic duty you have is to question, to make things better," Taylor said in an interview.

Noah Taylor/X - PHOTO: Noah Taylor, candidate for Congress in Kansas in a video posted to his X account.'I love this country'

In New Jersey's toss-up 7th District, Rebecca Bennett won the Democratic nomination in early June to take on GOP Rep. Tom Kean. Bennett is a former Navy helicopter pilot and served for over a decade and also worked as a test pilot and served in the Air National Guard.

She said she does not shy away from any themes of patriotism: "I am a patriot. I love this country. It's why I joined the military. It's why I'm doing this now. And I explicitly say that in my stump [speech] every time when I'm talking to people."

Ryan Murphy/AP - PHOTO: Rebecca Bennett, Democratic candidate for New Jersey's 7th Congressional District, speaks during a primary election night watch party after winning the Democratic nomination, June 2, 2026, in Bridgewater, N.J.

Democratic veterans running for Congress also point to their military bona fides when discussing the Iran war and how it's driven up prices.

Matt Maasdam, a retired Navy SEAL and onetime military aide to former President Barack Obama who is running in a swing district in Michigan, told ABC News, "As somebody who watched Baghdad and Kabul roads get fixed while I was overseas, I want to see Michigan's roads get fixed. If we don't have money to spend on health care and education in America, why are we spending billions of dollars dropping bombs on the other side of the world?"

Matt Maasdam For Congress via AP - PHOTO: This undated image provided by Matt Maasdam For Congress, shows Matt Maasdam, a Democrat running for Michigan's 7th Congressional District.

Maasdam is a candidate in Michigan's 7th District Democratic primary in which the winner will take on incumbent GOP Rep. Tom Barrett. Barrett, himself a former Army helicopter pilot, has voted in Congress to rein in President Donald Trump's powers to conduct the Iran war.

Jason Cabel Roe, a spokesperson for Barrett's campaign, told ABC News, "Tom Barrett wasn't elected to Congress because of his service in the Army, he was elected because he has deep ties to the 7th District, and faces the same struggles as thousands of other families living in the district."
Will it work?

Running a large set of veteran candidates is something of a reprisal of a strategy that worked before for the Democratic Party, like in the 2018 midterms when former Navy helicopter pilot Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey and former CIA case officer Abigail Spanberger in Virginia flipped GOP-held seats. Both went on to be elected governor in their respective states.

The strategy isn't foolproof by any means, even in intra-party Democratic primaries. For instance, in Texas' 9th Congressional District, former astronaut and Air Force fighter pilot Terry Virts lost in the Democratic primary in March. In Kentucky, former Marine Corps fighter pilot Amy McGrath -- who was the party's nominee for a Senate seat in 2020 -- lost in the state's Democratic Senate primary in May.

Are Democrats intentionally prioritizing or recruiting veterans this cycle because of the gulf between the parties on patriotism?

Sawyer Hackett, a Democratic political strategist, told ABC News, "As much as I would love to credit the Democratic Party leaders for recruiting a slate of fantastic veteran candidates, I think, honestly, most of it is organic," because, he argued, veterans are more attuned to actions taken by Trump as commander-in-chief.

Hackett acknowledged that the party is also recruiting veterans, but thinks that veterans already active with the party are encouraging others.

But why do Democrats feel veterans can be successful candidates?

Emily Cherniack, CEO of the Democratic-aligned New Politics, argued that along with high prices, "people are really pissed that Trump has not solved the problems he promised to solve, and so they're really looking for a new generation of leadership."

New Politics recruits candidates with military backgrounds and has endorsed Bennett and Maasdam.

And Matt Corridoni, a Democratic strategist who advises Democratic groups The Bench and VoteVets, which are boosting some candidates including Maasdam and Lacore, argued, "Because they are veterans and they have the experience of putting service over self, people trust them on a wide range of issues. ... especially right now, though, with Iran, they can speak with an extra level of credibility."

What does the Lebanon-Israel "Framework Agreement" Say?

The Iranian militia in Lebanon, Hezbollah, is seething with anger at the signing yesterday June 26, 2026, of a "framework agreement" between Lebanon and Israel toward the pacification of their borders that have been the stage for what seems like a perpetual war for the past six decades.

Will this agreement succeed? Or will it suffer the same fate as the May 1983 Accord that followed the 1982 Israeli invasion to get rid of Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)? Back then, after nearly a year of difficult negotiations, the May 1983 Accord was never signed or ratified and no one really knows why, although there are a number of explanations and speculations. 

Most of the latter seem to point to three salient possibilities: 

1- When faced with his obligation to sign the agreement that his own government negotiated, the Lebanese President at the time, Amin Gemayel, became reluctant to be the second (after Egypt in 1979) Arab country to sign peace with Israel. From very close and well informed sources, Lebanon Iznogood has learned that Gemayel justified his refusal to sign the May 1983 Accord by saying he "didn't want to close 20 [Arab] doors to open one [Israeli] door". In other words, he feared a massive boycott of Lebanon by the Arab countries.

2- Amin's brother, Bashir, had been assassinated by the Syrian occupation army in September 1982 just weeks after his election to the presidency, and after indicating he would seek a peace treaty with Israel. Amin might have feared for his life if he signed the Accord, and balked at the idea. Anwar Sadat of Egypt signed peace with Israel in 1979 and was also assassinated in 1981. In sum, Amin might have feared for his life. He refused to sign at the last minute even though Parliament had ratified the agreement.

3- Some suggest, perhaps in defense of President Gemayel, that it was the US that instructed Gemayel not to sign because, as has been the case throughout the past six decades of Lebanon's torment in the Israeli-Arab conflict, the US always gave priority to its relations with the Arab world (and its sword of Damocles oil embargo threat over the West) over Lebanon. Indeed, the US sponsored the Syrian dictatorship's takeover of Lebanon between 1974 and 2005, when it finally relented and demanded that Syria end its occupation of Lebanon in the aftermath of 9-11 and the invasion of Iraq. 

Up until then, the US considered Syria like an avatar of the Arab world at large, and in order to appease the Arabs and Muslims, the US always favored Syria's interests in Lebanon, sacrificing the small country's welfare in the process. It may well be that the US back in 1983 also concurred that peace between Lebanon and Israel was too "early" and that the May 1983 Accord would be a slap in the face of the Arab world, especially that the US was not addressing the question of Palestine appropriately.

The failure of ratifying and implementing the May 1983 Accord resulted in the fall of Amin Gemayel's government, the reinvigoration of Syria's dominion over Lebanon, the gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces, the inability of Parliament to elect a successor for Amin Gemayel in 1988, and the completion of Syria's takeover of Lebanon through the 1989-1990 Taig Agreement - all of which were sponsored by the US and Saudi Arabia. 

Right now, President Joseph Aoun is faced with the same dilemma, except that there has been a tectonic shift in the Arab world's relations with Israel. Most Arab countries have essentially abandoned and betrayed Palestine and are on their way to "normalizing" with Israel, and whereas Israelis used to say that liberal, democratic and Christian-led Lebanon would be the first Arab country to sign peace with Israel, Lebanon might well be the last to do so now.

But also right now, Hezbollah and Iran see the wind in their sails as they consider that not losing to the US and Israel means that they won. Hezbollah is not a signatory to the Framework Agreement and has not participated in the negotiations, which does not augur well for its successful implementation. The virulence of Hezbollah's reaction over the past 24 hours since the signing of the agreement is unprecedented, accusing the government of President Aoun and PM Salam of treason and submission to the US-Israeli expansionist plan in the south of the country. 

Lebanon Iznogood predicts difficult moments ahead in Lebanon, including potential assassinations, riots, clashes with the Lebanese Army, and an insurrection bordering on civil war by Hezbollah against the Lebanese government, leading perhaps even to a takeover of the state. This way Iran will acquire a new territory and a substitute beachhead on the Mediterranean (which it lost with the fall of the Assad regime in Syria), and will no longer be operating via its proxy Hezbollah but would be directly in charge of operations in Lebanon right along the Israeli border.

Of note and particular concern is that if the agreement fails and Hezbollah's ascendancy grows in Lebanon, the presumed "temporary" presence of Israel in the south of the country might become a permanent one, leading to the eventual Israeli annexation of that part of Lebanese territory (south of the Litani River) just as Israel has done with the Syrian Golan Heights.

Here are the details of the "Framework Agreement" signed yesterday June 26, 2026, by Lebanon and Israel in Washington DC: 

The trilateral (US, Lebanon, Israel) agreement consists of 14-points. The agreement aims to end the state of war, ensure sovereignty and security for both nations, and establish peaceful neighborly relations.

The core mechanism of the deal is a reciprocal, sequenced process: the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) will restore effective sovereign authority over all Lebanese territory pending the verified disarmament of non-state armed groups (specifically Hezbollah) and dismantlement of their infrastructure. In exchange, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will progressively redeploy out of Lebanese territory.

Key provisions include:

Pilot Zones: Two initial areas (one south and one north of the Litani River) will serve as pilot zones for phased IDF withdrawal and LAF deployment, with future zones to be agreed upon by mutual consent.

Sovereignty and Disarmament: Lebanon commits to rebuilding its monopoly on the use of force and ensuring no non-state groups have military capabilities anywhere in the country, requesting support from international and Arab partners.

Security Arrangements: Israel declares it has no territorial ambitions in Lebanon and that its military actions were solely in response to threats from non-state actors; termination of this threat will eliminate the need for future IDF presence.

Reconstruction and Aid: The United States will mobilize international partners for substantial reconstruction and humanitarian assistance, with future U.S. aid conditioned on verified milestones.

Next Steps: The parties will establish working groups to draft a comprehensive peace and security agreement and a Security Annex detailing verification mechanisms, while maintaining a military coordination group with U.S. support.

Note that Hezbollah is not a signatory to this agreement, and its reaction to the deal remains a critical factor in its implementation.

The specific disarmament verification mechanisms are not fully detailed in the public text of the June 26, 2026 framework agreement itself; instead, the agreement mandates that these mechanisms will be defined in a forthcoming Security Annex.

However, the framework and associated statements outline the following key components of the verification process:

1. The Security Annex

The primary mechanism for verification is a Security Annex to be developed immediately by working groups with full United States support. This annex will complement the framework by detailing:

Specific security arrangements.

Precise verification mechanisms to confirm the disarmament of non-state armed groups (specifically Hezbollah) and the dismantlement of their infrastructure.

The steps required to advance the reciprocal process of Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) deployment and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) redeployment.

2. Pilot Zones as Verification Mechanisms

The agreement establishes a phased verification process using pilot zones:

Initial Zones: Two specific areas (one south and one north of the Litani River) have been agreed upon as initial pilot zones.

Process: In these zones, the LAF will gradually assume security responsibility. The verification of disarmament in these specific zones is the trigger for:

Phased IDF redeployment from those specific areas.

The start of internationally supported reconstruction.

The safe return of Lebanese civilians.

Expansion: Future pilot zones will be agreed upon by mutual consent only after successful verification in previous zones.

 
3. U.S. Verification and Oversight

The United States plays a central role in the verification architecture:

Direct Verification: The U.S. explicitly intends to "work closely with both countries to verify and support this process."

Military Coordination Group: A trilateral Military Coordination Group (including the U.S., Israel, and Lebanon) will be established to ensure overall implementation and likely oversee day-to-day verification activities.

Conditionality: Future U.S. assistance and reconstruction aid are strictly conditioned on verifiable milestones, full transparency, and demonstrated results monitored by the U.S.

4. Performance-Based Metrics

The verification is tied to a performance-based program for the LAF. The U.S. and international partners will monitor:

The complete and verified disarmament of all non-state armed groups.

The dismantlement of associated infrastructure (e.g., tunnels, weapons depots).

The LAF's ability to exercise exclusive sovereign authority and a monopoly on the use of force in the cleared areas.

The Framework Agreement does not establish a fixed calendar timeline for the Israeli withdrawal. Instead, it mandates a conditional, performance-based schedule tied strictly to security benchmarks.

Withdrawal Mechanism: "Move-for-Move"

The withdrawal follows a reciprocal, sequenced process rather than a set date. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will only "progressively redeploy" as the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) demonstrates the capacity to maintain security.

No Fixed Timetable: Israeli Ambassador Yechiel Leiter explicitly stated that the deal is not based on a fixed timetable but on "measurable progress" by the Lebanese army in disarming Hezbollah and dismantling its infrastructure.

Condition Precedent: Full Israeli withdrawal is contingent upon the verified disarmament of non-state armed groups and the removal of the threat to Israel. Until these conditions are met, Israel retains the right to maintain its security zone in southern Lebanon.

Phased Implementation via Pilot Zones

The timeline is structured around the successful handover of specific geographic areas:

Initial Pilot Zones: The process begins with two designated "pilot zones" (one north and one south of the Litani River).

Verification Phase: In these zones, the LAF must assume full security responsibility while international monitors verify the absence of Hezbollah weapons and infrastructure.

Expansion: Only upon confirmation of successful disarmament in the initial zones will additional areas be opened for handover. As Ambassador Leiter noted, "Additional 'pilot' handovers... will take place as benchmarks are met."

