Raw Story

Tank tracks still fresh on his field in southern Gaza’s coastal area of Al-Mawasi, Nedal Abu Jazar lamented the damage war has wrought on his trees and crops.

“Look at the destruction,” the 39-year-old farmer told AFP, holding an uprooted tomato plant.He pointed to his greenhouse’s metal frame and its white plastic sheeting strewn across the plot, inside an area designated a humanitarian zone by the Israeli army “People were sitting peacefully on their farmland … and suddenly tanks arrived and fired at us, and then there were (air) strikes.”

Abu Jazar said the Israeli operation in late June destroyed about 40 dunams (10 acres) of land and killed five labourers.

His is not an isolated case. Across Gaza, 57 percent of agricultural land has been damaged since the war began, according to a joint assessment published in June by the UN’s agriculture and satellite imagery agencies, FAO and UNOSAT.

The damage threatens Gaza’s food sovereignty, Matieu Henry of the Food and Agriculture Organization told AFP, because 30 percent of the Palestinian territory’s food consumption comes from agricultural land.

“If almost 60 percent of the agricultural land has been damaged, this may have a significant impact in terms of food security and food supply.”

The Gaza Strip exported $44.6 million worth of produce in 2022, mainly to the West Bank and Israel, with strawberries and tomatoes representing 60 percent of the total, according to FAO data.

That number fell to zero after the October 7 attack on southern Israel that resulted in the deaths of 1,195 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on Israeli figures.

Israel’s retaliatory offensive has killed at least 38,098 people, also mostly civilians, according to figures from the Hamas-run territory’s health ministry.

The damage assessment on the agricultural land comes as the UN’s hunger monitoring system estimated in June that 96 percent of Gaza faces high levels of acute food insecurity.

Contacted by AFP, the Israeli army said it “does not intentionally harm agricultural land”.

In a statement, it said Hamas “often operates from within orchards, fields and agricultural land."

No work, no income

The impact is worse in the Palestinian territory’s north, where 68 percent of agricultural land is damaged, although the southern area encompassing parts of Al-Mawasi has seen the most significant increase in recent months due to military operations.

UNOSAT’s Lars Bromley told AFP the damage is generally “due to the impact of activities such as heavy vehicle activity, bombing, shelling, and other conflict-related dynamics, which would be things like areas burning.”

Near the southern city of Rafah, 34-year-old farmer Ibrahim Dheir feels helpless after the destruction of 20 dunams (five acres) of land he used to lease, and all his farming equipment with it.

“As soon as the Israeli bulldozers and tanks entered the area, they began bulldozing cultivated lands with various trees, including fruits, citrus, guava, as well as crops like spinach, molokhia (jute mallow), eggplant, squash, pumpkin and sunflower seedlings,” he said, before listing more damage in a testimony of the area’s past agricultural abundance.

Dheir, whose family exported its produce to the West Bank and Israel, now feels destitute.

“We used to depend on agriculture for our livelihood day by day, but now there’s no work or income.”

Lasting damage

Farmer Abu Mahmoud Za’arab also finds himself with “no source of income”.

The 60-year-old owns 15 dunams (3.7 acres) of land on which crops and fruit trees used to grow.

“The Israeli army passed through the land, completely wiping out all trees and crops,” he told AFP.

“They bulldozed and shelled the land, turning it into barren pits.”

The harm done to farmland in Gaza will last far beyond tank tracks and explosions, said Bromley of UNOSAT.

“With modern weaponry, a certain percentage is always going to fail. Tank shells won’t explode, artillery shells won’t explode … so clearing that unexploded ordnance is a massive task,” he said.

It will require “probing every centimetre of the soil before you can allow the farmers back onto it”.

Despite the risks, Dheir wants to return to farming.

“We want the war to stop and things to return to how they were so we can farm and cultivate our lands again.”

John Ullyot, a former aide to Donald Trump, was scolded Sunday after he attacked Vice President Kamala Harris as a "DEI hire."

During a panel discussion on Newsmax, Ullyot claimed that former President Barack Obama was running a "monarchy" that would select the Democratic presidential nominee.

"Barack Obama, with his henchmen, his aides, have been running the show under President Biden, and now you've got a situation where it's really up to him who it's gonna be," Ullyot said. "But bottom line here is that it's gonna go to Kamala, if anybody, because she was a DEI hire."

"She was hired because President Biden said when he was a candidate that he wanted to hire a woman to be his number two, and then after the BLM riots, then he got a lot of pressure to have a Black woman from a lot of Black women's groups, and he did that," he added.

Newsmax host Sarah Williamson and Democratic columnist Ellis Henican condemned Ullyot's remarks.

"Okay, the DEI thing I strongly disagree with here, but this is not my place to have the disagreement," Williamson said.

"Yeah," Henican agreed. "You shouldn't talk, John, you shouldn't talk like that. It makes you sound like a racist. Don't talk like that."

ALSO READ: Why I'm sticking with Joe Biden

"Look, it's the party that embraces DEI," Ullyot replied. "Those are the guys that put identity above qualifications."

"Don't talk like that," Henican insisted. "In the end, the reality is that whichever one of these candidates is being focused on, that's who's in trouble."

"So this week, it's been Biden," he continued. "He had a rotten debate performance. But next week, Trump will say something like, oh, maybe we should execute the daughter of the former Republican vice president."

Over the weekend, Fox News contributor Charlie Gasparino also attributed Harris's vice presidency to Diversity ­Equity and Inclusion policies.

"The American public may soon be subjected to DEI writ large in the next president of the United States, if Kamala Harris finds her way to the top of the Democratic ticket while Joe Biden wilts away as the party’s presidential nominee after his horrific ­debate performance," Gasparino wrote for the New York Post.

Watch the video below from Newsmax or at the link.

On Friday, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) amplified a baseless, debunked claim that President Joe Biden was experiencing a medical episode on board Air Force One. Now, the senator is getting roasted for his tweet by both journalists and commentators.

At 7:41 PM Eastern Time yesterday, far-right activist Laura Loomer tweeted: "Joe Biden is reportedly having a medical emergency on Air Force One right now" and that "press access has been removed." However, this was quickly debunked by X/Twitter's Community Notes function, which read that Biden "did NOT have a medical emergency on Air Force One following the Wisconsin rally and was perfectly fine throughout...and exited on his own after touching down in Delaware."

In response, Lee tweeted: "If Biden is having a medical emergency at this moment — on board Air Force One or otherwise — that raises ... a lot of questions." That tweet, which was posted at 8:09 PM Eastern Time last night, is still currently up on his official account.

White House pool reporter Sophie Hills of the Christian Science Monitor shed additional light on the president's health at the time of Loomer's initial tweet, writing that he stepped off of Air Force One at 7:34 PM and left with his motorcade afterward, before stopping at his home in Wilmington, Delaware at 7:50. This means Biden was already at home roughly 20 minutes before Lee sent his tweet.

Former Trump administration official Monica Crowley also tweeted Loomer's lie, only to backtrack and later tweet that there were "conflicting reports about Biden on AF1 but appears to be untrue."

Lee's amplification of Loomer's fictitious "medical emergency" resulted in harsh pushback on social media. Civil rights lawyer Leslie Proll called the Utah Republican's tweet "unconscionable." Biden campaign advisor James Singer accused him of "s—posting lies." And Joe Perticone – a contributor to never-Trump conservative website the Bulwark, noted the absurdity of a sitting U.S. senator relying on disinformation artists for news.

"The most concerning thing about a US senator’s judgment and intelligence is that he believes he’d first be hearing something as important as this from… Monica Crowley and Laura Loomer," Perticone wrote.

Former WGN reporter Jennifer Schulze also sharply criticized Lee and urged news outlets to "take a moment to cover this story about a sitting US Senator spreading malicious lies about the President."

"I know it's business as usual for republicans but it's still newsworthy," she tweeted.

Journalist Jamie Dupree noted the time difference between Lee's tweet and the time in the pool report when Biden was picked up by the presidential motorcade and driven home.

"Sen. Mike Lee R-UT tweeting out baseless medical rumors about Biden tonight. In fact, Biden was already back home (lid at 7:56 pm) by the time Lee was pressing the send button," Dupree posted.

Former President Donald Trump is now aiming to use the Supreme Court's recent immunity decision to justify tossing his classified documents case in the Southern District of Florida. But at least one legal expert isn't sure his gambit will succeed.

According to the 6-3 decision in Trump v. United States, a president is afforded absolute broad immunity from criminal prosecution, so long as any possible violation of laws is done as an "official act." Trump's attorneys may now attempt to have the Mar-a-Lago case thrown out by claiming that the former president's decision to store classified documents at his Florida home was done before he left his office as an official act. And given the fact that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon — who is presiding over the case — was appointed to the federal bench by Trump, some in the legal world told NBC News that she may side with him and grant the presumption of immunity.

"The outcome will depend on whether Judge Cannon characterizes Trump’s decision at the end of his Presidency to transport the documents to Mar-a-Lago as an official act of designating the documents as personal, and whether she views that act as an essential premise on which the criminal charges depend," Pepperdine University law professor Joel Johnson told NBC.

But one Florida-based prosecutor isn't so sure that Trump will be able to convince even his own appointed judge. Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg told the network that Cannon's colleagues in the federal judiciary likely won't see eye to eye with her interpretation and application of the immunity ruling should she take the former president's side.

"If Judge Cannon wishes to adopt his reasoning, I expect she will be reversed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals," he said.

Cannon has already been overruled by the 11th Circuit in past decisions pertaining to the Mar-a-Lago case. When she appointed a special master to review the FBI's seizure of documents following its 2022 raid on the former president's home, the 11th Circuit vacated that ruling, saying she "improperly exercised equitable jurisdiction."

"The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant," an 11th Circuit panel wrote at the time. "Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so."

Regardless of how Cannon applies the immunity ruling to the classified documents case, Loyola Marymount University law professor Justin Leavitt argued that the Supreme Court's recent decision will mean even more delays before the actual trial.

"I have no doubt that there will be another set of motions filed and that Judge Cannon will need ample time to work through those motions," Leavitt told NBC. "The primary impact of today’s decision on the classified documents cases is just to reconfirm that it’s extremely unlikely to be heard before November."

Click here to read NBC's report in full.

Reacting to the Supreme Court's presidential ruling that will hand Donald Trump unfettered power to do as pleases under the cover of presidential immunity should he be re-elected, a former FBI official warned the agency could become an agent of terror under the revenge-minded ex-president.

Appearing on MSNBC on Saturday, former assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI, Frank Figliuzzi was candid about the agency's history of trampling on Americans' civil rights and claimed it would pale in comparison to what Trump would order it to do.

"I think we have to look at the intelligence community and federal law enforcement and here is why," the ex-FBI agent began. "[Supreme Court Justice] Samuel Alito has responded to the dissenters in this position and saying, 'Oh come on, you guys are bringing up extreme hypotheticals,' is what he called them as if we will have a good man in place who will always do the right thing despite having the presumption of immunity."

"Well, guess what/" he continued. "It is not extreme because all we have to do is look back in history to the early and mid-1970s when the American people began to find out that their FBI and their DOJ and their CIA were spying unlawfully without court authorization on American people. And who were those American people? Anybody J. Edgar Hoover and the administration felt was a threat."

Continuing in that vein he added, "This is what happens when the executive branch literally has no rules they need to follow and, I am telling you, we will see it again because Trump has said he will seek revenge on those he deems a threat."

Watch below or at the link.

MSNBC 07 06 2024 09 04 44 youtu.be

Newly-minted Prime Minister Dick Schoof faced a baptism of fire at the opening of the Dutch parliament over remarks by two cabinet ministers about a conspiracy theory with neo-Nazi roots.

Schoof was inaugurated on Tuesday with pomp and fanfare to head a coalition government dominated by far-right leader Geert Wilders and his anti-immigration Freedom Party, the PVV.

Two days later, the new Dutch premier's first lower house debate spiralled into chaos when not only the opposition, but Wilders himself aimed his arrows at Schoof, his own choice for the top job.

No amount of preparation could ready Schoof, a veteran career civil servant, for his first appearance within the bear pit of Dutch parliamentary politics, marked by interruptions and sniping on X, formally known as Twitter.

At the centre of the controversy are two cabinet ministers from Wilders's PVV: new Asylum and Migration Minister Marjolein Faber and Foreign Trade and Development Aid Minister Reinette Klever.

Both have in the past spoken about the so-called "omvolking" -- the Dutch term for the "great replacement" theory that supposes that Europe's white population is being deliberately replaced by immigrants.

While both ministers have "distanced themselves" from the term, they maintained that there was a "worrying demographic development" in the Netherlands, where the ruling coalition now wants to implement the "strictest immigration policy ever."

Isolated

But Schoof reiterated during the debate: "I repeat, this government is against discrimination, racism and exclusion."

The Dutch left-wing opposition accused Schoof of tolerating those who have made "conspiratorial" and "racist" remarks -- which also included criticizing the wearing of veils -- within his ministerial team.

Wilders himself then launched a virulent attack on Schoof for not defending his ministers for "being made out as racists", calling Schoof's response "weak."

Schoof, not aligned to any party and who has been appointed by a four-party coalition of the PVV, the Liberal VVD, the farmer-friendly BBB and the new centre-right NSC, appeared isolated on all sides.

Yet on Friday at his first weekly press conference, Schoof denied there was discord within cabinet relationships.

"I repeat what I said. This government is for all Dutch people. It's against racism, discrimination or any conspiracy theories."

At the same time, Schoof reiterated he had "full confidence in his ministers."

Leiden politics professor Ruud Koole told AFP the first debate was a litmus test to see how far the PVV's junior coalition parties would go to normalize extreme views within Wilders' party.

"It turns out very far," he said.

"The statements made in the past by PVV ministers about the 'great replacement' have been swept under the carpet," Koole said.

"All three the other coalition parties have accepted to have the 'great replacement' rephrased as a 'demographic phenomenon'," he said.

'Disgusting'

Wilders, who claimed a stunning victory in last year's parliamentary elections, continues to lead his party as an MP.

He gave up on ambitions to become Dutch prime minister after other coalition parties threatened to withdraw because of his anti-Islam and eurosceptic views.

Wilders said he wanted to limit immigration to the Netherlands "as much as possible", but he has indeed called the "great replacement" theory "disgusting".

But during the debate, he aimed his barbs at Schoof for not defending his party's ministers.

Wilders's outburst was immediately criticized by the junior coalition partner leaders of the VVD and the NSC on X.

"I was particularly struck by how defensive Wilders was and how he tried in a frantic and authoritarian way to deny the racism that his party clearly propagates in various ways," said Sarah Bracke, sociology professor at the University of Amsterdam.

"It is intellectually and politically untenable to continue to deny that the ideas at the heart of the PVV, and also of this government, are not racist, or that it would be enough to no longer mention the term 'great replacement' to make extremist and racist ideas disappear," she told AFP.

"If Mr Wilders continues to criticise his prime minister, this could lead to Schoof's resignation," added Leiden University's Koole.

"But we are not there yet," he said.

© 2024 AFP