In 2025, the city of Los Angeles Fire Department admitted that a full 54% of its calls for service were related to homeless encampments. In essence, first responders, both police and fire, are continuously devoting an ever-growing share of their calls for service to mental health disturbances in homeless housing developments and encampments that represent a threat to public safety.
[T]he pro-Hamas lobby is circulating a mass petition calling for the expulsion of the Israeli Medical Association from the World Medical Association.
The petition – which blames the Israeli doctors for alleged bias and omits any mention of Hamas' war crimes – was amplified in June by once-respected UK medical journal The Lancet, clearly crossing the line between professional medical publication and blatant propaganda.
Far from providing medical evidence or reflecting professional ethics, the petition, as echoed by The Lancet, recycles political slogans and ancient blood libels, accusing Israel of "genocide" and the destruction of Gaza's health system. Of course, there is no mention of the overwhelming evidence of Hamas's systematic militarization of hospitals and other civilian medical facilities – all actual war crimes.
In promoting this campaign, The Lancet copied the accusations of fringe activist NGOs including the People's Health Movement (PHM), Doctors for Gaza (Artsen voor Gaza), and the "Health Advisory Council" of the so-called Jewish Voice for Peace. Even a cursory review makes clear that the petition touted by this ostensible medical journal is not remotely about medical ethics.
By parroting these NGOs and violating fundamental requirements for a scientific journal, The Lancet does not make even a minimal attempt to examine their credibility and embrace of terror.
Unsurprisingly, this isn't the first time journal editor Richard Horton has used The Lancet to publish anti-Israel propaganda. From 2001 to 2014, a majority of the publication's output regarding Israeli and Palestinian issues – 58.3% of its 264 items – took the form of political commentary rather than medical research.
The Lancet dismisses any mention of Hamas' responsibility for Gaza's medical plight as mere Israeli claims, despite extensive documentation.
Additionally, neither this medical journal nor the NGOs leading the petition have ever asked any other civilian medical associations to condemn their home states' military operations. The list includes Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Sudan, and other actual violators of human rights and international law.
With Horton and The Lancet again at the forefront of a hate directed at Israeli doctors, and under the thin facade of scientific publishing, an effective response is necessary that will get the attention of the journal's Dutch publisher, Elsevier.
Among the many orchestrated campaigns to demonize Israel, the targeting of Israeli doctors and medical professionals under the false flag of "human rights" is one of the most transparently cynical. Specifically, the pro-Hamas lobby is circulating a mass petition calling for the expulsion of the Israeli Medical Association from the World Medical Association.
The petition – which blames the Israeli doctors for alleged bias and omits any mention of Hamas' war crimes – was amplified in June by once-respected UK medical journal The Lancet, clearly crossing the line between professional medical publication and blatant propaganda.
Far from providing medical evidence or reflecting professional ethics, the petition, as echoed by The Lancet, recycles political slogans and ancient blood libels, accusing Israel of "genocide" and the destruction of Gaza's health system. Of course, there is no mention of the overwhelming evidence of Hamas's systematic militarization of hospitals and other civilian medical facilities – all actual war crimes.
In promoting this campaign, The Lancet copied the accusations of fringe activist NGOs including the People's Health Movement (PHM), Doctors for Gaza (Artsen voor Gaza), and the "Health Advisory Council" of the so-called Jewish Voice for Peace. Even a cursory review makes clear that the petition touted by this ostensible medical journal is not remotely about medical ethics. Instead, it's one more part of the heinous effort to isolate and delegitimize Israeli institutions in the wake of Hamas's October 7 massacre. In essence, this is another front of Hamas's war against the people and institutions of the Jewish state.
By parroting these NGOs and violating fundamental requirements for a scientific journal, The Lancet does not make even a minimal attempt to examine their credibility and embrace of terror. For example, PHM's newly-appointed global coordinator, Aziz Rhali, publicly celebrated October 7 as "Victory Day," and participated in mob violence supporting "Palestinian resistance" immediately afterward. He has also expressed support for Hezbollah, and its late leader, arch-terrorist Hassan Nasrallah.
Unsurprisingly, this isn't the first time journal editor Richard Horton has used The Lancet to publish anti-Israel propaganda. From 2001 to 2014, a majority of the publication's output regarding Israeli and Palestinian issues – 58.3% of its 264 items – took the form of political commentary rather than medical research. This culminated in the 2014 publication of a notorious "Open Letter for the People of Gaza," a propaganda screed whose hate-filled co-authors (doctors) had emailed colleagues a message entitled "CNN Goldman Sachs & the Zio Matrix" that promoted a video featuring white supremacist Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke among other antisemitic materials.
After calls for Horton's removal gained high visibility, he embarked on an Israel apology tour and vowed change. He even published a special edition on Israeli medical advances. But following Hamas' October 7 atrocities, he regressed to his old poisonous ways, culminating in last month's NGO-led boycott petition. The articles repeating accusations of "war crimes" including "genocide" have no legal or factual basis, and were obviously fabricated to divert attention from Hamas's mass slaughter. Doing its part in this theater of the absurd, The Lancet dismisses any mention of Hamas's responsibility for Gaza's medical plight as mere Israeli claims, despite extensive documentation.
Additionally, neither this medical journal nor the NGOs leading the petition have ever asked any other civilian medical associations to condemn their home states' military operations. The list includes Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Sudan, and other actual violators of human rights and international law. The petition's premise is thus a glaring double standard.
The consequences of this trajectory extend well beyond Israel. As politics increasingly overtakes scientific institutions, physicians and researchers are pressured to conform to ideological and immoral litmus tests unrelated to medicine. As a result, academic journals, professional associations, and humanitarian organizations risk becoming seen by serious medical professionals as simply another form of mass manipulation.
With Horton and The Lancet again at the forefront of a hate directed at Israeli doctors, and under the thin facade of scientific publishing, an effective response is necessary that will get the attention of the journal's Dutch publisher, Elsevier. At its core, The Lancet is a business like any other, and when readers stop reading, subscribers pull their subscriptions, top researchers stop submitting articles, and advertisers go elsewhere, the leadership change will follow.
Prof. Gerald Steinberg is founder and president of the NGO Monitor research institute, and professor emeritus of political science at Bar Ilan University.
Several disenrolled students attributed their delayed tuition payments to waiting for private scholarships and other financial aid promises from Howard.
Just a few weeks before the first day of class, Howard University retracted the admission of 502 incoming freshmen, whom it says failed to pay tuition on time. Now, New York is opening up its public university system to affected students and offering $800 credits to offset non-refundable deposit costs.
The would-be incoming Howard students were notified July 22 by the school of their dis-enrollment, and many took to social media afterward to lament the situation.
Several attributed their delayed tuition payments to waiting for private scholarships and other financial aid promises from Howard, a private school and one the country's Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul on Monday announced that affected students could instead apply to schools within the State University of New York system or the City University of New York. While the initiative guarantees admission only to New York residents, out-of-state individuals can receive expedited late admissions review at SUNY and CUNY campuses that have open space, according to Hochul.
“Hundreds of students, including New Yorkers, are scrambling and scared since they’ve been dis-enrolled from their intended college just a few weeks before classes are set to begin,” Hochul said. Each student will also receive an $800 credit from Howard in an effort to offset deposits, the governor said.
While the exact number of students is unclear, New York sent more students to the university than any state except Maryland last year, according to Howard's enrollment data. The school enrolled about 11,000 total undergraduate students last fall, with an average annual tuition of $38,000 for undergraduates who live on campus.
The prestigious university, which boasts a 35% acceptance rate and defines itself as the “leading producer of African-American students,”released a statement July 23 saying students who didn’t meet payment, scholarship and other financial aid deadlines were notified on July 22 that their enrollments were retracted.
“We recognize that some students with pending outside scholarships and other financial aid resources may have been impacted by the recent enrollment update,” the statement reads, adding that the school sent “multiple detail communications” via emails, personalized financial aid information, videos and preparation sessions from March to July to inform students and families of the steps necessary for securing enrollment for the fall semester — which begins Aug. 17.
“Howard has been my everything," incoming freshman Isabella Williams, of Alabama, told nbcwashington.com.
Williams said she had scholarships to cover the rest of the balance and had sent documents to Howard informing the school that the money was coming in August.
"I put in so many hours, late nights, to apply for scholarships, to make sure that I could go to the school of my dreams comfortably. And to have that ripped away isn't fair," Williams also told the news outlet.
Laverne Mickens, who runs The Scholarship College Mama LLC (an educational consulting and scholarship coaching business) told the Associated Press: “People are devastated,” “Parents are saying: ‘Can you help us? Howard unenrolled us.’”
Howard's Senior Vice President for Enrollment Management, Keyana Scales, attributes the situation to a lack of resources.
“What we have since realized is that there are a number of students who have indicated that they have actually submitted the information or attempted to satisfy our requirements,” Scales said. “I think that the lesson learned here, to be completely candid, is we need to double down on resources."
Howard is now in the midst of re-enrolling dozens of students while school officials review appeals; as of Monday, 40 had been readmitted for the fall.
Interim President Wayne Frederick said in a CNN interview on July 26 that while it’s not uncommon for higher education institutions to rescind enrollments of incoming students who miss deadlines, Howard was stricter about enforcing the cutoff for this semester than in previous years.
Notable figures who attended the school include former Vice President Kamala Harris, first African American Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, “Black Panther” leading actor Chadwick Boseman and Nobel Prize-winning author Toni Morrison.
Katherine Pugh is a reporter for Just the News. Follow her on X for more coverage.
New York City socialist mayor Zohran Mamdani is back in his element. After admitting that he cannot fulfill his campaign pledge to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mamdani returned to his class warfare narrative. This week, he taunted the city’s highest-earning taxpayers with a letter informing them of another special tax awaiting them in the Big Apple.
As wealthy citizens flee the city, Mamdani strongly suggests that those who remain are going to get burned by his promised “warmth of collectivism.” In doing so, he repeated a socialist myth about how the wealthiest taxpayers are not paying “their fair share.”
Mamdani went on X to tell those with second homes in New York City worth more than $5 million that “you’ve got mail” and a “new pied-a-terre tax.” He gleefully declared, “The best city in the world deserves the best parks, libraries, and schools in the world. That’s only possible when we all pay our fair share.”
The fair share myth is a virtual mantra among socialist and Democratic leaders, from Mamdani to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). In my book, “Rage and the Republic,” I address the false claim that the wealthy are not “paying their fair share.”
In fact, the top 10 percent already pay more taxes than the bottom 90 percent combined.
In 2023, the top 1 percent paid an estimated 38.4 percent of all federal individual income taxes. One can certainly raise the need for additional taxes to support public works, but it is simple demagoguery to claim that the wealthy do not pay their fair share when the top 10 percent pay an estimated 75 percent of federal income taxes. The U.S. income tax system is already the most progressive in the developed world, even before additional New York state and city taxes are added in.
The demonization of the wealthy is one of the oldest tactics of politicians seeking to empower themselves by harnessing mob rage.
Combined with pledges of free stuff under socialism, it creates a dangerous delusion among disgruntled citizens.
Another common fable has been repeated by socialists such as Darializa Avila Chevalier, the prison abolitionist who won a recent primary for Congress in New York. This radical, who once boasted how she wiped her hands on the American flag in lieu of a napkin, was pressed on whether there has ever been a “successful model of socialism anywhere in the world outside the U.S., in terms of both human rights and widespread economic justice.”
She responded by citing Sweden and Norway, as other figures such as Sanders have done before her. Indeed, the claim of successful Scandinavian socialist systems is a sort of Marxist bedtime fairytale, told to children about a workers’ paradise in quaint Nordic fishing villages.
But Sweden’s experience only shows the limits of socialism even in a relatively small nation. Decades ago, after disastrous results to its economy, Sweden turned away from the very kind of socialist theories increasingly fashionable in the U.S. today.
Norway has large public welfare systems, it is true. But there is a very specific reason for that: It has enormous direct oil revenues supporting a very small population. The Norwegian state produces about 120 barrels of oil for every man, woman and child living in the country. If the U.S. could produce that much oil per person through a state-controlled entity, it would be more oil than the entire world produces today and worth enough money to replace all federal individual and corporate income tax revenue.
In truth, countries like Denmark and Sweden strongly embrace capitalist principles today. They are listed among the most capitalist nations on Earth — in some rankings ahead of the U.S.
Indeed, many of their leaders have expressed disbelief or amusement at longstanding claims by American leftists about their being socialist nations. In 2015, Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen observed, “I know that some people in the U.S. associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.”
Likewise, the former Swedish Social Democratic Minister of Finance Kjell‐Olof Feldt said, “That whole thing with democratic socialism was absolutely impossible. It just didn’t work.”
But to candidates eager to prove their revolutionary bona fides, none of that matters.
Even mainstream hopefuls such as California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) are now making the bizarre claim that capitalism is no longer working. It also does not matter that, in supporting Mamdani’s new tax, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) heralded how it could raise $500 million, despite reports showing a loss of billions in annual revenue as wealthy taxpayers flee the state.
Amid a rash of capital flight, many ask why Mamdani would want to continue taunting the wealthy and portraying them as freeloaders. The fact is, wherever it gets a foothold, socialism becomes self-perpetuating.
Wherever ruinous policies destroy an economy, demand increases for government services and welfare. Citizens become more dependent on government as wealth is diminished.
The most vivid example of the new socialist fabulism came this week from the new British prime minister, Andy Burnham. He declared that he wants to restore the policies of 40 years ago, before the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher.
In his own version of promising the “warmth of collectivism,” Burnham declared, “The country surrendered control of the essentials — housing, water, energy, transport — and left people exposed to higher costs.”
Burnham’s account leaves out that the supposed golden age under Labour Prime Minister James Callaghan, which he was referencing, led in 1977 to the so-called “winter of discontent.”
Those policies destroyed the British economy, and the nation was faced with the humiliation of being rescued by the International Monetary Fund as if it were some banana republic.
With a record like that, it is little surprise Mamdani and his allies prefer to focus on socialist mythologies rather than realities.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.“
This just in: China is not a friend of the United States. They may be a trading partner, but they are not our friends. Now, as further proof of that, we can point to evidence that the Chinese Communist Party may have been paying for complimentary news coverage from quite a laundry list of American legacy media figures.
Natalie Winters is a Washington correspondent for the Bannon War Room. On Monday, with now less than 100 days until the midterm elections, Natalie Winters has broken quite the story: It seems American legacy media members have been taking trips, funded by the Chinese Communist Party, to China - in return, of course, for favorable reporting.
That's quite the quid pro quo.
That's quite an assertion, and Natalie Winters has quite the list of names to go with it:
That's just a sample. There are a lot more. And cast your optics over the media outlets implicated: The New York Times, CNN, the Associated Press, The Hill, and (shocker, I know) MS NOW/MSNBC.
What's more, Ms. Winters has information on what these "journalists" were treated to in China:
Note that a tour of a Chinese military installation isn't something offered to just any tourist. Meanwhile, Chinese nationals here in the United States have been remarkably curious about our military installations.
Remember when I said there was a quid pro quo? Soon enough, the free tours ended, the legacy media figures flew home, and went back to their offices and their keyboards. Then, the payback came:
There's a lot more, all of which you can find on Natalie Winters' Substack report here.
Read More: Watch As Tom Homan Shuts Down Fake News Attack on ICE
'Protection Racket': Tech Giants Reportedly Suppressed Negative Platner News for Seven Months
The (China-United States Exchange Foundation) CUSEF network also intersected repeatedly with the political apparatus surrounding Joe Biden.
Posts
All Comments