Immediate Next Steps

Military Coordination: A U.S.-facilitated Military Coordination Group for Lebanon (MCG4L) has been established to oversee the implementation and verify benchmarks.

Reconstruction Link: International reconstruction efforts and significant aid are also conditioned on these security milestones, meaning financial support flows in parallel with verified LAF deployment.

JD Vance Says Nixon's Corruption Pales in Comparison to Trump's

Having elevated official corruption and crime to new "standards", Donald Dumb and JD Dunce admit that Richard Nixon's corruption is insignificant per their standards, but that thanks to them, Nixon's corruption is witnessing a "renaissance".

=================================================


Vance, an admirer of Richard Nixon, says Watergate would be a 'a 12-hour news story' today



Updated Thu, June 25, 2026

WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President JD Vance on Thursday said the Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon would have been a blip in today's news cycle, and he drew parallels between Nixon and President Donald Trump — arguing that both were targeted by "deep state" forces.

Vance described his admiration for Nixon during a conversation at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library in Yorba Linda, California. Widely expected to be a presidential contender in 2028, Vance spoke at the library while promoting his new book, "Communion."

After talking about the book and his faith journey, Vance shifted to Nixon, saying the legacy of the 37th president is "enjoying a bit of a renaissance."

"If Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12-hour news story. The idea that it would have taken down a presidency is crazy," Vance said.

He went on: "If you look at the story of how the deep state took down Richard Nixon, it's not all that different from what the same groups of people, the same institutions tried to do to Donald Trump in the first Trump administration."

Vance then noted his own similarities with Nixon.

"Young senator, vice president, writes some bestselling books, is hated by the media," he said. "It kind of sounds like JD Vance. I've always liked Richard Nixon."

Nixon was in his second term when he resigned over the Watergate scandal in 1974.

US Memorandum of Misunderstanding with Iran Hits a New Low

[Updated: US strikes Iran in retaliation for the Iranian attack which replies with its own attack on Bahrain. See AP reports below]

 

Iran knows that if the war remains in the news and gasoline prices remain high, it can tilt the outcome of the midterm elections in the US against Donald Dumb and his MAGA-GOP party. 

Does Iran have a right to impose transit fees across the Strait of Hormuz and shoot at vessels crossing it?

Does Israel have the right to continue bombing Lebanon despite Trump's shoddy Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Iran?

Netanyahu knows that he is safe as long as a war, any war, is ongoing. 

Per AI:
An Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is a maritime area defined by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) that extends up to 200 nautical miles (370 Km) from a coastal state’s baseline. Within this zone, the coastal state holds sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve, and manage all natural resources, both living (e.g., fish) and non-living (e.g., oil, gas), as well as jurisdiction over marine scientific research and environmental protection. But other states retain the freedom of navigation, overflight, and the laying of submarine cables and pipelines, provided these activities do not interfere with the coastal state’s resource rights.

Unlike the EEZ, a country's Territorial Waters extend only 12 nautical miles (22 Km) in which it has full sovereignty.

Since the closest distance between Iranian land territory and United Arab Emirates (UAE) land territory is 24 nautical miles (44 kilometers), which occurs across the Strait of Hormuz, a critical narrow stretch of water separating the two nations, it is clear that Iran has no legal or legitimate right to impose fees on transiting ships across the Strait, since its territorial waters do not encompass the remaining 22 Km of international/UAE territorial waters.

Be that as it may, Iran has managed to interfere with shipping across the Strait, which has caused oil prices to skyrocket, and in turn caused Donald Dumb to retreat from his war against Iran because he feared that high gasoline prices at the pump in the US would hurt the Republican Party's chances at the midterm elections in November.

After signing the American surrender document, the so-called "memorandum of understanding", Iran continues to invoke the right to control shipping across the Strait of Hormuz. And to poke the dumb criminal felon in the eye, it just attacked a vessel in the area, as if Iran is playing into the elections. If Iran manages to keep oil prices high by disturbing oil shipping, it could indeed increase the chances of Trump and his party losing Congress.

According to CNN, Iran struck a vessel in the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, demonstrating its continued ability to restrict the critical waterway, despite the agreement reached last week with the United States. A US official told CNN the vessel was attacked by an Iranian drone, challenging the Trump administration's claim that the strait is free and open once more.

The attack, the first since the US and Iran agreed signed the MoU last week, prompted a jump in global oil prices and came as Secretary of State Marco Rubio tried to sell the agreement to skeptical Gulf nations. 

This week, ship movements in the Strait of Hormuz hit their highest point since the war began in late February, with MarineTraffic data showing 70 crossings on Wednesday. Most of those vessels using a route that followed the coast of Oman, the maritime monitoring group said. Traffic dipped again on Thursday, however.

Iran sees control of the waterway as a key point of leverage in negotiations. On Thursday, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp warned that safe passage would only be given to ships via routes declared to Iran.

After the attack, the Persian Gulf Strait Authority – an agency Tehran recently established to manage the strait – said safe transit would not be guaranteed. "The consequences of traveling on unauthorized routes will be the responsibility of the owner, operator, and commander of the vessel," the agency said on X.

The current agreement between Washington and Tehran includes a commitment to reopen the waterway without tolls for 60 days, and has already seen the US lift its blockade of Iranian ports. But the 14-point memorandum also grants Iran a formal role in overseeing commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz alongside Oman.

Tehran began to enforce tolls on vessels wishing to transit the strait during the conflict, something the Trump administration has vowed not to allow under a long-term peace deal.

"The reality of it is that no country on Earth has a right to charge for the use of international waterways, and that will never be an acceptable condition of any deal," Rubio said at a meeting with foreign ministers of Gulf Arab states in Bahrain on Thursday. A joint statement later said the ministers "rejected any tolls, fees, or attempts to assert control over the Strait."

Tehran, which disputes the waterway being international waters, has previously raised the prospect of charging a kind of service fee, rather than toll, alongside Oman in the future.

The memorandum is meant to halt fighting, open the Strait of Hormuz and offer economic relief to Iran in exchange for a pledge never to develop nuclear weapons - just a pledge that can easily be broken. (The US under Trump broke its own pledges and signature by wantonly withdrawing from the JCPOA, the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran, the US and Europe).

But the MoU leaves the critical details, like Tehran's nuclear program and its stocks of enriched uranium, to be hashed out over 60 days of high-stakes negotiations.

