AMERICA IS A FASCIST STATE
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.
Opposed to anarchism, democracy, pluralism, egalitarianism, liberalism, socialism, and Marxism fascism is at the far right wing of the traditional left–right spectrum.
AMERICA IS A ROGUE STATE
A nation or state regarded as breaking international law and posing a threat to the security of other nations.
A Moral Outrage: Mass Deportation & Starving Gaza | The Joy Reid Show LIVE!
The Joy Reid Show
Streamed live on July 25, 2025
The Joy Reid Show
VIDEO:
In this episode of The Joy Reid Show, Joy proposes the following truth that she believes: the U.S. and Israel are the two biggest human rights abusers in the world right now; given the abuse and terrorizing of migrants by the Trump regime and the starvation and genocide Benjamin Netanyahu's government is unleashing on the Palestinian people -- in Gaza AND the occupied West Bank.
Then, our political panel talked Epstein cover-up, Ghislaine Maxwell's potential pardon, and the Columbia University and Paramount sellouts.
Joining the show: Nana Gyamfi, Executive Director of the Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI), the largest Black-led racial justice and immigrant rights organization in the US.
Nana: Instagram @attorneynana BAJI: Instagram - @instabaji Twitter. - @BAJItweet Angela Fernandez, Executive Director of Safe Passage Project. Angela: www.instagram.com/safepassageproject /
@safepassageproject / safepassageproject https://www.threads.com/@safepassagep...
Then, our political panel talked Epstein cover-up, Ghislaine Maxwell's potential pardon, and the Columbia University and Paramount sellouts.
Joining the show: Nana Gyamfi, Executive Director of the Black Alliance for Just Immigration (BAJI), the largest Black-led racial justice and immigrant rights organization in the US.
Nana: Instagram @attorneynana BAJI: Instagram - @instabaji Twitter. - @BAJItweet Angela Fernandez, Executive Director of Safe Passage Project. Angela: www.instagram.com/safepassageproject /
@safepassageproject / safepassageproject https://www.threads.com/@safepassagep...
ABOUT THE PARTICIPANTS:
Rula Jebreal, award-winning journalist, international bestselling author, and foreign policy analyst renowned for her groundbreaking work in Europe, the United States, and across the Middle East.
IG: @rulajebreal
Jill Wine-Banks, MSNBC Legal Analyst and Author of The Watergate Girl Twitter (X): @JillWineBanks
Instagram: @jillwinebanks Lizz Winstead, co-creator of The Daily Show, comedienne, and human rights advocate, focused on reproductive rights with the Abortion Access Front.
Read Lizz's Rolling Stone essay: I Worked With Stephen Colbert. Here’s Why His Cancellation Should Scare You:
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/...
Lizz: XTwitter: @lizzwinstead
Insta: @lizzwinstead Website: Abortion Access Front: https://www.aafront.org/
Documentary: "No One Asked You" - https://www.nooneaskedyoudoc.com/
Book: Lizz Free or Die: Essays - https://www.amazon.com/Lizz-Free-Die-...
SUBSCRIBE to The Joy Reid Show channel so you never miss a moment!
/ @thejoyreidshow ABOUT JOY REID:
Joy-Ann Lomena Reid (AKA Joy Reid) is a best-selling American author, political journalist and TV host. She was a national correspondent for MSNBC and is best known for hosting the Emmy-nominated, NAACP Award-winning political commentary and analysis show, The ReidOut, from 2020 to 2025. Her previous anchoring credits include The Reid Report (2014–2015) and AM Joy (2016–2020).
STAY CONNECTED WITH THE SHOW:
Website: https://www.joyannreid.com
Substack: https://substack.com/@joyannreid Facebook:
/ 61576759980854 Instagram:
/ joyreidshow TikTok:
/ thejoyreidshow Bluesky: bsky.app/profile/joyannreid.bsky.social
FOLLOW JOY ON SOCIAL:
Facebook: / joyreidofficial
Instagram: / joyannreid
TikTok: / joyreidofficial
https://jacobin.com/2025/07/israel-palestine-genocide-war-crimes
Israel / Palestine
War and Imperialism
International Relations
Israel / Palestine
War and Imperialism
International Relations
Israel Has Made Gaza a Hell on Earth
by Seraj Assi
July 28, 2025
Jacobin
How much longer will we watch Israel starve children to death and massacre civilians seeking food before American political leaders put a stop to this madness?
A charity distributes meals to Palestinians facing food shortages amid ongoing Israeli attacks and severe restrictions in Gaza City, Gaza, on July 28, 2025. (Ali Jadallah / Anadolu via Getty Images)
More than twenty months into the genocide, Israel has rendered Gaza a hellscape on earth. This hellscape is not an act of God, or a natural disaster, or some force majeure — it’s human-made, orchestrated by Israel, funded and armed by the United States, and cheered on by Western political elites.
For five hellish months, Israel has imposed a total blockade on Gaza, blocking all food deliveries to the starving population of two million Palestinians, almost half of them children, and condemning hundreds to a slow and agonizing death. Unsatisfied with forced mass starvation, Israeli forces carried out the equivalent of their previous flour massacre in Gaza almost daily, slaughtering over one thousand Palestinians seeking food. On Wednesday, more than one hundred international aid and rights groups appealed to governments to take immediate action in Gaza, where over one hundred thousand children are facing imminent mass death if this barbarity continues.
The humanitarian calamity is so horrific that top UN officials have abandoned their customarily restrained tone for outraged and emotionally charged condemnations. UN secretary-general António Guterres has berated the international community for ignoring the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, which he said presents a “moral crisis that challenges the global conscience.”
“I cannot explain the level of indifference and inaction we see by too many in the international community — the lack of compassion, the lack of truth, the lack of humanity,” Guterres told participants at the global assembly of the rights group Amnesty International.
Meanwhile, genocidal rhetoric continues to pour out of the upper echelons of Israeli leadership, with one minister pledging that Israel is “racing to wipe out Gaza.” The genocidal mania also includes an Israeli version of Donald Trump’s Gaza video, featuring a dystopian AI-generated scenario of an ethnically cleansed Gaza, with Trump Tower glimmering over the depopulated landscape.
