By Garth Friesen

When President Donald Trump returned to the White House last week, many expected him to target China or address border security with Mexico. Instead, Trump surprised the world by reiterating his plan to expand U.S. territory by acquiring Greenland from Denmark and incorporating Canada as the 51st state. This agenda has naturally drawn criticism from allies, many of whom view it is unfeasible. While Trump’s aggressive approach and bombastic rhetoric may be quickly dismissed, it is worth understanding why the United States is expressing such bold geopolitical ambitions. The reasons are a compilation of economics, national security, and global power.

Canada As The 51st State?

Canada’s vast 9.98 million square kilometers makes it the second-largest country globally and a natural extension of U.S. territory from a geographical perspective. The two nations already share the longest undefended border in the world, but Trump has described this boundary as an artificially drawn line that hinders economic integration and security cooperation.

Economically, Canada is America’s second-largest trading partner and number one export market. Trade is governed by the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, signed by the first Trump administration. TD Bank estimates the U.S. is on track to record a trade deficit with Canada of roughly $45 billion (U.S.) in 2024, which is just 5% of the U.S. overall trade deficit. When Canadian energy exports are stripped out, the trade deficit becomes positive: in 2023, 78% of all Canadian production went to the U.S., and 60% of all U.S. crude oil imports came from Canada. Therefore, energy is a huge part of trade between the two countries. However, given the relatively small share of the overall deficits and the fact that U.S. energy production continues to grow, there are likely other motivations for wanting to make Canada the 51st state.

Trump argues that annexation would eliminate trade barriers, streamline resource extraction, and strengthen North American energy independence relative to the rest of the world. However, national and economic security interests are a bigger motivation.

Control over the border is one issue. For example, Trump has expressed concerns about the flow of fentanyl and illegal immigrants across the U.S.-Canada border. Integrating the two nations would enhance border security. Resource control is another issue. The Trump administration sees access to Canada’s large store of natural resources, including oil, minerals, and freshwater, as vital for U.S. economic security.

The main prize would be the Arctic. Nearly 40% of Canada’s land mass is considered Arctic. By integrating Canada, the U.S. could strengthen its dominance in global trade and Arctic geopolitics. This move would counterbalance the growing Russian and Chinese presence in the Arctic while securing control over critical shipping routes.

Trump is most likely aware that making Canada the 51st state is a long shot. However, his aggressive tactics, which threaten the relationship between the two countries in the short run, could result in a negotiated deal that would allow more integration rather than less.

[…]

Greenland: A Strategic Arctic Asset

Greenland, an autonomous region of Denmark, is the world’s largest island, spanning 2.16 million square kilometers. It is sparsely populated with just 56,916 residents.

Similar to Canada, Greenland’s proximity to important Arctic shipping lanes makes it a geopolitical asset. The island also hosts Pituffik Space Base, a key U.S. military installation used for missile defense and surveillance operations.

Economically, Greenland is rich in untapped rare earth elements such as dysprosium, neodymium, europium, and yttrium — critical materials for AI hardware, quantum computing technologies, renewable energy systems, and advanced defense equipment. The Tanbreez project alone contains an estimated 28 million tonnes of rare earth oxides, nearly 30% being heavy rare earth elements. These resources could significantly reduce U.S. reliance on China, which currently controls over 80% of global rare earth element production.

The U.S. appears quite serious about gaining control of Greenland, or at minimum, achieving a much closer economic and political alliance. “This is not just about Greenland,” National Security Adviser Mike Waltz told Fox News host Jesse Watters on January 8 this year. “This is about the Arctic. You have Russia that is trying to become king. This is about critical minerals, this is about natural resources.It’s oil and gas. It’s our national security. It’s critical minerals.”

[…]

The Geopolitical Importance Of The Arctic

The Arctic has become a focal point of global competition due to its abundance of natural resources, emerging shipping routes, and strategic military significance. The region contains an estimated 13% of undiscovered global oil reserves and 30% of natural gas reserves. As mentioned above, critical rare earth elements are also abundant in the Arctic region.