The process has been riddled with stumbling blocks – including persistent fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, which threatened to derail US-Iran talks last week. Rubio has tried to separate the Israel-Lebanon talks from the US-Iran negotiations, even as Iran has repeatedly insisted that the issues are entwined. The agreement itself declared an end of fighting on all fronts, including Lebanon. But just as Iran has struck a vessel in the Strait of Hormuz, the US client Israel launched airstrikes on targets near Nabatieh in southern Lebanon. It therefore seems that Iran is trying to counteract Israel's continued attacks on Lebanon by its own attacks in Hormuz.

Iran has so far succeeded in driving a wedge between Israel and the US. As long as Israel's campaign in Lebanon continues, Iran says it will not cease interdicting oil shipping in the Gulf. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is skipping Israel on his ongoing Middle East visit, which some describe as a snub of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

==========================================

US strikes Iran in response to a drone attack on a ship that Trump says violated ceasefire

COLLIN BINKLEY and JON GAMBRELL
Updated Fri, June 26, 2026

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. struck Iran on Friday in response to a drone attack a day earlier on a cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz. It's the most significant test yet to an interim understanding reached a week ago by the two countries to begin working to end their months-long war and reopen the pivotal waterway.

U.S. President Donald Trump said the drone attack violated the ceasefire. The strikes came shortly after Trump told reporters, "You'll find out," whether the U.S. would respond.

U.S. Central Command said the military struck missile and drone locations and coastal radar sites in Iran.

"I don't like the fact that they took a shot yesterday, actually four of them," Trump said at the White House shortly before the U.S. struck back. When asked why there would be strikes when Trump has insisted talks with Tehran are going well, Trump said of Iran: "They're a little bit different."

He then abruptly cut off questions and reporters were ushered out of his office.

Ebrahim Azizi, who heads the Iranian parliament's national security commission, responded to Trump on social media earlier Friday, saying, "the Strait of Hormuz is governed by Iran, so: Respect the rules" and to "not mistake control for escalation."

"This is not a violation of the ceasefire; it is ceasefire management," Azizi wrote.

Friday evening, Vice President JD Vance said on social media that Iran should "pick up the phone" if there are disagreements about the ceasefire agreement.

"But violence will be met with violence," Vance said.

Strikes conclude an hour later

The U.S. strikes on Iran concluded about an hour after U.S. Central Command announced the military action on social media, a U.S. official with knowledge of the situation told The Associated Press. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing military operation.

The British military said on Thursday that a container ship was hit by a projectile off the coast of Oman, coming hours after Iran threatened vessels to stop using the route. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said no injuries were reported.

The development came during a fragile time for the U.S. and Iran as they work to negotiate a permanent end to the war. Iran has increasingly challenged the region and the U.S. over its control of the Strait of Hormuz, even with the current interim deal it reached with the U.S. last week.

The attack on the cargo ship happened while a United Nations maritime agency was beginning an operation to move stranded ships out of the strait this week, using an alternative route, hugging the shores of Oman rather than sailing through the central part of the strait.

The International Maritime Organization halted the evacuations after the attack and said on Friday they won't resume until there are guarantees that the other ships won't be attacked.

About 115 ships were able to move out of the strait in recent days, leaving about 500 still in the area, said Arsenio Dominguez, the agency's secretary-general.

The opening of the alternative passage through the strait was expected to relieve pressure on the world economy and remove Iran's main source of leverage in ongoing peace talks with the U.S.

The U.S. and Iran are still negotiating terms of the deal, including issues such as getting ships through the key strait and addressing the future of Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium. Under the interim deal, the two sides have 60 days to work out the details.
Cargo ship attack poses a test for shipping

Shipping analysts said the drone strike cast a shadow over what had been a growing stream of trapped vessels finally leaving the Gulf and an increasing flow of tankers carrying crude oil.

"A week of widening commercial confidence in the Strait of Hormuz has hit its first significant test," said marine data company Windward on X. It said that while the strait remains operationally open with 43 transits recorded after the incident, "the pace of normalization has slowed."

On Wednesday before Thursday's drone strike, 78 vessels transited the strait, the highest since the war began, although below the prewar averages of 130 or more per day.

At least two tankers reversed course while attempting to transit the strait on the U.N.-backed route near Oman after Iran insisted vessels use only the Teheran-approved routes, according to marine data and analytic firm Lloyd's List Intelligence.

More than two dozen ships were still transiting the strait's southern route after the attack, Lloyd's said Friday.

Lebanon and Israel make a step toward peace

Ambassadors from Israel and Lebanon announced an agreement Friday described as a step toward peace following months of conflict between Israeli troops and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

Nada Hamadeh, Lebanon's ambassador to the U.S., called the framework a move toward "enabling our people to go back to their land and allowing all Lebanese to live in peace, security, and prosperity."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the plan was a "great achievement" for Israel.

"The most important thing, first and foremost, is that Israel will remain in the security zone in southern Lebanon," he said, adding that they will stay until Hezbollah is disarmed and no longer poses a threat to Israel.
___

Gambrell reported from Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Associated Press writers Ben Finley, Michelle L. Price and Josh Boak in Washington, David McHugh in Frankfurt, Germany, and John Seewer in Toledo, Ohio, contributed to this report.

===============================================

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran launched a drone assault targeting Bahrain while a ship in the Strait of Hormuz separately came under attack Saturday, likely Tehran's response to overnight airstrikes by the United States.

The attacks across the Persian Gulf show the danger of the Iran war again spinning out of control, even after Iran and the U.S. reached an interim deal to try and agree on a final accord to end the conflict.

The U.S. had launched its airstrikes in response to an Iranian drone attack on a ship trying to get out of the strait on Thursday, continuing a string of attacks that have shaken the uneasy ceasefire in the war.

Meanwhile, a multinational maritime body overseen by the U.S. Navy said Saturday that it would expand a route near Oman in the strait to allow for both inbound and outbound traffic — likely setting up a new flashpoint with Tehran.
Bahrain condemns Iran's drone attack

That Iran targeted Bahrain likely was not coincidental. The kingdom has been one of the strongest critics of Iran and is home to the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet. It just hosted U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio for a meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council's foreign ministers, which ended with a call for an end to Iran's attacks and the strait to be completely open.

A statement from Bahrain's Foreign Ministry said a "number of Iranian drones" targeted the country. It called the attack "a flagrant threat to the security of citizens and residents."

Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard earlier on Saturday issued a statement carried by the state-run IRNA news agency saying it had targeted several locations "of the U.S. terrorist army in the region."

It did not name what areas were targeted.

The U.S. military's Central Command said the military struck Iranian missile and drone locations and coastal radar sites in the overnight strikes.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who has led the American negotiations with Iran, said on social media Friday night that Iran should "pick up the phone" if there are disagreements about the ceasefire agreement.

