Author

admin

Browsing

Lawmakers on the House Homeland Security Committee met with stakeholders and law enforcement to address the rise of antisemitic violence in the U.S., during a closed-door congressional roundtable on July 22, Fox News Digital has learned. 

The roundtable comes amid growing concerns about antisemitic violence months after recent attacks in Boulder, Colorado, and Washington, D.C., along with growing fears surrounding the potential election of Zohran Mamdani, who has espoused anti-Israel viewpoints, as New York City mayor. 

‘Jewish communities across the country are living in fear, and I am committed to standing with them. This roundtable comes at a critical moment: a far-left activist who has defended the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’ is inching closer to leading a city home to one of the world’s largest Jewish populations,’ Rep. August Pfluger, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee’s counterterrorism and intelligence subcommittee, said in his opening statement, obtained by Fox News Digital. 

‘Antisemitic and anti-Israel rhetoric is becoming dangerously mainstream. We must act now to expose and combat this vile hatred wherever it is spread,’ Pfluger said. 

The roundtable focused on improving interagency coordination, intelligence sharing, training, and enforcement to better prevent and respond to antisemitic violence, according to a House Homeland Security Committee aide.

In particular, the meeting addressed ways to bolster communication between the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, along with state and local law enforcement, according to Michael Masters, the CEO of the Secure Community Network, a non-profit organization focused on the safety of the Jewish community in North America. 

This interagency coordination is absolutely paramount as the Secure Community Network has flagged 500 credible threats to life this year – which all have required immediate law enforcement intervention, according to Masters. 

‘Bad guys don’t respect orders. Bad actors don’t respect jurisdictions, and that means that our intelligence can’t be siloed,’ Masters told Fox News Digital on Monday. 

 

Additionally, the roundtable’s discussion highlighted how extremist rhetoric can spread, especially on college campuses and via social media, the aide said. Since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war in October 2023, student protests have erupted across college campuses in the U.S., including at Columbia University in New York. 

Likewise, those participating in the roundtable addressed the prevalence of homegrown and foreign-influenced extremism, when one participant highlighted instances where anti-Israel terrorist organizations have disseminated tool kits and talking points aimed at promoting attacks in the U.S., the committee aide said. 

The discussion is expected to inform legislative priorities centered around bolstering officer training, improving data collection, and ensuring ‘robust prosecution’ of antisemitic offenses, the committee aide said. 

Those who participated in the roundtable included representatives from the Secure Community Networks; the Anti-Defamation League, an organization dedicated to stopping the defamation of the Jewish people; the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence & Analysis; and law enforcement officials. 

Pfluger, a Republican from Texas, has spearheaded legislation that would bar any visa holders backing Hamas or other designated terror groups from staying in the U.S. 

He also led a hearing last month on the rise of antisemitic violence in the U.S., following a May shooting that killed two Israeli Embassy employees in Washington and a terrorist attack in Colorado targeting a grassroots group advocating for the release of Israeli hostages.

Antisemitic violence reached a new high in 2024, according to the Anti-Defamation League. 

The group recorded 9,354 antisemitic instances of harassment, assault, and vandalism in the U.S. in 2024 – a 5% increase from the 8,873 incidents recorded in 2023 and a 344% increase in the past five years. Likewise, the number of incidents is the highest the group has recorded since 1979, when the group first started tracking these cases. 

Incidents of antisemitic violence in 2024 were highest in the state of New York, where Mamdani is currently a state assemblyman. 

Mamdani has attracted scrutiny, including from Democrats, for initially failing to condemn the term ‘globalize the intifada,’ a phrase used to back Palestinian resistance against Israel. However, he has since said he will not use the term and will discourage others from using it as well. 

Still, concerns remain over what his potential leadership as mayor could mean for the Jewish community in New York City. Roughly 1.4 million people in the Greater New York Area identified as Jewish in 2023, according to UJA-Federation of New York. 

‘There’s a lot of fear in the Jewish community if this guy becomes mayor,’ New York City Republican councilwoman Inna Vernikov told Fox News Digital. 

‘This is a guy who wants to globalize the intifada,’ Vernikov said. ‘We’ve never seen anything close to this in New York City. We have the largest Jewish population in America, and I’ll tell you Jews are telling me they’re going to run away from New York City, and Jews have contributed a lot to the city and to this country, and the idea that they are now afraid to live here – it’s unacceptable and unprecedented really, this has never happened here.’

Fox News’ Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The uranium market entered Q2 on shaky footing, with spot prices slipping to around US$63.50 per pound (March 13)—the lowest level in 18 months—as utilities hesitated to contract amid ample secondary supply and demand uncertainty.

By early June, however, spot prices rebounded to the US$70–US$71 per pound range, buoyed by geopolitical tailwinds and renewed nuclear policy support in the US.

While the spot market showed typical volatility, long-term contract prices remained stable around US$80 for the first six months of the year, underscoring producer discipline.

Utilities have so far stayed largely on the sidelines, but expectations are mounting for a wave of contracting in the second half.

Uncertainty impacting utility sentiment

Trade tensions and tariff threats from US President Donald Trump have been a catalyst for volatility in the uranium market through the first half of 2025.

Term uranium contracting remains well below replacement levels despite firm prices and growing demand, according to Oceanwall’s Ben Finegold.

“Term prices are sitting around US$80 per pound right now—roughly US$6 to US$7 above spot—but it’s still extremely difficult to get reliable data on actual volumes and pricing,” said Finegold during the Bloor Street Capital Virtual Uranium Conference in June.

By mid-year only 25 million pounds had been contracted, putting the market on track to fall 75 percent short of replacement-rate contracting. That shortfall has been a recurring issue, with contracting volumes lagging for more than a decade.

While 2023 saw the strongest term contracting in years (160 million pounds), about 30 percent of that came from a single deal. In 2024, 110 million pounds were contracted, well above where 2025’s totals are likely to fall.

Uncertainty continues to weigh heavily on term uranium contracting, particularly among U.S. utilities, who remain unsure about the future of US-Russia relations and whether Russian supply will remain accessible.

“There’s a certain naivety among fuel buyers,” said Finegold, referencing a recent conversation with a former buyer who suggested utilities have grown used to a decade-long environment where they could easily dip in and out of the spot or term market.

But that era may be ending.

“I just don’t see a situation where the supply-demand fundamentals get better for utilities,” the source added.

Despite global momentum—31 countries aim to triple or quadruple nuclear capacity by 2050 and the US government has pledged US$75 billion toward domestic reactor builds—contracting volumes remain surprisingly low.

“It’s a pressure cooker,” said Finegold. “At some point something has to give—and when utilities return to the term market, history shows they tend to do so all at once.”

Supply gap to collide with surging demand

From a structural perspective, the market is grappling with a widening supply deficit: global production in 2024 met just 80 percent–90 percent of reactor demand, with the shortfall made up through inventories and spot purchases—a buffer that is fading fast.

Meanwhile, development pipelines are thin, projects suffer regulatory delays, and geopolitical constraints—including Russia sanctions—further limit available supply options. Further compounding the issue are the 69 nuclear reactors that are in the process of being built, in addition to the 440 operational reactors around the globe.

The need for uranium is especially prevalent in the US where 45 million pounds are consumed annually, while the country produces roughly 1 percent of that.

In an effort to remedy this discrepancy, President Trump issued several Executive Orders in early 2025 and targeted energy production in his “big beautiful bill”.

Included within these measures Trump has proposed an increase in nuclear energy targeting 400 gigawatts by 2050.

The uptick would mark a fourfold increase from the country’s current 100 gigawatts of capacity—far exceeding the International Atomic Energy Agency’s projected range of 89 to 142 gigawatts for all of North America.

If realized, this expansion would push U.S. uranium demand from about 50 million pounds of U3O8 equivalent annually to nearly 200 million pounds—an amount that alone would nearly double current global mine output, which UxC estimates at 164 million pounds for 2025.

“The US is signaling a once-in-a-generation commitment to domestic uranium independence and advanced nuclear deployment,” wrote Sprott’s Jacob White, in a June uranium report.

While the scale of future demand will depend on execution challenges such as permitting, grid infrastructure, and financing, analysts say the scenario presents “asymmetrically positive” risk, offering potential upside to long-term uranium demand forecasts.

This thesis was further bolstered when the Trump admin fast tracked permitting for the Anfield Energy’s (TSXV:AEC,OTCQB:ANLDF) Velvet-Wood project in Utah and Laramide Resources’ (TSX:LAM,ASX:LAM,OTCQX:LMRXF) Crownpoint-Churchrock and La Jara Mesa uranium projects in New Mexico.

“For the first time under the current policy framework, a uranium mine, Anfield’s … received US approval in just 14 days,” the Sprott report noted.

“This demonstrates how quickly support for domestic supply can translate into tangible action. The project was permitted under Trump’s emergency energy declaration, reinforcing a shift toward uranium as a strategically vital input.”

Elsewhere uranium supply could face headwinds. Kazakhstan, which accounts for roughly 40 percent of global uranium output, is unlikely to boost production meaningfully.

“I see Kazakhstan as sort of the 800 pound gorilla in the room,” said Finegold.

Kazatomprom, the country’s state-owned uranium company, reduced its 2025 production guidance, by 12 percent–17 percent, due to a critical shortage of sulfuric acid, the chemical essential for its in-situ leach mining process.

Further complicating the outlook, the company’s planned acid production facility isn’t expected online until 2026 or later. Additionally, anticipated increases in Kazakhstan’s mineral extraction tax beginning in 2025 threaten to raise production costs significantly, eroding the company’s historical cost advantage over peers.

Finegold also sees potential issues arising in projected Canadian supply. He noted that the market assumes that developers like NexGen Energy (TSX:NXE,NYSE:NXE), Denison Mines (TSX:DML,NYSEAMERICAN:DNN), Fission Uranium (TSX:FCU), and Paladin Energy (ASX:PDN,OTC:PALAF) will hit timelines and budgets

“And that’s just not how uranium mining works,” he said, pointing to similar issues with North American counterpart Peninsula Energy ASX:PEN,OTC:PENMF).

Peninsula just canceled contracts for 2 million pounds—that demand doesn’t disappear,” he said. “It’ll need to be filled elsewhere, likely via the spot market.”

Uranium-themed equities surge on global nuclear momentum

As highlighted in the Sprott report uranium’s mid-year price ignited a rally in mining equities which posted a 16.22 percent gain by June.

“This sharp equity rebound points to the sector’s leverage to increases in the spot price and catch-up potential, especially as investor sentiment begins to recover,” it read.

Furthermore, the Sprott Physical Uranium Trust’s (TSX:U.U,OTCQX:SRUUF) mid-June US$200 million capital raise bolstered market sentiment and boosted uranium prices and equities.

As John Ciampaglia, CEO of Sprott explained during the virtual uranium event, the move was a strategic play aimed at taking advantage of what the firm viewed as a temporary and unsustainable dip in uranium prices.

He noted investors from Australia led the raise, followed by North American and European interest.

Van Eck’s Uranium and Nuclear Technologies UCITS ETF (LSE:NUCL), also made large gains in 2025, growing its assets under management to over US$500 million in mid-June and then to US$926.6 million by the end of July.

“Nuclear re-entered the public conversation in 2024,” said Sudiyarov, noting the shift followed years of muted sentiment in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster.

While 2022 marked the initial turning point—spurred by Europe’s energy crisis and an urgent search for stable power sources—it wasn’t until last year that nuclear power fully took center stage.

“In 2022 and 2023, the uranium price story led the narrative, but in 2024, nuclear itself became the headline,” he said, pointing to growing political support and corporate endorsement, including power purchase agreements signed by major US tech firms.

The fund also benefited from its lighter exposure to uranium prices compared to peers, allowing it to outperform during a period of spot price softness. “That combination of strong nuclear sentiment and more resilient positioning helped us attract significant inflows.”

Tracking the MarketVector Global Uranium and Nuclear Energy Infrastructure Index, the fund holds roughly 33 companies across the uranium fuel cycle, reactor technologies, services, and utilities.

The ETF is structured around three distinct pillars, according to Sudiyarov.

“The first pillar is uranium miners and companies in the uranium business,” he said, noting this includes traditional miners as well as firms like Yellow Cake that stockpile physical uranium.

The second category focuses on nuclear pure plays, including small modular reactor (SMR) developers like NuScale (NYSE:SMR) and domestic nuclear fuel producers such as Centrus Energy (NYSE:LEU).

The third pillar was developed to broaden exposure beyond competitors’ uranium-heavy strategies.

“We wanted a more even split,” Sudiyarov explained. “So we decided to tap into industrial conglomerates with significant nuclear business units.”

On the investor side, interest in uranium appears to be growing.

“Last year, I had maybe one or two calls about uranium. This year, I’ve had a lot already,” he said, suggesting rising attention from institutional investors.

Growing political acceptance, especially around energy security and defense, has helped reduce the hesitation seen among more conservative investors.

“Once they realize the theme is back in vogue, they feel more comfortable,” he said.

Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Sranan Gold (CSE:SRAN,FSE:P84) is a junior exploration company focused on Suriname, a South American country that produces over 600,000 ounces of gold annually. The company’s flagship project is located in the highly prospective Guiana Shield, one of the world’s most underexplored and gold-rich geological regions.

Sranan’s 29,000-hectare Tapanahony gold project sits atop a historic mining belt with strong geochemical and structural markers. Leveraging local knowledge, legacy drill data, and modern exploration tools, the company aims to define its first gold resource along a 4.5 km mineralized corridor.

Aerial view Sranan Gold

Backed by the discovery team behind Suriname’s major deposits—Merian, Rosebel, and Saramacca—Sranan is targeting hard-rock gold beneath saprolite zones, with plans to accelerate drilling, grow its land position, and deepen community ties.

Company Highlights

  • District-scale land position: The 29,000-hectare Tapanahony project covers one of Suriname’s oldest and most productive artisanal mining districts, offering untested hard-rock upside within the Guiana Shield, home to numerous multi-million-ounce gold deposits.
  • Immediate drill targets: A 10,000-metre diamond drilling program is set to kick off in 2025 across the 4.5 km Poeketi-Randy trend, targeting high-grade shear zones validated by historic IAMGOLD drilling.
  • World-class discovery pedigree: The technical team has led or co-led discoveries at Merian (7 Moz, Newmont), Rosebel (13.7 Moz, now Zijin) and Saramacca (1.5 Moz).
  • Deep in-country knowledge: Geologists are locally trained at Anton de Kom University and have decades of experience in Suriname’s regolith-dominated terrain.

This Sranan Gold profile is part of a paid investor education campaign.*

Click here to connect with Sranan Gold (CSE:SRAN) to receive an Investor Presentation

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

 

(TheNewswire)

 

      
  Angkor Resources Corp. 
                 

 

GRANDE PRAIRIE, ALBERTA TheNewswire – July 29, 2025 – Angkor Resources Corp. (TSXV: ANK,OTC:ANKOF) (‘ANGKOR’ OR ‘THE COMPANY’) announces its subsidiary, EnerCam Resources Co. Ltd. (Cambodia) (‘EnerCam’) met with officials from the Ministry of Mines and Energy (‘MME’) and the General Department of Petroleum (‘GDP’) to request an additional 220 square kilometers as part of Block VIII to include a potential sub-basin for exploration of oil and gas.

 

  Following field scoping, data analysis, and indications of hydrocarbon potential, the technical team, headed by EnerCam’s Keith Edwards, provided a presentation to members and authorities of GDP and MME.  The presentation focused on the addition of a 220 square kilometer area in the northeast section of Block VIII to expand the boundaries of Block VIII.  The area indicates potential for a sub-basin that the EnerCam team refers to as the ‘Mussel Basin’ named primarily based on the shape of the potential basin.  

 

  The most recent research of the geoscience team indicates that it would be prudent to expand the boundaries in the northeast corner of Block VIII and include the expansion as part of the explored territory including the basin in the 2D seismic to be undertaken over the next 40 days.  

 

    
Click Image To View Full Size
 

 

  Figure 1  Outline of Block VIII with proposed Mussel Basin encapsulated within the boundaries and proposed seismic lines (left)and details and coordinates showing all exclusions and the proposed additional area(right).  

 

    
Click Image To View Full Size
 

 

  Figure 2 EnerCam’s technical manager, Keith Edwards, presents to officials from GDP and MME regarding proposed boundary expansion to be included in the exploration and activities of Block VIII.  

 

  The response from the meeting was positive.  The Company expects an answer within a few weeks, well in time to include the new area in the existing seismic program.  

 

  On the mineral activities in Cambodia, in the northwest area of the country and forty kilometers south of the Thailand / Cambodia border, drilling activities of the Andong Bor license were suspended on July 24 due to border conflicts.  With the Malaysian Chairman of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) hosting the Prime Ministers or representative of Thailand and Cambodia, the recent announcement of a ceasefire on July 28   th   comes as a relief for all citizens.  

 

  The drilling program will continue when equipment is back in place, and it is deemed to be safe to resume.  

 

  Other activities, both for minerals in the northeast area of Ratanakiri province and for the oil & gas exploration in the southwest Block VIII continued without interruption.  

 

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

 

   ABOUT Angkor Resources CORPORATION:   

 

   Angkor Resources Corp. is a public company, listed on the TSX-Venture Exchange, and is a leading resource optimizer in Cambodia working towards mineral and energy solutions across Canada and Cambodia. ANGKOR’s carbon capture and gas conservation project in Saskatchewan, Canada is part of its long-term commitment to Environmental and Social projects and cleaner energy solutions across jurisdictions.  The company’s mineral subsidiary, Angkor Gold Corp. in Cambodia holds three mineral exploration licenses in Cambodia and its Cambodian energy subsidiary, EnerCam Resources, was granted an onshore oil and gas license of 7300 square kilometers in the southwest quadrant of Cambodia called Block VIII.  The license was reduced to roughly half the size with the Company’s voluntary removal of all parks and protected areas in March 2025.  Since 2022, Angkor’s Canadian subsidiary, EnerCam Exploration Ltd., has been involved in gas/carbon capture and oil and gas production in Evesham, Saskatchewan.   

 

   CONTACT:     Delayne Weeks – CEO   

 

   Email:      info@angkorresources.com        Website:     angkor      resources.com    

 

   Telephone:     +1 (780) 831-8722   

 

   Please follow @AngkorResources on     ,     ,     ,      Instagram      and     .   

 

   Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.   

 

   Certain information set forth in this news release may contain forward-looking statements that involve substantial known and unknown risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, certain of which are beyond the control of the Company, including, but not limited to the potential for gold and/or other minerals at any of the Company’s properties, the prospective nature of any claims comprising     the Company’s property interests, the impact of general economic conditions, industry conditions, dependence upon regulatory approvals, uncertainty of sample results, timing and results o     f future exploration, and the availability of financing.  Readers are cautioned that the assumptions used in the preparation of such information, although considered reasonable at the time of preparation, may prove to be imprecise and, as such, undue reliance should not be placed on forward-looking statements.   

 

Copyright (c) 2025 TheNewswire – All rights reserved.

 

 

News Provided by TheNewsWire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

The United Kingdom will recognize a Palestinian state if Israel does not agree to a ceasefire and move toward peace in Gaza by September, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned Tuesday.

Starmer made the announcement during a press conference on Tuesday, just a day after meeting with President Donald Trump in Scotland and discussing the Israel-Hamas war and the hunger crisis in Gaza.

‘I can confirm that the U.K. will recognize the State of Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in September, unless the Israeli government take substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and commit to a long-term sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a two-state solution,’ Starmer told reporters. ‘This includes allowing the U.N. to restart the supply of aid and making clear there will be no annexations in the West Bank.’

‘Meanwhile, our message to the terrorists of Hamas is unchanged and unequivocal. They must immediately release all the hostages. Sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza,’ he continued.

Trump declined to endorse Starmer’s move in a statement to reporters aboard Air Force One. He noted that both Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron have now moved toward recognizing a Palestinian state.

‘Essentially, they’re saying the same thing and that’s okay. But you know it doesn’t mean I have to agree,’ Trump said.

Starmer said his government will make a final assessment ahead of the UNGA meeting to determine what steps both Israel and Hamas have taken and make a final decision on recognizing a Palestinian state.

The U.K. leader went on to say that the primary motive behind the announcement is to change the situation on the ground in Gaza as well as facilitate the release of more hostages.

Israel’s foreign ministry rejected Starmer’s announcement in a countering statement on Tuesday.

‘The shift in the British government’s position at this time, following the French move and internal political pressures, constitutes a reward for Hamas and harms efforts to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza and a framework for the release of hostages,’ the ministry said.

The U.K.’s announcement comes just one day after Starmer met with Trump in Turnberry, Scotland, where both leaders condemned the humanitarian and hunger crisis in Gaza.

Trump publicly broke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the meeting, saying he disagreed that the hunger crisis is a false narrative put forward by Hamas.

‘Based on television, I would say not particularly, because those children look very hungry,’ Trump said when asked if he agreed with Netanyahu’s claims. ‘That’s real starvation stuff.’

Trump has highlighted America’s efforts to secure aid for Gaza, noting some $60 million the U.S. spent on the issue in recent days.

‘We gave $60 million two weeks ago for food for Gaza, and nobody acknowledged it. Nobody talks about it. And it makes you feel a little bad when you do that,’ Trump said during a Sunday meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. ‘And, you know, you have other countries not giving anything. None of the European countries, by the way, gave – I mean, nobody gave but us and nobody said, gee, thank you very much. And it would be nice to have at least a thank you.’

Israel has begun conducting aid drops across Gaza in recent days, bending to pressure after months of restricting the flow of aid. The IDF had long said Hamas was stealing much of the resources being sent into the region, a statement Trump and the U.S. have echoed.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump addressed the ongoing hunger crisis in Gaza on Monday in Scotland, where he addressed the urgency of getting food into the enclave immediately, while doing it safely and securely. 

‘The United States recently, just a couple of weeks ago, we gave $60 million … No other nation gave money,’ as he urged other nations ‘to step up.’ 

$30 million in U.S. contributions to Gaza have been channeled through the U.S.- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. 

Since the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) began its operations on May 27, the organization has partnered with local Palestinian aid workers and non-governmental organizations to deliver 97 million meals to date to Gazans.

GHF spokesperson Chapin Fay told Fox News Digital that GHF ‘has one exclusive mission: to feed the people of Gaza in a way that prevents Hamas from being able to steal or loot or divert the aid.’ In addition to having ‘zero diversion,’ Fay said GHF has ‘put [aid] directly into the hands of the people who need it the most.’ 

What is GHF providing the local population? 

At its four distribution sites in Gaza, it provides boxes of aid sufficient to provide 2,400 daily calories for 5.5 people over a total of 3.5 days. GHF’s sites are able to distribute, on average, 2 million total meals per day.

Fay said GHF has also started a potato pilot program which has seen ‘hundreds of tons of potatoes’ delivered into Gaza.

Another new pilot program in association with local Gazan NGO Al-Amal has allowed GHF to deliver 2,000 boxes of food to families in Gaza. Fay said that GHF is in the process of scaling up the operation, vetting hundreds of inquiries received since the program’s announcement and working on establishing additional local NGO partnerships.

Attacks on GHF’s aid model

The U.N. has lambasted GHF’s distributions, with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini calling the organization an ‘abomination’ that ‘provides nothing but starvation and gunfire to the people of Gaza.’  

Though media headlines are thick with accusations of violence at GHF sites, Fay said that the reality of GHF distributions ‘is almost the opposite of what you read about, what you see on TV.’ 

Though he admitted that ‘there’s some chaos when thousands of desperate, hungry people are trying to get aid,’ he claims that only two violent incidents have transpired at GHF distributions. A stampede and a grenade attack that harmed two American veteran employees were ‘Hamas-fomented terrorist attacks,’ he said.

The U.N. and many NGOs have also opposed GHF’s use of armed security to protect aid-seekers. However, U.N. data shows that only 8% of U.N. aid had reached its destination without being looted in the last 10 weeks, according to a Reuters report.

Fay says that GHF is ready and willing to provide security support for U.N. aid. ‘We need to stop pretending that there’s only one way to get aid into Gaza,’ he explained. 

GHF’s adaptations and improvements on the ground

As GHF continues to assist Gazans, Fay says the organization has ‘adapt[ed] in a dynamic environment, and our distributions seem to be going more smoothly every day.’ 

New adaptations include a red-light, green-light system to indicate whether distribution sites are open and a suggestion from aid-seekers. GHF has also added more shelf-stable onions to its aid boxes.

Fay said that workers are also holding back some aid to ensure that women and children receive needed assistance. Because of this change, Fay says he recently ‘saw women leaving and smiling at our personnel with their onions on their way home.’

GHF is set to deliver its 100 millionth meal to Gazans later this week. 

Reuters contributed to this report.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Lawmakers on the House Homeland Security Committee met with stakeholders and law enforcement to address the rise of antisemitic violence in the U.S., during a closed-door congressional roundtable on July 22, Fox News Digital has learned. 

The roundtable comes amid growing concerns about antisemitic violence months after recent attacks in Boulder, Colorado, and Washington, D.C., along with growing fears surrounding the potential election of Zohran Mamdani, who has espoused anti-Israel viewpoints, as New York City mayor. 

‘Jewish communities across the country are living in fear, and I am committed to standing with them. This roundtable comes at a critical moment: a far-left activist who has defended the phrase ‘globalize the intifada’ is inching closer to leading a city home to one of the world’s largest Jewish populations,’ Rep. August Pfluger, the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee’s counterterrorism and intelligence subcommittee, said in his opening statement, obtained by Fox News Digital. 

‘Antisemitic and anti-Israel rhetoric is becoming dangerously mainstream. We must act now to expose and combat this vile hatred wherever it is spread,’ Pfluger said. 

The roundtable focused on improving interagency coordination, intelligence sharing, training, and enforcement to better prevent and respond to antisemitic violence, according to a House Homeland Security Committee aide.

In particular, the meeting addressed ways to bolster communication between the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, along with state and local law enforcement, according to Michael Masters, the CEO of the Secure Community Network, a non-profit organization focused on the safety of the Jewish community in North America. 

This interagency coordination is absolutely paramount as the Secure Community Network has flagged 500 credible threats to life this year – which all have required immediate law enforcement intervention, according to Masters. 

‘Bad guys don’t respect orders. Bad actors don’t respect jurisdictions, and that means that our intelligence can’t be siloed,’ Masters told Fox News Digital on Monday. 

 

Additionally, the roundtable’s discussion highlighted how extremist rhetoric can spread, especially on college campuses and via social media, the aide said. Since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war in October 2023, student protests have erupted across college campuses in the U.S., including at Columbia University in New York. 

Likewise, those participating in the roundtable addressed the prevalence of homegrown and foreign-influenced extremism, when one participant highlighted instances where anti-Israel terrorist organizations have disseminated tool kits and talking points aimed at promoting attacks in the U.S., the committee aide said. 

The discussion is expected to inform legislative priorities centered around bolstering officer training, improving data collection, and ensuring ‘robust prosecution’ of antisemitic offenses, the committee aide said. 

Those who participated in the roundtable included representatives from the Secure Community Networks; the Anti-Defamation League, an organization dedicated to stopping the defamation of the Jewish people; the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence & Analysis; and law enforcement officials. 

Pfluger, a Republican from Texas, has spearheaded legislation that would bar any visa holders backing Hamas or other designated terror groups from staying in the U.S. 

He also led a hearing last month on the rise of antisemitic violence in the U.S., following a May shooting that killed two Israeli Embassy employees in Washington and a terrorist attack in Colorado targeting a grassroots group advocating for the release of Israeli hostages.

Antisemitic violence reached a new high in 2024, according to the Anti-Defamation League. 

The group recorded 9,354 antisemitic instances of harassment, assault, and vandalism in the U.S. in 2024 – a 5% increase from the 8,873 incidents recorded in 2023 and a 344% increase in the past five years. Likewise, the number of incidents is the highest the group has recorded since 1979, when the group first started tracking these cases. 

Incidents of antisemitic violence in 2024 were highest in the state of New York, where Mamdani is currently a state assemblyman. 

Mamdani has attracted scrutiny, including from Democrats, for initially failing to condemn the term ‘globalize the intifada,’ a phrase used to back Palestinian resistance against Israel. However, he has since said he will not use the term and will discourage others from using it as well. 

Still, concerns remain over what his potential leadership as mayor could mean for the Jewish community in New York City. Roughly 1.4 million people in the Greater New York Area identified as Jewish in 2023, according to UJA-Federation of New York. 

‘There’s a lot of fear in the Jewish community if this guy becomes mayor,’ New York City Republican councilwoman Inna Vernikov told Fox News Digital. 

‘This is a guy who wants to globalize the intifada,’ Vernikov said. ‘We’ve never seen anything close to this in New York City. We have the largest Jewish population in America, and I’ll tell you Jews are telling me they’re going to run away from New York City, and Jews have contributed a lot to the city and to this country, and the idea that they are now afraid to live here – it’s unacceptable and unprecedented really, this has never happened here.’

Fox News’ Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Kim Jong-Un’s powerful sister opened up about relations with the second Trump administration, warning the U.S. not to try to restart talks centered on getting North Korea to give up its nuclear program. 

Kim Yo Jong, in remarks blasted out by state media, said relations between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un are ‘not bad’ but added Pyongyang would view any attempt to pressure North Korea to denuclearize as ‘nothing but a mockery.’ 

She said that North Korea’s nuclear arsenal has sharply increased since Trump and Kim last spoke, and the pair would not meet for a summit again if denuclearization was on the table. 

The North Korean dictator’s sister did not rule out bilateral talks entirely — as she did with South Korea in a separate statement. 

‘If the U.S. fails to accept the changed reality and persists in the failed past, the DPRK- U.S. meeting will remain as a ‘hope’ of the U.S. side,’ Kim Yo Jong said, referring to the nation by its official name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

She said it would be ‘advisable to seek another way of contact.’

Trump held three unprecedented summits with the North Korean leader he dubbed ‘Little Rocket Man’ during his first term: in Singapore in 2018, Hanoi in 2019 and the Korean Demilitarized Zone in 2019, becoming the first president to step foot on North Korean territory. 

None of the meetings resulted in any breakthroughs: North Korea kept its nukes, and the U.S. left sanctions that have isolated it from international markets in place. 

Kim Yo Jong is a top official on the Central Committee of the North’s ruling Workers’ Party and handles relations with the U.S. and South Korea.

Kim Yo Jong’s comments came after an article posted by Yonhap news agency cited an unnamed White House official as saying Trump ‘remains open to engaging with Leader Kim to achieve a fully denuclearized North Korea.’

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said last month Trump would like to see ‘progress’ this term on the summits he held during the first term. 

In a statement commemorating the 72nd anniversary of the end of the Korean War on Monday, Trump said, ‘I was proud to become the first sitting President to cross this Demilitarized Zone into North Korea.’

He underscored the U.S. alliance with South Korea. 

‘Although the evils of communism still persist in Asia, American and South Korean forces remain united in an ironclad alliance to this day.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

In a recent essay, John Tamny, at RealClearMarkets got rather SALTy. Worth reading.

John (whom I know and like, and have hosted to give a talk to my big undergrad “Intro to Capitalism” class at Duke) is taking issue with the claims I made about state and local tax deductions (SALT) here, at AIER’s The Daily Economy.

Now, John is a fine, smart man. But we really do disagree about this.  Consider two points:

First, John claims that the most important policy change needed is a substantial cut in federal spending.  He’s right about that, of course. But for some reason, he equates cutting taxes with cutting spending.

As I have argued for years, starting when I sometimes got little policy pieces discussed by Rush Limbaugh, US policy is “DAFT” — Deficits Are Future Taxes. Since we are not cutting spending, a SALT deduction is a tax increase. The SALT deduction increases the deficit; deficits are future taxes, so SALT deductions are straightforward tax increases.

I could see Tamny’s point if there were a balanced budget requirement at the federal level. But since there isn’t, SALT is a tax increase on everyone else, because we have to pay for the increased deficit.

Yes, the “everyone else” includes people in the future, but that’s even worse! Generations yet unborn are paying higher expected taxes so that Californians can subsidize state spending with lower federal taxes. There is simply no connection between a SALT deduction and a decrease in federal spending, but SALT deductions enable state governments to spend more, at the expense of the entire nation. SALT deductions enable spending increases at the state level, precisely because states have balanced budget requirements but the federal government does not.

Second, I agree completely with Tamny’s point that California is wealthy despite its high government spending. But that’s all the more reason to make California taxpayers bear the full burden of having legislators light their solar-powered cigars with hundred dollar bills. If Golden State citizens actually had to pay for the government they vote for, they might vote smarter. With the SALT deduction, California can slip by and keep spending, because a big part of their tax revenue is being subsidized by the hardworking citizens of Texas, and by future generations of taxpayers that are already burdened with having to pay John Tamny’s Social Security.

One more thing: Tamny called me a Keynesian.  Now,  Keynes drank scotch. I drink scotch. That doesn’t make me a Keynesian.  Keynes wanted to increase government spending; I want to decrease it. 

The fact is that deficits are future taxes, and SALT increases deficits. Given that the current debt is approaching $40 trillion (well over $100,000 per US citizen!), increasing the deficit is moving the already egregious debt in the wrong direction. How much depends on your assumptions about growth, and on the exact form of the legislation. But according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, raising the cap to only $20,000 would add between $150 and $200 billion over the next decade. 

And that’s the best case scenario. If the cap structure now in the bill ($15,000 single/$30,000 joint filers) goes through, the cost is half a trillion.  And if the real hawks like John Tamny get their way, with the cap going up to $100,000 or more, the loss in tax revenue could top a trillion in the next ten years.

These costs might be tolerable if there were some benefit. But all the cost savings go to the states that have irresponsible tax and spending policies. A recent study by David Ditch, of the Economic Policy Innovation Center, makes the case starkly: California’s state spending is nearly double the combined state budgets of Texas and Florida. That’s in spite of the fact that Texas and Florida have 15 million more people. California, which does have (more or less) a balanced budget requirement, can only get away with that kind of spending because citizens in Texas and Florida are making up for the federal tax losses!

While it’s hard to give an exact estimate, here is a table of the top five states, in terms of targeted benefits from the increased SALT deductions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (source: CRS and Tax Policy Center):

Top Five States Most Affected by SALT Deduction Limits

Rank  StateWhy Affected
1New YorkHigh state income taxes and property taxes; large number of high-income households; suburban and urban property owners hit hardest.
2CaliforniaHighest state income tax rates in the US; expensive real estate market leads to large property tax bills.
3New JerseyExtremely high property taxes; high-income suburbs around NYC heavily affected.
4ConnecticutHigh property taxes and state income taxes; large concentration of wealthy taxpayers.
5MassachusettsHigh property values, significant state income tax; many affluent taxpayers in Greater Boston area.

Those are not Republican states; in fact, there is not even one Republican Senator from any of the five states that would benefit most.  Why do people want to take money from honest people who earn it in Red states, and use it to fund government spending in the Heart of Blueness?

All this means that increasing the SALT deductions has two effects, both bad:

  1. There will be a substantial increase in the federal deficit, and a ballooning of the debt, all of which amounts to a tax increase (because DAFT). Raising SALT deductions is a big tax increase, on other states and on future generations. 
  2. SALT excuses and covers for profligate and wasteful state government. The five biggest beneficiary states, disproportionately to the total benefit, subsidize wasteful and intrusive government. People are leaving California, New York, and the other high tax states. But not as fast as they would be moving if states bore the full costs of their bad decisions and spendthrift policies.  

SALT defenders are living in the past. There is a long and embarrassing history of attempts to “starve the beast” by cutting taxes without cutting spending.  But the US federal government, unlike the states (even California) now completely disregards any connection between revenues and spending.

The beast doesn’t starve; we never cut spending. And if we impose SALT deductions, we are actually raising taxes on most Americans.

Last month, Australian writer Alistair Kitchen was detained by Customs and Border Protection (CPB) when he flew from Melbourne to Los Angeles. Agents interrogated him, intimidated him, and lied to try to get a confession out of him. Ultimately they denied him entry to the United States. Why? Because he had written articles that the Trump administration didn’t like. As the officer who interrogated him told him, “Look, we both know why you are here…It’s because of what you wrote online about the protests at Columbia University.”

It’s not just Kitchen. Last month the State Department issued a statement that they would be vetting visa applicants’ online presence in order to determine whether applicants were fit to enter the United States. When applying for three common types of visa (F, M, and J), applicants are “instructed to adjust the privacy settings on all of their social media profiles to ‘public.’” Apparently, the Trump administration is now choosing to turn visitors away from the US due to social media posts.

To be clear, neither the administration’s actions towards Kitchen nor its new policy of vetting visa applicants based on their online presence is illegal. Non-citizens have fewer protections than citizens when it comes to free speech, and the administration is at perfect liberty to punish visa applicants who say things online that the administration doesn’t like.

But commentators’ focus on the legality of the Trump administration’s actions is missing the forest for the trees. Just because the government can do something doesn’t mean that it should.

As we consider how to treat visa applicants, we should consider what kind of example we wish to set for the world. Do we still wish to be the shining city on the hill, a beacon of freedom and liberty for other countries? Do we wish to stand tall in our principled defense of free speech, and to show other countries by our example just how well freedom can work? Do we wish to honor the legacy of our Founding Fathers, who created the first country in the world that stood for freedom of speech as a bedrock principle, and whose shining example convinced country after country to grant its citizens their own freedoms?

Or do we wish to be the country that intimidates peaceful visa applicants because they wrote articles with which the Trump administration disagrees?

I’m not sure that we can be both.

Some critics might argue that it doesn’t matter how we treat visa applicants; after all, they’re not Americans, and they shouldn’t reasonably expect to receive the same rights and protections as citizens. A shining city on a hill can still keep out undesirables.

But again, this misses the broader point. As Brad Polumbo points out, Jordan Peterson has been a vocal critic of the United States’ foreign policy with regard to Ukraine. Imagine if the Biden administration had arrested Peterson, detained him, and revoked his visa for his criticism. That would be an international scandal, and it would suggest to the world that the Biden administration didn’t support free speech as a matter of principle. Kitchen’s example is very similar.

Then there’s the chilling effect of the state department’s new rules. In writing about his experience with CPB for The New Yorker, Kitchen says, “I fear that writing about this, and speaking to the media, as I have done, will trigger further reprisals from the U.S. government. I’m afraid that I will be banned for good, if I haven’t been already, or that the information on my phone, which I handed over to them, will be used against me.” 

When anyone, citizen or not, justifiably worries that speaking up about their treatment will lead to further punishment at the hands of a government, then we can hardly say that said government is standing up for the principle of free speech.

All of this is especially salient because the world is at a crossroads. More and more countries, even countries that voice nominal support for the principle of free speech, are leaning into censorship. In England, feminists have been charged with hate speech for insisting that there are biological differences between men and women. In Germany, you can be prosecuted for calling someone a “jerk” online. In France, a woman was arrested and threatened with a fine of 12,000 euros for insulting French President Emmanuel Macron.

The United States has tried to use its bully pulpit to encourage the rest of the world to recommit itself to the principle of free speech. Speaking in Munich in February, J.D. Vance took European leaders to task for retreating from “some of its [Europe’s] most fundamental values,” including a robust commitment to freedom of speech. But it’s hard to urge global leaders to commit to a value that your own administration isn’t committed to.

If the United States wants to reverse the spread of censorious policies across the globe, then it needs to lead by example. We should absolutely vet visa applicants and turn away those who represent genuine national security concerns. But when the Trump administration conflates writing op-eds with endangering national security, it tells the world that free speech isn’t a principle worth defending. That’s a notion with which our Founding Fathers disagreed strongly: as Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1786, “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”