EUROPE FEARS RUSSIA’S NEXT MOVE / Ian Proud
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – September 24, 2026
Big tech hands in its DSA censorship reports to the EU
RT | September 24, 2026
The EU has published a wide range of reports detailing what social media companies like TikTok and Meta are doing to comply with its Digital Services Act (DSA). The reports detail the extreme censorship needed to stay on Brussels’ good side.
Under the European Commission’s “voluntary Code of Conduct on Disinformation,” the largest online platforms operating in the EU are required to submit biannual reports explaining their efforts to combat so-called “disinformation.” Although adherence to the code is described as “voluntary,” those who do not comply are subject to fines under the DSA, which came into force in 2023.
The commission published reports by Meta, TikTok, Google, Twitch, and more than two dozen other platforms on Wednesday. Each report spans hundreds of pages, and details the speech restrictions and censorship policies put in place at the behest of the EU.
These include restrictions on political speech surrounding elections, which the EU has mandated in every major European vote since 2024, under the pretext of fighting “Russian interference.” According to documents released by the US House Judiciary Committee earlier this year, these measures have almost always been used “to disadvantage conservative or populist political parties.”
In its report, TikTok admitted that it removed more than half a million posts concerning elections in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Hungary, Malta, Portugal, and Slovenia this year. RT has covered the EU’s efforts to interfere in the Bulgarian and Hungarian elections in depth, and found that TikTok came under particularly intense pressure from Brussels, after its failure to implement sufficiently draconian restrictions during Romania’s presidential election in 2024.
Each report is hundreds of pages long, and every major social media company admitted that they now defer to EU-approved “fact-checkers” to police content on their platforms. Meta explained that it now automatically down-ranks content flagged by fact-checkers, while YouTube stated that it has trained AI models to pre-emptively remove content it thinks would fall foul of these groups.
Multiple reports specify that the platforms themselves must pay the fact-checkers’ salary. These fact-checkers flagged more than 14 million posts on Facebook in the first six months of this year alone.
Every social media platform devoted a chapter in its report to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, with Facebook noting that all posts on the conflict are subject to monitoring for “disinformation and misinformation” by pro-EU fact-checkers.
Russian media outlets are banned from Facebook, while Ukrainian outlets are free to operate, and Kiev is permitted to fundraise on the platform.
Despite mentioning “disinformation” more than a dozen times, the DSA does not define the term.
‘A Big Victory’ – Palestine Chronicle Wins Two-Year Legal Battle
By Romana Rubeo | Palestine Chronicle | September 22, 2026
A US federal court dismissed the lawsuit against the Palestine Chronicle and its editor, Dr. Ramzy Baroud, after the three plaintiffs asked to withdraw it.
Almog Meir Jan filed the case in July 2024. Shlomi Ziv and Andrey Kozlov joined an amended complaint the following year. The suit sought to link the Chronicle to their captivity in Gaza through its publication of reports by Palestinian journalist Abdallah Aljamal.
The Chronicle rejected the accusations throughout the proceedings. The plaintiffs moved to withdraw their case in July, and US District Judge Tiffany Cartwright granted the request on September 15. The court record closed the case after more than two years of litigation.
“After a struggle of over 2 years, we have won a big victory. We have beaten back a calculated attempt to chill the free speech of some of the most critical voices of the Palestinian people — The Palestine Chronicle and Ramzy Baroud. I have been so proud and honored to represent these clients and am happy for the outcome,” Attorney Dan Kovalik said.
“Still, we must remain vigilant for the inevitable attacks to come against people whose only ‘crime’ is advocating for the lives and rights of the Palestinian people. We are fully prepared for this ongoing struggle,” Kovalik added.
For his part, Baroud welcomed the outcome but said that the case “should have been thrown out from the start.”
“It was initially dismissed, only to be refiled and treated as though the accusations had any legitimacy, despite there not being a single piece of evidence to prove any wrongdoing on our part,” he said.
A Gaza Journalist at the Center of the Case
The lawsuit grew out of an Israeli massacre in central Gaza in June 2024. Israeli occupation forces freed four captives during the operation, which also killed hundreds of Palestinians.
Among those killed was Abdallah Aljamal, a Palestinian journalist who had contributed reports to the Palestine Chronicle. His wife, father and neighbors were also killed. After the raid, Israeli officials alleged that three of the captives had been held in Aljamal’s home.
The three former captives later sued the Chronicle and Baroud. They alleged that the outlet had aided their captivity by publishing Aljamal’s work and paying him for it. The Chronicle denied paying Aljamal and rejected any suggestion that publishing his reports, which were also widely disseminated in both Arabic and English, connected the outlet to the captives’ detention.
Aljamal had filed many reports during the first six months of the war. Baroud said the value of that work lay in its attention to Palestinians whose experiences rarely reached an international audience.
“When Abdallah was sending articles, what I liked about his work is that he spoke to ordinary people,” Baroud said in an earlier interview with journalist Rachel Blevins.
“(We) did not want political commentary; we already have analysts. We wanted the voices of people you never hear from. That’s all,” he added.
In the same interview, Kovalik challenged the allegation that the Chronicle had financed Aljamal’s activities. “The claim is that the Palestine Chronicle paid a journalist, and somehow that money was used to hold hostages. It’s not true. There’s no evidence,” he said.
For the Chronicle, the case put an ordinary editorial decision—publishing firsthand reports from Gaza—at the center of an accusation of wrongdoing. It also forced a small newsroom to defend its work in court while continuing to cover the genocide facing the people and journalists on whom that work depended.
“The saddest aspect of all this is that the victims once again became the accused,” Baroud said in his latest statement. “Some of us have lost hundreds of family members, relatives, friends, neighbors and colleagues, only to find ourselves having to defend against entirely politically and ideologically motivated accusations.”
Israeli authorities have repeatedly accused Palestinian journalists killed or targeted in Gaza of ties to Hamas. The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented a pattern of labeling journalists as “terrorists” without substantiated evidence, while Reporters Without Borders has reported smear campaigns against Gaza’s journalists. Those allegations should be assessed on evidence, rather than treated as established facts because they come from the army that targeted them.
According to the International Federation of Journalists, at least 240 Palestinian journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza as of September 2026. The federation described the toll as “the greatest massacre of journalists in the history of modern journalism”.
A Silver Lining
Baroud reflected on the people who helped the Chronicle through the case.
“There is a silver lining. This case made us stronger. Dan Kovalik and his team fought with extraordinary dedication on our behalf, while countless readers and intellectuals stood by us.
“Throughout it all, we refused to let the case slow us down. We expanded our coverage and our network, sharpened our journalism and emerged more resilient and more committed than ever to telling Palestinian stories.”
The Palestine Chronicle dedicated the outcome to its readers, solidarity activists, intellectuals, independent journalists and all those who stood beside it and defended the right of Palestinians to tell their own stories.
– Romana Rubeo is an Italian writer and the managing editor of The Palestine Chronicle.
IAEA inspectors cannot return to Iran amid US threats: Russia
Press TV – September 24, 2026
Russia’s permanent representative to international organizations in Vienna says the return of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors to Iran is not possible amid continued US threats against the country.
Mikhail Ulyanov said the United States has never provided guarantees that it will halt missile attacks on Iranian territory. “On the contrary, they are practically issuing threats every day, and sometimes several times a day,” Ulyanov said, according to RIA Novosti.
“In such circumstances, what meaning can there be in talking about the presence of IAEA inspectors?” he added.
Ulyanov’s remarks come against the backdrop of a fundamental security problem surrounding the resumption of inspections. In June, Israeli and US strikes targeted Iranian nuclear facilities that had been under IAEA safeguards.
The US and Israel attacked Iran while nuclear negotiations were underway, using the talks as a cover for aggression under the illusion that the attack would eliminate Iran’s nuclear program and eventually topple the Islamic Republic.
The bombing has killed the bilateral framework for cooperation between Iran and the IAEA, which has so far refused to condemn the aggression, thus failing in its commitment and now demanding Iran to go out of its way and cooperate with aggressors—amounting to awarding the aggressors.
The attacks forced the Agency to halt its field verification activities and withdraw its inspectors from Iran for safety reasons. The IAEA itself reported that its inspectors had been withdrawn from the country by the end of June because of the security situation.
That history provides an important context for Tehran’s refusal to immediately restore unrestricted access. Iran is being asked to facilitate the return of international inspectors while the military threat that forced their withdrawal has not been conclusively removed.
From Tehran’s perspective, the question is therefore not simply whether inspectors should have access, but whether the conditions exist for them to operate safely and independently without their presence becoming entangled in an active military confrontation.
The IAEA has also acknowledged the exceptional circumstances created by the attacks. In its reporting, the Agency stated that attacks against nuclear facilities can have serious consequences for nuclear safety, security, safeguards and international peace and security, and recalled that nuclear facilities must not be attacked because of the risks to people and the environment.
This is particularly significant because the facilities targeted in the strikes were not outside the safeguards system. Russia has argued that the affected Iranian sites had been subject to regular Agency monitoring before the attacks.
In a 2025 statement, Ulyanov said the facilities at Fordow, Natanz, Isfahan and Arak had been regularly inspected and that the strikes damaged both nuclear infrastructure and IAEA equipment.
The attacks therefore created a difficult contradiction for the international verification system: facilities under international monitoring were struck militarily, inspectors were subsequently withdrawn for security reasons, and Iran then faced intensified demands to restore access under conditions in which it continues to regard itself as exposed to further attack.
The Agency has reported unresolved questions concerning uranium particles and has said that it requires further information from Iran before it can provide broader assurances about the exclusively peaceful nature of the country’s nuclear program.
At the same time, the current dispute cannot be separated from the security environment in which verification is being demanded. A sustainable inspection arrangement would require more than simply instructing Iran to open its facilities.
It would require credible security arrangements for inspectors, protection for safeguarded nuclear installations, and a mechanism that prevents inspections from becoming a source of additional military or political escalation.
Tehran’s position is that inspectors should not simply return under the same conditions that existed before the attacks. There are several concrete reasons for that position.
First, the safety of inspectors has become a direct issue. The IAEA withdrew its personnel because of the security situation after the attacks.
Without credible assurances that inspectors and their equipment will be protected from further military action, Iran can argue that an immediate return would expose Agency personnel to risks that are beyond the Agency’s ability to control.
Second, Iran’s nuclear facilities have themselves become potential military targets. The IAEA has repeatedly stressed the dangers of attacking nuclear installations.
Allowing inspectors to return without addressing the possibility of renewed strikes would leave them operating in an environment where the facilities they are monitoring could again come under attack.
Third, the previous monitoring framework was disrupted by military action rather than simply by a disagreement over access. The IAEA’s own records state that verification activities stopped following the attacks and that Iran subsequently enacted legislation suspending cooperation with the Agency.
Fourth, the dispute now involves a question of reciprocity and confidence. Iran maintains that it cannot be expected to provide extensive access while simultaneously facing threats of additional military action.
The dispute has intensified following a September resolution by the IAEA Board of Governors reporting Iran’s case to the United Nations Security Council.
Iran has rejected the move as politically motivated and has stressed that the military strikes and subsequent diplomatic pressure have fundamentally changed the circumstances surrounding the nuclear dispute.
Russia and China have opposed efforts to escalate the matter through the Security Council.
At the same time, Iranian officials have warned that continued military and political pressure could lead Tehran to reconsider its position within the nuclear non-proliferation framework.
Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said Iran’s recent experience could encourage other countries to reconsider participation in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
Senate Rejects Iran War Powers Resolution Passed By House
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | September 24, 2026
The Senate narrowly voted to reject legislation that would require President Donald Trump to end the war against Iran.
The Senate voted against the War Powers resolution 49-50 on Thursday, largely along party lines. Republican Senators Thom Tillis, Susan Collins, Rand Paul, and Lisa Murkowski all voted for the legislation with nearly all Democrats. The only Democratic senator to vote against the War Powers resolution was John Fetterman.
The resolution would have required Trump to end the war against Iran. It directs the President to “remove the use of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, including potential ground forces in a combat role or used for occupation, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran.”
The House passed the legislation, H.Con.Res.89, in July. Earlier this month, the House passed a separate War Powers resolution, H. Con. Res. 93, 220-204, with seven Republicans joining nearly all Democrats to pass the legislation.
Even if the legislation had passed the Senate, Trump likely would have vetoed it. In 2019, Trump vetoed a War Powers resolution directing him to withdraw US support for Saudi Arabia’s war against Ansar Allah in Yemen.
Congress has not passed any authorization for the US to wage war against Iran, making the conflict unconstitutional. Republican Congressman Thomas Massie has introduced articles of impeachment against Secretary of War Pete Hegseth for waging an undeclared war.