US president Trump has once again cheered for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. In a recent interview, Trump openly called on Israel to cleanse Gaza, while virtually blaming Palestinians for their own death. He told Israel to “finish the job” in Gaza.
US complicity in the Gaza genocide goes beyond funding and arming Israel to the hilt with bipartisan blessing. Recent media reports have revealed that Israel and the Trump administration are coordinating a scheme to drive Palestinians out of Gaza, which could include countries like Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Libya — a revived Zionist dream as old as Israel itself, hatched originally by Zionist leaders like Moshe Dayan and Levi Eshkol, to transfer Palestinian refugees in Gaza to countries in North Africa (the Libyan Operation), or even to Latin America by air (the Moshe Dayan plan). “All of Gaza will be Jewish,” as one Israeli minister recently vowed.
Europe is faring hardly better. For over twenty months, the Western political class has refused to rein in Israel’s genocidal spree in Gaza. France’s recent recognition of a Palestinian state, while refusing to take immediate and concrete actions to stop the genocide and the forced starvation of Palestinians in Gaza, is a largely empty gesture, especially in the face of what the UN’s former aid chief describes as “the worst crime of the century.”
UK leaders seem to believe that Israel can always act with impunity and without consequences against Palestinians, while Germany has no qualms about making Palestinians pay for its past crimes against the Jews, with a horrifying repeat of past atrocities. Or as Hans Frank, a Nazi governor in occupied Poland, put it in his diary: “That we sentence 1.2 million Jews to die of hunger should be noted only marginally.”
For decades, Western leaders have winked at Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people, refusing to take a stand against the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the siege of Gaza, and the apartheid in the West Bank, marked by the constant dispossession and erasure of Palestinian existence, daily dehumanization and forced displacement, unhinged settler violence, systematic torture, and other unspeakable injustices, which together have culminated in the Gaza genocide.
According to international law, siege starvation is a war crime, a crime against humanity, and an act of genocide. The global consensus has been that sieges are “barbaric and medieval” and belong to a darker period in human history. And yet, for nearly two decades, Israel has imposed its devastating and suffocating blockade of Gaza without consequences.
This brutal and inhumane blockade, the longest in modern history, has been sustained and naturalized with Western support and blessing, whose leaders have become accustomed to seeing Palestinians ghettoed in concentration camps swollen by refugees, caged in a tiny enclave like sheep penned for slaughter, under constant bombardment and invasions, displaced time and again. If Gaza was already unlivable before the genocide, it’s now “worse than hell on earth,” to cite the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross.
The new threshold, established in Gaza by Israel and its Western allies, is that a pariah state can starve to death an entire people and still be a member of the United Nations.
The Gaza genocide is the most documented genocide in human history. Future historians contemplating it will scratch their heads over how this unimaginable horror was allowed to happen in this enlightened century — how the civilized world watched it unfold in real time, broadcast by the victims themselves, and did nothing to stop it. As UNICEF spokesperson James Elder put it: “Gaza has shattered humanity’s records for its darkest chapters. Humanity must now urgently write a different chapter.”
For the horror of the Gaza genocide is not merely the fact that it was allowed to happen, but that it was allowed to happen for this long and for far longer than most genocides in recent memory — with the persistent backing of Western powers. The Srebrenica genocide, which marks thirty years this month, unfolded in a few horrific days in July 1995, prompting swift Western intervention. While Israel’s genocide in Gaza has reaped so far at least ten times as many victims as the Srebrenica genocide in Bosnia, no other genocide has garnered the same level of complicity and apathy from Western elites. Not to mention Arab complicity, whose leaders largely see Palestinian resistance and struggle for freedom as an existential threat.
In Slaughterhouse-Five, American writer Kurt Vonnegut describes the bombing of Dresden, which unfolded eighty years ago and lasted for two nights, as the “greatest massacre in European history.” One wonders what he would say about Israel’s unending slaughter of Gaza, which has been unfolding before our eyes for nearly two years, with no end in sight. Gone are the days when a Palestinian prisoner’s hunger strike would cause a global outrage. The new threshold, established in Gaza by Israel and its Western allies, is that a pariah state can starve to death an entire people and still be a member of the United Nations.
For twenty-one months, Western powers, led by the United States, have allowed Israel to plumb new depths of barbarity in Gaza almost daily without offering Palestinians even the dignity of humanitarian sympathy. They continue to do so even when the Western-backed destruction of Palestinians has brought the whole global order and postwar moral legacy to the brink of collapse. And they remain unfazed by Israel’s absolute contempt for the basic tenets of international justice, thus rendering Gaza, in the words of a prominent Palestinian human rights lawyer, “the graveyard of international law.”
This holocaust must stop now. Humanity itself is at stake. As Philippe Lazzarini, head of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), has put it: “Make ‘never again’ a reality. If we fail the Palestinians in Gaza, others are likely to be failed too in the future.”
More than twenty months into the genocide, Israel has rendered Gaza a hellscape on earth. This hellscape is not an act of God, or a natural disaster, or some force majeure — it’s human-made, orchestrated by Israel, funded and armed by the United States, and cheered on by Western political elites.
For five hellish months, Israel has imposed a total blockade on Gaza, blocking all food deliveries to the starving population of two million Palestinians, almost half of them children, and condemning hundreds to a slow and agonizing death. Unsatisfied with forced mass starvation, Israeli forces carried out the equivalent of their previous flour massacre in Gaza almost daily, slaughtering over one thousand Palestinians seeking food. On Wednesday, more than one hundred international aid and rights groups appealed to governments to take immediate action in Gaza, where over one hundred thousand children are facing imminent mass death if this barbarity continues.
The humanitarian calamity is so horrific that top UN officials have abandoned their customarily restrained tone for outraged and emotionally charged condemnations. UN secretary-general António Guterres has berated the international community for ignoring the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, which he said presents a “moral crisis that challenges the global conscience.”
“I cannot explain the level of indifference and inaction we see by too many in the international community — the lack of compassion, the lack of truth, the lack of humanity,” Guterres told participants at the global assembly of the rights group Amnesty International.
Meanwhile, genocidal rhetoric continues to pour out of the upper echelons of Israeli leadership, with one minister pledging that Israel is “racing to wipe out Gaza.” The genocidal mania also includes an Israeli version of Donald Trump’s Gaza video, featuring a dystopian AI-generated scenario of an ethnically cleansed Gaza, with Trump Tower glimmering over the depopulated landscape.
US president Trump has once again cheered for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. In a recent interview, Trump openly called on Israel to cleanse Gaza, while virtually blaming Palestinians for their own death. He told Israel to “finish the job” in Gaza.
US complicity in the Gaza genocide goes beyond funding and arming Israel to the hilt with bipartisan blessing. Recent media reports have revealed that Israel and the Trump administration are coordinating a scheme to drive Palestinians out of Gaza, which could include countries like Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Libya — a revived Zionist dream as old as Israel itself, hatched originally by Zionist leaders like Moshe Dayan and Levi Eshkol, to transfer Palestinian refugees in Gaza to countries in North Africa (the Libyan Operation), or even to Latin America by air (the Moshe Dayan plan). “All of Gaza will be Jewish,” as one Israeli minister recently vowed.
Europe is faring hardly better. For over twenty months, the Western political class has refused to rein in Israel’s genocidal spree in Gaza. France’s recent recognition of a Palestinian state, while refusing to take immediate and concrete actions to stop the genocide and the forced starvation of Palestinians in Gaza, is a largely empty gesture, especially in the face of what the UN’s former aid chief describes as “the worst crime of the century.”
UK leaders seem to believe that Israel can always act with impunity and without consequences against Palestinians, while Germany has no qualms about making Palestinians pay for its past crimes against the Jews, with a horrifying repeat of past atrocities. Or as Hans Frank, a Nazi governor in occupied Poland, put it in his diary: “That we sentence 1.2 million Jews to die of hunger should be noted only marginally.”
For decades, Western leaders have winked at Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people, refusing to take a stand against the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the siege of Gaza, and the apartheid in the West Bank, marked by the constant dispossession and erasure of Palestinian existence, daily dehumanization and forced displacement, unhinged settler violence, systematic torture, and other unspeakable injustices, which together have culminated in the Gaza genocide.
According to international law, siege starvation is a war crime, a crime against humanity, and an act of genocide. The global consensus has been that sieges are “barbaric and medieval” and belong to a darker period in human history. And yet, for nearly two decades, Israel has imposed its devastating and suffocating blockade of Gaza without consequences.
This brutal and inhumane blockade, the longest in modern history, has been sustained and naturalized with Western support and blessing, whose leaders have become accustomed to seeing Palestinians ghettoed in concentration camps swollen by refugees, caged in a tiny enclave like sheep penned for slaughter, under constant bombardment and invasions, displaced time and again. If Gaza was already unlivable before the genocide, it’s now “worse than hell on earth,” to cite the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross.
The new threshold, established in Gaza by Israel and its Western allies, is that a pariah state can starve to death an entire people and still be a member of the United Nations.
The Gaza genocide is the most documented genocide in human history. Future historians contemplating it will scratch their heads over how this unimaginable horror was allowed to happen in this enlightened century — how the civilized world watched it unfold in real time, broadcast by the victims themselves, and did nothing to stop it. As UNICEF spokesperson James Elder put it: “Gaza has shattered humanity’s records for its darkest chapters. Humanity must now urgently write a different chapter.”
For the horror of the Gaza genocide is not merely the fact that it was allowed to happen, but that it was allowed to happen for this long and for far longer than most genocides in recent memory — with the persistent backing of Western powers. The Srebrenica genocide, which marks thirty years this month, unfolded in a few horrific days in July 1995, prompting swift Western intervention. While Israel’s genocide in Gaza has reaped so far at least ten times as many victims as the Srebrenica genocide in Bosnia, no other genocide has garnered the same level of complicity and apathy from Western elites. Not to mention Arab complicity, whose leaders largely see Palestinian resistance and struggle for freedom as an existential threat.
In Slaughterhouse-Five, American writer Kurt Vonnegut describes the bombing of Dresden, which unfolded eighty years ago and lasted for two nights, as the “greatest massacre in European history.” One wonders what he would say about Israel’s unending slaughter of Gaza, which has been unfolding before our eyes for nearly two years, with no end in sight. Gone are the days when a Palestinian prisoner’s hunger strike would cause a global outrage. The new threshold, established in Gaza by Israel and its Western allies, is that a pariah state can starve to death an entire people and still be a member of the United Nations.
For twenty-one months, Western powers, led by the United States, have allowed Israel to plumb new depths of barbarity in Gaza almost daily without offering Palestinians even the dignity of humanitarian sympathy. They continue to do so even when the Western-backed destruction of Palestinians has brought the whole global order and postwar moral legacy to the brink of collapse. And they remain unfazed by Israel’s absolute contempt for the basic tenets of international justice, thus rendering Gaza, in the words of a prominent Palestinian human rights lawyer, “the graveyard of international law.”
This holocaust must stop now. Humanity itself is at stake. As Philippe Lazzarini, head of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), has put it: “Make ‘never again’ a reality. If we fail the Palestinians in Gaza, others are likely to be failed too in the future.”
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Seraj Assi is a Palestinian writer living in Washington, DC, and the author, most recently, of My Life As An Alien (Tartarus Press).
Seraj Assi is a Palestinian writer living in Washington, DC, and the author, most recently, of My Life As An Alien (Tartarus Press).
Filed Under:
Israel / Palestine
War and Imperialism
International Relations
European Union
Gaza
Genocide
War Crimes
Israeli Occupation
Trump Administration
https://truthout.org/articles/dhs-uses-iconic-scene-from-e-t-to-tell-immigrants-to-deport-themselves/
News
Immigration
DHS Uses Iconic Scene from “E.T.” to Tell Immigrants to Deport Themselves
DHS has been lambasted recently for sharing art on its social media accounts that stokes white nationalism.
by Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg
July 28, 2025
Truthout
A U.S. Department Of Homeland Security and U.S. Customs and Border Protection sign is displayed at the CBP Headquarters in Washington, D.C. Kevin Carter / Getty Images
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently used an iconic image from the 1982 movie “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” to promote its white supremacist policies on social media.
“Even E.T. knew when it was TIME TO GO HOME,” DHS’s edited version of the movie poster reads, underneath a picture of E.T. and Elliot, the science fiction movie’s protagonists, riding a bike across the night sky. “Take control of your departure using the CBP [Customs and Border Protection] app.”
On July 16, DHS posted the image on its Instagram, X and Facebook pages. The Latin Times was the first outlet to report on the posts.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently used an iconic image from the 1982 movie “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial” to promote its white supremacist policies on social media.
“Even E.T. knew when it was TIME TO GO HOME,” DHS’s edited version of the movie poster reads, underneath a picture of E.T. and Elliot, the science fiction movie’s protagonists, riding a bike across the night sky. “Take control of your departure using the CBP [Customs and Border Protection] app.”
On July 16, DHS posted the image on its Instagram, X and Facebook pages. The Latin Times was the first outlet to report on the posts.
“Illegal aliens, take a page from E.T. and PHONE HOME,” DHS posted on Facebook. “If you are here illegally, leave NOW — the easy way — using the CBP Home App. You will receive travel assistance and a stipend to return to your home country. Take control of your self-departure: www.dhs.gov/cbphome.”
It seems unlikely that the movie’s director, Steven Spielberg, who advised President Joe Biden on his reelection campaign, would approve of its use. Billboard magazine has cataloged numerous instances of Trump using musicians’ work without their permission, which has prompted several lawsuits.
On July 23, DHS, along with the White House, also posted the 1872 painting, American Progress by John Gast — a depiction of manifest destiny — to its social media pages. Manifest Destiny is the idea that white settlers were ordained to expand westward and steal Indigenous people’s land.
“A Heritage to be proud of, a Homeland worth defending,” reads the caption on the DHS Instagram post.
Many lambasted the agency for celebrating a concept used to justify the genocide of Indigenous people.
“You don’t need to be an art history major to pick up on the reactionary subtext of DHS’ messaging,” Zeeshan Aleem wrote in a commentary for MSNBC. “The agency is promoting the idea that America’s most authentic heritage can be traced back to its history of ethnic cleansing, racist social hierarchies and racial domination. The ‘homeland’ is to be expropriated and protected from savages, and the people who most belong are the European settler class.”
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg
Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg is a reporter based in New Jersey. Follow her on Twitter: @elizabethweill.
‘With Famine, No Electricity, Fuel, Water, No Family, How Are You Going To Survive?’ in Gaza
Zeteo
July 27, 2025
Unshocked with Naomi Klein
VIDEO:
After over 21 months of Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza, the humanitarian crisis in the Strip has reached its worst point yet. 94% of Gaza’s hospitals have been destroyed or damaged. Dozens of children have died from malnutrition. And Israeli troops continue to kill scores of Palestinians as they try to receive food from the so-called “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.” In this second part of Zeteo’s live ‘Unshocked,’ Dr. Yasser Khan – a Canadian ophthalmologist and plastic surgeon who has traveled twice to Gaza since October 7, 2023 – describes to Mehdi and Naomi how Israel’s humanitarian assault on Gaza has turned injuries and disabilities in Gaza into, “a death sentence.” Dr. Yasser Khan: “It was horrific, the most horrific things that I've ever seen.” In the interview, Dr. Khan shares the stories of his many patients, the vast majority of whom he says were women and children. Dr. Khan also discusses how upon returning from Gaza, many of his colleagues in the medical field refused to believe such stories, with some even going out of their way to tell him that, “‘he’s done nothing to be a hero.’” Dr. Khan explains how he came to the conclusion that what he was seeing in Gaza was indeed a genocide and why he takes so much inspiration from the people in Gaza. Mehdi, Naomi, and Dr. Khan also take questions from a live audience. Do consider becoming a paid subscriber so you can get early access to exclusive content like this. Also, if you are interested in learning more about Israel’s assault on Gaza’s healthcare system, check out Zeteo’s most recently acquired documentary, ‘Gaza: Doctors Under Attack.’
Chapters:
00:00 intro
2:36 ‘Made My Peace With God’
4:52 ‘It Was Horrific’
7:15 Responsibility To Bear Witness
11:25 ‘He’s Done Nothing To Be A Hero’
16:12 ‘Gaza Is A Death Sentence’
18:20 ‘People Of Tremendous Dignity’
20:00 Q&A
Subscribe to Zeteo to support independent and unfiltered journalism: https://zeteo.com/subscribe
Find Zeteo: Twitter: / zeteo_news
Instagram: / zeteonews
TikTok: / zeteonews
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/zeteo.com
Find Mehdi:
Substack: https://substack.com/@mehdirhasan
Chapters:
00:00 intro
2:36 ‘Made My Peace With God’
4:52 ‘It Was Horrific’
7:15 Responsibility To Bear Witness
11:25 ‘He’s Done Nothing To Be A Hero’
16:12 ‘Gaza Is A Death Sentence’
18:20 ‘People Of Tremendous Dignity’
20:00 Q&A
Subscribe to Zeteo to support independent and unfiltered journalism: https://zeteo.com/subscribe
Find Zeteo: Twitter: / zeteo_news
Instagram: / zeteonews
TikTok: / zeteonews
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/zeteo.com
Find Mehdi:
Substack: https://substack.com/@mehdirhasan
Twitter: / @mehdirhasan
Instagram: / @mehdirhasan
Tik Tok: / mehdirhasan
https://truthout.org/articles/disgrace-tlaib-slams-bill-threatening-sanctions-on-south-africa-over-icj-case/
News
Politics & Elections
Instagram: / @mehdirhasan
Tik Tok: / mehdirhasan
https://truthout.org/articles/disgrace-tlaib-slams-bill-threatening-sanctions-on-south-africa-over-icj-case/
News
Politics & Elections
“Disgrace”: Tlaib Slams Bill Threatening Sanctions on South Africa Over ICJ Case
“Republicans and any Democrats who vote for this should forever keep Mandela’s name out of their mouths,” Tlaib said.
by Sharon Zhang
July 28, 2025
“Republicans and any Democrats who vote for this should forever keep Mandela’s name out of their mouths,” Tlaib said.
by Sharon Zhang
July 28, 2025
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) speaking during a hearing on Capitol Hill on June 24, 2025 in Washington, D.C.Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) has denounced a bill advancing through the House that threatens sanctions on South Africa over its genocide case against Israel in the Hague and other actions against Israel, calling it an “extremist disgrace.”
Last Tuesday, the House Foreign Affairs Committee overwhelmingly voted to advance a bill that requires the U.S. to reexamine its relationship with South Africa and proposes sanctions on South African officials, specifically naming leaders of the African National Congress party. The legislation advanced 34 to 13, with bipartisan support.
It’s unclear if House or Senate leaders would put the bill to a full chamber vote. However, the advancing of the bill, introduced by Republican Rep. Ronny Jackson (Texas), is yet another show of U.S. lawmakers’ willingness to bend over backwards to please Israel in a time when it is committing genocide in Gaza and ethnic cleansing in the occupied West Bank.
“Congress is threatening to sanction South Africa for their courageous leadership against the Israeli regime’s genocide in Gaza,” said Tlaib in a statement on social media on Monday. “H.R. 2633 is an extremist disgrace. Republicans and any Democrats who vote for this should forever keep [Nelson] Mandela’s name out of their mouths.”
The bill effectively says that the U.S. should punish South Africa for its criticism of Israel’s genocide, including its genocide case against Israel in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and referral of Israeli officials to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes in Gaza. The bill also names cooperation with China and Russia as a reason to reexamine ties — though South Africa also maintains close ties with U.S. allies.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) has denounced a bill advancing through the House that threatens sanctions on South Africa over its genocide case against Israel in the Hague and other actions against Israel, calling it an “extremist disgrace.”
Last Tuesday, the House Foreign Affairs Committee overwhelmingly voted to advance a bill that requires the U.S. to reexamine its relationship with South Africa and proposes sanctions on South African officials, specifically naming leaders of the African National Congress party. The legislation advanced 34 to 13, with bipartisan support.
It’s unclear if House or Senate leaders would put the bill to a full chamber vote. However, the advancing of the bill, introduced by Republican Rep. Ronny Jackson (Texas), is yet another show of U.S. lawmakers’ willingness to bend over backwards to please Israel in a time when it is committing genocide in Gaza and ethnic cleansing in the occupied West Bank.
“Congress is threatening to sanction South Africa for their courageous leadership against the Israeli regime’s genocide in Gaza,” said Tlaib in a statement on social media on Monday. “H.R. 2633 is an extremist disgrace. Republicans and any Democrats who vote for this should forever keep [Nelson] Mandela’s name out of their mouths.”
The bill effectively says that the U.S. should punish South Africa for its criticism of Israel’s genocide, including its genocide case against Israel in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and referral of Israeli officials to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes in Gaza. The bill also names cooperation with China and Russia as a reason to reexamine ties — though South Africa also maintains close ties with U.S. allies.
RELATED NEWS:
News
Human Rights
Israeli Knesset Overwhelmingly Passes Motion Calling for West Bank Annexation
“This is unambiguously illegal, and they’re proud of it,” said US Rep. Rashida Tlaib of the nonbinding measure.
by Sharon Zhang
Truthout
Other Democrats have criticized the bill as counterproductive, saying that it would only push South Africa closer to adversaries by cutting ties with the U.S. They also criticized the Trump administration’s decision to establish a supposed refugee program for white Afrikaners that was reportedly explicit in only welcoming white people who already experience privilege in the country compared to the majority Black population.
Israel was once close with South Africa, in the apartheid era. Since the fall of South Africa’s apartheid regime, however, leaders have been critical of Israel and its apartheid against Palestinians.
Trump administration officials and U.S. lawmakers have taken numerous steps to retaliate against international figures and institutions in order to shield Israel from any shred of consequences for its genocide.
Earlier this month, the Trump administration sanctioned UN Special Rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese for her continued advocacy for Palestinian rights.
This follows the Trump administration’s sanctions on ICC officials like chief prosecutor Karim Khan, after the House overwhelmingly passed a bill calling for the measure, over the ICC’s issuing of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former military leader Yoav Gallant — warrants that the U.S. has openly flouted.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Sharon Zhang
Sharon Zhang is a news writer at Truthout covering politics, climate and labor. Before coming to Truthout, Sharon had written stories for Pacific Standard, The New Republic, and more. She has a master’s degree in environmental studies. She can be found on Twitter and Bluesky.
Support our work: https://democracynow.org/donate/sm-de...
Peter Beinart - "Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning" | The Daily Show
The Daily Show
July 28, 2025
VIDEO:
Other Democrats have criticized the bill as counterproductive, saying that it would only push South Africa closer to adversaries by cutting ties with the U.S. They also criticized the Trump administration’s decision to establish a supposed refugee program for white Afrikaners that was reportedly explicit in only welcoming white people who already experience privilege in the country compared to the majority Black population.
Israel was once close with South Africa, in the apartheid era. Since the fall of South Africa’s apartheid regime, however, leaders have been critical of Israel and its apartheid against Palestinians.
Trump administration officials and U.S. lawmakers have taken numerous steps to retaliate against international figures and institutions in order to shield Israel from any shred of consequences for its genocide.
Earlier this month, the Trump administration sanctioned UN Special Rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories Francesca Albanese for her continued advocacy for Palestinian rights.
This follows the Trump administration’s sanctions on ICC officials like chief prosecutor Karim Khan, after the House overwhelmingly passed a bill calling for the measure, over the ICC’s issuing of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former military leader Yoav Gallant — warrants that the U.S. has openly flouted.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Sharon Zhang
Sharon Zhang is a news writer at Truthout covering politics, climate and labor. Before coming to Truthout, Sharon had written stories for Pacific Standard, The New Republic, and more. She has a master’s degree in environmental studies. She can be found on Twitter and Bluesky.
Peter Beinart - "Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning" | The Daily Show
The Daily Show
July 28, 2025
VIDEO:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1RWiSZUJxc
#DailyShow #Israel #Gaza
Editor-at-large of "Jewish Currents," who writes "The Beinart Notebook" on Substack, Peter Beinart sits down with Jon Stewart to discuss his book, "Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning," and speaking out against Israel. They talk about learning from Jewish history to be the saviors rather than the oppressors, America and the U.N.’s failure to hold Benjamin Netanyahu accountable, the urgency of engaging in critical discourse with other Jews, and how listening to Palestinian stories can illuminate the dehumanizing conditions.
#DailyShow #Israel #Gaza #Palestine
#DailyShow #Israel #Gaza
Editor-at-large of "Jewish Currents," who writes "The Beinart Notebook" on Substack, Peter Beinart sits down with Jon Stewart to discuss his book, "Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning," and speaking out against Israel. They talk about learning from Jewish history to be the saviors rather than the oppressors, America and the U.N.’s failure to hold Benjamin Netanyahu accountable, the urgency of engaging in critical discourse with other Jews, and how listening to Palestinian stories can illuminate the dehumanizing conditions.
#DailyShow #Israel #Gaza #Palestine
July 27, 2025
VIDEO:
The Majority Report w/ Sam Seder
Watch the Majority Report live Monday–Friday at 12pm EST on YouTube OR via daily podcast at http://www.Majority.fm Live-streamed on July 25, 2025
Watch the Majority Report live Monday–Friday at 12pm EST on YouTube OR via daily podcast at http://www.Majority.fm Live-streamed on July 25, 2025
We’re joined by Zeteo News Editor-in-Chief Mehdi Hasan to discuss the mass starvation in Gaza, the ongoing Epstein cover-up, and his recent appearance on Jubilee’s Surrounded. https://zeteo.com/ https://www.house.gov/representatives... https://www.senate.gov/senators/senat...
Trump's $10 Billion Coverup ft. Mini Timmaraju, David Cay Johnston & Paul Butler| The Joy Reid Show
The Joy Reid Show
July 26, 2025
VIDEO:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT3ASj9v-bU
#JoyReidShow #JoyAnnReid #TheJoyReidShow
Joy Reid and her panel—including legal expert Paul Butler, journalist David Cay Johnston, and advocate Mini Timmaraju—break down Donald Trump’s shocking $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch over their reporting on Jeffrey Epstein. The discussion explores Trump’s legal threats, the unreleased Epstein files, Attorney General Pam Bondi’s role in suppressing evidence, and the disturbing parallels between Trump’s rhetoric and authoritarian tactics. The conversation then shifts to examining MAGA's obsession with Epstein while challenging Trump's base to push for genuine transparency and accountability.
/ @thejoyreidshow #JoyReidShow #JoyAnnReid #TheJoyReidShow #JoyReid #JoyReidYouTube #trumplawsuit #epsteincoverup #MAGAaccountability #BondiBlockade#MurdochvsTrump
Chapters: 0:00
Trump's $10B Lawsuit Threat 4:20
Why WSJ won't settle:
Discovery risks for Trump 8:15
The REAL Epstein Files Demand 12:30
Trump's Bizarre Epstein Letter 16:00
Epstein's Extortion Racket 20:00
Epstein's Suspicious Death 24:19
Joy's Direct MAGA Appeal 27:31
Closing
ABOUT JOY REID:
Joy-Ann Lomena Reid (AKA Joy Reid) is a best-selling American author, political journalist and TV host. She was a national correspondent for MSNBC and is best known for hosting the Emmy-nominated, NAACP Award-winning political commentary and analysis show, The ReidOut, from 2020 to 2025. Her previous anchoring credits include The Reid Report (2014–2015) and AM Joy (2016–2020).
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/28/us/politics/trump-harvard-payment.html
Harvard Is Said to Be Open to Spending Up to $500 Million to Resolve Trump Dispute
The sum sought by the government is more than twice as much as the $200 million fine that Columbia University said it would pay when it settled its clash with the White House last week.
The sum sought by the government is more than twice as much as the $200 million fine that Columbia University said it would pay when it settled its clash with the White House last week.
Listen to this article · 8:20 minutes
Neither Harvard nor the government has publicly detailed the types of terms they might find acceptable for a settlement. Credit: Sophie Park for The New York Times
by Michael C. BenderAlan Blinder and Michael S. Schmidt
[Michael C. Bender, Alan Blinder and Michael S. Schmidt have been covering the Trump administration’s attacks on Harvard.]
July 28, 2025
New York Times
Harvard University has signaled a willingness to meet the Trump administration’s demand to spend as much as $500 million to end its dispute with the White House as talks between the two sides intensify, four people familiar with the negotiations said.
According to one of the people, Harvard is reluctant to directly pay the federal government, but negotiators are still discussing the exact financial terms.
The sum sought by the government, which recently accused Harvard of civil rights violations, is more than twice as much as the $200 million fine that Columbia University said it would pay when it settled antisemitism claims with the White House last week. Neither Harvard nor the government has publicly detailed potential terms for a settlement and what allegations the money would be intended to resolve.
President Trump has privately demanded that Harvard pay far more than Columbia. The people who described the talks and the dynamics surrounding them spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential negotiations.
Although the two sides have made progress toward a deal, Harvard is also skeptical of Columbia’s agreement to allow an outside monitor to oversee its sweeping arrangement with the government. Harvard officials have signaled that such a requirement for their own settlement could be a redline as a potential infringement on the university’s academic freedom.