Shifting ice patterns are opening new maritime shipping routes, including Canada’s Northwest Passage and Russia’s Northern Sea Route. These pathways could significantly shorten shipping time by 30% to 50% between Asia, Europe, and North America. Control over these routes would provide an economic and political advantage to the U.S.

The Arctic has significant military importance, intersecting North America, Europe and Eurasia. The U.S. military has a presence in Greenland, but so does its adversaries. Russia, which controls 53% of the Arctic coastline, has heavily militarized its territories with airbases and naval forces, while China has declared itself a “near-Arctic state” to justify its growing investments in Greenland’s mining sector. It also holds substantial stakes in major Russian Arctic LNG projects. By acquiring Canada and Greenland, the United States would secure dominance over these resources and routes while countering Russian and Chinese ambitions.

[…]

Implications Of A Unified U.S., Canada And Greenland

If Trump succeeds in integrating these territories into the United States, it would fundamentally reshape global geopolitics. The combined landmass would total approximately 21,553,522 square kilometers, making it the world’s largest country. This new entity would surpass Russia by over 4 million square kilometers and dwarf China’s land area of 9.6 million square kilometers.

Economically, control over Arctic resources brought by a unification would leverage the United States in global energy markets while securing a technological edge through access to rare earth elements critical for AI growth and advancements in quantum computing.

[…]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/garthfriesen/2025/01/26/why-trump-wants-greenland-and-canada-strategic-and-economic-goals/

By Dr Mercola

Story at-a-glance

Colin Todhunter (first published in 2015)

If physical violence is to be used only as a final resort, a dominant class must seek to gain people’s consent if it is to govern and control a population. It must attempt to legitimize its position in the eyes of the ruled over by achieving a kind of ‘consented coercion’ that disguises the true fist of power. This can be achieved by many means and over the years commentators from Gramsci to Althusser and Chomsky have described how it may be done.

However, one of the most basic and arguably effective forms of control is eugenics/ depopulation, a philosophy that includes reducing the reproductive capacity of the ‘less desirable’ sections of a population.

There is a growing fear that eugenics is being used to get rid of sections of the world population that are ‘surplus to requirements’.

And it is a legitimate fear, not least because there is a sordid history of forced/covert sterilizations carried out on those deemed ‘undesirable’ or ‘surplus to requirements’, which reflects the concerns of eugenicists who have operated at the highest levels of policy making. From early 20^th century ‘philanthropists’ and the Nazis to the nascent genetics movement and rich elites, by one means or another ridding the planet of the great unwanted masses has always been fairly high on the ‘to do’ list (see this informative piece)

Millionaire US media baron Ted Turner believes a global population of two billion would be ideal, and billionaire Bill Gates has pledged hundreds of millions of dollars to improve access to contraception in the Global South.

Gates has also purchased shares in Monsanto valued at more than $23 million at the time of purchase. His agenda is to help Monsanto get their genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into Africa on a grand scale. In 2001, Monsanto and Du Pont bought a small biotech company called Epicyte that had created a gene that basically makes the male sperm sterile and the female egg unreceptive.

Bill Gates’ father has long been involved with Planned Parenthood:

“When I was growing up, my parents were always involved in various volunteer things. My dad was head of Planned Parenthood. And it was very controversial to be involved with that.”

The above quotation comes from a 2003 interview with Bill Gates.

Planned Parenthood was founded on the concept that most human beings are reckless breeders. Gates senior is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and a guiding light behind the vision and direction of the Gates Foundation, which is heavily focused on promoting GMOs in Africa via its financing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA).

According to a report published by La Via Campesina in 2010, 70 percent of AGRA’s grantees in Kenya work directly with Monsanto and nearly 80 percent of the Gates Foundation funding is devoted to biotechnology.

The report also explains that the Gates Foundation has pledged $880 million to create the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), which is a heavy promoter of GMOs.

The issue of genetic engineering cannot be fully understood without looking at the global spread of US power. The oil-rich Rockefeller dynasty helped promote the ‘green revolution’, which allowed the US to colonise indigenous agriculture across large parts of the planet. By projecting power through the WTO, IMF and World Bank, Washington has been able to make food and agriculture central to its geopolitical strategy of securing global dominance.

As with the control of food and agriculture, the US also regards depopulation as a potential geo-strategic tool (see this) in the quest for control of global resources. What better way to achieve this via a (GM) tampered-with food system that US agribusiness has increasingly come to dominate?

What better way to achieve this than with ‘spermicidal corn’ for example? In Mexico, there is concern about biopharmaceutical corn. Some years ago, Silvia Ribeiro, of the ETC organization, stated:

“The potential of spermicidal corn as a biological weapon is outrageous, since it easily interbreeds with other varieties, is capable of going undetected and could lodge itself at the very core of indigenous and farming cultures. We have witnessed the execution of repeated sterilization campaigns performed against indigenous communities. This method is certainly much more difficult to trace.”

While most of the literature on GMOs is concerned with the impacts of crops that have been genetically modified to deal with pests or herbicide spraying, there are very worrying trends regarding plants being genetically modified to contain industrial pharmaceuticals or possess possible contraceptive traits.

The world’s problems are not being caused by overpopulation, as Turner states, but by greed and a system of ownership and global power relations that ensures wealth flows from bottom to top. The issue at hand should not be about stopping population growth in its tracks but about changing a socially divisive global economic system and the unsustainable depletion of natural resources.

Millionaires like Ted Turner believe it should be a case of carry on consuming regardless, as long as the population is cut.

This is the ideology of the rich who regard the rest of humanity as a problem to be ‘dealt with.’ He says there are “too many people using too much stuff.” He couldn’t be more wrong. For instance, developing nations account for more than 80 percent of world population, but consume only about one third of the world’s energy. US citizens constitute 5 percent of the world’s population but consume 24 percent of the world’s energy.

We should be weary of a politically and militarily well-connected biotech sector which has ownership of technology that allows for the genetic engineering of food and a gene that could be used (or already is) for involuntary sterilization. From covert vaccination campaigns to germ warfare and geo-engineering, sections of the population around the world have too often been sprayed on, injected or exposed to harmful processes to induce sterility, infertility or to merely see the outcome of exposures to radiation, bacteria or some virus. It is for good reason some conflate GMOs and bio-terror.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/sowing-the-gmo-seeds-of-depopulation-2/5450801

Craig Murray

Two key points the discussion has mostly missed:

1) It has been a bipartisan Justice Department policy for years to attempt to establish that the First Amendment does not apply to non-US citizens

2) Why has the Trump administration chosen Mahmoud Khalil out of thousands of potential victims; about as problematic a test case as can be imagined?

First Amendment Protection

The outrageous arrest and detention of Mahmoud Khalil by Immigration Control Enforcement is a new front in the widespread attack on free speech on Palestine in the USA. Indeed free speech on Palestine is under severe attack throughout almost the entire western world.

There is no shortage of excellent commentary and analysis on the Khalil case and its multiple ramifications. The characterisation of criticism of Israel as anti-semitism, the fake narrative of a threat to Jewish students, the denial of the right to protest, the attack on academic freedom, these are all aspects of the case which shed a horrifying light on the devastating effect on civil liberties of explicit Zionist control of the political system.

The same can be said of the arbitrary detention, the lack of access to lawyers and the characterisation of dissent as “terrorism”.

But it has not been much discussed that the central legal issue in the case – whether non-US citizens have First Amendment rights or whether free speech only applies to US citizens – is not an innovation by the Trump administration.

That non-US citizens are not protected by the First Amendment was the key issue pursued by Biden’s Justice Department in the extradition hearings of Julian Assange.

Indeed it was the insistence of English Court of Appeal judge Dame Victoria Sharp that the US must confirm that Assange did have First Amendment protection, that led directly to the Biden administration dropping the case and agreeing a plea deal, rather than give the assurance which Sharp requested.

Key paragraphs of the relevant judgment are here

…

…

The British judges took the view that not to apply the First Amendment to non-citizens would breach the principle of non-discrimination (as guaranteed in the European Convention of Human Rights), and I am sure they were right.

This is a very worrying doctrine which the US Executive is attempting to enforce. But Trump did not initiate it – Biden tried it too, on Assange.

Why Mahmoud Khalil?

Thousands of foreign students in the USA have spoken out and demonstrated against the genocide in Gaza. I am sure that amongst them there will be one or two individuals who can plausibly be depicted as jihadist, who may indeed have actual anti-semitic tendencies and who are only in the US on a student visa.

So why pick on Mahmoud Khalil, who is none of these things?

He has a pregnant American wife and is in possession of a Green Card residency. Those factors may conceivably play into the First Amendment argument in his favour, if judges are looking to fudge the issue.

In addition to which, while he undoubtedly was in the leadership group of protestors at Columbia University, he appears to have played a responsible role in liaising with authorities. The cherry on the cake is that he is a former British Government employee, having worked in the British Embassy in Lebanon, on Syrian affairs.

This is where the story starts to become very murky. I was told by Resistance-linked contacts in Lebanon that not only was Khalil not viewed as pro-Resistance to Israel while there, he was believed to be involved in UK government attempts to undermine the Assad regime by promotion of jihadist groups.

Free Palestine TV, which is Lebanon-based, has the same information.

It is important to understand how deeply the UK has been involved in anti-Syrian activity in Lebanon. Training and equipping of al-Nusra/ISIS/HTS units was carried out by British special forces based at Rayak airbase in the Bekaa Valley, who were certainly still there in January after HTS conquered Damascus.

Contrary to some reports, Mahmoud Khalil would not have worked for MI6 in the Embassy. MI6 stations do not employ foreign nationals. He would have worked for the Political and Information Sections, under diplomats who cooperated closely with MI6 or in some instances were active “undeclared” members of MI6.

Middle East Eye describes Khalil’s role in the Embassy as a “programme manager” running Chevening scholarships. I know this programme extremely well. While I have no reason to doubt Khalil did this, it would amount to no more than 10% of anybody’s time and would not require the UK security clearance which the article states that Khalil received.

The simple truth is that anybody working in good faith in the British Embassy in Lebanon can be no friend of the resistance to Israel. Everything the British Embassy do in Lebanon is intrinsically linked to the overriding goal of promoting the interests of Israel, particularly through weakening Hezbollah, and this is especially true when it comes to programmes into Syria running out of Beirut.

So how did Khalil move from British government operative to Palestinian student activist?

And then, why on earth did the Trump regime pick him for its first high-profile deportation?

I can see three plausible explanations for Khalil’s behaviour:

1) He was never pro-British but was infiltrating the Embassy for the Palestinians

2) He was never pro-Palestinian but was infiltrating the protest movement for the British government

3) He was not very political but was moved recently to activism by the genocide in Gaza

Of these, option 3) seems to me the most plausible, though all are certainly possible.

It would be a delicious irony if the Trump regime had arrested a British agent by accident, but this seems to me unlikely. I do not think MI6 would run a Palestinian agent in the USA without informing the CIA – although they may have done if there were a specific concern that the CIA would leak the identity.

If Khalil were a British agent he could have been arrested for protection if there were concerns he had been “made”, or he could have been arrested because the Americans found out and were furious at not being informed. But I do not think these are the likely scenarios.

It seems to me much more probable that a once-complacent Khalil changed his mind and became more – righteously – radical due to the genocide in Gaza.

In which case the motive for choosing him as the target for arrest is very plain. Both the US and UK will be worried about revelations Khalil might make about support to jihadists in Syria from his time working on this in Lebanon. Whisking him into incommunicado detention, whilst maximum pressure is applied to persuade him to keep silent, is then an obvious move.

It is important for freedom of speech and for the rights in general of immigrants in the USA that Mr Khalil is free. It is obviously profoundly important for him and his family. I do not want anything I have written to detract from that.

But the puzzle of why such an extremely complicated target for the test case was chosen, when there exist far lower-hanging fruit, is one that needs to be considered. I hope I have offered some possible lines of thought you find useful.

---

The case of #MahmoudKhalil is a perfect example of the limits of Liberalism and collaboration with the Zionist Empire in hopes of gaining some equity or change in the power structures. For those who don’t know, Khalil is a Syrian citizen who collaborated with the Imperialist plot against his homeland, and worked for the UK embassy in Lebanon coordinating destabilization programs. He also worked in the NGOs in the USA designed to drive the Syrian diaspora youth astray from decolonization, and into the arms of Wahhabi and Ikhwani collaborationist rule.

As for his role at Columbia University, he was a go-between agreed upon by the Zionist Administration and the Palestine liberation supporters; ie he was not a member of the movement, and only a messenger. He was also against the Hind Hall movement and actions.

So, here is Mahmoud Khalil, a man who sold his country to the wolves for a few measly dollars, who acted as reasonable messenger of Zionist power to the Palestinians at Columbia, and all he got in return was to be disappeared by Zionist Master in the White House.

Moral of the story here, as an Arab or Muslim, no matter how much you suck up to Zionists, they will never treat you as an equal human, and the more you suck up to them, the more they will humiliate you when you outlive your usefulness.

We hope Mr Khalil returns home safely to his family, but you should all know what you are supporting, and to do so in spite of his shortcomings, because his disappearing even though he is a tool, fool or even agent, signals that all Arabs and Muslims in the USA could be treated even worse.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2025/03/16/the-curious-case-of-mahmoud-khalil/

Screenshot: Fox Business / Youtube

By Jim Hoft

Attorney General Pam Bondi has promised again that the American people will finally receive long-awaited answers on the Epstein client list, the January 6th investigation, and the long-classified records related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Pam Bondi is encountering growing impatience from MAGA supporters due to the absence of charges against prominent elites.

In an interview with Maria Bartiromo, Bondi made it clear that the government’s history of stonewalling crucial information is coming to an end under the new administration.

During the interview, Bartiromo pointed out that MAGA supporters are furious over the lack of transparency regarding Jeffrey Epstein’s associates.

It can be recalled that the so-called “Epstein Files: Phase One” was a colossal disappointment — heavily redacted pages handed over to a select group of MAGA influencers.

Bondi had hyped the release on Fox News with Jesse Watters the night before, promising “flight logs, names, and a lot of information” about Epstein’s depraved criminal network.

Conservatives braced for a bombshell that would finally unmask the elite swamp creatures tied to the notorious pedophile. Instead, they got a dud.

Speaking with Maria Bartiromo, Bondi confirmed that critical information has been withheld, and she is determined to get to the truth.

Speaking with Maria Bartiromo, Bondi confirmed that critical information has been withheld, and she is determined to get to the truth.

Maria Bartiromo:
The MAGA group is mad that they don’t know more about the Epstein files. The MAGA group is mad that they don’t know more about the January 6th investigation. Are you going to give us any more information on these two issues?

Pam Bondi:
Sure. First, to the Epstein issue—I’m mad that I didn’t have more information on Epstein. I was given 200 pages of documents. I’ve asked Director Patel—he came in after that, of course. I’d asked for those documents prior to Kash coming in. Kash is going to get me all the information; I’ve asked him to find out why I didn’t receive all those documents, and he didn’t receive all those documents.

We’ve now found out, of course, that they were in New York. We’ve received a truckload of documents and evidence, and Kash is going to give me a deadline on when he can go through that to protect, of course, the victims of sex trafficking who are wrapped into this. He’s going to give me a deadline on when he can get this, and we will get out as much as we can, as fast as we can, to the American people because they deserve to know.

Same with January 6th. We’re all working on JFK right now. We will be working on Martin Luther King. All of these things that the President promised, we will be doing. They can try to hide documents from us, but they can’t.

It might take a little longer, but we will find them, and we will release them to the American people because it’s about transparency.

[…]

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/03/ag-pam-bondi-provides-update-epstein-files-january/

Economist/Futurist Catherine Austin Fitts Heightens DOGE Warnings

Daily Clout (2025)

In this episode, Naomi Wolf invite financial analyst Catherine Austin Fitts to outline her major concerns Elon Musk’s current DOGE program. Overall Fitts is really happy about many of Trump’s executive orders, especially those that reduce corrupt and increase transparency.

She’s also sympathetic to the pressure Trump (and RFK Jr) face in dealing with the Wall Street and Zionist lobby. That’s why it’s really important that we call them out when they betray the MAGA and MAHA principles they campaigned on

Recent polls reveal that the majority of Americans have ceased to support DOGE, especially when they see department heads resign rather than break the law by obeying Trump’s.

As Fitts points out, the DOGE website provides little evidence for most of their claims (see No 150-year-olds Aren’t Collecting Social Security Benefits). She’s also concerned that DOGE has violated many privacy and information technology laws and that Musk may be trying to clandestinely privatize federal data collection. At the moment there is nothing (but the courts) to stop him from using our personal, financial and medical data to benefit his AI company, xAI, and/or to build some kind of private social credit database.

She refers to a January 27 2025 announcement about Musk integrating xAI with Peter Thiel’s Palantir AI platform. This is concerning, given that Palantir, a big data analytics company that collaborates with the NSA to enhance their surveillance capacity, has already uploaded all the personal, financial and medical information of Social Security Disability recipients.

According to Fitts, allowing Musk collect any data on Social Security recipients is a possible first step in handing over the Social Security payment system to banks or other private companies. Moreover using xAI to integrate this information with other data sets, enables the creation of a social credit system. In this way, powerful oligarchs could cancel someone’s Social Security for expressing unacceptable political views.

According to Fitts, Musk has already committed a felony by violating federal conflict of interest laws, which forbid any officer or employee of the US government from interceding in matters that benefit their private financial interests.

She’s also really concerned that Trump has fired the White House Ethics Officer and the five inspectors general who were investigating Musk’s companies. The Department of Defense inspector general was investigating Musk for possible use of illicit drugs and secret conversations with Putin. Two of Musk’s companies, Space X and Star Link, have multibillion dollar contracts with the Department of Defense, and both would be highly problematic behaviors for a defense contractor. See Musks Companies Under Investigation by Five Insprectors General. Musk’s average income from his federal contracts is $8 million a day.

Trump has also shut down the Consumer Protection Agency. Consumer Protection Agency

Fitts worries the ultimate goal of Musk and his backers may be to give banks ultimate control over fiscal policy by eliminating the civil service altogether. Unfortunately many  MAGA supporters equate the civil service with the deep state and are unaware of their role in ensuring new congressional laws are implemented. Without them the legislative branch would be helpless in preventing Wall Street from having total control over fiscal policy. At present Congress still has a surprising amount of control over the privately owned Federal Reserve (most importantly the New York Federal Reserve Bank which issues the debt to keep the US government operating).

According to Fitts, the civil service also stands in the way of Musk and his cronies creating the control grid they would need to force all Americans to sign up for digital ID.

At the end of the interview she makes the surprising revelation that US currently owns $500 trillion worth of federal land across the country. This is obviously more than enough to pay of the federal government’ current $36.2 trillion debt. She worries about speculation that some corporate oligarchs may try to purchase the land with cryptocurrency, which amounts to buying it for nothing.

US special envoy Steve Witkoff

This comes amid heightened tensions between “Israel” and Hamas, as the occupation’s ban on aid entering Gaza enters its 10th day, and as “Israel” refuses to move on to the second phase of the ceasefire deal.

The United States has put forward a “bridge” proposal aimed at extending the ceasefire in Gaza through April, beyond Ramadan and Passover, to provide additional time for negotiating a permanent end to the war, the White House announced in a statement on Friday.

According to a statement from their offices, the proposal was presented on Wednesday by US special envoy Steve Witkoff and National Security Council official Eric Trager.

The White House accused Hamas of making “entirely impractical demands” and stalling a deal that would see the extension of the ceasefire in Gaza in return for the release of a US-Israeli captive.

“Hamas is making a very bad bet that time is on its side. It is not,” said the statement.

“Hamas is well aware of the deadline, and should know that we will respond accordingly if that deadline passes,” it pointed out, emphasizing Trump’s previous vows that Hamas would “pay a severe price” for not releasing the captives.

The statement indicated that “Hamas was told in no uncertain terms that this ‘bridge’ would have to be implemented soon- and that dual US-Israeli citizen Edan Alexander would have to be released immediately,” adding, “Unfortunately, Hamas has chosen to respond by publicly claiming flexibility while privately making demands that are entirely impractical without a permanent ceasefire.”

The Palestinian group announced earlier on Friday that it was prepared to release an Israeli-American captive along with the remains of four others, following the resumption of indirect Gaza ceasefire talks with “Israel”.

This closely follows direct talks between Hamas and the United States, where the US envoy to Hamas Adam Boehler said his meetings with Hamas were “very helpful,” as “Israel” tightens its siege on Gaza.

Senior Hamas official Taher al-Nono told Reuters on March 9 that recent meetings between Hamas leaders and US captives negotiator Adam Boehler have primarily focused on the release of an American-Israeli dual national held by the group in Gaza.

Al-Nono, political advisor to the leader of Hamas, confirmed the direct talks with the US, noting that they had occurred over the past week in the Qatari capital, Doha.

“Several meetings have already taken place in Doha, focusing on releasing one of the dual-nationality prisoners. We have dealt positively and flexibly, in a way that serves the interests of the Palestinian people,” al-Nono pointed out.

He further explained that both sides had also addressed how to implement the phased agreement aimed at ending the war on Gaza.

“We informed the American delegation that we don’t oppose the release of the prisoner within the framework of these talks,” the Palestinian official noted.

Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, emphasized last week that securing the release of Edan Alexander, a 21-year-old from New Jersey believed to be the last remaining American captive held by Hamas in Gaza, was a “top priority”.

Alexander, who served as a soldier in the Israeli occupation military, has been in captivity since the outbreak of the war.

On March 8, “Israel” and Hamas indicated they were preparing for the next phase of ceasefire talks, with mediators working to extend the fragile 42-day truce that began in January.

On March 9, “Israel’s” Energy Minister, Eli Cohen, announced that he had instructed the Israel Electric Corporation (IEC) to cease electricity sales to Gaza, a move he claimed was aimed at pressuring Hamas to release captives.

However, the measure is unlikely to have an immediate impact, as “Israel” had already cut off the power supply to Gaza at the start of the war. It could, however, affect a wastewater treatment plant currently relying on the supply.

Al-Nono praised Witkoff for his significant role in securing the ceasefire agreement on January 19 that brought an end to the war on Gaza.

“We hope that he (Witkoff) will work to succeed in the negotiation of the second phase,” he concluded.

[…]

Via https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/us-proposes–bridge–plan-to-extend-gaza-ceasefire

Diplomats from Iran, Russia and China are meeting in Beijing for talks on Tehran’s nuclear programme that could lead to negotiations following years of delay.

Beijing said the three countries hope to find a “diplomatic” solution to Iran’s nuclear issue, Chinese state media reported on Friday.

“In the current situation, we believe that all parties should maintain calm and restraint to avoid escalating the Iran nuclear situation, or even walking towards confrontation and conflict,” China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters before the meeting.

The meeting was attended by Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who “exchanged views on the Iran nuclear issue and other issues of common concern,” according to Chinese media.

Donald Trump, a year into his first term as United States president in 2018, withdrew from a landmark pact Iran reached in 2015 with the US, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany and the European Union, in which Tehran agreed to curb its nuclear programme in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions.

Tehran continued to abide by the terms of the deal – which was considered a milestone for the administration of then-US President Barack Obama – but began slowly rolling back its commitments after Trump ended the deal.

The meeting in Beijing between the three diplomats follows a series of overtures from Trump since his return to the White House in January to resume nuclear talks with Tehran.

The US president this week sent a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calling for new talks but also warning that the US was within its rights to take military action against the country’s nuclear programme.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian responded that he would not negotiate with the US while being “threatened”, and Iran would not bow to US “orders” to talk.

Iran was further enraged after six of the United Nations Security Council’s 15 members – the US, France, Greece, Panama, South Korea and the United Kingdom – held a closed-door meeting this week to discuss its nuclear programme. Tehran said the meeting was a “misuse” of the UN Security Council.

Separately on Friday, Iran also slammed the US for “hypocrisy” after Washington announced new sanctions targeting its oil minister, saying they were “another clear proof of the falsity of these statements and another sign of its hostility to development”.

Ayatollah Khamenei maintains Tehran does not have or want nuclear weapons, but a recent report from the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was close to the requirements for a nuclear bomb.

[…]

Via https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/14/iran-russia-china-discuss-tehrans-nuclear-programme-at-beijing-meeting

St Vincent Times

In a chilling blow to religious freedom, Amish children in New York are now being forced to receive vaccinations against their families’ deeply held beliefs—under threat of massive fines and exclusion from their own private schools.

The ruling, handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on March 3, 2025, marks a dark milestone in government overreach, stripping one of America’s most peaceful religious communities of their constitutional rights.

The Amish, known for their steadfast commitment to faith and self-sufficiency, have long resisted government-mandated medical interventions. For centuries, they have lived apart from modern society, rejecting outside interference in their way of life.

But under New York’s repeal of religious exemptions—a law pushed through in the wake of a 2019 measles outbreak—the Amish were given an impossible choice: violate their conscience by vaccinating their children or face crippling financial penalties and educational exile.

And now, the state has made its position brutally clear. Reports indicate that Amish families and schools have already been hit with fines totaling $118,000 for refusing to comply.

The Second Circuit’s ruling dismissed Amish objections, arguing that the repeal of religious exemptions is “neutral” and applies to all children, regardless of whether they attend public, private, or parochial schools. The court insisted that the law serves a compelling public health interest—despite carving out medical exemptions for those with a doctor’s note while denying the same protection to those with religious objections.

This double standard is glaring. The Amish aren’t asking for special treatment—they’re simply asking to be left alone to live by their faith, a right the First Amendment is supposed to protect.

Reaction to the ruling has been swift and furious. Social media has erupted with outrage, with posts on X calling it a “horrific violation of basic freedoms.” One user warned, “If they can force this on the Amish, no one’s rights are safe.” Another pointed out the hypocrisy: “New York claims it’s about safety, but they’ll let unvaccinated kids in with a doctor’s note—just not a prayer.”

This sentiment underscores a growing concern that the crackdown on religious exemptions is part of a broader effort to erode individual liberties under the guise of public health. Several states, including California, Connecticut, and Maine, have already followed New York’s lead, stripping away religious exemptions in recent years.

The targeting of the Amish is particularly egregious given their insular lifestyle. Unlike large urban communities, Amish schools are small, private, and community-run, posing minimal risk of mass disease outbreaks. Their estimated 25,000 residents in New York live largely apart from mainstream society, making the state’s public health justification for forced vaccination appear flimsy at best.

Despite this, New York officials have leaned on the 2018-2019 measles outbreak—primarily centered in other unvaccinated groups—to justify steamrolling the Amish’s rights. Critics argue this is a manufactured excuse, with the state choosing heavy-handed enforcement rather than reasonable alternatives, such as voluntary vaccination campaigns.

A Legal Precedent with Dangerous Consequences

Legal experts warn that this ruling sets a dangerous precedent. The Amish had based their challenge on Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972), a Supreme Court case that upheld their right to exempt their children from compulsory high school education on religious grounds. But the Second Circuit brushed aside these arguments, claiming that mandatory vaccinations do not fundamentally alter the Amish way of life in the same way.

That reasoning, however, ignores a crucial reality: forcing a child to receive a medical intervention against their parents’ religious beliefs is a direct assault on their autonomy and identity.

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, along with 19 other states, had filed a legal brief supporting the Amish, denouncing New York’s actions as harassment against a group that “wants only to live out their faith amongst themselves.” He warned that the state’s penalties—including reports of threats to seize Amish school property—are blatant violations of First Amendment protections. The court’s refusal to acknowledge these concerns only adds to the growing outrage.

This ruling isn’t just about public health—it’s about government control. By steamrolling religious communities into compliance, the state is setting a precedent that could soon be used against anyone who dares to defy its mandates.

This case is far from settled. Legal challenges are already in motion, and calls for Supreme Court intervention are growing louder. But one thing is clear: the Amish are now on the front lines of the battle for religious freedom in America.

Their quiet resilience in the face of tyranny is a stark reminder that when the government tramples on one group’s rights, it’s only a matter of time before it comes for the rest of us.