“By engaging in hostilities in Iran for more than 90 days without congressional authorization, Secretary Hegseth is breaking the law and must be held accountable,” said Massie when he introduced the articles of impeachment. “Secretary Hegseth’s constitutional violations extend beyond the illegal war in Iran. He is abusing the power of his office to ignore congressional war powers resolutions, to kidnap foreign leaders, and to intimidate critics of the Trump administration by retaliating against them for exercising free speech.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed the lower chamber for the midterm recess early, delaying the vote on Massie’s articles of impeachment.
‘We did not attack Pakistan with drones’: Afghan sources
Al Mayadeen | September 24, 2026
An Afghan source told Al Mayadeen that Afghanistan did not launch drone attacks against Pakistan, rejecting Islamabad’s account and describing the Pakistani claims as a pretext for the strikes carried out against Afghan territory.
The source said Afghanistan will determine “the nature of the response and the appropriate timing to respond to the repeated Pakistani violations of our sovereignty.”
The Afghan source categorically denied that Kabul’s forces had attacked Pakistan using drones, saying the allegations were being used to justify Pakistan’s latest strikes.
“Afghanistan will choose the nature of the response and the appropriate timing to respond to the repeated Pakistani violations of our sovereignty,” the source told Al Mayadeen.
The statement comes amid a sharp escalation in tensions between Kabul and Islamabad, following a series of cross-border strikes and clashes in recent days. Pakistan has accused Afghan territory of being used by armed groups to launch attacks against Pakistan, while Afghan authorities have repeatedly rejected accusations that Kabul is facilitating such operations.
Pakistan says it struck 10 sites in Afghanistan
The source’s comments to Al Mayadeen came after Pakistan announced that it carried out a series of drone and airstrikes against 10 sites inside Afghanistan following what Islamabad claimed were drone incursions launched from Afghan territory.
“In exercise of its sovereign right to self-defence, Pakistan conducted precision aerial and drone strikes against 10 locations in Afghanistan used for launching and storing these drones,” Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said. “The strikes were deliberate, precise, calibrated, and proportionate, and strictly limited to identified military objectives directly linked to the attempted attacks against Pakistan.”
Pakistan said the strikes were limited to military objectives it linked directly to the alleged drone attacks, although official details of where the sites were located were withheld. A resident of Kanfahar, however, told AFP that an airstrike targeted the southern Afghan city.
Tarar said in a statement that the drone incursion “constitutes a blatant violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and is a grave and unacceptable act of aggression.”
Kabul warns attacks could derail dialogue
The Afghan source also said there had been efforts to resume dialogue with Pakistan, warning that the latest attacks could undermine prospects for negotiations and rebuilding confidence between the two neighboring countries.
“There was an effort to resume dialogue with Pakistan,” the source said, adding that “the latest attacks may thwart opportunities for dialogue and confidence-building” between the two sides.
The warning comes as regional mediation efforts face mounting pressure following renewed military exchanges along the border.
A spokesperson for the Afghan Taliban said four people were killed as a result of Pakistani airstrikes against targets inside Afghanistan.
Earlier this week, Pakistani airstrikes in Afghanistan also resulted in civilian casualties, according to Afghan officials and the United Nations. Reuters reported that three civilians were killed in strikes on September 21, while Pakistani authorities said they had targeted militants
Read more: UK inquiry hears claims soldiers abused Afghan detainees ‘for fun’
Iraqi Resistance faction links arms to sovereignty, questions US exit
By Al Mayadeen | September 24, 2026
Weapons are tied to Iraqi sovereignty, Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada spokesperson Sheikh Kazem al-Fartousi said Thursday, arguing that they exist to defend the country and establish deterrence.
Speaking to Al Mayadeen Plus, al-Fartousi said, “If you provide sovereignty to Iraq, then there is no need for weapons.”
He said the group had put forward 10 points that would guarantee Iraqi sovereignty, stressing that the proposals serve Iraq’s interests rather than those of the factions.
Al-Fartousi questions US withdrawal from Iraq
Addressing the US presence in Iraq, al-Fartousi said its continuation, alongside US control over political decision-making, the economy, and oil sales, constitutes a clear violation of Iraqi sovereignty.
He also stressed that the presence of Turkish forces and armed members of Turkish Kurdish opposition groups in Iraq was a violation of the country’s sovereignty.
Al-Fartousi expressed doubts about the US withdrawal from Iraq, saying that the US side was speaking about needing additional time.
In this context, he revealed information indicating that large numbers of US forces have returned to the Ain al-Assad base in Iraq 10 days ago.
Warning over possible political mobilization
Recent reporting has likewise placed the future of foreign forces and armed factions’ weapons at the center of discussions in Iraq, with some factions linking any weapons arrangements to the restoration of full Iraqi sovereignty.
Al-Fartousi also warned Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi about “a street movement being prepared with US support to overthrow the government.”
The remarks come as Baghdad approaches the September 30 deadline for the end of the remaining US-led Coalition mission, while discussions over bringing weapons under state authority remain unresolved.
Iraq forms new committee amid transformation in relations with coalition
Spokesperson for the Commander-in-Chief of the Iraqi Armed Forces, Sabah al-Numan, announced earlier this month that Commander-in-Chief and Prime Minister Ali Falih al-Zaidi has directed the formation of a committee to determine the form of the relationship with the international coalition based on the principle of reciprocity.
Al-Numan said, “The relationship with coalition countries will transition to integration and cooperation after September 30 of this year,” reaffirming that September 30 is the final date for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.
He said the timing is “a culmination of Iraqi sovereignty and a beacon for the capabilities of the security forces in the national security file and the protection of sovereignty.”
Al-Numan revealed that the country is witnessing an acceleration in the withdrawal of foreign forces within the international coalition, noting that “the office of the Commander-in-Chief has provided facilities.”
The spokesperson stressed the authority’s determination to restrict weapons to the state, saying, “We will not allow the existence of any weapon outside the framework of the state.” He explained that “the process of organizing weapons is proceeding according to the vision of the Iraqi government and has a political and legal framework” and noted that “after September 30, dialogues will accelerate in order to resolve the weapons file.”
Cannon fodder no more… South Korea rejects Trump’s pressure to join his criminal war on Iran
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 24, 2026
This is a pivotal moment in history as South Korea tells Trump it is done with being a vassal for American imperialist wars.
KJ Noh notes in this interview for Strategic Culture Foundation that South Korea’s defiance of U.S. power is resonating with growing resistance among other nations towards Washington’s bullying and warmongering.
President Lee Jae-myung of South Korea gave a televised nationwide address last week declaring that his country would not be deploying military forces to the Strait of Hormuz.
That announcement followed weeks of speculation that South Korea would cave to pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump, who has been arm-twisting Seoul and other allies to send military support for his seven-month war on Iran. A war that is plunging the global and American economy into turmoil and could derail his presidency in the U.S. mid-term elections.
Geopolitical commentator KJ Noh says the public rejection of Trump’s appeal by South Korea is a major blow to Washington’s international image.
He notes that the Republic of Korea has been a loyal vassal of the United States, always sending its troops to fight American wars. South Korean soldiers have deployed in every U.S. overseas war from Vietnam to Iraq.
“The Korean people are saying they do not want to be cannon fodder for any more U.S. wars,” comments KJ Noh.
He adds that this defiance will inspire other nations to reject American hegemony.
However, KJ Noh warns that Washington is exerting severe pressure on South Korea to bend the knee. “South Korea is a living example of the maxim that to be an enemy of America is dangerous, but to be an ally is fatal.”
Trump is in a deep mess of his own making as a result of his criminal war against Iran, which he is losing. He needs “allies” to bail him out by supplying weapons and military personnel to act as cannon fodder.
Over the past eight decades, South Korea would have bent over and loyally obliged. But not anymore, it seems. The Korean people have had enough of being Uncle Sam’s vassal.
Korean defiance is a rallying call for global repudiation of American imperialism.
Neria Leiter Was A Legitimate Military Target
By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | September 24, 2026
Israel and its stooges in mainstream media are claiming that Neria Leiter, the son of Yechiel Leiter, the current Israeli ambassador to the United States, was wounded in a supposed “terrorist attack”.
In reality, it was in no way a terrorist attack, but resistance against illegal occupation, a guaranteed right under international law.
Neria Leiter was hit by a car driven by 29-year-old Palestinian Mahmoud Muhammad Mahmoud Suleiman- who was killed at the scene- while he was carrying out service as an IDF reservist manning the checkpoint outside of the West Bank settlement of Beit Horon.
As Drop Site News noted, Beit Horon is an “illegal settlement” which “sits on land in the occupied West Bank, where Israeli settlements are illegal under international law.”
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank is illegal under international law.
International law also guarantees the right to resist illegal occupation by military means.
Given that Neria Leiter was a combatant upholding an occupation illegal under international law, the “ attack” against him was not “terrorism” but a legitimate act of self-defence and resistance to criminal occupation supported by international law.
As journalist Glenn Greenwald noted in response to claims that this was a “terrorist” attack, “Don’t terrorist attacks require the targeting of civilians? This was an armed, on-duty soldier in a military considered to be an occupying force under international law. How does that remotely fit the definition of ‘terrorism’?”
As journalist Abubaker Abed noted, “It was a self-defence and resistance act. That’s the undeniable truth. He was a soldier illegally occupying parts of the West Bank. The Palestinian defended himself from his terror. Palestinians have a right to defend themselves.”
Neria Leiter was a combatant, sent to the West Bank to uphold an illegal military occupation under international law; he was in no way a victim of a terrorist attack, but a legitimate military target for Palestinians living under Israeli occupation.
Featured Video
The Search for Truth: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination One Year Later
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The 9/11 “Double-Cross” Conspiracy Theory
BY LAURENT GUYÉNOT • UNZ REVIEW • SEPTEMBER 6, 2022
Is it true that “9/11 was an inside job”? Yes, insofar as Israel is “inside” the U.S. But for the 9/11 truthers who have identified Israel as the main perpetrators, “9/11 was an inside job” is at best a half-truth, and at worst an integral part of the Zionist operation, like a secondary flag sewn as a lining under the false flag of Islamism. Victor Thorn (1963-2017) wrote in his book 9/11 made in Israel: The Plot Against America (2011): “In essence, the ‘9-11 truth movement’ was created prior to Sept. 11, 2001 as a means of suppressing news relating to Israeli complicity. . . . The slogan ‘9-11 was an inside job’ was quite possibly the greatest example of Israeli propaganda ever devised.” In milder terms, it is “controlled opposition”.
A genuine truth movement would have pointed to Israel as the prime suspect from the start. From day one, it was obvious who would benefit. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Europe’s mounting social chaos… chickens coming home to roost for proxy war against Russia
- US-Russia Diesel Deal Becomes Massive Defeat for Ukraine
- Hormuz and the Looming Economic Catastrophe
- Dhubab offensive, media blitz and the rapid unraveling of Saudi-backed coalition’s new gambit
- Putin Conveys to Trump Iran’s Vision on Possible Conflict Resolution – Kremlin
- The Search for Truth: Charlie Kirk’s Assassination One Year Later
- ‘Harsh reality’: Iran says France seeks monopoly on power and intimidation, not peace for all
- When Will This White House Madness End?
- Huckabee aide goes to ‘unusual lengths’ to portray ‘Israel’ positively
- Trump Announces Diesel Supply Deal With Putin Following Phone Call
- If Americans Knew
- Israeli forces kill another child in Gaza – Daily Update
- Gaza ceasefire exists in name only, say more than 100 organizations
- Nearly 2 Million in Gaza Need Urgent Shelter Assistance as Winter Looms: IOM Chief Warns
- Suppressing Palestinian resistance: US charity under fire for AI monitoring of Gaza classrooms
- Thousands Are Held in Israeli Torture Camps. This Is What Happens Inside
- Israel puts Gaza’s sick, injured, newborn in peril – Daily Update
- Report claimed Mark Levin used by Israeli government to influence Trump
- Over 2,000 Gazans have died awaiting medical evacuation amid Israel’s continued siege
- How a U.S. Diplomat Suppressed and Altered Reports Critical of Israel
- 5 Palestinians Die from Israeli Strikes in Gaza as Relentless Attacks Continue
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
- Green Energy Debacle: German Expert Professor Fritz Vahrenholt Warns Of Severe Economic And Social Consequences
- Two More Paleo Reconstructions Affirm Meters-Higher Sea Levels Across Ireland, Brazil 7000-6000 Years Ago
- New Study: Earth And Venus Surface Warmth Largely Explained By Convection And Lapse Rate, Not CO2 Or Radiation
- 2025 Nature Paper Claiming Worsening Global Drought Gets RETRACTED …Heavily Flawed
- New Study: ‘Global Drought Shows No Detectable Recent Acceleration Under Climate Warming’
- Economic Masterminds: German Socialists Suggest Taxing Productivity Gains Stemming From Using AI
- The South China Sea Has Not Been Cooperating With The Climate Change Narrative