"But violence will be met with violence," Vance said.

The U.S. and Iran are still negotiating terms of the deal, including issues such as getting ships through the key strait and addressing the future of Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium. Under the interim deal, the two sides have 60 days to work out the details.
Ship comes under attack as strait route expands

Meanwhile, the British military's United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said that a tanker was attacked Saturday in the strait, saying the crew was safe and no environmental damage was reported. No one immediately claimed the strike, but suspicion immediately fell on Iran.

Just after the report of the ship attack, the Joint Maritime Information Center, overseen by the U.S. Navy, said the route near Oman's shores is expanding to allow for both inbound and outbound traffic.

Iran has insisted ships must obey its orders and is warning it will start charging fees for transit through the strait, through which a fifth of all oil and natural gas once passed. However, ships have been increasingly trying to get out of the Gulf in recent days, to Iran's ire.

Ebrahim Azizi, who heads the Iranian parliament's national security commission, wrote Friday that "the Strait of Hormuz is governed by Iran, so: Respect the rules."

The U.S. and Gulf Arab states have rejected Iran's demands. The strait is considered around the world as an international waterway, despite being the territorial waters of Iran and Oman.

In its announcement, the Joint Maritime Information Center warned that the threat in the region to ships was "substantial."

"Mariners are advised of the existence of mines and should expect a naval presence as clearance operations continue," it said.

No "Israeli Dream" for Zionist Colonial Settlers: Life in Constant Warfare

It is hard to imagine that Israelis actually dream of a life in peace and tranquility. When you're a foreign implant in a land that belongs to other people, when your numbers can never overwhelm the numbers of those indigenous people you raped, and when you "achieved" the feat of creating an artificial country with brutality and violence, uprooting people from their millennial homeland to make a place for yourself, you have to expect your life to be a constant struggle and on a war footing.

It's always the same story with colonial brutes. Algeria, India, Indochina, South Africa....Even back to the Greek and Roman Empires. It never ends well for the colonial settler rapist invader. The only time stealing another people's land works is when you combine: 1- an overwhelming demographic advantage over the invaded people you are raping, with 2- using such a high level of violence and brutality that you condemn yourself to eternal unrest, turmoil and conflict.

The Ottoman empire was created by invading hordes of savages from central Asia that forced their way into the West, essentially the Greco-Roman-Christian world, with such violence and brutality and in such overwhelming numbers that they managed to settle and become accepted. Today's Turkiye represents the nadir of that entire quest, after the empire was dismantled after some 500 years of existence. And even today, Turkiye is wracked by centrifugal forces that were not subdued sufficiently. The western part of Turkiye used to be Greece, and its eastern part will undoubtedly one day return to Armenian sovereignty and to an independent state of Kurdistan. Some one hundred years ago, Greece tried to reconquer the lands the Turks stole from them, but failed. That doesn't mean that the Greeks won't seize the first opportunity to try again.

Israel has overwhelming force, thanks to its breastfeeding English and American mothers, but only for now. But what it lacks is the demographic advantage. In fact, Israelis constantly worry about the so-called "demographic timebomb" in which the indigenous Palestinians' proclivity to procreate by far outweigh that of the foreign European and American settlers. More broadly, and despite the superficial "normalization" and pseudo-acceptance of Israel in the greater Near East through the Abraham Accords, the 400 million Arabs and the 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide are not likely to forget any time soon the brutality and savagery with which Israel was created. As long as there is a Palestine and a Palestinian people, Israel will not know peace.

The European Crusaders attempted the same "return to the Holy Land" at the turn of the first millennium AD, using the garbage Christian narrative of the birth of Jesus there some 1000 years before. They came, conquered with savagery and brutality, and were "normalized" for a while by their neighbors. But they lasted some 200 years before being expelled. During those two centuries, after atrocious massacres and barbarity, they settled, created artificial kingdoms, counties and principalities, bred with the natives, made peace deals and waged wars, and assumed that this new, rejuvenated Greco-Roman-Christian order will forever last.

Israel is yet another Crusader attempt, a Jewish (and fake) one, based on a similar garbage biblical narrative of a desert god by the name of Yahweh who, we are told, gave the land to his preferred tribe of nomadic goat and camel herders from the Arabian desert some 3,000 years ago. Like the Crusaders, Israelis conquered with barbarity and savagery, created their artificial state, settled, and seem to become slowly "normalized" with their surrounding peoples and nations. They wage wars and make peace deals while in a constant state of anxiety at their uncertain future. I assume that they assume to last forever. And Yahweh might, in the minds of the ultra-religious morons among them, intercede in their favor and split oceans and move mountains for them.

But if history is our guide, the "Israeli Dream" is unlikely to succeed.
=================================================


Forever wars: Israel’s cycle of conflict shows no finish line

Simon Speakman Cordall
Fri, June 26, 2026 

An overwhelming 92 percent of Israelis feel the US has signed away their victory over Iran, with almost half saying Israel should continue attacks on Lebanon and Hezbollah, irrespective of Washington's urgings.

Less than a week after the signing of the memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington brought the stuttering, three-month-long US-Israel war on Iran to a close – for now – the verdict of Washington's principal ally, Israel, was in.

According to a recent poll, an overwhelming 92 percent of Israelis felt the US has signed away their victory over a decades-old enemy, with almost half of those polled saying Israel should continue its attacks on Lebanon and the pro-Iran group Hezbollah, irrespective of the urgings of Washington, its principal ally and sponsor.

Israel has spent the years since the surprise Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, in Israel, which killed 1,139 people, fighting continuous wars across the region.

It has committed a genocide in Gaza, killing more than 73,000 Palestinians and razing large swaths of the territory to the ground. It has attacked Iran twice, killed thousands in Lebanon while fighting Iran ally Hezbollah, launched multiple ground incursions into Syria, and launched sporadic strikes on the Houthis in Yemen, also allies of Tehran.

Within Israel's fractious parliament, support for the country's wars offers one of the few points of consensus, even if individual politicians disagree on how they are prosecuted.

Going into the war on Iran, Israel's former chief of staff and one of the contenders to replace Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Gadi Eisenkot, did not hold back. Speaking during an interview in early March, shortly after the joint US-Israeli strikes on Iran began, he described the unprovoked attacks on Tehran as "the most just war in recent decades against the most bitter enemy".

Opposition leader Yair Lapid was equally supportive of the attacks, with his enthusiasm for renewed conflict against Iran and Hezbollah only eclipsed by his anger following Washington's decision to make a deal with Tehran. He described the US decision as "one of the most shocking failures of Israel's foreign and security policy, and it is entirely on Netanyahu's account".

Israeli sociologist Daniel Bar-Tal from Tel Aviv University said little of this reaction in Israel is surprising. It was, he said, the outcome of a process across Israeli politics, media, and society that linked the Hamas 2023 attack with the "central anchor" of Israeli identity: the Holocaust. In this light, the attack was framed not "merely as a horrific event in its own right, but as the latest chapter in a much older story of Jewish historical trauma".

Bar-Tal added that the "justness of the national goals, glorification of the Jewish nation, [and] sense of collective victimhood", as well as "the delegitimisation of Palestinians", were ingrained into the consciousness of most Israelis, and therefore played a role in the support behind Israel's wars.

Gains and losses

Despite almost three years of almost constant and unquestioned war, few people in Israel believe that the country is significantly more secure than it was before October 7.

In Gaza, Hamas remains in control of large parts of the territory, while in Iran, the regime that Netanyahu is reported to have told his US allies would fall within days of the start of the war, remains steadfast.

"There is no particular achievement that will stop this eternal war," Israeli analyst and academic Shaiel Ben-Ephraim said.

"There are two main engines behind it," he said, describing the catalysts for the seemingly endless push for war. One of those engines, he said, was a reflection of Israel's immediate circumstances, while the other was a reflection of the fundamental shift in the consciousness of Israelis following the October 7 attack.

A member of a civilian response team looks at the sky as he searches for a hostile drone, in Metula, on the Israeli side of the Israel-Lebanon border [File: Amir Cohen/Reuters]

With elections looming later this year, Netanyahu enters the campaign still carrying the baggage of the October 7 attack, his ongoing trial on multiple corruption charges, and his apparent failure to finish the job in Iran and with Hezbollah.

"Netanyahu believes that as long as he has a war going on, he can avoid accountability for his corruption charges and responsibility for October 7 and his inability to prevent it," Ben-Ephraim said, of the immediate political fall out of the 2023 attack, with none of Netanyahu's rivals for government offering any meaningful alternative to the multiple conflicts embarked upon by the Israeli government since.

"The Israeli military and all the main candidates for prime minister – Netanyahu, [former Prime Minister, Naftali] Bennett, Eisenkot – have a doctrine of defence that believes in crushing any threat before it develops, and that there can be no deterrence or diplomatic agreement.

"This is the result of October 7, when, in the Israeli view, all these measures failed. The result is not only a desire to destroy Gaza and southern Lebanon completely, but also to take out Iran, Turkiye, and any other potential threat completely and irrevocably,' he said.

Whatever gains Israel may claim in Lebanon, the prospect of a future threat, from wherever it may come, makes the likelihood of a future war close to certain, Ben-Ephraim said.

"No potential or possible achievement will stop this," he concluded. "It is a pathology that comes from trauma and political need. Only a complete reversal of strategic fortune for Israel could change it in the future."

Hard-Right Dominated US Supreme Court: A White Supremacist Project 2025 Tool

Immigrants made - and continue to make - America Great because they have the entrepreneurial drive. Once "nativized" after one or two generations, Americans become dull entitled leeches who think the world owes them. Just look at the "native" white trash that populates the middle of the country.

======================


Supreme court conservatives accused of advancing ‘white-supremacist agenda’


TPS holders, union leaders and activists protest outside the supreme court in April. Photograph: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call/Getty Images
José Olivares
Thu, June 25, 2026 

Lawmakers and immigration advocacy groups on Thursday sharply denounced two US supreme court rulings that allowed the Trump administration to strip certain immigration protections and fundamentally reshape the asylum system.

Dozens of groups, advocates and members of Congress called the court's decisions "disastrous" and "cruel", while the Trump administration, Republican lawmakers and anti-immigrant groups celebrated the rulings.

"Today, Trump's loyalists in the supreme court have joined forces with him to deny immigrants' internationally recognized human rights and advance an authoritarian, white-supremacist agenda at home," said the Illinois congresswoman Delia Ramirez, a Democrat. "The supreme court's decisions put more than 350,000 TPS holders at risk of deportation and countless more asylum seekers' lives in danger."

One of Thursday's rulings from the supreme court stripped away temporary protected status (TPS) from hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians, who were living and working legally in the US and were protected from deportation. The TPS policy allows immigrants from specific countries to live and work in the US without the threat of deportation, due to violent or unstable conditions in their countries.

Despite the state department currently warning against traveling to Haiti or Syria, citing violence, Haitians and Syrians in the US on TPS are now vulnerable to deportation, even if they have applications for other forms of immigration status in progress.

"Simply put, the supreme court's ruling will directly result in thousands of innocent people dying violent, needless deaths," said attorneys Geoff Pipoly and Andy Tauber in a statement, who represented Haitians before the supreme court in the TPS case. "This decision will endanger Haitian TPS holders who fled their homeland in pursuit of what generations of immigrants yearned for when they made the painful decision to leave all they have known: to live in safety."

A number of Democratic senators and representatives – and even one Republican – agreed, adding that the 6-3 ruling on TPS will place hundreds of thousands at risk.

People with TPS have permission to live and work in the US because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) deemed their home countries to be unsafe. The Trump administration has attempted to slash the program for various countries in its anti-immigrant crusade. Last year, the supreme court allowed the Trump administration to strip TPS for more than 300,000 Venezuelans.

Now, analysts fear that this decision may open the door to further cut TPS for all countries, in what would be the biggest de-documentation move in US history.

"The supreme court has opened the door to the president's broader effort to dismantle TPS for all 1.3 million holders," said Insha Rahman, president and director of the Vera Institute of Justice. "This ruling underscores a troubling reality: too many immigrants in the United States, who have spent years contributing to their communities, remain trapped in temporary statuses that can be revoked at the whim of political agendas."

Andrea Flores, an immigration expert and former director of border management on the national security council under the Biden administration called Thursday's TPS decision "the biggest delegalization moment in modern history".

Some groups decried the potential effects of the TPS decision on the US economy. A report from earlier this year showed TPS holders contribute about $29bn every year to the economy.

Similarly, the court's other immigration-related decision on Thursday has allowed the Trump administration to fundamentally reshape asylum policy at the US-Mexico border.

In a 6-3 decision, where the conservative majority on the nine-judge bench prevailed, the supreme court ruled that US government officials can turn back asylum seekers at the southern border – allowing officials to physically and indefinitely block people from requesting asylum in the US. The court ruled that US border officials do not have to accept any asylum claims from migrants who have not actually reached US soil.

Immigrant rights organizations, which originally filed a lawsuit in 2017 during the first Trump administration, argued that the US government was violating federal law by turning back asylum seekers at points of entry, a now-defunct policy dubbed "metering". Migrants turned back were left in dangerous conditions in Mexico. The Biden administration rescinded that policy and it has not been in effect. But the current Trump administration asked the supreme court to overturn a previous court decision declaring the policy unlawful.

"We believe that today's ruling violates international law," said Erika Pinheiro, Al Otro Lado's executive director. Al Otro Lado was the main organization that pursued the end to the metering policy. "This decision has destroyed the United States' position as a global leader in promoting the rights of refugees and threatens to serve as a dangerous justification for other countries that unlawfully prevent refugees from crossing borders in search of safety."

"In a world of increasing conflict and climate disaster, this hardening of borders to keep out the most vulnerable is sure to result in many more lives lost," Pinheiro added.

Although organizations argued that the metering policy violated federal law, including the refugee convention, the supreme court ruled border officials could deny asylum to people who had not entered the US, but arrived at the border.

"This ruling should sound the alarm for anyone who cares about human rights and the rule of law," said Melissa Crow, director of litigation at the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies. Crow said that the court's decision suggests "the president may unilaterally override decades of established law and trample on people's legal rights if doing so suits his political agenda".

"The turn-back policy did not merely delay entry for people seeking safety. For far too many asylum seekers, the policy denied entry entirely. In some cases, that became a death sentence," Crow added.

UN: Israel Continues to Commit Genocide ... by Deliberately Targeting Palestinian Children

COLONIAL ZIONIST KILLERS OF INDIGENOUS PALESTINIAN CHILDREN:

Ben-Gvir, Netanyahu, Smotrich

UN: NOW THAT YOU'VE DOCUMENTED IT, BRING BACK YOUR ZIONISM = RACISM RESOLUTION. 

Does anyone still doubt that the Zionists, who actually believe that some Bronze Age god by the name of Yahweh still favors them over other Untermensch people, want to exterminate the Palestinian people whose very existence and persistence negate the very idea of Israel? Now inspired by racial and ethnic purification ideas they brought with them from Nazi Germany as settlers of Palestine, they have their own "Final Solution" to the question of Palestine: a carefully planned, well-thought of, strategic, and meticulous genocide and ethnic cleansing plan to snuff out Palestinian demographic growth by deliberately killing Palestinian children and eliminating any future for them and their people?

Zionist playbook: How to perpetrate genocide and ethnic cleansing from the crib.

====================================================

UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem:

Israel continues to commit genocide and other atrocity crimes by deliberately targeting Palestinian children

23 June 2026

GENEVA – Israeli authorities and security forces have deliberately targeted Palestinian children resulting in genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in the Gaza Strip and war crimes in the West Bank, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel said in a new report today.

The Commission, which concluded last year that Israel had committed genocide against the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip, found that the intense scale and systematic nature of the Israeli military operations have continued – resulting in unprecedented death, injury and trauma of Palestinian children.

The Commission reiterates that the deliberate targeting of children is one of the key elements establishing genocidal intent of the Israeli authorities and security forces to destroy the Palestinian group, in whole or in part, in Gaza.

“The evidence shows that Palestinian children have been deliberately targeted and killed by the Israeli security forces,” said Srinivasan Muralidhar, Chair of the Commission. “Even after the October 2025 ceasefire, children continue to be killed and seriously injured, with continued disregard by Israel for the ceasefire and for the protection owed to Palestinian children under international law.”

Severe physical and mental injuries, mass trauma, orphanhood, separation, disability, repeated displacements, starvation, and the collapse of education and healthcare have erased childhood and will continue to affect children in Gaza throughout their lives.

Palestinian children have been arrested and subjected to torture and other severe forms of mistreatment in Israeli prisons and detention facilities, with no information on their whereabouts. Israeli security forces have also used sexual violence against children as part of the collective shaming and oppression, entrenched within a prolonged, ethnic, gendered, and intergenerational pattern of Israeli occupation and hostilities.

Israel’s targeting of neonatal and maternity care centers in Gaza have directly harmed the survival of newborns and Palestinians’ reproductive future, including rises in miscarriages, birth defects and lasting vulnerabilities among newborns, resulting in the destruction of Palestinian newborn life and the population’s continuity. Starvation imposed by Israel through blockade and siege have further caused the death of Palestinian children and severely impacted the health of many others, depriving them of essential nutrition and increasing disease risks amid reduced immunization, food insecurity and destroyed health services.

In parallel, the dismantling and destruction of orphanages and education facilities in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, have obstructed children’s cognitive, social and emotional care and development and disrupted the foundations of Palestinian society.

“Even if the bombs and guns fall silent in Gaza and West Bank, Palestinian children will not simply recover overnight,” said Muralidhar. “The destruction of their health, education and development is irreversible.”

Palestinian children have suffered immense psychological harm, having been stripped of any sense of safety and future. Mental harm is an intergenerational condition, producing a distinctive “occupied psyche” in which the freedom to play, imagine, hope, and develop an identity has been eroded.

By targeting children, Israel is eroding the foundational structure of Palestinian society, weakening the demographic vitality, and overall capacity of the Palestinian people to sustain and exercise its right to determine its future as a people.

“The protection, care and survival of Palestinian children are inseparable from the Palestinian people’s right to self- determination,” said Muralidhar. “By targeting children, Israel is attacking the very capacity of the Palestinian people to exist and to determine their future.”

The Commission calls for Israel to cease committing violations and crimes against and affecting Palestinian children. The Commission further calls for the end of Israel’s continuing presence in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, in compliance with the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice.

The Commission has identified military units within the Israeli security forces responsible for killing and injuring of Palestinian children and makes recommendations to Israel and to all Member States to ensure accountability for such crimes.

The international community as a whole must uphold their international legal obligations and call for an end to the hostilities, for Israel to end its occupation and to prioritize accountability and access to justice for victims as an integral component of any political process, grounded in the meaningful participation of Palestinians, including children.

Trump's Hastily Clinched US Surrender to Iran MoU Beginning to Unravel

Not surprising that, having hastily signed his Memorandum of US Surrender Understanding with Iran because he feared that gasoline prices at the pump might cause his MAGA herd to lose the elections, Trump's postponement of the real issues at stake - nuclear issue, ballistic missiles, Iranian frozen assets, Iran's proxies.... - is now coming back to bite him in the ass as he pretends to solve all those issues in 60 days. This sounds more like his 2024 campaign promise of resolving the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours once in the white house, thanks to his stupid charm.

The dumbass is now screaming at himself. "Gasoline prices better start going down a lot faster than what I'm seeing!" he said on social media. Gasoline prices is the only thing on his mind right now. Forget nuclear, forget ballistic, forget Hezbollah, .... none of those weighty issues matter to the Great Moron because he doesn't understand them. They're too complicated for his white trash American brain.

Now that the celebrations at signing the toilet paper are ebbing, and sobriety is taking over the terror-inspired drunkenness, reality is setting in. The reality is that Iran got so much more than the US, and any expectation that Iran will within 60 days give in on all the issues for which dumbass Trump launched the war as he was led by the Zionist leash handler Netanyahu is an asinine expectation. The leash has a bit frayed between the two buddies because a moron friend like Trump is reckless, impulsive and unpredictable. Israel's military and political leadership were taken by surprise at the Great Moron throwing Israel under the bus just to get the Strait of Hormuz open and see gasoline prices in Glasgow, Montana, drop. I guess the "Judeo-Christian" bullshit is vulnerable to such momentous issues like the price of a gallon of milk at the local 7-11. The Israeli leadership is complaining that Israel's military freedom of action, particularly in Lebanon, which has never ever been challenged, is suddenly hostage to the diplomatic tug of war in Washington DC. Live and learn.

Perhaps Hezbollah should learn its lessons too, namely that warmongering and terrorism are a dead-end. But, as is the case now with the Lebanese government leading the negotiations in DC on behalf of Hezbollah, when military savagery is combined with civilized negotiations and diplomacy, there may be some gains to be made.

Predictably, we should expect Trump to now start lashing out at Iran just as he is lashing out at Netanyahu: Why? Because with every reckless decision he makes, he comes face to face with his own stupidity. And the "genius" that he thinks he is cannot look at himself in the mirror and see stupidity. How could the moron think that Iran will offer him concessions on a plate of baklava after refusing to make them for decades?

America, do not elect a businessman moron again next time around. NO, you can't run a country like you run a business, especially when the businessman in question is a weird hybrid of a moron and a criminal.
=================================================

US, Iran at odds on nuclear inspections, frozen assets in deal to end war
By Jarrett Renshaw and Tala Ramadan
Wed, June 24, 2026

LOWER MACUNGIE TOWNSHIP, Pennsylvania/DUBAI, June 23 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that Iran had agreed to nuclear inspections into "infinity," while Tehran said it had made no such concession in negotiations, raising questions about the viability of their fragile peace deal.

The two countries, which ended a first round of negotiations in ‌Switzerland on Monday, also offered conflicting accounts about financial incentives for Iran, control of the Strait of Hormuz, and Israel's parallel war in Lebanon - all major aspects of their framework deal ‌signed last week aiming to end the war.

Nevertheless, Trump said negotiations with Iran were going smoothly. "We're getting along quite well," he said at a rally in Pennsylvania.

The United States also relaxed travel curbs on Iran's World Cup soccer team, allowing it to travel from ​Tijuana, Mexico, to Seattle two days before its next match instead of one.

In signs of withering domestic support for the war, Trump's poll numbers weakened while the Republican-controlled Senate defied the president and voted to halt the war, in a largely symbolic move that highlighted fissures in his party.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll found 35% of Americans think the U.S. is now in a weaker position with Iran than before the war, while 23% believe it is in a stronger position.

The Senate vote of 50-48 endorsed a resolution passed by the House of Representatives this month, reflecting growing concern even among some of Trump's Republicans about the unpopular conflict that began on February 28.

It ‌was the first time both chambers of Congress had passed a resolution ⁠directing a president to remove U.S. armed forces from hostilities under the War Powers Act, though it was not immediately clear how the votes might affect the conflict.

RESCUING SEAFARERS

Though prospects for a lasting peace are far from certain, the initial agreement between Washington and Tehran has allowed traffic to flow again through the strait, which typically ⁠handles one-fifth of global energy supply.

Trump said on Wednesday he had told the Justice Department to look into oil companies for not lowering pump prices in line with falling crude costs.

"Gasoline prices better start going down a lot faster than what I'm seeing!" he said on social media.

Oil prices fell more than 1% on Wednesday, extending this week's losses and trading near their lowest since before the war began on February 28.

The United Nations' shipping agency said it was ​working ​to evacuate 11,000 seafarers stranded when Iran closed the strategic waterway.

The agreement calls for Iran to allow traffic to ​flow freely for 60 days, though it has said it might impose tolls or ‌other fees on shipping subsequently.

In a joint statement on Tuesday, Iran and Oman, which controls the other side of the strait, stressed their "sovereign rights" in the waterway, adding that they would work together to manage traffic, along with associated costs.

Oman said it had coordinated with the International Maritime Organization to provide a temporary corridor for vessels seeking to transit the Strait of Hormuz.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, visiting Gulf allies unsettled by the peace deal, said Iran would not be allowed to charge tolls in the strait as part of any final agreement.

The deal calls for an immediate end to the war, including in Lebanon, lifting U.S. sanctions on Tehran and unfreezing Iranian assets held abroad. It also outlines a $300-billion investment fund for the Islamic Republic's reconstruction.

AT ODDS OVER NUCLEAR INSPECTIONS, FROZEN ASSETS

The framework itself sets no limits on Iran's nuclear program, ‌an issue to be tackled in 60 days of negotiations.

Trump claimed that Iran had agreed to allow international inspectors ​indefinite access to its damaged nuclear sites.

"Iran has fully and completely agreed to highest level Nuclear inspections long into the future (Infinity!!!)," ​Trump said on social media.

Iran denied it had discussed its nuclear program at the talks and ​said it had not agreed to invite International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors back to the country.

The two sides also disagreed on details of a provision that would give ‌Iran access to funds that have been frozen in overseas accounts.

Trump said any ​unfrozen assets would be used to buy food and ​medical supplies from the U.S., while Iran's ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Ali Bahreini, said Iran would decide how to spend that money.

Washington has already agreed to waive sanctions on Iran for 60 days, allowing Tehran to sell oil and related products and receive payment for them.

Israel's parallel war against Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon also remains a sticking point.

Bahreini said the deal requires ​Israel to withdraw its troops from Lebanon, while Israel has said it ‌will maintain a security zone in southern Lebanon and act to "neutralize" threats against Israeli soldiers and citizens.

Even as Israel and Lebanon renewed talks in Washington on Tuesday, Israeli gunfire killed ​two people in southern Lebanon, its civil defence and health ministry said, prompting Iran-backed Hezbollah to accuse Israel of violating a ceasefire that has largely held since Sunday.

(Reporting by Reuters ​bureaus; Writing by Lincoln Feast, Sharon Singleton and Clarence Fernandez; Editing by Gareth Jones, Cynthia Osterman and Raju Gopalakrishnan)