University officials, though, concluded months ago that even if they prevailed in their court fight against the government, a deal could help Harvard to avoid more troubles over the course of Mr. Trump’s term.
The timing was unclear for when the administration and Harvard might reach an accord, but the university is expected to demand that any deal be tied to the federal lawsuit it brought against the government in April.
Mr. Trump said in June that his administration might strike an agreement with Harvard “over the next week or so.” Although that time frame has lapsed, the president has privately told aides that he will not green-light a deal unless the nation’s oldest and wealthiest university agrees to spend many millions of dollars.
The president’s focus on financial terms reflects a shift in strategy for the administration, which spent the first months of its assault on higher education highlighting the prospects of reorienting the industry’s perceived ideological tilt. Although the White House has tied federal research funds to its quest for negotiations with top schools since the winter, Mr. Trump’s focus on the financial conditions of any settlements emerged more recently.
Harvard declined to comment on Monday.
A White House spokesman, Harrison W. Fields, said on Monday that the administration’s “proposition is simple and common sense: Don’t allow antisemitism and D.E.I. to run your campus, don’t break the law, and protect the civil liberties of all students.”
Mr. Fields added that the White House was “confident that Harvard will eventually come around and support the president’s vision, and through good-faith conversations and negotiations, a good deal is more than possible.”
The Trump administration publicly depicted last week’s settlement with Columbia as a template for bargaining with Harvard and other universities it has targeted. And, indeed, higher education executives have spent days dissecting the fine print of Columbia’s agreement, a wide-ranging deal that goes far beyond addressing antisemitism. Many have focused on a provision that said no part of the settlement “shall be construed as giving the United States authority to dictate faculty hiring, university hiring, admissions decisions or the content of academic speech.”
Although some people assailed Columbia for agreeing to the deal, others saw the arrangement as a necessity and a model for others to consider.
“They didn’t admit wrongdoing — it’s a classic settlement,” said Donna E. Shalala, who was the health secretary under President Bill Clinton and led four schools, including the University of Miami and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “You don’t admit wrongdoing, and you preserve your right to continue as an institution.”
Mr. Trump, Dr. Shalala said, had a long record of “transactional” bargaining with powerful institutions.
“The details are less important than getting the deal and getting the win,” she said. “So if you know that when you go into a negotiation that it’s less ideological than it is getting a win, then you can get a win on both sides.”
Harvard is now weighing its own calculations. But it faces a different range of considerations than Columbia, including its outsize standing in American life, its legal battle with the government and its insistence that it will not surrender its independence to any government.
“No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” Harvard’s president, Alan M. Garber, wrote in April, an early signal that the university might resist oversight like what the Trump administration has envisioned.
Harvard sued soon after Dr. Garber released his statement and after the Trump administration began to strip the university of billions of dollars in federal research money.
Just last Monday, a federal judge in Boston appeared deeply skeptical in a hearing about the government’s tactics against Harvard.
Although the judge, Allison D. Burroughs, did not immediately issue a decision in the case, her barrage of questions suggested serious doubts about the government’s efforts to tie research funding to accusations of antisemitism.
Mr. Trump repeatedly criticized Judge Burroughs after the hearing, where the university’s negotiations with the White House were not substantively discussed.
“Harvard wants to settle, but I think Columbia handled it better,” Mr. Trump said to reporters on the South Lawn of the White House on Friday.
His administration has not always insisted on payments from elite universities to settle disputes with the government.
When the administration cut a deal this summer with the University of Pennsylvania over accusations that the Ivy League school had violated civil rights laws by allowing a transgender person onto its women’s swim team, Penn agreed to apologies and policy changes but no financial penalties.
But the administration has been eyeing Harvard’s wealth for months, and Trump aides believe that the university is able to pay much more than Columbia did. Columbia’s $200 million fine will go to the Treasury, a White House official said last week, until Congress decides how to spend it.
In April, when a government lawyer sent Harvard’s legal team an array of potential actions by the university, one was the possibility of Harvard agreeing to a lien on its assets so the government could recoup federal dollars “in event of noncompliance in the future.”
The idea, included in a document that became public in connection with Harvard’s lawsuit against the government, gained little traction. When the administration sent Harvard a list of demands later that month, the notion of a lien was not mentioned.
Harvard has an endowment valued at about $53 billion. But most of the endowment is restricted, meaning that university leaders are limited in how they can tap a war chest that has long animated Mr. Trump and his aides. In a memorandum this month, Harvard’s leaders wrote that a series of actions from Washington — including an increase in the excise tax on endowments and the administration’s quest to eliminate grant funding to Harvard — could affect the university’s budget by close to $1 billion a year.
“We hope that our legal challenges will reverse some of these federal actions and that our efforts to raise alternative sources of funding will be successful,” the Harvard officials wrote. “As that work proceeds, we also need to prepare for the possibility that the lost revenues will not be restored anytime soon.”
Columbia’s agreement with the federal government was intended to restart the flow of federal grant money, which is essential to top research universities. About 11 percent of Harvard’s revenue comes through federally sponsored research.
Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS:
Michael C. Bender is a Times correspondent in Washington.
Alan Blinder is a national correspondent for The Times, covering education.
Michael S. Schmidt is an investigative reporter for The Times covering Washington. His work focuses on tracking and explaining high-profile federal investigations.
A version of this article appears in print on July 29, 2025, Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: Harvard Open To a Settlement Of $500 Million. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper
by Michael C. BenderAlan Blinder and Michael S. Schmidt
[Michael C. Bender, Alan Blinder and Michael S. Schmidt have been covering the Trump administration’s attacks on Harvard.]
July 28, 2025
New York Times
Harvard University has signaled a willingness to meet the Trump administration’s demand to spend as much as $500 million to end its dispute with the White House as talks between the two sides intensify, four people familiar with the negotiations said.
According to one of the people, Harvard is reluctant to directly pay the federal government, but negotiators are still discussing the exact financial terms.
The sum sought by the government, which recently accused Harvard of civil rights violations, is more than twice as much as the $200 million fine that Columbia University said it would pay when it settled antisemitism claims with the White House last week. Neither Harvard nor the government has publicly detailed potential terms for a settlement and what allegations the money would be intended to resolve.
President Trump has privately demanded that Harvard pay far more than Columbia. The people who described the talks and the dynamics surrounding them spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential negotiations.
Although the two sides have made progress toward a deal, Harvard is also skeptical of Columbia’s agreement to allow an outside monitor to oversee its sweeping arrangement with the government. Harvard officials have signaled that such a requirement for their own settlement could be a redline as a potential infringement on the university’s academic freedom.
University officials, though, concluded months ago that even if they prevailed in their court fight against the government, a deal could help Harvard to avoid more troubles over the course of Mr. Trump’s term.
The timing was unclear for when the administration and Harvard might reach an accord, but the university is expected to demand that any deal be tied to the federal lawsuit it brought against the government in April.
Mr. Trump said in June that his administration might strike an agreement with Harvard “over the next week or so.” Although that time frame has lapsed, the president has privately told aides that he will not green-light a deal unless the nation’s oldest and wealthiest university agrees to spend many millions of dollars.
The president’s focus on financial terms reflects a shift in strategy for the administration, which spent the first months of its assault on higher education highlighting the prospects of reorienting the industry’s perceived ideological tilt. Although the White House has tied federal research funds to its quest for negotiations with top schools since the winter, Mr. Trump’s focus on the financial conditions of any settlements emerged more recently.
Harvard declined to comment on Monday.
A White House spokesman, Harrison W. Fields, said on Monday that the administration’s “proposition is simple and common sense: Don’t allow antisemitism and D.E.I. to run your campus, don’t break the law, and protect the civil liberties of all students.”
Mr. Fields added that the White House was “confident that Harvard will eventually come around and support the president’s vision, and through good-faith conversations and negotiations, a good deal is more than possible.”
The Trump administration publicly depicted last week’s settlement with Columbia as a template for bargaining with Harvard and other universities it has targeted. And, indeed, higher education executives have spent days dissecting the fine print of Columbia’s agreement, a wide-ranging deal that goes far beyond addressing antisemitism. Many have focused on a provision that said no part of the settlement “shall be construed as giving the United States authority to dictate faculty hiring, university hiring, admissions decisions or the content of academic speech.”
Although some people assailed Columbia for agreeing to the deal, others saw the arrangement as a necessity and a model for others to consider.
“They didn’t admit wrongdoing — it’s a classic settlement,” said Donna E. Shalala, who was the health secretary under President Bill Clinton and led four schools, including the University of Miami and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “You don’t admit wrongdoing, and you preserve your right to continue as an institution.”
Mr. Trump, Dr. Shalala said, had a long record of “transactional” bargaining with powerful institutions.
“The details are less important than getting the deal and getting the win,” she said. “So if you know that when you go into a negotiation that it’s less ideological than it is getting a win, then you can get a win on both sides.”
Harvard is now weighing its own calculations. But it faces a different range of considerations than Columbia, including its outsize standing in American life, its legal battle with the government and its insistence that it will not surrender its independence to any government.
“No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,” Harvard’s president, Alan M. Garber, wrote in April, an early signal that the university might resist oversight like what the Trump administration has envisioned.
Harvard sued soon after Dr. Garber released his statement and after the Trump administration began to strip the university of billions of dollars in federal research money.
Just last Monday, a federal judge in Boston appeared deeply skeptical in a hearing about the government’s tactics against Harvard.
Although the judge, Allison D. Burroughs, did not immediately issue a decision in the case, her barrage of questions suggested serious doubts about the government’s efforts to tie research funding to accusations of antisemitism.
Mr. Trump repeatedly criticized Judge Burroughs after the hearing, where the university’s negotiations with the White House were not substantively discussed.
“Harvard wants to settle, but I think Columbia handled it better,” Mr. Trump said to reporters on the South Lawn of the White House on Friday.
His administration has not always insisted on payments from elite universities to settle disputes with the government.
When the administration cut a deal this summer with the University of Pennsylvania over accusations that the Ivy League school had violated civil rights laws by allowing a transgender person onto its women’s swim team, Penn agreed to apologies and policy changes but no financial penalties.
But the administration has been eyeing Harvard’s wealth for months, and Trump aides believe that the university is able to pay much more than Columbia did. Columbia’s $200 million fine will go to the Treasury, a White House official said last week, until Congress decides how to spend it.
In April, when a government lawyer sent Harvard’s legal team an array of potential actions by the university, one was the possibility of Harvard agreeing to a lien on its assets so the government could recoup federal dollars “in event of noncompliance in the future.”
The idea, included in a document that became public in connection with Harvard’s lawsuit against the government, gained little traction. When the administration sent Harvard a list of demands later that month, the notion of a lien was not mentioned.
Harvard has an endowment valued at about $53 billion. But most of the endowment is restricted, meaning that university leaders are limited in how they can tap a war chest that has long animated Mr. Trump and his aides. In a memorandum this month, Harvard’s leaders wrote that a series of actions from Washington — including an increase in the excise tax on endowments and the administration’s quest to eliminate grant funding to Harvard — could affect the university’s budget by close to $1 billion a year.
“We hope that our legal challenges will reverse some of these federal actions and that our efforts to raise alternative sources of funding will be successful,” the Harvard officials wrote. “As that work proceeds, we also need to prepare for the possibility that the lost revenues will not be restored anytime soon.”
Columbia’s agreement with the federal government was intended to restart the flow of federal grant money, which is essential to top research universities. About 11 percent of Harvard’s revenue comes through federally sponsored research.
Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS:
Michael C. Bender is a Times correspondent in Washington.
Alan Blinder is a national correspondent for The Times, covering education.
Michael S. Schmidt is an investigative reporter for The Times covering Washington. His work focuses on tracking and explaining high-profile federal investigations.
A version of this article appears in print on July 29, 2025, Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: Harvard Open To a Settlement Of $500 Million. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper
