Opinion
Climate
Economy
Politics
Rights & Justice
War & Peace
Lawrence Ferlinghetti protesting ICE fascism at City Lights
Further

Pity the Nation/ Whose Shepherds Mislead Them

Amidst plunging polls and righteous rage at his Epstein Memorial Ballroom, the inept manchild faces growing resistance, sublime to ridiculous, to his nascent kingship. Cue anti-ICE whistle kits - “Form a crowd, stay loud" - rainbow church steps, Newsom hawking knee pads, D.C. Jedi suing individual goons, and a successfully mobilized Bay Area, including his iconic bookstore's revival of Lawrence Ferlinghetti's howling edict that his people not "allow their rights to erode/and their freedoms to be washed away."

Trump was already underwater with the lowest approval rating for any president, even him, at this point in his reign - see no jobs, high prices, cancelled SNAP benefits, murdered innocents, rounded-up brown neighbors - before his abrupt, illegal obliteration of the East Wing for a gilded obscenity to host his billionaire suck-ups. For many, the travesty is a bitter echo of what in part got us here: Obama's mocking, gaudy, then-hilarious 2011 vision of a lurid purple "Trump White House, Hotel, Casino, Golf Course" with glitzy tyrant chandeliers and half-naked women welcoming you. Now, of course, we are about to have the execrable real thing, a tacky "abomination," born of his "poisonous bravado," bearing the "bombast (of) a dictator-for-life megalomania vibe."

Despite widespread horror at a now-$300-million, White-House-dwarfing atrocity for fat cats, smirking, clueless Press Barbie touted the ballroom as "of course the main priority" of the "builder-in chief" with a lifetime of bankruptcies to his tawdry name. Still, the outcry was loud enough for some flunkies to attempt an unhinged distraction: a new, racist, trolling Major Events Timeline on the ballroom that lurches from fake history - for 150 years, everyone has "longed for" it - to George Washington, the Oval Office, the Rose Garden to Clinton/Monica, Obama in a turban hosting Muslim Brotherhood extremists, debauched Hunter in a bath tub with cocaine, Biden with topless transsexuals to, straightfaced, Trump's hellacious, gold-blinged redecorating.

Reflecting the same crude regime run by a petty, vengeful bully - who hung along his new "Presidential Walk of Fame" not a portrait of the man he can't admit defeated him but the image of an autopen and just snarled, "You know nothing about nothing" at a reporter questioning him - comes the story from D.C. of Jedi knight Sam O’Hara, 35, who sometimes mocks the masked, armed, camoed thugs parading around his town by walking behind them, playing Star Wars' "The Imperial March" that marks the arrival of Darth Vader, and posts his videos online. Bemused millions have watched his personal protest, audible but not loud, against "a dystopian occupation," but last month he was accosted by one thin-skinned stormtrooper who was not amused.

Going home after work, O’Hara was following four Ohio National Guardsmen when Sergeant Devon Beck turned back to threaten him with calling D.C. cops to "handle" him. The Empire quickly struck back: Police arrived, tightly handcuffed him, argued "this isn't a protest" when he explained himself, and held him for a while before letting him go without charges. Now O'Hara and the ACLU are suing four police and Guardsmen under a law that renders individuals liable for punitive damages for infringing on a plaintiff's Constitutional rights. "The law might have tolerated government conduct of this sort a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away," argued O'Hara, citing the First and Fourth Amendment and a D.C. prohibition on false arrest, but not "in the here and now."

In his complaint, in which he demands a jury trial, O'Hara calls the deployment of military police "a waste of tax dollars, a needless display of force, and a surreal danger" that shouldn't be normalized. Likewise citing a 200-year-old tradition of civilian law enforcement, ACLU senior attorney Michael Perloff defended O'Hara's right to play "The Imperial March" as a "quintessential exercise of free speech." "The government doesn't get to decide if your protest is funny, and can’t punish you for making them the punchline," he said. "That’s really the whole point of the First Amendment." Or, paraphrasing Justice William Brennan on a free nation vs. police state, If you act like an autocrat when you're called an autocrat, you probably are one.

Many others are rising up and acting out in the belief that, argues Rev. Rachel Griffin-Allison, "Silence is not neutral. Silence in the face of harm always sides with the oppressor." The senior pastor of Oak Lawn United Methodist Church in Dallas, she and her congregation took to painting their church steps in rainbow colors after an inane order from Gov. Greg Abbott banning "all political ideologies from our streets," including existing rainbow crosswalks or other "political" pavement designs; he said he wanted to "keep roads safe and free from distraction" - a claim, under threat of cut funding, many called "highly questionable" and, given his law requiring the Ten Commandments in schools, deeply hypocritical. The reverend called it "political bullying."

"A rainbow is not a political statement," she said. "It’s a universal symbol of inclusion, hope, and pride in diversity (representing) a safe space for a community that’s been marginalized. The rainbow is for everyone." Undercutting Abbott's brazen fear-mongering, she noted the multi-hued crosswalks were funded by private donations and approved by the city, and their re-painting action was "not one of defiance, but of faith, a visible witness to the gospel we preach...When the forces of power try to erase symbols of inclusion, the Church has a choice - to retreat into comfort or to step forward in courage. We choose courage. This is not a political act; it’s a pastoral one. It says, 'The love of God meets you exactly as you are.'"

Many elsewhere are also fighting back with courage. In and around besieged Chicago, organizers have rallied groups of hundreds of volunteers to create 30,000 anti-ICE kits packed with warning whistles for ICE sightings, handouts about how and when to use them, and bilingual flyers detailing migrants' rights: "Immigrants keep us moving forward." Last week, when masked agents descended on a Chicago suburb - variously claiming they were looking for an escaped dog, gang member, sex offender - residents texted one another - “ICE IS HERE," "Fucking helicopters," "On our way" - before emerging to scream, film, tail and honk at them. "You don’t belong here,” one yelled. "Our neighbors, our community members, they do belong here.”

In California's diverse, liberal Bay Area, which just won a billionaire-bought reprieve from ICE invasion, officials and residents were organized and mobilized after months of Trump threats and his announcement troops were finally going there to bring down its record-low crime rate and "make it great." Good luck on that With Marvin Gaye blaring, pre-dawn protesters at Alameda's Coast Guard base blocked the entrance, bore signs urging "Protect Our Neighbors/ Protegemos Nuestros Vecinos," and faced off against about 100 agents already there who quickly fired flash-bang grenades, injuring several. Are we great yet? "In the Bay we're involved, and our kids know what's happening," said one father. "They’re going to see they’re not wanted here."

Officials were just as adamant. If ICE was loosed on them, state and city attorneys would be "in court within hours, if not minutes." Newsom, slamming voter suppression and "a direct assault on the rule of law,” vowed to sue "within nanoseconds"; he also added to his satirical, union-supplied Patriot Shop "KNEE PADS FOR ALL CEO’s, UNIVERSITIES, AND GOP BENDING THE KNEE TO DONALD TRUMP." Meanwhile, Steve Bannon's witless, flip-flopping "vehicle of divine providence" called off his "surge" after some tech oligarchs told him to - what, no Fox or Loomer or Goebbels? - and San Francisco's mayor "very nicely" asked him to. At immigration court the next day, Aztec dancers led a cleansing ritual and defiant protesters called for a general strike.

The crisis also sparked the return of a seminal voice as City Lights Books unfurled banners quoting co-founder, poet, veteran, pacifist and "philosophical anarchist" Lawrence Ferlinghetti's “Pity the Nation,” a 2007, George W-era lament against tyranny. Beginning in 1953 and over seven decades - he died age 101 in 2021 - Ferlinghetti nursed the hub of free speech and Beat poets, thinkers and dissenters that was City Lights; he also fiercely defended Allen Ginsberg's 1955 Howl - "I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving, hysterical, naked" - in an obscenity trial that ended in a landmark victory for the First Amendment. Despite "the iron circumstances of the world," Ferlinghetti was always seeking "a renaissance of wonder," and he was not afraid. Be like him, and California, Chicago, D.C., all the rest.

Update: A federal judge in Portland, Oregon rejected Trump's request to lift her order blocking the deployment of goons there, at least for now. And a judge in D.C is still hearing arguments to remove over 2,000 troops from there.

From comedian  Bill Jubran: "Fox News wants you to be afraid." 185K views · 5.8K reactions | This is how Fox News indoctrinated a whole generation. | Bill Jubran www.facebook.com

PITY THE NATION

Pity the nation whose people are sheep
And whose shepherds mislead them

Pity the nation whose leaders are liars
Whose sages are silenced
And whose bigots haunt the airwaves

Pity the nation that raises not its voice
Except to praise conquerors
And acclaim the bully as hero
And aims to rule the world
By force and by torture

Pity the nation that knows
No other language but its own
And no other culture but its own

Pity the nation whose breath is money
And sleeps the sleep of the too well fed

Pity the nation oh pity the people
who allow their rights to erode
and their freedoms to be washed away

My country, tears of thee
Sweet land of liberty!

– Lawrence Ferlinghetti (after Lebanese American poet Kahlil Gibran)

SEE ALL
US-WEATHER-FIRE
News

As Planet Burns, US Banking Agencies Ditch Climate Risk Rules

Federal regulators have rescinded a set of guidelines for large banking institutions to consider the financial dangers of the climate crisis when making decisions about business strategy, risk management, and strategic planning.

On Thursday, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the Federal Reserve Board announced that they would immediately withdraw their interagency Principles for Climate-Related Financial Risk Management for Large Financial Institutions, a framework that required financial institutions with $100 billion or more in assets to consider climate risks.

The guidelines were first issued in 2023, which was, at the time, the hottest year on record. That year, the US experienced a record number of weather and climate-related disasters—including a massive drought across the south and Midwest, historic wildfires in Hawaii, and major flooding events across the country—that caused at least $92 billion worth of damage.

In October of that year, Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell said: "Banks need to understand, and appropriately manage, their material risks, including the financial risks of climate change."

The OCC, meanwhile, explained that "financial institutions are likely to be affected by both the physical risks and transition risks associated with climate change." This included both the risks to the safety of people and property "from acute, climate-related events, such as hurricanes, wildfires, floods, and heatwaves, and chronic shifts in climate," as well as changes due to "shifts in policy... that would be part of a transition to a lower carbon economy."

But these concerns have not carried over to the administration of President Donald Trump, who recently referred to climate change as a "con" and has sought to purge the federal government of any acknowledgement of the scientific consensus that it is being caused by human fossil fuel usage, which he has moved to aggressively expand.

In a joint release Thursday, the agencies said they "do not believe principles for managing climate-related financial risk are necessary because the agencies' existing safety and soundness standards require all supervised institutions to have effective risk management commensurate with their size, complexity, and activities," adding that "all supervised institutions are expected to consider and appropriately address all material financial risks and should be resilient to a range of risks, including emerging risks."

Elyse Schupak, policy advocate with Public Citizen's climate program, criticized the withdrawal of the guidelines, calling it "an irresponsible and politically motivated move in the wrong direction."

"The increase in the frequency and severity of climate disasters and the rapidly escalating property insurance crisis mean the agencies should be working harder to understand and mitigate climate-related financial risks faced by banks and the financial system—not backtracking," she said. "Effective bank regulation requires looking squarely at all risks to supervised institutions, including climate risks, and addressing them before they have destabilizing effects. This approach, rather than politics, should guide regulator action."

The move comes as the globe is reaching the point of no return for the climate crisis. Global temperatures have already soared to between 1.3°C and 1.4°C above preindustrial levels and are expected to pass the 1.5°C threshold within the next five years, at which point many of the worst effects will become unavoidable. These effects include more frequent heatwaves, sea level increases, more frequent severe storms, and aggressive droughts.

In addition to the human toll, these entail considerable financial damage. In December 2024, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that if the Earth continues to warm at current rates, the nation's gross domestic product (GDP) will be 4% lower than if temperatures had remained stable.

It predicted that sea level rise—projected 1 to 4 feet by the turn of the century—would cause anywhere from $250 billion to $930 billion worth of losses to property owners, mortgage lenders, insurance companies, and the federal government. Other untold costs, it said, would be borne as a result of heightened mortality from heat, declines in available food and water, increased rates of illness, and forced migration due to unlivable conditions.

Testifying before Congress earlier this year, Powell noted that banks and insurance companies have been pulling out of coastal areas at risk of flooding and places prone to wildfires due to the financial risk.

State Farm had recently canceled thousands of policies in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of Los Angeles shortly before it was hit with massive wildfires in January. He warned that as climate change worsens, financial institutions will deem it too risky to serve large portions of the country.

"If you fast forward 10 or 15 years," Powell said, "there will be regions of the country where you can't get a mortgage, there won't be ATMs, banks won't have branches, and things like that."

Schupak said: "For the Federal Reserve, capitulation to the politics of climate denial championed by the Trump administration is a threat to both its legitimacy and efficacy, which will be hard to repair."

"Powell has admitted that the Federal Reserve has done the 'bare minimum' on climate," she continued. "Now it will do even less, putting the banks it supervises and the broader financial system at risk."

SEE ALL
Epstein Files Transparency Act
News

CNBC Host Doesn't Know How to Fix Runaway Healthcare Costs. Ro Khanna Says: Medicare for All

With the second-longest federal government shutdown dragging on and Americans concerned about soaring health insurance premiums and coverage losses, Congressman Ro Khanna on Thursday again made the case for Medicare for All.

On CNBC's "Squawk Box," co-host Joe Kernen made clear he doesn't support Medicare for All but expressed concern about rising premiums. He also admitted, "I don't know what the answer is."

Khanna (D-Calif.), meanwhile, reiterated his support for a single-payer system, in part by highlighting how private health insurance companies are raking in billions of dollars in profits each year, at the expense of patients.

If the United States extended eligibility for Medicare, which is now only available to Americans ages 65 and older, "it would help private business," the congressman argued. "It would lower healthcare costs."

A 2020 analysis from the Economic Policy Institute found that Medicare for All would benefit companies and workers by supporting self-employment and small business development, boosting wages, increasing job quality, and lessening the stress and economic shock of losing or changing employment. That same year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that shifting to Medicare for All could save $650 billion annually.

Khanna on Thursday pushed back against claims that under Medicare for All, Americans wouldn't be able to get the healthcare they need, saying: "I don't think Medicare is rationing more than the private industry. [If] you are on private insurance, that's where you get rationed. You have to get your pre-authorization. You have things denied. Medicare, actually, doesn't do that."

Although Medicare can deny coverage, KFF found in 2023 that people with employer-sponsored health insurance were twice as likely as those on Medicare for Medicaid—which covers people with low incomes and disabilities—to have a claim denied.

"Traditional Medicare, also known as Original Medicare, has historically required little in the way of pre-authorization for beneficiaries seeking services; pre-authorization was typically the domain of Medicare Advantage," or plans administered by private insurance companies, Kiplinger reported this summer. "But that's about to change."

Under President Donald Trump's "profoundly unqualified" pick to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Dr. Mehmet Oz, CMS will require prior authorization for 17 services it claims "are vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse" in six states next year.

Beginning in January, Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington will serve as testing grounds "to provide an improved and expedited prior authorization process relative to Original Medicare's existing processes, helping patients and providers avoid unnecessary or inappropriate care and safeguarding federal taxpayer dollars," CMS said in a June statement.

Julie Alderman Boudreau, who has worked as a researcher at various organizations, warned at the time that "this is a Medicare cut by another name. This will cause seniors to delay care or forgo it altogether."

The CMS announcement came just days before Trump signed Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which contained cuts to Medicaid and did not extend expiring Affordable Care Act premium tax credits. The current government shutdown, which began on October 1, stems from Democrats' fight to undo the GOP attacks on Medicaid and ACA subsidies.

The CBO estimates that 10 million Americans could be booted off Medicaid because of cuts. Additionally, more than 20 million Americans who buy insurance via ACA marketplaces are expected to see their premiums spike next year, and some of them may not be able to afford any plans. Multiple polls released this week show that US voters are concerned about premium hikes.

One of those surveys, released Monday by Data for Progress and Groundwork Collaborative, also shows that voters want Democrats in Congress to keep fighting for a fix to the looming healthcare crisis, even if it means the shutdown continues.

Khanna—one of several Democrats considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate—noted on social media earlier this week that KFF polling shows that "78% of Americans favor extending ACA credits."

"Republicans are once again trying to reward the ultrawealthy at the expense of regular folks," he added. "It's time to pass Medicare for All and solidify Americans' right to affordable healthcare."

SEE ALL
Maine Senatorial Candidate Graham Platner Speaks To Voters During Town Hall
News

Another Poll Shows Platner's Double-Digit Lead Over Establishment Pick Mills in Maine Senate Race

A second poll that was conducted in the midst of the recent onslaught of media reports about US Senate candidate Graham Platner's deleted Reddit posts and tattoo confirmed that voters in Maine have been undeterred by the attacks on the Democrat's character.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) polled 647 likely Democratic voters from October 22-23, amid considerable national attention focusing on a tattoo that Platner got while he was in the Marines—one that some said resembled a Nazi symbol and that Platner got covered up after learning of the resemblance.

The survey found that 46% of respondents supported Platner despite the controversies, while 25% were backing Maine Gov. Janet Mills.

Mills announced her campaign earlier this month; US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) had called on her to join the Democratic primary race.

Next year's primary winner will face longtime Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who has persistently claimed to hold moderate views, particularly on abortion rights, but has voted for numerous anti-choice federal judges including Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Seventy-one percent of voters said they viewed Platner favorably, and 73% said he stands up for their values.

Since launching his campaign in August, Platner has been outspoken in his criticism of the United States' "oligarchy," Democratic leaders who have capitulated to President Donald Trump, and US support for Israel's assault on Gaza. His platform includes support for Medicare for All, a billionaire minimum tax, and federal LGBTQ+ anti-discrimination legislation.

This week, in addition to promoting policy proposals to help working families afford childcare, groceries, and other essentials, Platner has spoken about how many of his views have evolved since he wrote comments in online forums about sexual assault, people who live in rural areas, and other topics.

At a town hall in Ogunquit on Wednesday night, Platner said he did not want to "minimize what has come out,” but emphasized that he "used to hold different opinions."

"I also grew," he said. "I met new people. I learned of other people’s experiences."

In the NRSC poll, 45% of respondents said Platner's statements about his past remarks made them more likely to support him.

The findings, said journalist Ryan Grim of Drop Site News, suggested that the scandal is "helping Platner rather than hurting him—not because people love Nazi tats but because people want a culture that brings back grace, forgiveness, and growth."

Drop Site News interviewed attendees at the town hall, and found similar sentiments.

"I’ve lived long enough to know people make mistakes, and I’ve never been someone to throw a person by the wayside because they misstep," said Christian Millian, 39, of Wells. "Otherwise, I’d be on the wayside."

At another event in Waterville recently, Sharon McCarthy, 50, told Drop Site News that "anyone our age and younger is going to have a past on the internet."

“I liked that he addressed the Reddit comment issue straight out," she said. "A lot of us said things we aren’t proud of in our younger years and have learned and grown since then. Since he addressed it straight out, didn’t deny or deflect, and said he had changed, I’m willing to give him that grace.”

At the town hall Wednesday, Platner also spoke about the need for voters to connect with one another over politics instead of seeing it as the realm of "congressman and senators."

"For us to get young people to believe again, we have to show young people that... politics is about building power with your neighbors," he said. "Politics is about protecting your community... We are not going to just convince people by telling them that they need to read a different news source."

SEE ALL
Oxygen mask in trauma room of a hospital
News

'Now Imagine... You Are Suffocating': Sotomayor's Graphic Dissent Over Nitrogen Gas Execution

US Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was unable to convince the right-wing majority of the nation's highest court on Thursday night to accept a last-ditch petition from a man slated to be killed by the state of Alabama asking that he be put to death by firing squad as opposed to the more brutal and painful method of asphyxiation from nitrogen gas, a torturous process of execution experts have said amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.

Anthony Boyd, convicted of a 1993 murder and kidnapping, which he maintained until the end that he did not commit, was put to death by the state of Alabama using nitrogen gas after a request for a stay of execution and a review of a lower appeals court ruling was rejected in a 6-3 decision.

In the first four paragraphs of her dissent, backed by Justices Elana Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor departed from the majority by asking people to put themselves inside the death chamber with the mask of nitrogen strapped to their face:

Take out your phone, go to the clock app, and find the stopwatch. Click start. Now watch the seconds as they climb. Three seconds come and go in a blink. At the thirty-second mark, your mind starts to wander. One minute passes, and you begin to think that this is taking a long time. Two . . . three . . . . The clock ticks on. Then, finally, you make it to four minutes. Hit stop.

Now imagine for that entire time, you are suffocating. You want to breathe; you have to breathe. But you are strapped to a gurney with a mask on your face pumping your lungs with nitrogen gas. Your mind knows that the gas will kill you. But your body keeps telling you to breathe.

That is what awaits Anthony Boyd tonight. For two to four minutes, Boyd will remain conscious while the State of Alabama kills him in this way. When the gas starts flowing, he will immediately convulse. He will gasp for air. And he will thrash violently against the restraints holding him in place as he experiences this intense psychological tor- ment until he finally loses consciousness. Just short of twenty minutes later, Boyd will be declared dead.

Boyd asks for the barest form of mercy: to die by firing squad, which would kill him in seconds, rather than by a torturous suffocation lasting up to four minutes. The Constitution would grant him that grace. My colleagues do not. This Court thus turns its back on Boyd and on the Eighth Amendment’s guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment. Because the Court should have instead granted a stay of execution and Boyd’s petition for certiorari, I respectfully dissent.

Last year, a body of experts at the United Nations urgently pleaded with US officials to put a stop to the death penalty by nitrogen hypoxia, calling it "clearly prohibited under international law." The experts cited the killing of Kenneth Smith by the state of Alabama in February of 2024 as the "first person ever to be executed in this way," a death which reportedly took more than 20 minutes as Smith "writhed and convulsed on the gurney."

The wife of another man executed by this method—approved by seven states, but only put to use so far by Alabama and Louisiana—said watching her husband be killed this way was like “watching someone drown without water.”

Citing the seven times the method had been used before Boyd, Sotomayor said there is now a clear record of the intense pain and unnecessary suffering experienced by people put to death in this manner. All the killings, she wrote, resulted in a similar experience: "apparent consciousness for minutes, not seconds; and violent convulsing, eyes bulging, consistent thrashing against the restraints, and clear gasping for the air that will not come."

While the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution “does not guarantee a prisoner a painless death," argued Sotomayor, "when a State introduces an experimental method of execution that superadds psychological terror as a necessary feature of its successful completion, courts should enforce the Eighth Amendment’s mandate against cruel and unusual punishment."

She called for Boyd to be spared the excruciating death, given that a less cruel and painful alternative was readily available, and an end to the use of nitrogen hypoxia nationwide. While Kagan and Jackson agreed, the other six justices allowed the execution to proceed.

Before he was killed, according to CBS News, Boyd pleaded his innocence for a final time on Thursday. "I didn’t kill anybody. I didn’t participate in killing anybody,” he said. “There can be no justice until we change this system.”

SEE ALL
Hot meal distributed to Palestinians struggling with hunger in Gaza
News

ICJ Rejects Israeli Claims About UNRWA and Orders Officials to Provide More Aid to Gaza

The commissioner-general of the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees said Wednesday that he welcomed an "unambiguous ruling by the International Court of Justice" affirming that the organization has not been infiltrated by Hamas, as Israel and its allies have persistently claimed, and that Israeli officials must cooperate with the UN to ensure Palestinians receive sufficient aid after nearly two years of starvation policy.

In an advisory opinion, the ICJ ruled 10-1 that as the occupying power in the West Bank and Gaza, Israel is responsible for providing aid to Palestinians and allowing the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to operate in Gaza.

Israel has sought to ban UNRWA from Gaza since January 2024, when it alleged without evidence that a small number of staffers at the agency had participated in a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel in October 2023.

Multiple investigations found that Israel had not provided supporting evidence of the allegations, and the ICJ on Wednesday said that the country had “not substantiated its allegations that a significant number of UNRWA employees were members of Hamas.”

With the advisory opinion, said Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, "yet another Israeli government lie—slavishly repeated by Western media—collapses."

ICJ President Yuji Iwasawa said in the ruling, which is not legally binding, that Israel's first obligation is to "ensure that the population of the occupied Palestinian territory has the essential supplies of daily life, including food, water, clothing, bedding, shelter, fuel, medical supplies, and services."

The court also ordered Israel to "agree to and facilitate by all means at its disposal relief schemes on behalf of the population of the occupied Palestinian territory so long as that population is inadequately supplied, as has been the case in the Gaza Strip."

UNRWA has said it has roughly 6,000 aid trucks that are ready to enter Gaza.

"With huge amounts of food and other lifesaving supplies on standby in Egypt and Jordan, UNRWA has the resources and expertise to immediately scale up the humanitarian response in Gaza and help alleviate the suffering of the civilian population," said Philippe Lazzarini, commissioner-general of the agency.

Israel began blocking humanitarian aid from entering Gaza following the Hamas-led attack in 2023, and intensified the blockade from March-May this year after breaking a ceasefire that began in January. More than 450 Palestinians have starved to death, and experts have warned that the many of the effects of starvation on those who have survived, especially children, may be irreversible. A famine was declared in August by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, a UN-backed group.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said the ICJ opinion "comes at a moment in which we are doing everything we can to boost our humanitarian aid in Gaza. So the impact of this decision is decisive in order for us to be able to do it to the level that is necessary for the tragic situation in which the people of Gaza still is.”

As it has with numerous other rulings by the ICJ, Israel immediately rejected the decision and claimed it was politically motivated. The US State Department also dismissed the ruling, saying it "unfairly bashe[d] Israel" and repeated the debunked allegations of UNRWA's "deep entanglement with and material support for Hamas terrorism."

Step Vaessen of Al Jazeera reported that "even if Israel ignores [the advisory opinion], as it’s done time and time again, all the UN countries are obliged to follow up on this court’s advice."

The ICJ is also considering a genocide case against Israel, brought by South Africa.

In September, a commission of independent experts at the UN said Western countries including the US must stop providing military aid to Israel as it found the country was carrying out a genocide in Gaza, citing several of the attacks that have killed more than 68,000 Palestinians since October 2023 and public statements made by Israeli officials demonstrating their intent to wipe out Gaza's population of 2.1 million people.

SEE ALL