Kristi Noem’s Authoritarian Take on Travel
By Adam Dick | Peace and Prosperity Blog | May 6, 2025
Speaking Tuesday before the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the United States House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations regarding the implementation of REAL ID mandates on travelers, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem displayed succinctly in one sentence her disdain for the right of Americans to travel freely and her support instead for an authoritarian approach to travel.
“But we are telling people that this law will be enforced and it will allow us to know individuals in this country who they are and that they’re authorized to travel,” declared Noem regarding the starting the next day of REAL ID enforcement on travelers. Yet, the right to travel is a fundamental right long recognized by the US government and its courts. And the right to travel is the opposite of travel being allowed only when and to whom the government decides. Further, the right to travel includes the right to travel without showing your papers, updated in the age of mass surveillance to showing your REAL ID. An apparently peaceful person going about his business should be able to continue to do so without having to identify himself to any government agent or provide proof that the government has preapproved his movement from point A to point B. That’s freedom. The Noem approach, in contrast, is authoritarianism.
Adding to the outrageousness of this defense of REAL ID Noem offered is an assertion she made just before in her comments at the subcommittee hearing. Noem said that REAL ID would be imposed on travelers on Wednesday because after years — 17 years in fact — of delay of implementation “the Biden administration chose that it should go into place on May seventh and we intend to follow the law.” Hold on: Noem is really passing the buck to the Biden administration? President Donald Trump and his administration has spent a great amount of effort — via executive orders, regulation changes, and other actions — rescinding many decrees of the Biden administration. Trump and Noem could do the same regarding REAL ID. At a minimum, they could ensure four more years of delay as administration after administration has done before. Instead, they chose to move forward with imposing REAL ID on travelers. They cannot evade any of the responsibility on this. Trump and Noem are choosing to pursue the authoritarian course.
Official Arab alignment with Israel to eliminate the resistance
By Majeb Zebda – Palestinian Information Center – May 4, 2025
The media warning issued by the Lebanese Higher Defence Council to Hamas, accusing it of undermining Lebanese national security, not only contradicts the facts that Israel is the one undermining Lebanese national security and violating Lebanese territory through killing, bombing and occupation without deterrence or accountability, but also paves the way for the disarmament of the Palestinian camps in Lebanon and suggests that they pose a threat to Lebanon’s security and territorial integrity. I will not rule out the possibility of the camp weapons issue being used to distort the image of the Palestinian resistance and to drag Hamas’s name into any future conflicts on the ground. This desire aligns with the vision of Mahmoud Abbas, who is hostile to the Palestinian resistance in general and Hamas in particular and plans to visit Lebanon to discuss the issue of weapons in the camps in the coming days.
On the other hand, the sudden Lebanese warning comes in response to the vision of the US and Israel’s arrangements for the future of the Arab region, which is being re-engineered politically and on the ground to allow for complete and undisputed Israeli domination. It also aligns with other Arab measures, including, for example, Jordan’s criminalisation of support for the Palestinian resistance and the new Syrian regime’s efforts, under American pressure, to tighten the noose on Palestinian resistance factions and prevent their activities inside Syria under the pretext of “arms control.”
This allows us to come to the conclusion that the Lebanese warning is just one scene among several others that together form the American-Israeli vision of the region. It is a bleak future for Arab dignity, in which Israel violates Arab lands and capabilities daily in a provocative and humiliating manner, while Arab regimes undertake the task of clipping the wings of the Palestinian resistance and cutting off its supply lines under the force of American pressure. The US will implement what these regimes fail to, and the American bombing of Yemen in defence of Israel, which has been ongoing for weeks, is a prime example of this.
Unfortunately, official Arab alignment with Israeli-American goals is pushing some to treat the Palestinian resistance with arrogance and condescension, describing it as the weakest link. Therefore, there is no high political price to pay for antagonising it and distorting its positive image, even though it has the legitimate and legal right to resist military occupation and defend its land, people and holy sites. This is a chance to recall the shameless insults and obscenities uttered by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas against the Palestinian resistance, which is the opposite of the official Arab approach to the criminal occupation, which violates the dignity of Arabs, their skies and their land around the clock. Yet, no one dares to threaten it or issue warnings—even as a formality—of resisting its attacks, which have become a daily occurrence on our television screens.
Arab identification with Israel’s desire to eliminate the resistance will strongly clash with the resistance’s popular support and its deep roots in the hearts of the nation’s free people. The resistance, which has persevered for 18 months against the Israeli enemies and sacrificed its best leaders and fighters without being broken, is capable of regrouping and rebuilding what the occupation has destroyed. When it does so, many of those who align with Israel’s goals today may seek to cosy up to the resistance after their strength weakens and they fail to eliminate it and uproot it from the land of Palestine and its surroundings.
Translation by MEMO
As India and Pakistan edge toward full-scale war, Kashmir braces for the fallout
By Fatemeh Fazli | Press TV | May 7, 2025
Tensions between the two nuclear-armed South Asian neighbors have once again reached a boiling point, following India’s most extensive missile strikes yet into Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
The death toll continues to climb alarmingly, with some reports putting the figure at 26, with several others injured, marking one of the bloodiest military escalations in the region in recent memory.
Graphic images circulating on social media platforms depict scenes of chaos and commotion, with wounded civilians, including children, being rushed to overwhelmed hospitals in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and parts of Punjab.
In Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-administered Kashmir, residents recalled the terror that unfolded after a barrage of missiles pounded the city. One local said they scrambled to the hills surrounding the city as a deafening barrage of missiles lit up the night sky.
Codenamed Operation Sindoor, the Indian Army announced that it had struck nine sites, labeling them “terrorist infrastructure” scattered across Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
It claimed to have targeted the bases of Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist group, which is based in Pakistan and has been responsible for several terrorist incidents in India and Indian-administered Kashmir.
In response, the Pakistani military offered its own account, stating that Indian forces had launched 24 missiles at six separate locations, resulting in the deaths of at least 26 individuals.
The strikes were followed by intense cross-border shelling along the volatile de facto boundary, which has been the scene of minor and major skirmishes between the two sides for decades.
This dramatic escalation follows closely on the heels of a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, a serene hill resort in Indian-administered Kashmir, where more than two dozen tourists from India’s southern states were gunned down last month.
The attackers reportedly emerged from forest cover and targeted only male tourists, leaving women unharmed, a chilling crime that sent shockwaves across India and the world.
India was quick to blame Pakistan for orchestrating the attack. Islamabad, however, denied any involvement, insisting no credible evidence had been presented, a position that gained traction among observers worldwide even as the terrorist attack itself drew widespread condemnation.
This is not the first instance of such clashes souring relations between the estranged neighbors, and it likely won’t be the last. Their hostility and mistrust run deep, rooted in the painful legacy of the 1947 partition of British India, a wound that continues to fester.
In the decades since, India and Pakistan have fought multiple wars, waged proxy battles, and engaged in countless skirmishes, each confrontation widening the rift and reinforcing mutual suspicion, despite their intertwined histories, cultures, languages, and cuisines.
Yet, amid the hostility, ordinary people on both sides of the border have consistently voiced their opposition to war. They speak the same tongue, prepare the same meals, and see each other not as enemies but as long-lost kin separated by politics and pride.
In particular, the war-weary people of Kashmir, who have seen nothing but war and violence all these years, have paid the highest price for the hostility between the two South Asian countries.
There have been some genuine efforts at reconciliation in the past. Some governments in New Delhi and Islamabad did make attempts to thaw relations, most notably during the era of Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.
Musharraf even proposed a popular “four-point solution” to the long-festering Kashmir dispute. Vajpayee, in turn, championed a peace initiative grounded in empathy, as evident in his memorable April 2003 speech delivered in the heart of Srinagar, the summer capital of Kashmir.
But that fragile hope was shattered in November 2008 when coordinated terrorist attacks paralyzed Mumbai, India’s financial capital. Carried out by Lashkar-e-Taiba militants based in Pakistan, the attacks dealt a severe blow to the peace process.
Subsequent tragedies – the 2016 terrorist attack in the town of Uri in Kashmir that killed 18 Indian soldiers, and the 2019 suicide bombing in Pulwama that claimed the lives of 28 Indian military personnel – further deepened the divide, derailing any diplomatic momentum.
India blamed Pakistan on both occasions, even though Islamabad feigned ignorance. After the Uri attack, India responded with “surgical strikes” deep inside Pakistan.
These incidents unfolded under the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose tenure has been marked by increased militarization of the Kashmir conflict.
In a controversial move in August 2019, Modi’s government revoked Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its special autonomy.
While Indian officials have since claimed that peace and normalcy have returned to the region, the massacre of tourists in Pahalgam on April 22, killing at least 28, belies such assurances, including those from Home Minister Amit Shah.
In January, Shah asserted that the Modi administration had dismantled terrorism in the Kashmir valley and eradicated its underlying ecosystem. Just months prior, in September 2024, Modi himself promised that the BJP would turn Jammu and Kashmir into a “terror-free haven for tourists.”
But the events in Pahalgam shattered that illusion. The militants emerged from the forests and opened fire on unarmed tourists while no security personnel were anywhere in sight.
The attack set off ripples far beyond the valley. In the days that followed, Kashmiri students across India were harassed and scapegoated by right-wing groups demanding revenge for the slain tourists.
Ironically, the most vocal condemnation came from Kashmir itself. Locals filled the streets in protest. Even pro-independence groups denounced the attack, and a moment of silence for the victims was solemnly observed at the Jamia Masjid, the region’s largest mosque.
Now, with war drums beating once again, it is the people of Kashmir, caught in the crosshairs of two hostile nations, who stand to suffer most. The fragile peace in the region has been shattered and the economy will also be affected with a drop in tourists visiting Kashmir.
Reports suggest at least 10 civilians have already died in Indian-administered Kashmir due to cross-border shelling along the Line of Control since last night. It will only get worse.
With both India and Pakistan in possession of nuclear weapons, the specter of full-scale war between them is not just terrifying, it’s potentially apocalyptic.
The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons has issued a dire warning, saying it was “gravely concerned” about the rising tensions and cautioning that a nuclear exchange could result in “millions of immediate deaths in the region and have global consequences.”
As has been the case far too often, the true victims of this decades-old conflict remain the people of Kashmir, who are straddling both sides of a fragile, blood-soaked border.
Fatemeh Fazli is a PhD candidate in Indian Studies at the University of Tehran.
India hits Pakistan with ballistic missiles, Islamabad vows response
Press TV – May 6, 2025
India reports attacking nine sites in Pakistan and the Pakistan-administered Kashmir amid rising tensions between the countries following a terrorist attack in the Indian-administered Kashmir.
The Indian ministry of defense announced the strikes in a statement on Wednesday, saying they had hit the targets “from where terrorist attacks against India have been planned and directed,” describing the attacks as “Operation Sindoor.”
The statement said the ministry would release detailed briefing of the operation later in the day.
A Pakistani military spokesman told broadcaster Geo that sites struck by India included two mosques.
Both sides’ armies, meanwhile, reportedly exchanged heavy shelling and gunfire across the border between the Pakistan-administered Kashmir and the Indian-administered Kashmir in at least three places.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said Islamabad was mounting a response, but did not provide details.
Muzaffarabad, the capital of the Pakistan-administered Kashmir, reported a blackout, while the eastern Pakistani border province of Punjab declared an emergency and put hospitals and emergency services on high alert.
Pakistan reports casualties
Pakistan said India had launched missiles towards three Pakistani regions, although New Delhi is yet to identify the nature of the deployed ammunition.
Islamabad also said at least three people had been killed and 12 others injured, according to an initial assessment.
The Pakistani military’s Inter-Services Public Relations said one of the fatalities was a child.
Sharif also condemned India’s attacks, and vowed that Islamabad would respond forcefully.
“The enemy has once again shown its deceitful nature,” he said, according to Geo.
The country had, on several occasions, announced recently that it had “credible information” pointing to pending Indian attacks, and vowed to retaliate accordingly.
India: Attacks were ‘surgical but non-escalatory’
The Indian ministry described the operations as “precision strikes at terrorist camps” and “terrorist infrastructure” in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
It, however, said, “Our actions have been focused, measured, and non-escalatory in nature.”
“No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in selection of targets and method of execution.”
Pakistan: Targets were ‘civilian’
Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif, however, told Geo that all sites targeted by India were “civilian” and not terrorist camps.
He said India had fired missiles from its own airspace and the latter’s assertion of targeting “camps of terrorists is false.”
The developments follow the terror attack in the town of Pahalgam in the Indian-administered Kashmir that claimed the lives of at least 26 tourists on April 22, 2025.
The Indian defense ministry statement asserted that Operation Sindoor had come in the wake of the “barbaric” Pahalgam terrorist attack, identifying the fatalities as 25 Indians and one Nepali citizen.
“We are living up to the commitment that those responsible for this attack will be held accountable.”
Pakistan has rejected any role. Federal Information Minister Attaullah Tarar had most recently rejected, what he called, India’s narrative regarding ongoing issues, and said that New Delhi was facing “diplomatic embarrassment on the global stage.”
Conflict over water
After the terrorist indecent, both countries began taking tit-for-tat measures.
India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, a water-sharing agreement mediated by the World Bank and signed in 1960, and closed the Wagah-Attari border crossing.
On Tuesday, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had said water from the country that once flowed across borders would be stopped.
“India’s water used to go outside, now it will flow for India,” he said in a speech in New Delhi, adding, “India’s water will be stopped for India’s interests, and it will be utilized for India.”
Pakistan has described India’s measures as tampering with its rivers that would be considered “an act of war.”
For its part, Islamabad has suspended visas issued to Indian nationals, closed its airspace to Indian airlines, and test-fired several long-range missiles.
WHO Pandemic Agreement ⏤ WHO is really in charge?
By Dr Lisa Hutchinson | Health Advisory & Recovery Team | May 6, 2025
On 15 April 2025, as we approached Easter, the not so joyous news broke that member states have now reached an agreement on the WHO Pandemic Agreement or Treaty, with negotiations expected to be formalized in May (17-26) when each member state can then decide whether or not to sign the agreement. Notably, this Treaty has gone ahead without the inclusion of countries such as Argentina and also the United States. It is now well known that President Trump signed an Executive Order to pull the USA out of the agreement owing to the ‘mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic’ and concerns of China’s ‘inappropriate political influence’. Moreover, federal health officials are also prevented from contributing to talks with WHO, due to concerns it is a harmful organization. So what does this WHO Pandemic Agreement mean for the UK and the rest of the world?
Anne-Claire Amprou, a co-chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, has claimed that this is a “major step forward in protecting populations, the response will be faster, more effective and more equitable” and will bolster “equity and international security.” She continues by noting that “nothing in the draft agreement shall be interpreted as providing WHO any authority to direct, order, alter or proscribe national laws or policies, or mandate States to take specific actions, such as ban or accept travelers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures or implement lockdowns.” However, many more skeptical followers of the Agreement, such as James Ruguski, indicate that this represents a Framework Convention to usher in a global pharmaceutical power grab dressed up as ‘health equity’ under the guise of ending ‘vaccine apartheid’. The fact that governments worldwide have bypassed normal safety protocols during ‘health emergencies’ sets a dangerous precedent for a totalitarian approach to a one world governance.
The latest agreement on the WHO Pandemic Agreement refers to pandemic-related health products in response to pandemic emergencies. Of note, these health products include “medicines, vaccines, diagnostics, medical devices, vector control products, personal protective equipment, decontamination products, assistive products, antidotes, cell- and gene-based therapies, and other health technologies”. The agreement continues to elaborate on the fact that a “coordinating financial Mechanism is hereby established to promote sustainable financing for the implementation of this Agreement”. In other words, this will expand the capacities around pandemic prevention and preparedness and response using the above mentioned coordinated financial mechanism to serve the implementation of this Agreement. James Roguski defines the acronym PHEIC (Public Health Emergency of International Concern) in reality as a Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex!
In his Substack, James Ruduski explains the main aspects of the Pandemic Treaty:
- This is really Corporate Wealth Redistribution Disguised as Health – as this represents a Framework Convention that benefits Big Pharma;
- A behind the scenes peak at the Conference of Parties (COP) reveals what the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing (PABS) scheme does, which gives authority to a government official so they can deem if a countermeasure is required;
- Emergency Powers and the PREP Act is another way that governments take control by bypassing normal safety protocols during declared ‘emergencies’ and sets a dangerous precedent;
- Vaccines are being developed with self-amplifying mRNA technology for new emerging ‘threats’ such as bird flu, H5N1 and the role of regulatory oversight in this regard;
- This reveals biosecurity theatres in which the WHO is given authority over logistics, manufacturing and flow of money for the PREP Act.
Although the World Health Assembly has reached an agreement for the WHO Pandemic Treaty which will be put forward for adoption in mid-May, the international agreements are not legally binding. However, where it becomes problematic for UK citizens is that a section within the agreement based on the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act [1984] ⏤ an ironic date given George Orwell’s book “Nineteen Eighty Four” ⏤ empowers the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to adopt or embrace any “international agreement or arrangement relating to the spread of an infection or contamination”. While advocates of the WHO Pandemic Agreement opine that it respects national sovereignty, it is also subject to “Obligations under International Law” ⏤ an oxymoron by any standards. Disturbingly, the language of the Agreement also includes emergencies owing to climate change!
The WHO’s One Health initiative integrates human, animal and environmental health across the organization, and includes collaborations with the usual culprits, such as the United Nations (UN) that has created the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH). Censorship is also notable in this WHO Agreement document with references to the importance of “building trust and ensuring the timely sharing of information to prevent misinformation, disinformation and stigmatisation.” Most people are unaware that mandates relating to health are illegal. People should not have to comply with health mandates that are not aligned with their beliefs. Human rights educators and justice advocates have pointed out that individuals are more empowered than they realise but resilience is largely something people do not enact as they are unaware of their true legal rights.
British citizens should ignore these international agreements and treaties and focus on repealing section 45 of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act [1984]. A recent post on platform X by Weston A. Price Foundation, London Chapter, explains how repealing section 45 of the 1984 Public Health Act will ensure we can effect how we are governed, as this can only be affected by statutes. Moreover, the 1688 Bill of Rights confirms that no treaty or government proclamation can change our laws: “That the pretended Power of Suspending of Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authority without Consent of Parlyament is illegall.”
These agreements are really about taking money from wealthy nations, via the WHO, to fund and further extend the powers of Big Pharma around the world. The WHO Pandemic Agreement can enable future public health emergency provisions or pandemic-related unapproved therapies to be rolled out globally in circumstances of another health threat. The Pandemic Agreement allows an increase in the supply chain (for medicines, vaccines, and hospital protocols) that may inflict untold damage. People’s individual rights should never be usurped by government ⏤ even in a health emergency situation. The pandemic and PREP Act enabled engineered emergencies to be initiated so that the 4th Industrial Complex architects could profit from such measures. A compliant population kept in a state of perpetual fear relinquishes power too readily. We need to protect ourselves from manipulation by authorities with too much power. The deadline for member nations to reject the amendments to the International Health Regulations is rapidly approaching: July 19, 2025. But our Secretary of State, Wes Streeting, is likely to agree the terms when he attends the World Health Assembly in Geneva on 19th May, well ahead of the rejection deadline.
James Roguski summarises: 10 reasons to reject the WHO’s Pandemic Agreement
1. Lack of Public Discussion/Debate ⏤ public debate and discussion has been almost non-existent;
2. Pandemic Related Products ⏤ the proposed Pandemic Agreement is not about health, rather, it is a redistribution of wealth under the guise of ‘equity’;
3. Surveillance ⏤ within the Agreement it states that: “Parties shall take steps through international collaboration, in bilateral, regional and multilateral settings, to progressively strengthen pandemic prevention and surveillance measures and capacities, consistent with the International Health Regulations (2005)”;
4. The One Health Approach ⏤ the Agreement states: “developing, implementing and reviewing relevant national policies and strategies that reflect a One Health approach”. This is a key policy instrument for dealing with global health risks but this has far-reaching implications. The WHO Pandemic Agreement gives the WHO Director-General the ability to issue orders to all nations regarding humans, animals and plant ecosystems when a public health emergency is declared, which overrides nation sovereignty;
5. Massive Expansion of the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex ⏤ with Article 10 stating “sustainable and geographically diversified local production”;
6. The Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing System (PABS) ⏤ the Pandemic Agreement fails to adequately address the issue of gain-of-function research and the proposed PABS would effectively monetize and incentivize the search for “pathogens with pandemic potential”;
7. The Global Supply Chain and Logistics Network ⏤ put simply the WHO should NOT be given the authority to oversee and/or operate a Global Supply Chain and Logistics Network;
8. The Financial Coordinating Mechanism ⏤ this aims to bolster the funding of the WHO to actively control the money and supply chains;
9. The Conference of the Parties ⏤ the establishment of a new bureaucracy (the Conference of the Parties) consisting of unelected, unaccountable and largely unknown bureaucrats ⏤ is unlikely to prioritise the people’s best interests in helping to prevent, prepare for, or respond to future ‘pandemics’;
10. Relevant Stakeholders ⏤ includes private corporations but not we the people.
No informed consent or democratic debate has existed during all these negotiations.
Why this matters is that the WHO Pandemic Agreement has:
⏤ Hidden clauses and centralized control
⏤ Potential impacts on national sovereignty
⏤ Your rights during future health crises will be heavily restricted.
Ultimately public private partnerships do not work and we need transparency. The WHO Pandemic Treaty and vaccine experimentation should not be able to happen again and exiting the WHO or not complying with the Pandemic Agreement is one way to oppose this. Hopefully there is a better way to health ⏤ we need to take away power from government and global officials and we need to contact MPs to raise our objections.
Consider signing the petition linked here FINAL VOTE IMMINENT: REJECT the WHO Pandemic Treaty!
Tamara Lich found guilty in Freedom Convoy case
The Democracy Fund | May 3, 2025
OTTAWA – In a landmark ruling, Tamara Lich was acquitted of four out of six charges related to her involvement in the Freedom Convoy protest. A fifth charge, counselling to commit mischief, was stayed, leaving only a single conviction of mischief. Justice Perkins-McVey determined that the Crown failed to prove Ms. Lich obstructed police, intimidated others, or counselled obstruction or intimidation during the protest. However, the court found her guilty of mischief as both a principal offender and an aider and abettor, citing her encouragement of others to participate, her fundraising efforts, organizational role, and statements such as “we will hold the line,” which the judge deemed a “rallying cry” to the truckers. Having already spent 49 days in pre-trial detention, Ms. Lich now awaits sentencing after what has been called the longest mischief trial in Canadian history.
The ruling ignites fierce debate over the boundaries of peaceful protest and the growing criminalization of political dissent in Canada. The verdict, delivered after 45 days of trial proceedings concluding on September 13, 2024, marks a significant moment in the legal treatment of protest-related cases, potentially deterring Canadians from exercising their rights to free expression and assembly out of fear of severe legal repercussions.
Her defence, led by top criminal lawyer Lawrence Greenspon and supported by Eric Granger, argued that Ms. Lich’s participation was safeguarded by Charter rights to free expression and peaceful assembly. They contended there was no evidence of criminal intent, emphasizing that police and city actions—such as directing protesters to park in specific areas—contributed to the disruptions. Despite a robust defence, the court rejected these arguments, finding her organizational role and public statements, including calls to “hold the line,” amounted to culpable conduct under the Criminal Code.
The Democracy Fund, which crowdfunded over half a million dollars to cover Ms. Lich’s legal expenses, described the trial as a critical test of Canadians’ right to peaceful assembly. “This ruling is a bittersweet moment—while Tamara Lich’s acquittal on several charges affirms the centrality of free expression, the mischief conviction could be interpreted as punishing some participants for the actions of others,” said Mark Joseph, Director of Litigation for The Democracy Fund. “We remain committed to challenging any erosion of Canadians’ rights to protest.”
As the legal community and public brace for sentencing, the decision raises urgent questions about the balance between public safety and individual freedoms.
Founded in 2021, The Democracy Fund (TDF) is a Canadian charity dedicated to constitutional rights, advancing education and relieving poverty. TDF promotes constitutional rights through litigation and public education. TDF supports an access to justice initiative for Canadians whose civil liberties have been infringed by government lockdowns and other public policy responses to the pandemic.
One martyred in Israeli drone strike on South Lebanon vehicle
Al Mayadeen | May 6, 2025
Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in southern Lebanon reported that an Israeli drone strike targeted a civilian vehicle in the university district of Kfar Rumman, located in Nabatieh Governorate. The attack resulted in the martyrdom of one individual.
The assassination occurred against a backdrop of intensifying Israeli aggression across Lebanon and Syria. Last night, Israeli warplanes conducted coordinated strikes targeting displacement shelters in Tayr Harfa, residential areas in Srifa, and border regions near Syria’s Serghaya.
These attacks follow Saturday’s disturbing incidents where Israeli drones dropped grenades near Marjayoun while others broadcast threats to farmers working in Wadi Khansa’s agricultural lands.
Local monitoring groups note an alarming trend in “Israel’s” violation patterns since the November 2025 ceasefire. Their latest data shows over 3,000 breaches, with a particular focus on southern Lebanon, where vehicle-targeted strikes have increased by 73%.
The cumulative toll now stands at 149 martyrs and 346 wounded, predominantly civilians caught in what human rights organizations describe as “a campaign of collective punishment.”
Shelter in your bunkers or leave our region: President of Yemen’s Supreme Political Council to Israelis
Al Mayadeen | May 6, 2025
President of Yemen’s Supreme Political Council, Mahdi al-Mashat, vowed on Tuesday that Sanaa’s response to Israeli and US aggression would be “devastating and painful,” and beyond what either party could withstand.
His remarks followed Israeli airstrikes targeting civilian infrastructure in Sanaa, including the airport, power stations, and factories.
“From now on, take shelter in your bunkers or leave our region immediately,” al-Mashat warned the Israeli occupation. “Your failed government can no longer protect you.”
He reaffirmed Yemen’s firm stance in supporting Gaza, stressing, “Our strikes are effective, and they will continue. We will not be deterred from our rightful stance in supporting our brothers in Palestine until the aggression ends and the siege on Gaza is lifted.”
Trump says aggression on Yemen suspended
The remarks came shortly after US President Donald Trump declared a halt to American airstrikes on Yemen, claiming Sanaa had promised to end Red Sea attacks on ships.
However, Ansar Allah leaders denied any formal commitment, with senior official Mohammed al-Bukhaiti stating that operations against US warships might pause if American strikes ceased, but vowed that military actions in support of Gaza and against the Israeli occupation would continue unabated.
Al-Mashat: Escalation will endanger Trump during his visits to the region
Later, al-Mashat said that authorities in Sanaa indirectly informed Washington that the continued escalation in the region will only affect the visits of “the criminal Trump” to the region. He said that Yemen did not inform the US of anything else.
“If the criminal Trump wants to stop his aggression and compensate [for the destruction] he left behind, that is up to him,” al-Mashat emphasized.
Oman’s Foreign Ministry confirmed it had brokered a ceasefire agreement aimed at de-escalation between the US and the authorities in Sanaa, with both parties agreeing not to target each other moving forward.
Yet the US State Department later clarified that the agreement applies strictly to maritime operations in the Red Sea. “If the Houthis [Ansar Allah] commit to not targeting ships, we will also reciprocate,” a spokesperson said.
‘Israel’ bewildered by Trump announcement
Meanwhile, the announcement from Trump sent shockwaves through the Israeli political establishment. According to Channel 14, the Israeli occupation leadership was blindsided by both Trump’s remarks on Yemen and his promise of a “major announcement” during his upcoming Middle East tour. The channel described the political mood as one of “confusion and disbelief.”
Amit Segal of Channel 12 described Trump’s message as a regional signal: “If I were Iranian, I would understand it as: hit ‘Israel’ and leave us alone.”
Tsvi Yehezkeli, Arab affairs analyst for Channel 13, speculated that the US may be pursuing a quiet agreement with Yemen. “I don’t see another explanation for this declaration,” he said, warning that the US disengagement puts “Israel” in a difficult position, effectively leaving it alone to face Yemeni retaliation. “This is no longer just about Red Sea shipping; it’s now about direct fire on Israel,” he added.
However, despite Trump’s claims of a breakthrough, Ansar Allah denied that any such concession had been made. In an interview with Bloomberg, Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a member of the group’s Political Council, affirmed that military operations in the Red Sea and against “Israel” would continue until the aggression on Gaza ends and the siege on its people is lifted.
Oman brokers US-Yemen ceasefire, Israelis in dark regarding deal
Al Mayadeen | May 6, 2025
The Omani Foreign Ministry announced on Tuesday that it had successfully brokered a ceasefire agreement between the United States and the authorities in Sanaa, aimed at achieving mutual de-escalation.
According to a statement from Muscat, the agreement entails a commitment by both sides, Washington and the Sanaa-based government, not to target each other in future military operations.
“The Sultanate thanks both parties for their constructive approach that led to this welcome outcome,” the statement read, emphasizing Oman’s longstanding diplomatic efforts in mediating regional conflicts.
US President Donald Trump had earlier declared an immediate halt to US airstrikes on Yemen, claiming that Yemeni authorities had promised to cease attacks on vessels in the Red Sea.
‘Trump surprised us’
The declaration appears to have caught the Israeli occupation off guard, with Axios journalist Barak Ravid quoting a senior Israeli official saying, “We didn’t know about this. Trump surprised us.”
Despite Trump’s claims of a breakthrough, Ansar Allah denied that any such concession had been made. In an interview with Bloomberg, Mohammed al-Bukhaiti, a member of the group’s Political Council, affirmed that military operations in the Red Sea and against “Israel” would continue until the aggression on Gaza ends and the siege on its people is lifted.
Support for Gaza will not cease
While al-Bukhaiti indicated that attacks on US warships may pause if American strikes cease, he stressed that “we will definitely continue our operations in support of Gaza,” underscoring that the movement’s military actions are directly tied to the Israeli regime’s ongoing war on the Gaza Strip.
Ansar Allah “will not stop regardless of the consequences until the end of the aggression on Gaza and blockade on its people,” al-Bukhaiti stressed.
US to halt airstrikes on Yemen
Trump announced on Tuesday that Washington will halt its airstrikes on Yemen, claiming that his administration received a “promise” from Yemeni representatives to stop attacks on vessels in the Red Sea. Trump described the move as “good news” and a step toward de-escalation in the region.
Speaking during a press conference at the White House alongside Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump said his administration trusts the Yemeni assurances despite the absence of a formal agreement. “The Yemenis don’t want to fight, and we’ll stop bombing them. We believe their word that they won’t target ships anymore,” he said.
He emphasized that the decision was made in light of what he described as a “genuine desire for calm” and reiterated that there is “no reason to continue the air raids as long as Yemen holds to its commitment to end naval operations.”
‘Israel’ conducts airstrikes on Yemen
Trump’s remarks came just hours after Israeli warplanes carried out airstrikes on the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, resulting in several casualties and injuries.
According to The Jerusalem Post, the Israeli occupation was not informed in advance about the US decision to halt its aggression on Yemen.
Al Mayadeen’s correspondent confirmed that Sanaa International Airport was targeted by a series of Israeli airstrikes.
Footage shared on social media platforms showed scenes of Israeli airstrikes reportedly targeting Sanaa International Airport.
Alberta Could Hold Secession Referendum – Premier
RT | May 6, 2025
Alberta could hold a public referendum on breaking away from Canada next year if a citizen-led petition gets the required number of signatures, the province’s Premiere Danielle Smith said on Monday.
The western province has long clashed with the federal government over legislation limiting fossil fuel development and promoting clean energy, which Alberta officials say unfairly targets their economy. Smith’s announcement comes days after the Liberal Party secured a fourth consecutive term in the federal election, deepening political divides between Ottawa and oil-rich Alberta.
Following the election, the Alberta Prosperity Project launched a petition calling for a referendum on the province’s independence. The petition garnered more than 80,000 signatures within 36 hours of its May 2 launch and remains open for public support.
“Should Ottawa, for whatever reason, continue to attack our province as they have done over the last decade? Ultimately that will be for Albertans to decide,” Smith said.
She added that although she does not personally support the idea of separation, she would respect the will of voters. “I will accept their judgement,” the premiere said.
Recently, Smith’s government also introduced legislation to lower the threshold for referendums initiated by citizen petition. The bill reduces the number of signatures needed from 20% to 10% of eligible voters from the last provincial election and extends the collection period from 90 to 120 days. In order to pass the threshold, a petition would need about 177,000 signatures.
Smith noted that Alberta doesn’t want “special treatment or handouts;” it just wants to be free to develop its “incredible wealth of resources” and choose how to provide healthcare and education. She expressed hope that secession would not be necessary and that her government would be able to reach an agreement with Prime Minister Mark Carney and Canada’s new government.
Last week, Carney’s Liberal Party retained power after a campaign that focused heavily on what he called the existential threat posed by US President Donald Trump, who has floated the idea of Canada becoming the 51st US state and imposed extensive tariffs on most of its neighbor’s goods.
The outcome of the election has added to long-running tensions in conservative regions. In Alberta, where the Conservatives won 34 out of 37 seats, many residents have expressed frustration with their federal leadership. Similar dissatisfaction has been reported in neighboring Saskatchewan, and to a lesser extent in British Columbia.
Released captive: I felt safer in Hamas captivity than in Israel
MEMO | May 6, 2025
A former Israeli captive has admitted that she felt more safe and protected in Gaza than in Israel, the Hebrew Maariv newspaper reported yesterday.
Mia Schem, 23, was released as part of a prisoner swap deal in November 2023.
Earlier this month, Schem identified herself as the plaintiff in a previously reported rape case against a famouse personal trainer in Tel Aviv, who is a prominent figure on social media and has several celebrity clients, including a former prime minister.
According to the paper, Schem alleged that the rape took place in her home, using a date rape drug, and that she does not remember many of the details.
Israeli media outlets reported that the suspect in Schem’s case had lied in a polygraph test, yet he was released from custody due to lack of evidence. They also accused Schem of lying in search of limelight.
A court placed a complete gag order on the investigation including the identities of the parties involved.
According to official reports, while thousands of sexual harassment and assault cases are reported each year, almost nine out of ten rape cases are closed without charges.
A report by the Association of Rape Crisis Centres, Israel Police opened 6,405 investigations into rape cases in 2023, however, 81 per cent of them were closed without an indictment while charges were filed in only 16 per cent of cases. Two per cent of the remaining cases ended in a conditional settlement.
Norway sovereign wealth fund urged by largest union to divest from companies aiding Israel
Press TV – May 6, 2025
Norway’s largest trade union has urged the Scandinavian country’s sovereign wealth fund to divest from companies aiding the Israeli regime, which has been waging a genocidal war on the besieged Gaza Strip since 2023.
The Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) called on the country’s $1.8 trillion sovereign wealth fund on Monday to divest from firms operating in Israel’s occupied Palestinian territories.
“We want the fund to pull out of the companies that have activities in the occupied Palestinian territories,” Steinar Krogstad, deputy leader at LO, said in an interview, speaking on the margins of the union’s congress, where the Palestinian flag flew alongside those of the United Nations and Norway.
LO, which is closely aligned with the ruling Labour Party, argues that such investments may implicate Norway in violations of international law, with Krogstad emphasizing that the urgency of this issue is in light of Israel’s recent military aggression in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
He also stressed that under LO’s general policy, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, which is the world’s largest, should not invest in companies that violate international law.
“This question is more on the agenda now … because of Israel’s policy, attacks and war in Gaza and in the West Bank,” Krogstad said.
LO, along with 47 other civil society organizations, has also sent a letter to Finance Minister Jens Stoltenberg, urging a reassessment of the fund’s investment guidelines to ensure alignment with international legal standards.
The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund, known for its ethical investment policies, has previously divested from Israel’s largest telecommunications company, Bezeq, due to its services in West Bank settlements.
Although the fund has cleared most companies in its recent ethical reviews, the ongoing genocidal war in Gaza and international scrutiny have increased calls for more comprehensive divestment.
As of the end of 2024, the fund held approximately $2.12 billion in 65 companies listed on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange, representing about 0.1 percent of its portfolio.
LO’s recent move is in line with a broader trend among European financial institutions re-examining their investments related to Israeli settlements.
For instance, Storebrand Asset Management, a major Norwegian investor, divested from Palantir Technologies over concerns about its work in the Israeli occupied territories.
Such moves reflect mounting pressure on financial entities to ensure their investments do not contribute to activities considered illegal under international law.
Last year, the UN’s highest court ruled that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories and settlements there were illegal and must end as soon as possible.
Featured Video
10 Climate Myths Busted (in 60 seconds!)
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
US Also Destroyed Iraqi Water Supply During First Gulf War
International Humanitarian Law prohibits the attack, destruction, or rendering useless of objects indispensable to civilian survival.
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | June 10, 2026
… During the first Gulf War, the United States “deliberately bombed Iraq’s water system,” Thomas J. Nagy, a professor at George Washington University, wrote in September, 2001. The Bush administration, “with malice aforethought,” “destroyed, removed, or rendered useless” Iraq’s ‘drinking water installations and supplies’… They amount to a systematic effort to, in the DIA’s own words, ‘fully degrade’ Iraq’s water sources.”
Nagy found declassified documents at the website of the Office of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses that detailed the effort to degrade Iraq’s water supply and commit a serious violation of humanitarian law. The documents included “Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerability,” “Disease Information,” “Disease Outbreaks in Iraq,” “Medical Problems in Iraq,” “Status of Disease at Refugee Camps,” “Health Conditions in Iraq,” and “Iraq: Assessment of Current Health Threats and Capabilities.”
Then Representative Cynthia McKinney, a Democrat from Georgia (subsequently removed from Congress), referred to the Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities document, and said, “Attacking the Iraqi public drinking water supply flagrantly targets civilians and is a violation of the Geneva Convention and of the fundamental laws of civilized nations.” … Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- A New Economic Front: Yemen’s Entrance to Regional War against US-Israeli Alliance
- Will Trump Break JFK’s Agreement on Cuba?
- Settlers, sanctions and impunity
- Christian village in occupied West Bank goes up in flames after large-scale attack by Israeli settlers
- Iran, Russia, China reject IAEA resolution as politically driven
- Nuking Iran: Why Israel and the US gain nothing from crossing the ultimate red line
- Iranian missiles pierced US defense systems, hit 70% of targets: Fars
- Pakistan says Israel derailed US–Iran peace deal described as ‘inches away’: Report
- US strikes cut drinking water to 20,000 in Iran’s Hormozgan province
- Why Iran’s Retaliation for Israel’s Attack on Beirut is a Regional Game Changer
- If Americans Knew
- Welcome to the 60th Year of Israel’s Occupation of the West Bank
- In south Lebanon, as in Gaza, Israeli drones use the sound of crying children to lure civilians
- Israel’s ethnic cleansing of West Bank Bedouin and herding communities
- Israel has no mercy on Christian communities in West Bank, Lebanon: 2 Articles
- “No Exit”: Israel is killing Gaza patients with delays – Daily Update
- Netanyahu Isn’t ‘Defying’ Trump Any More Than He Ever ‘Defied’ Biden
- Those who championed free speech in the UK and US now wage war on it. And here’s why: Palestine
- ‘Instead of trying to control the whole world’, pro-Israel advocates can control AI, AJC told
- Massie honors survivors of USS Liberty on House floor, calls for investigation into attack: 4 Articles
- Israel has hundreds of millions to spend on settler outposts (illegal even in Israeli law) – Daily Update
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
- Germany’s Ecological Holocaust… Once Fairy Tale Forests Getting Cleared For Wind Turbines
- A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s
- European “Expert Commission” Urges COVID-19-Like Global Climate State Of Energency!
- Real-World Observations Do Not Support The Position That Climate Change Is Human-Caused
- Germany’s AfD Party Calls Debunked Climate Scenarios “Greatest Fraud In Human History”
Aletho News 