Author

admin

Browsing

A 5.6 magnitude earthquake that struck off Peru’s central coast Sunday, rattling Lima and the port city of Callao, has left one person dead and five injured, authorities said.

The earthquake happened at 11:35 a.m. local time in the Pacific Ocean, according to the United States Geological Survey. Its epicenter was located 23 kilometers (14 miles) southwest of Callao, west of the capital Lima.

A 36-year-old man died in northern Lima while “standing outside his vehicle waiting for a passenger” when a wall from the fourth floor of a building under construction detached and fell on his head, Police Col. Ramiro Clauco told RPP radio.

The five people injured are being treated in hospitals, the Emergency Operations Center said. The agency also reported damage to roads and educational centers.

President Dina Boluarte is heading to Callao to monitor developments, the Peruvian presidency said on X.

Footage shared by local media also showed cars hit by falling debris, damaged houses and collapsed billboards.

All of Lima’s districts felt the earthquake, Hernando Tavera, executive president of the Geophysical Institute of Peru, told local TV channel N.

Local radio stations reported that a professional football match at Lima’s Alberto Gallardo Stadium was paused for several minutes.

A mass at Lima’s cathedral was also interrupted, after frightened worshippers fled the scene.

Peru is located along the Ring of Fire, a path along the Pacific Ocean characterized by frequent earthquakes and active volcanoes.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

As an unprecedented Israeli attack on Iran last week sparks a spiraling conflict between the two enemy states, China has seen an opportunity to cast itself as potential peace broker – and an alternative voice to the United States.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi took up this mission over the weekend, speaking with both his Iranian and Israeli counterparts in separate phone calls, where Wang decried the attack that sparked latest conflict and telegraphed China’s offer to “play a constructive role” in its resolution.

“China explicitly condemns Israel’s violation of Iran’s sovereignty, security and territorial integrity … (and) supports Iran in safeguarding its national sovereignty, defending its legitimate rights and interests,” Wang said in a call Saturday with Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi, according to Beijing’s official readout.

China’s self-described “explicit” opposition to Israel’s attack stands in sharp contrast to the country’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – which Beijing refused to condemn as it ramped up its close ties with Moscow.

It also underscores the hardening of geopolitical lines that have placed China in opposition to the US across a host of global issues.

Israel launched its aerial attack targeting Iran’s nuclear, missile and military complex early Friday in what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said was an operation to “roll back” the Iranian threat to his country’s survival.

Multiple waves of deadly assaults launched by both sides in the days since have seen mounting casualties and raised the risk of a broader regional conflagration that could involve the United States, which has so far only assisted in Israel’s defense against an onslaught on Iranian missiles and drones.

In Beijing’s eyes, all this gives ample reason to be outspoken on a conflict playing out in a part of the world where it has steadily worked to increase its own economic and diplomatic sway, but where experts say its heft as a powerbroker remains limited.

‘Play a constructive role’

For one, as the Trump administration’s “America First” policy has shaken up the US’ traditional position on the international stage, Beijing sees an opportunity to further expand its clout. That’s especially true in the context of countries across the Global South, where Israel has received stark condemnation over its ongoing assault on Gaza.

Beijing is also a key diplomatic and economic backer of Iran and has moved to further deepen collaboration in recent years, including holding joint naval drills, even as it’s sought to balance those ties with its growing relations with countries like Saudi Arabia. Chinese officials long voiced opposition to US sanctions on Iran and criticized the US withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, while accusing Washington of being a source of instability and tensions in the region.

Wang took veiled aim at the US in his call with his Iranian counterpart Saturday, according to the Chinese readout of the call, saying that “China also urges the countries that have influence over Israel to make concrete efforts to restore peace.”

“China is ready to maintain communication with Iran and other relevant parties to continue playing a constructive role in de-escalating the situation,” he added.

Speaking to Israeli Foreign Minsiter Gideon Sa’ar on Saturday, Wang said China “urged both Israel and Iran to resolve differences through dialogue” and added “that China is willing to play a constructive role in supporting these efforts,” a Chinese readout said.

Beijing is unlikely to see benefits from the deepening of tensions in the region, which it relies on for energy and where it has looked to show itself as an emerging powerbroker. For example, it took on a surprise role in facilitating a diplomatic rapprochement between archrivals Saudi Arabia and Iran in 2023.

It’s unclear what role Beijing could play in the resolution of the current conflict, including how much leverage Beijing has over Tehran, even as lawmakers in Washington have warned of a deepening “axis” between China, Iran, Russia and North Korea.

But when it comes to managing the direction of this escalation of an entrenched regional conflict, chances are that players both within the Middle East and the US – which plays a key role in regional security – will ultimately drive that effort.

Trump on Sunday posted on social media that Iran and Israel “will make a deal,” adding that “many calls and meetings” were “now taking place,” without providing details.

But the US president had also suggested another potential leader could have a role to play brokering peace: Vladimir Putin, with whom Trump said he discussed the escalating situation on Saturday.

In an interview with ABC News, Trump said he was open to the Russian leader, whose forces invaded Ukraine and who has resisted a US-brokered ceasefire in that conflict, serving as a mediator – another sign of the warming ties between Washington and Moscow, which maintains close relations with Tehran and has condemned Israel’s attack.

“I would be open to it,” Trump said. Putin “is ready.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

For the past month Chinese aircraft carrier strike groups have been operating further from home shores and in greater strength than ever before, testing state-of-the-art technology and sending a message they are a force to be reckoned with, analysts and officials say.

Since early May, a People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) flotilla led by the carrier Shandong has conducted exercises north of the Philippines; its newest carrier, the soon-to-be commissioned Fujian, has been on sea trials in disputed waters west of the Korean Peninsula; and its oldest carrier, the Liaoning has led exercises in the Pacific waters of Japan’s exclusive economic zone.

During the drills the Fujian for the first time conducted aircraft take-off and landing operations at sea using its advanced electromagnetic catapult system (EMALS), regional defense officials said.

That’s a significant development. Only one other carrier in the world has that system – the US Navy’s newest carrier, the USS Gerald R Ford.

Last Monday, the Japanese Defense Ministry said the Shandong and its support ships had been exercising in the waters southeast of the island of Miyako Island in southern Okinawa prefecture, putting two Chinese carrier strike groups in the open Pacific for the first time.

At the center of that box of exercises is Taiwan, the democratically ruled island claimed by China’s Communist Party despite never having controlled it.

Chinese leader Xi Jinping has vowed to “achieve reunification” with the island, using force if necessary.

Analysts noted that the Pacific exercises specifically covered areas through which US naval support of Taiwan, in the event of conflict there, would have to pass.

“The projection of power is beyond China’s own defensive needs,” the Taiwanese official said, unless it wants to assert the entire first island chain is its internal waters.

The first island chain stretches from Japan to the Philippines and further down to Indonesia as is seen as a strategically vital line to both China and the US.

Some analysts say Beijing may be laying the groundwork for that with so-called “salami slicing” tactics, or pushing its claims and presence in small but unrelenting steps until it’s too late for an opponent to stop them.

Besides Taiwan, the waters inside that first island chain include the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands, called the Diaoyus in China and, like Taiwan, claimed by it as sovereign territory.

Chinese maritime forces have been increasing their visibility around those islands. According to statistics from the Japanese Defense Ministry, more than 100 Chinese vessels have appeared in the contiguous zone of the islands – the waters between them – for all but one of the past 24 months.

Also within the first island chain are disputed islands in the South China Sea that have seen violent flare-ups between Chinese and Philippine forces as Beijing tries to aggressively assert its claim over geographical features in the waterway through which trillions of dollars in trade passes each year.

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called out Beijing tactics at a recent defense forum in Singapore.

“Any unilateral attempt to change the status quo in the South China Sea and the first island chain by force or coercion is unacceptable,” Hegseth said in a speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue, noting the persistent PLA presence around Taiwan and harassment and intimidation tactics in the South China Sea.

“It has to be clear to all that Beijing is credibly preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth said.

Reaching well into the Pacific

While Hegseth focused on China’s activities inside the first island chain, the PLA Navy’s recent movements have it operating carriers beyond the second island chain, which runs from the Japanese main island of Honshu southeast to the US territories of Saipan and Guam and then southwest to Yap, Palau and New Guinea.

Japanese officials reported last week two Chinese carrier groups operating well out into the open Pacific.

“It is believed that China is planning to improve the operational capability of its aircraft carriers and their ability to conduct operations in distant areas of the sea,” Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi said last Monday, noting that China has demonstrated for the first time the ability to operate a carrier in the waters east of Iwo Jima and close to Japan’s easternmost island Minamitorishima.

“The PLA is demonstrating a capability for sustained carrier ops outside of the first island chain. This is certainly a significant milestone for the PLAN,” said Ray Powell, director of SeaLight, a maritime transparency project at Stanford University’s Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation.

“Beijing is using the PLAN to signal its growing maritime power and willingness to use it,” said Carl Schuster, a former US Navy captain and Hawaii-based analyst.

A PLA Navy press release on Tuesday acknowledged the carrier activity in waters well out into the Pacific and emphasized that they are defense-minded.

“The Chinese Navy’s Liaoning and Shandong aircraft carrier formations recently went to the Western Pacific and other waters to conduct training to test the troops’ far sea defense and joint combat capabilities. This is a routine training,” the release quoted Chinese navy spokesperson Wang Xuemeng as saying, adding that the exercises are “not targeting specific countries.”

Overall, Schuster said China is making a very clear statement with the series of exercises.

“Although Beijing has characterized these activities as routine training and trials, its neighbors did not miss the related strategic message: China has become a major naval power that can and will apply that power in their waters if it chooses,” Schuster said.

New ships, new reach

Only one other naval power, the United States, has the capability to operate two or more carrier strike groups at such distances.

US Navy carrier strike groups usually consist of the carrier plus cruisers and/or destroyers equipped with the Aegis missile system to defend the prized asset at their heart.

Analysts noted the Chinese carrier groups in the Pacific have a similar formation and include some of the PLAN’s newest and most powerful surface ships, large Type 055 guided-missile destroyers as well as new but smaller Type 052DM destroyers.

With a displacement of around 12,000 tons, the Type 055s are considered by many naval analysts to be the most powerful surface combatants afloat and a centerpiece of what is now the world’s largest naval force, a title the PLAN took from the US Navy around 2020.

A report Tuesday in the state-run Global Times said the PLAN may be looking to operate carrier strike groups in all the world’s oceans like the US Navy does.

Chinese military affairs expert Zhang Junshe told the tabloid that Beijing’s expanding overseas business and cultural interests justify its naval expansion, including the ability of carriers to operate far from Chinese shores.

New carrier training may be seen in the Indian and Atlantic oceans, Zhang said.

The newest carrier

The Fujian, China’s newest aircraft carrier, is likely to be pivotal in the any PLA Navy plans to operate well out into the Pacific or other oceans.

Estimated to displace 80,000 tons, it’s believed to the largest non-American warship ever built and able to carry a fleet of about 50 aircraft, up from 40 on Liaoning and Shandong.

During its sea trials in the Yellow Sea last month, the Fujian conducted aircraft take-off and landing operations, according to South Korean defense officials.

The trials marked the first time a Chinese carrier had conducted such an activity inside the Provisional Measures Zone (PMZ), a disputed area where China and South Korea have agreed to both oversee fisheries management, but where friction between Beijing and Seoul persists.

The take-off and landing operations are significant as it marks the first time the Fujian has done so at sea, using its electromagnetic catapult system.

The system allows carrier aircraft to take off with heavier weapon and fuel loads than those operating off the Shandong and Liaoning, which feature ski-jump type take-off ramps, enabling Fujian’s aircraft to strike enemy targets from greater distances.

The Fujian is expected to carry the naval version of the J-35, a twin-engine stealth fighter jet that can’t operate off a China’s older carriers.

And China is building another carrier, for now known as the Type 004, which is expected to not only employ EMALS technology, but also – unlike Fujian but like the USS Ford – be nuclear-powered.

Nuclear power will extend the range of Chinese naval air fleet significantly because, as the carrier doesn’t need to be refueled, it can stay at sea longer and farther away from replenishment tankers.

“Beijing’s carrier program, like its fleet, is expanding and improving rapidly, not just with new ships but with new aircraft. That trend signals Beijing’s maritime intent,” Schuster said.

But even with the new equipment and expanded range, analysts expressed caution on overestimating the PLA Navy’s abilities.

Compared to the US, which has been operating carrier strike groups in the far seas for decades, China is very much at the beginning of the learning curve.

“China’s carrier force is still very much developmental at this stage. Still, China is closing the gap,” said Powell, the SeaLight analyst.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Former top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin and Alex Soros, son of billionaire left-wing donor George Soros, married in a lavish wedding in New York on Saturday that reportedly drew attendance from high-profile Democrats stretching from former Vice President Kamala Harris to former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. 

The couple married in Water Mill, N.Y., at a Soros family estate on Saturday, according to the New York Times, which reported the swank Hamptons wedding drew private jets, fleets of black SUVs ‘and Clinton aides galore in a rare concentration of wealth and power.’ 

Democrat heavyweights including Bill and Hillary Clinton, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Harris – as well as her husband Doug Emhoff – and Pelosi attended the wedding, the New York Times reported. Other celebrities and high-profile attendees included Vogue’s Anna Wintour, socialite Nicky Hilton Rothschild, and Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama, the outlet reported, citing attendees. 

‘I’m looking forward to being a witness to their marriage; to the celebration that we all are going to be part of; to seeing so many longtime friends gathered in one place to really enjoy being part of Huma and Alex’s start of their married life. And I think we all could use some fun, so I’m looking forward to all of it,’ Hillary Clinton told Vogue of the wedding in an article published Saturday. 

Soros, 39, is the chairman of the Open Society Foundations, which is a massive $25 billion nonprofit founded by George Soros, 94, and helps bankroll left-wing causes and politicians across the country. Abedin, 48, is the former longtime aide to Hillary Clinton and often called the former secretary of state’s ‘second daughter.’ Abedin was previously married to disgraced former New York Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner. 

The wedding included a live performance from Boyz II Men, the vocal harmony group behind hits such as 1991’s ‘Motownphilly,’ according to the Times, as well as toasts from Hillary Clinton, Wintour, and the Albanian prime minister. Abedin wore two custom wedding dresses over the course of the day, Vogue reported. 

The wedding’s menu reportedly included cuts of Wagyu beef, grilled prawns and chilled English pea soup. 

Soros popped the question to Abedin in July of last year, sharing the announcement on his Instagram page at the time. 

‘This happened…we couldn’t be happier, more grateful, or more in love,’ Soros wrote in an Instagram post, accompanied by a photo of him on one knee. 

Abedin told Vogue of her engagement: ‘I was shocked, not by the fact that he proposed, but it was the timing that made no sense. It was a very hectic, very chaotic day, and I was leaving for a trip the next day. I went to get my hair colored in the morning [and] I dropped something on my foot, so I was wearing sneakers.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the Open Society Foundations on Sunday morning inquiring if representatives for the couple had any additional comment to include on the wedding, but did not immediately receive a reply. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

After House Republicans passed reconciliation language banning taxpayer funds from paying for sex change treatments, Democrats began using language to drum up opposition that conservative watchdog group the American Principles Project says is meant ‘to confuse people and make it sound like we’re trying to ban normal healthcare, medically necessary healthcare.’

The House-passed version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes provisions that prohibit federal Medicaid and Affordable Care Act funding from being spent on ‘gender transition procedures for any age’ in all 50 states. 

In response, Democrats and left-wing groups have begun claiming the GOP’s spending package seeks to eliminate ‘medically-necessary care.’ 

However, according to APP President Terry Schilling, ‘it’s a lie’ and an effort to combat the prevailing notion among Americans that taxpayer funds should not be paying for transgender procedures. 

‘They’re deliberately obfuscating here, and it’s because they don’t have any good arguments,’ Schilling told Fox News Digital. ‘We shouldn’t be paying for any cosmetic sex change procedures with our tax dollars, and that’s what we’re cutting here. 

‘But they’re introducing and now ramping up these highly weaponized and high-powered words to confuse people and make it sound like we’re trying to ban normal healthcare, medically necessary healthcare.’

After Republicans in the House of Representatives passed their version of the GOP spending package last month, the Congressional Equality Caucus complained that ‘Congress should be working to make healthcare more affordable – not banning coverage of medically necessary care.’ 

‘House Republicans changed a previous anti-trans provision so it now cuts off federal Medicaid and Affordable Care Act funding for medically-necessary care for ALL transgender people — no matter their age,’ a press release from the pro-trans Human Rights Campaign said after the House passed its spending bill.

According to APP’s Schilling, arguments that Republicans are taking away ‘medically necessary’ healthcare from anyone are ‘just not true.’   

To make his point, APP’s Schilling pointed to one of the left’s frequent sources for transgender medical recommendations, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). Schilling pointed out that WPATH’s guidelines and standards explicitly state there is no ‘one-size-fits-all approach’ to treating individuals with gender dysphoria.

‘These are not medically necessary [treatments]. It’s a lie. These are cosmetic,’ Schilling argued. ‘If you look at WPATH, even according to their own standards, transgender-identifying people don’t actually have to medically transition. They say there’s no one size fits all. Well, I’m sorry, but medically necessary means you need it in order to survive. You need it for your health. And they’re saying in their own writings that it’s not medically necessary, that it’s not a one-size-fits-all.’

Schilling added that they’re ‘arguing out of both sides of their mouth.’ 

‘We’re calling out the transgender industry, and we’re trying to stop them from confusing even more people as we pass a very, very good and important bill,’ he said.

In a statement to Fox News Digital, the Human Rights Campaign argued ‘gender-affirming care’ is considered ‘best practice’ and ‘evidence-based’ by every major medical association in the country, noting that studies have shown it significantly improves mental health outcomes for transgender youth.

‘Healthcare decisions should be made by patients, families, and doctors — not the American Principles Project,’ HRC said.

Schilling said he has run numerous polls and focus groups about whether Americans agree with taxpayer funds supporting individuals’ gender transitions, and he told Fox News Digital that the overwhelming sentiment from people across the political spectrum is that they should not.

‘Here’s where Americans are at,’ Schilling said. ‘They want to ban the procedures for anyone under 18. And, anyone over 18, they want you to pay for it yourself. That’s where they’re at, and that’s where [APP is] at, and that’s where Donald Trump is at. That’s where Republicans in the House and Senate are at.’

The Congressional Equality Caucus did not respond to requests for comment on this article. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former Biden-era White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre abruptly left the Democratic Party in her rear-view mirror, announcing in June that she had become an Independent after spending more than two years as President Joe Biden’s top spokesperson and defender. 

‘Our country has become obsessed with blind loyalty to a two-party democratic system. In her new book, timed for publication just one year after the 2024 election, Karine Jean-Pierre shares why Americans must begin to look beyond party lines and why she chose to embrace life as an Independent,’ a press release announcing Jean-Pierre’s upcoming book, ‘Independent,’ stated while revealing that the former spox had ditched the Democratic Party. 

‘Jean-Pierre didn’t come to her decision to be an Independent lightly, she has served two American presidents, Obama and Biden. . . . She takes us through the three weeks that led to Biden’s abandoning his bid for a second term and the betrayal by the Democratic Party that led to his decision,’ the press release continued. 

Fox News Digital took a look back at Jean-Pierre’s history as press secretary – which spanned from May 13, 2022, until January 20, 2025 – including the most partisan stances and statements she made in defense of the administration as the immigration crisis spiraled to new highs, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the administration embraced transgender issues, and the White House’s heated rhetoric aimed at President Donald Trump ahead of the 2024 election. 

‘We are not finishing a wall. We are cleaning up the mess that the prior administration made. We are trying to save lives. This is what the prior administration left behind that we are now cleaning up,’ Jean-Pierre declared from the White House briefing room’s podium in July of 2022, as the Biden administration said it would not continue work on the Trump administration’s border wall. 

 ‘A border wall is an ineffective use of taxpayer dollars, so it’s ineffective,’ she added. 

Months later, as Title 42, a Trump-era policy that allowed U.S. officials to turn away migrants who came to the U.S.-Mexico border because of health concerns was set to expire, Jean-Pierre argued, ‘It would be wrong to think that the border is open. It is not open.’

Critics at the time slammed the press secretary over the comment, calling the comment a ‘bold-faced lie’ as migrants were seen coming across the border with little consequences. 

The Biden administration was in power when the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision effectively ending the recognition of abortion as a constitutional right in the Dobbs v. Jackson decision in June of 2022, with Jean-Pierre calling the ruling ‘extreme.’ 

‘When the Supreme Court made that extreme decision on Dobbs, it really put a lot of families and women’s lives at risk,’ she said during a press conference in July of 2022. 

The Biden White House frequently celebrated LGBTQ holidays during its four years, including fiercely defending transgender issues and policies that the Trump administration has since ended. 

‘Tomorrow is Trans Visibility Day,’ Jean-Pierre said during a March 2023 press conference slamming Republicans who put forth legislation that aimed to keep biological boys out of girls’ sports and end transgender surgeries for minors. ‘On a day that we should be lifting up our trans kids and our trans youth and making sure that they feel seen, we’re seen more and more of these hateful, hateful bills.’

‘We’ve been very clear about these anti-LGBTQ bills that we’re seeing in state legislatures across the country, in particular these anti-trans bills, as they attack trans kids, as they attack trans parents. It is shameful, and it is unacceptable,’ she added. 

In the months leading up to Election Day, Trump faced two separate assassination attempts, including one in Butler, Pennsylvania, during a campaign rally in July that left him with an injury to the side of his head after a bullet whizzed towards him, and another in September when a man attempted to kill Trump while he played golf in Florida. 

‘It’s been only two days since somebody allegedly tried to kill Donald Trump again, and you’re here at the podium in the White House briefing room calling him a threat,’ Fox News’ Peter Doocy pressed during a news conference in September of 2024. ‘How many more assassination attempts on Donald Trump until the president and the vice president and you pick a different word to describe Trump other than ‘threat’?’

Then-Vice President Kamala Harris and Biden had both repeatedly claimed that ‘Democracy is on the ballot’ last year amid Trump’s re-election campaign. While the White House, Biden and Harris additionally described Trump as a ‘threat’ to democracy, Fox Digital previously extensively reported. 

Jean-Pierre exhaled in a sign of disapproval before answering: ‘Peter, if anything, from this administration, I actually completely disagree with the premise of your question, the question that you’re asking. It is also incredibly dangerous in the way that you are asking it, because American people are watching. And to say that, when you start bringing political rhetoric. . . . That is not okay.’

‘There are people watching at home who might miss the part where you say, let’s lower the temperature. And there are mentally unstable people who are attempting to kill political candidates, attempting to kill Donald Trump. And they are still hearing this White House refer to him as a threat. Is there no concern?’ Doocy continued in the press conference. 

‘We’re using examples. We’re not just saying that just to say it,’ Jean-Pierre responded. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Israeli parliament member Ohad Tal told Fox News Digital that striking a deal with Iran should not be the goal without first toppling its ‘evil, jihadist regime,’ as President Donald Trump on Sunday called on both sides to come to the negotiating table. 

Tal, who sits on the Knesset foreign affairs and defense committees, spoke to Fox News Digital from outside of Jerusalem on Sunday as Israel and Iran traded strikes for a third day.  

‘We are now engaging in a war with Iran, a war which I believe is historic, because we are now, finally, hopefully, we will liberate, not just ourselves, not just the Iranian people, but the entire world from the threat of the evil Iranian regime,’ he said. 

Earlier Sunday, Trump said on TRUTH Social that ‘Iran and Israel should make a deal, and will make a deal,’ noting how his administration has successfully negotiated other conflict resolutions, including between India and Pakistan, ‘by using TRADE with the United States to bring reason, cohesion, and sanity into the talks with two excellent leaders who were able to quickly make a decision and STOP!’ 

Tal, however, made the distinction that the goal of the Ayatollah and the Muslim Brotherhood is the ‘destruction of Israel’ and the ‘destruction of America.’   

‘I think that our goal should be taking down the Iranian regime, because if you really want to put an end to the ambitions of Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, the only way to do that is by taking down this regime,’ Tal said. ‘This regime has only one purpose, not to destroy Israel … they want to take down America.’ 

He said more deals would only allow Iran to re-arm and re-develop their nuclear program. 

‘I think just the idea of negotiating deals with a jihadist terror supporter regime is outrageous,’ he continued. ‘I mean, the only goal we should have, we should all have, is taking down this evil regime. Again, if we really want to build a better future of stability and prosperity for everybody in the region, in the world, that should be the goal.’ 

Trump has vetoed a plan floated by Israel to the U.S. to kill Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, a U.S. official told Fox News, amid concerns doing so would further destabilize the region. 

Tal told Fox News Digital that the West must face the reality that ‘we must take down this evil, jihadistic regime’ not just to save the region, but the ‘entire world from this threat.’ 

Since last Thursday, when the Israel Defense Forces launched a large-scale preemptive strike against Iran, targeting nuclear facilities, key infrastructure and leadership, Tal said he’s received calls from Muslim and Arab leaders across the Middle East who told him, ‘You’re not just saving yourself, you’re saving us as well.’ 

‘That is the reality. Iran and the Ayatollahs are not just a threat to Israel, they are a threat to the entire world, and therefore I believe that by the fact that Israel is not looking the other way,’ Tal said. ‘We’re not burying our head in the sand. We are standing in front of this threat, and we are fighting back. I think we are doing a big favor to the world.’ 

Tal said Iran has suffered ‘an unbelievable amount of damage’ and the IDF ‘basically has total control over the Iranian airspace.’ Israeli forces, he argued, are targeting military bases, nuclear facilities and officials, while Iran is targeting civilian populations. Some Iranian missiles have made it past Israel’s aerial defense systems. 

‘That’s a culture that glorifies death, doesn’t care about civilian casualties, and we’re a culture that sanctifies life,’ he said. 

Tal said he has received support from U.S. officials, including members of Congress. 

He believes that Israel’s actions are in line with Trump’s ‘America First’ policy, in that the ongoing operation will prevent the United States from being pulled into a broader conflict. 

‘We’re getting the support from the Trump administration 100 percent,’ Tal said. ‘Trump is supporting America First Policy. We are also supporting America First Policy because fighting this evil regime will help to prevent much, much bigger war.’

‘If the Iranians would have managed to get their desire and acquire a weapon, that would not have just been a threat to America,’ he continued. ‘We’re not asking [for] American boots on the ground, we’re not asking America to fight for us. We’re just asking them to support us in taking away the threat coming from Iran.’ 

Fox News’ Peter Doocy contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump on Sunday said Israel and Iran sometimes ‘have to fight it out’ while expressing optimism that a deal can be struck as both countries continue to trade airstrikes amid fears of a wider conflict in the Middle East. 

Trump was getting ready to board Air Force One to depart for Canada to attend the G7 Summit in Alberta when he was asked about his effort to help de-escalate the tensions between Israel and Iran.  

‘Well, I hope there’s going to be a deal,’ Trump said. ‘I think it’s time for a deal, and we’ll see what happens. But sometimes they have to fight it out. But we’re going to see what happens. I think there’s a good chance there will be a deal.’

Last week, Israel launched an airstrike targeting a nuclear facility and military structures in Iran, killing dozens of people. Israel said the operation was necessary to stop Iran, its biggest adversary, from moving closer to building an atomic weapon.  

Iran canceled the sixth round of nuclear talks scheduled to take place in Oman following Israeli strikes on Tehran. 

The attack prompted the Islamic Republic to retaliate with waves of missile strikes targeting various parts of Israel. 

Meanwhile, Israel launched strikes targeting surface-to-surface missile sites in central Iran, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said. 

Earlier, the Israeli Air Force and Navy successfully intercepted over 100 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) launched from Iran in ongoing aerial attacks, with no reports of fallen drones in Israeli territory.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump issued a full-throated endorsement of Rep. Abe Hamadeh, R-Ariz., backing the lawmaker for re-election less than half a year into the freshman House member’s first term in office.

‘Abe Hamadeh has my Complete and Total Endorsement for Re-Election – HE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!’ the president declared in a Truth Social post in which he described the congressman as ‘an America First Patriot.’

Trump endorsed Hamadeh in December 2023, ahead of the 2024 GOP U.S. House primary in Arizona’s 8th Congressional District.

But then later he issued an unusual dual endorsement of both Hamadeh and another GOP primary candidate, Blake Masters, just ahead of the 2024 contest that Hamadeh ultimately won.

Back in February Hamadeh introduced a resolution to limit the types of flags that may be displayed in House facilities, though the text of the proposal stipulates that it would not ‘apply to the individual personal office space of a Member of the House of Representatives.’

The resolution would allow for displaying the American flag and various other kinds of flags, some of which would include ‘The State flag of the represented district of a Member of the House of Representatives, displayed adjacent to the office of such Member’ and ‘The flags of visiting foreign dignitaries during an official visit.’

‘Congress is supposed to embody the AMERICAN people. That’s why I’ve introduced a resolution to ban foreign and ideological flags in the Halls of Congress. It’s pathetic that I even have to introduce this resolution,’ Hamadeh declared in a tweet this month.

Six other House Republicans are listed as cosponsors on congress.gov, including three original cosponsors and three other lawmakers listed as backing the measure this month.

‘You have inspired me and so many other young men and women to fearlessly serve our country in our nation’s Armed Services and the halls of Congress,’ Hamadeh wrote in a June 14 letter to Trump marking the president’s 79th birthday and the Army’s 250th.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

On October 7, 2023, like many around the world, I awoke to news of the horrific attacks perpetrated by Hamas against more than 1,200 innocent Israeli, American and other civilians who that day were doing nothing other than going about their lives. The television newscasts were bone-chilling – pictures of mutilated babies; of fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers slain in front of family members; of peace activists murdered in cold blood; and of the taking of 250 hostages, some of whom more than 20 months on are still being held.  

Later that day, the United States called for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council to address this mass terror attack, the largest murder of Jews since the Holocaust. As the American ambassador to the UN responsible for Security Council matters, I represented the United States at the October 8 emergency meeting and demanded the council issue a statement expressly condemning Hamas for the ruthless terrorist attacks.  

Unfortunately, Russia, China and a few other council members refused to endorse such a statement. To put it simply, their refusal to call a spade a spade was abhorrent and incomprehensible. Note: To this day, the Security Council has yet to formally declare Hamas a terrorist group. 

Going into the October 8 emergency Security Council meeting, there had rightfully been much global sympathy for Israel – and certainly an expectation that Israel would have to respond militarily. However, once Israel took measures to defend itself, a right enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, many nations, most notably from the Global South, condemned Israel’s response as disproportionate and used it as a rallying cry to further isolate Israel in the multilateral system and beyond.  

To me and many of my U.S. government colleagues, this was not unexpected. Since joining the UN in 1948, there has been an unfortunate decline in support for Israel at the world body, a decline that began to accelerate following the period of decolonization in the 1960s. Many former colonies wrongly began to view the Israel-Palestinian conflict through the prism of their own struggles against European colonizers, with Israel viewed as a colonizer and the Palestinians as being colonized. 

Israel’s relationship with the UN reached a nadir in 1975, when the UN General Assembly passed a highly politicized resolution equating Zionism with racism, a document that was finally revoked by the UNGA in 1991. Regrettably, efforts by the Palestinians and their supporters to isolate Israel at the UN have not abated and in fact have intensified since October 7, 2023.  

During my two-plus years in New York as ambassador, I engaged in a great deal of difficult diplomacy on the situation in Gaza and cast the sole veto of two UNSC draft resolutions related to the war, both of which lacked a clear condemnation of Hamas, a direct linkage of a ceasefire to the release of hostages, and a reference to Israel’s Article 51 rights. 

Had these texts been adopted by the council, they would not have delivered an immediate ceasefire or a release of the hostages – but certainly would have given Hamas the time and space to rearm. Other council representatives privately agreed but nevertheless felt increasing pressure from their capitals to produce a council document calling for an immediate ceasefire. 

From the beginning of the conflict through the end of the Biden administration, the U.S. regularly proffered creative alternatives on ceasefire language, while most other council members insisted on an explicit reference to an immediate ceasefire. On rare occasions, the council was able to find common ground on Gaza wording when it focused on upholding the principles of humanitarian assistance and protection of civilians. 

But when some members opted to abandon council unity and force votes on resolutions containing unacceptable ceasefire language, the U.S. was left with no choice but to exercise its veto. Before each veto was cast, we recognized the potential collateral damage to America’s international reputation; however, in our view the adoption of an unbalanced council resolution would have made a ceasefire neither practicable nor implementable given the highly charged and extremely complex situation on the ground.  

In the United States’ view, the establishment of a limited and credible negotiation channel was essential for achieving an effective, durable and sustainable end to the war. While the Biden administration didn’t achieve an end to the war on its watch, it did negotiate a three-phase diplomatic framework to pause the fighting and release the hostages, which was ultimately blessed by the council and backed by the Trump administration. 

To this day, one key factor hampering council unity on Gaza is Moscow and Beijing’s exploitation of the situation there for a clear geopolitical end: deflect international attention away from Russia’s savage war against Ukraine. In response to Russian statements in the Council on Gaza, which habitually condemned the U.S. for allegedly facilitating Israeli actions, I constantly reminded council members that Russia was in no position to criticize any country given the horrific war of aggression it was conducting in Ukraine.  

I also publicly warned Chinese diplomats that should they continue making false accusations about the U.S. concerning Gaza, I would immediately call out their country’s support to Russia’s military industrial base, refuting Beijing’s fictitious claim that it supports neither party to the conflict. Russia and China must end their politicization of Gaza and either contribute constructively to peace efforts or simply get out of the way. 

While I had expected Russia and China to take adversarial positions, I was extremely disappointed that three U.S. partners on the council, Slovenia, Algeria and Guyana, chose to regularly piggyback on Russian and Chinese political shenanigans to push for more urgent council action on the issue. Their aim was to shame the U.S. and compel it to change course from its steadfast support of Israel in the war with Hamas.  

All the while, the three had been keenly aware that Washington was conducting sensitive negotiations behind the scenes with Israel, Qatar and Egypt on steps to facilitate a durable end to the fighting and ease civilian suffering in Gaza. But instead of getting fully behind those steps and working with us in good faith, they preferred to ratchet up public pressure on the U.S. and ignore American concerns about how their actions would be manipulated by Hamas and other malign actors in the region – Iran, Hezbollah and the Houthis – to the detriment of regional peace and security.  

Given persistent council divisions over the war in Gaza, some UN member states continue to lay the diplomatic predicate for a future General Assembly resolution (non-legally binding) calling for sanctions, an arms embargo and other tough international measures against Israel. 

The recent U.S. veto of another council resolution on Gaza will certainly provide fuel for those efforts. As I write, the Palestinians and their allies continue to ponder additional pathways to go after Israel throughout the UN system. There is even discussion in some UN circles about suspending Israel’s voting rights in the General Assembly, an act that would deeply anger Washington and trigger severe political consequences for the UN.  

Since this tragic conflict began, I have been mystified as to why many UN officials believe that all the U.S. has to do is instruct Israel to end its pursuit of Hamas and then somehow a magical end to the fighting would materialize.  

On their part, I sense a genuine reluctance to treat Israel as a legitimate state with its own national security concerns. While the United States does indeed have influence with Israel, it is naïve at best for these colleagues to think America can simply dictate to Jerusalem what it should and shouldn’t do in response to what it perceives as existential threats.  

Russia and China must end their politicization of Gaza and either contribute constructively to peace efforts or simply get out of the way. 

Misguided pressure on the U.S., relentless efforts to isolate Israel, Russian and Chinese diversionary tactics, blatant antisemitism, and a reluctance by some states to compromise continue to stymie the Security Council’s ability to speak with one voice on ending the Gaza war. Until these unfortunate practices cease, the council will remain irrelevant to a resolution to Gaza and the broader Israel-Palestinian conflict. 

While no one can ignore the terrible tragedy that is now Gaza, it remains a fact that those UN member states that have influence with Hamas have made a strategic decision not to use it. The hesitancy of many countries over the years to publicly condemn Hamas as a terrorist group has only given it the oxygen it needs to carry on, no matter how much death and suffering Palestinians in Gaza continue to experience.   

To end this war, Hamas must disarm and disband. There will not be peace in Gaza until it does. Gazans deserve an opportunity to live in peace and to seek a prosperous future. Hamas’ continued rule will bring them neither. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS