This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

South Korea has unveiled one of the largest ballistic missiles in the world and other weapons capable of penetrating deep underground bunkers within North Korea.

During its Armed Forces Day ceremony, South Korean President Yoon Suk Teol told thousands of military troops in Seoul it would be the end of the North Korean regime if they attempted to use nuclear weapons against South Korea, according to the Independent.

"If North Korea attempts to use nuclear weapons, it will face the resolute and overwhelming response of our military and the South Korea-U.S. alliance … That day will be the end of the North Korean regime … The North Korean regime must abandon the delusion that nuclear weapons will protect them," Yoon said.

On display were approximately 340 weapons systems and military equipment, including a Hyunmoo-5 ballistic missile which carries around eight tons of a conventional warhead and is able to reach underground bunkers 100 meters deep in North Korea.

"Our government will build on the solid South Korea-U.S. alliance to further strengthen the security cooperation of South Korea, the US and Japan … The only way to secure peace is through enhancing our strength," Yoon said.

According to the Korea Herald, Yoon further stated the alliance between South Korea and the U.S. has been "upgraded" to a "nuclear-based alliance," after he and U.S. President Joe Biden signed an agreement in 2023.

During the ceremony, Yoon further noted South Korea has been on a peaceful path since the end of the Korean War in 1953, but added North Korea "insists on continuing down the path of regression."

Recently, North Korea has increased its aggressive posturing towards its neighbor to the south, launching 18 ballistic missiles simultaneously in May.

During a visit to North Korea by Russian President Vladmir Putin in June, a deal was struck between the two nations, and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was reportedly supplied with long-range nuclear missile technology in exchange for artillery.

Reuters reported North Korea had recently tested ballistic missiles capable of carrying a "super-large warhead," to improve weapons capabilities. Kim reportedly stated the tests are a necessity because of "outside threats."

This week at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, Pyongyang's U.N. representative Kim Song told the delegation North Korea would not give up its nuclear weapons, regardless of who is in the White House.

Song accused the U.S. and its "followers" of being confrontational and oppressive towards North Korea.

"Whoever takes office in the U.S., we will only deal with the state entity called the U.S., not the mere administration … Likewise, any U.S. administration will have to face the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea], which is different from what the U.S. used to think … When it comes to national prestige, we will never bargain over it with anyone for it was gained through the bloody struggle of the entire Korean people," Song said.

According to a report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, North Korea currently has 50 stored nuclear warheads in its possession as of June 2024.

"North Korea continues to prioritize its military nuclear programme as a central element of its national security strategy. SIPRI estimates that the country has now assembled around 50 warheads and possesses enough fissile material to reach a total of up to 90 warheads, both significant increases over the estimates for January 2023," the report states.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The People's Republic of China is celebrating 75 years since its founding by Chinese Communist Party dictator Mao Zedong, whose policies resulted in the deaths of up to 80 million Chinese citizens.

Nationalist Kuomintang forces were defeated by the Communist army in 1949 after a bloody 20-year civil war, with many fleeing to Taiwan.

During an address at a celebration banquet for the nation's founding, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for opposition to "separatist activities" of those who continue to support the independence of Taiwan.

China claims Taiwan as its own territory through its "One China Principle," and Xi reiterated his desire to "reunite" China with the democratically run Taiwan, whose President Lai Ching-te has been labeled as a "dangerous separatist."

"Achieving complete national reunification is the common aspiration of the Chinese people … It is an irreversible trend, a matter of justice, and it is in accordance with the popular will. No one can stop the march of history … Taiwan is sacred territory for China. People on both sides of the Taiwan Strait have blood ties, and these family ties will always be stronger than others," Xi said.

On Monday during an address to the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Xi expressed his gratitude to "friendly" countries and "international friends" who support the development of China.

Xi stressed the need for a united China.

"The great motherland and great nation nurtured by over 5,000 years of Chinese civilization, have always been the deepest and most enduring emotional ties of all the Chinese people. On this vast, beautiful, and fertile land, people of all ethnic groups share a common homeland, China; a common identity, the Chinese nation; a common name, Chinese; and a common dream, realizing the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation," Xi said.

While Xi calls for peace and unity, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi delivered a different message to the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Saturday, saying Taiwan will return to its "motherland" of China.

"Taiwan is an inalienable part of China's territory. This is the history and the reality. The complete reunification of China will be achieved. Taiwan will eventually return to the embrace of the motherland," Wang said.

Wang argued there are declarations that declare Taiwan as part of China, and which decreed all territories stolen by Japan, including Taiwan and the Ponghu Islands, should be returned.

"This constitutes an important part of the post war international order. Right here … 53 years ago, the 26th session of the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758 with an overwhelming majority, deciding to restore all the rights of the People's Republic of China at the UN, to recognize the representatives of the government of the People's Republic of China as the only legitimate representatives of China to the UN," Wang said.

Wang added that representatives of Taiwan should be "expelled""from the UN, and doubled down on the resolution giving China sovereignty over Taiwan.

"It made clear that there is no such thing as 'two Chinas' or one China, one Taiwan. On this matter of principle, there is no gray zone, or room for ambiguity," Wang said.

Taiwan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement prior to the UNGA, calling the Chinese views on the resolution distorted, and stated China is attempting to "mislead international opinion."

The ministry further stressed points regarding the resolution which threatens peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. Taiwan states the resolution does not exclude it from engaging with the UN, and urged the UN to remain neutral, and to allow Taiwanese nationals and journalists to enter UN premises for visits, meetings, and newsgathering activities.

"MOFA reiterates that UNGA Resolution 2758 does not mention and therefore has nothing to do with Taiwan. The resolution neither reflects nor equates to China's "one China principle," nor does it block Taiwan from participating in the UN system or other international organizations. MOFA strongly condemns China's continued malicious distortion of the resolution in attempts to mislead international opinion. It calls on the international community to jointly oppose China's false narratives and urges the UN Secretariat to actively uphold the principle of universality embodied in the UN Charter, honor its commitment to leave no one behind, and promptly allow Taiwan's participation," the ministry said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

JERUSALEM – Having given its emphatic response to the Franco-American idea, floated on Thursday, of a 21-day ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, by eliminating Hassan Nasrallah with more than 80 tons of high explosive on Friday, the IDF is attempting to press on with dismantling more terrorist infrastructure in Lebanon.

Over the weekend and continuing Monday, the Israel Air Force has pounded certain suburbs of Beirut, such as Dahiyeh, which are known to be nests of Hezbollah loyalists, as it maintains the enormous pressure it has exerted on the Iranian proxy – and also the Iranian regime itself – over the last two weeks or so.

In two separate strikes Monday, Israel's military eliminated Hamas' leader in Lebanon – Fateh Sherif Abu el-Ami – along with his wife, son, and daughter in a strike on a Palestinian refugee camp in the southern city of Tyre. Meanwhile, earlier in the day, Hezbollah's Telegram channel posted about the death of three People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) commanders in Beirut's Kola district.

Sherif was quick to praise the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, massacre of mostly Jewish Israelis in southern Israel, an attack – followed by Hezbollah's support of it – setting into motion events which might change the face of the entire Middle East. A statement from the terrorist group identified him as a "successful teacher and excellent [school] principal."

In March, UNRWA told Reuters that Sherif had been suspended for three months over allegations of involvement in activities "that are in violation of the Agency's regulatory framework governing staff conduct."

Meanwhile, in a Sunni-majority suburb of Beirut, Kola, a strike on an apartment building killed three members of The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the group said, marking the first time Israel carried out an attack inside the heart of the capital since the outbreak of the war in Gaza last year. However, in Judea and Samaria, Israel's military has been working for months to undermine and neutralize the threat posed by heavily armed so-called Palestinian resistance groups – including the PFLP – which have received weapons and training either directly or indirectly from Iran.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Imagine trying to explain to your children that their grandmother is a criminal because she was giving food to the needy.

Strange?

That's the result of a federal court decision in Arizona.

The Institute for Justice reports a new ruling from U.S. district court there concluded that a law in Bullhead City, Arizona, that makes it a crime to share food in public parks for "charitable purposes" is constitutional.

Norma Thornton, a grandmother, and the Institute for Justice say they will be appealing the decision.

Citing "illegal behavior," "human waste, litter, trash and other debris" the city imposed a permit requirement for giving away food, in order to "protect" the public and avoid the "deterioration" of public property," and decided, "It is unlawful for any person or organization to sponsor, promote or engage in a food sharing event at a public park in violation of the provisions of this chapter. Any violation of this chapter is a class 2 misdemeanor."

Thornton was arrested in March 2022 for feeding people in Community Park. and she and the IJ lawyers working with her said an appeal will be pursued.

"Americans have a constitutional right to engage in charitable activities and cities can't pass laws that outlaw doing so," said IJ lawyer Paul Avelar. "The district court failed to grapple with the fact that charity is deeply rooted in American history, and we look forward to proving to the appeals court that Bullhead City's actions criminalizing charity violate Norma's right to help others."

The court, in fact, claimed "the right to serve one's community, while important, is not a fundamental right."

Thornton has handed out food for decades, and when she retired to Bullhead City she wanted to continue.

"Being told that I cannot feed the hungry is absolutely heartbreaking to me, which is why I will continue fighting against this unjust law," she explained. "All I want to do is help people in my community, so they can survive and get back on their feet. It makes no sense for the city to prevent me from doing so."

The legal team noted that the city's "permit" requirement really is a ban, as "obtaining a permit is expensive and, even with a permit, the city allows people to share food only once per month."

Further, the restriction applies only to those sharing food for "charitable purposes."

"Norma is allowed to throw a pizza party in Community Park for 50 of her friends without limitation. But once she offers food for charity, she runs afoul of the ordinance. Each violation of the law is punishable with a fine of up to $1,431, 120 days in jail and 24 months of probation."

The decision is from Judge Susan M. Brnovich, who alleged there is a "rational basis for regulating food sharing events for charitable purposes differently than other food sharing events."

During the city's banishment of her charity, she has been using about half her income to feed some 30 people a day in an alley behind a jet ski shop that has no shade, tables, or restrooms.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A specialty foundation, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, unabashedly supports, free speech, academic freedom, religious liberty, due process, press freedom, freedom of assembly, freedom of conscience and more, mostly in the campus community.

You know, those items that are listed as being protected mostly by the First Amendment.

And it acknowledges there are many individuals who are grateful for a college education and are willing to support academia financially.

But the problem is that many major universities these days impose wildly extreme speech codes, from campuses where "free speech" is restricted to small plots of out-of-the-way grass to sites where expressing an opinion will get you in trouble if it's not what administrators believe.

So it is offering those education supporters a novel way to do that: support education. And yet not fund censorship of students or faculty.

By donating to the foundation.

The foundation continued, "It's no secret that America's colleges and universities struggle to uphold a foundational constitutional right: Freedom of expression. FIRE's 2025 College Free Speech Rankings show that roughly a quarter of students think it is not clear that their administration protects free speech on campus. And if a free speech controversy were to erupt? More than a quarter believe their administration would be unlikely to defend a speaker's right to express their views."

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

China has launched an intercontinental ballistic missile, only hours after U.S. President Joe Biden made his address at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City this week.

The Ministry of Defense of the People's Republic of China announced Wednesday it fired an intercontinental ballistic missile into the Pacific Ocean hours after Biden had called for security in the region.

The China announcement claimed the missile was launched as part of its military training routine, contained a dummy warhead, and was not targeted at any specific nation.

During his U.N. address, Biden said the U.S. needs to uphold its principles to manage competition with China.

However, Biden was caught on hot mic during the Quad Summit, which included Australia, India, Japan, and the U.S., stating that China is "testing" the U.S. over its stance with Taiwan and its growing aggression in the Indo-Pacific region.

"We believe Xi Jinping is looking to focus on domestic economic challenges, to minimize the turbulence in China diplomatic relationships, and he's also looking to buy himself some diplomatic space, in my view, to aggressively pursue China's interest. China continues to behave aggressively, testing us all across the region. It is true in the South China Sea, the East China Sea, South China, South Asia, and the Taiwan Straits. It is true across the scope of our relationship, including on economic and technology issues," Biden said.

In a joint statement from the White House, the Quad leaders state they are reaffirming their commitment to keeping the region stable and secure.

"Each of our governments has committed to working through our respective budgetary processes to secure robust funding for Quad priorities in the Indo-Pacific region to ensure an enduring impact. We intend to work with our legislatures to deepen interparliamentary exchanges, and encourage other stakeholders to deepen engagement with Quad counterparts," the White House said.

"President Xi Jinping and President Joe Biden had a successful meeting in San Francisco last November, and the two leaders talked on the phone this April. They have set the direction for a sound, stable and sustainable China-U.S. relationship. At present, there is a stabler momentum in the overall and defense relations between China and the US. The two militaries maintain high-level strategic communication, policy communication, institutionalized dialogues and exchanges in specialized fields. These engagements could help enhance mutual understanding, avoid miscalculation, and manage and control risks," Zhang said.

Zhang stated that the U.S. would have to change its perception of China, and make "efforts" to have a relationship of mutual respect.

"We require the U.S. side to recalibrate its strategic perception on China, return to a sensible and practical China policy, and respect China's major concerns. The U.S. should make concerted efforts with China in the principle of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation to stabilize and improve the mil-mil relationship through candid, effective and constructive dialogues and cooperation," Zhang said.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., has introduced a bill that will give a $100 million reward for the arrest and conviction of Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro.

In a news release, Scott said Maduro is continuing his efforts to steal a third Venezuelan election, after Maduro's highly contested victory during Venezuela's presidential elections this year.

Joined by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., Scott will be introducing the STOP MADURO Act – otherwise known as the Securing Timely Opportunities for Payment and Maximizing Awards for Detaining Unlawful Regime Officials.

The legislation increases the maximum reward amount from $15 million to a maximum of $100 million for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Maduro. To fund the reward, the federal government will be using Maduro's already seized assets.

"The time has come for Venezuela to be liberated from the illegitimate regime of dictator Nicolás Maduro. For years, I have urged the Biden-Harris administration to put the full weight of the federal government to put an end to the Maduro regime, but it has refused and continued its failed appeasement that has only enriched and emboldened Maduro and his puppet masters in Cuba at the expense of the Venezuelan people. In 2020, the Trump administration did the right thing by offering a reward of up to $15 million, but it's time to up the ante," Scott said.

According to Scott, the U.S. Attorney's Office in South Florida along with federal law enforcement partners already have seized assets worth approximately $450 million.

The bill has bipartisan support, and companion legislation will be introduced in the House of Representatives by U.S. Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., and Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla.

"My STOP MADURO Act will increase the maximum reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Maduro to $100 million, using seized assets instead of U.S. taxpayer money to bring an end to the tyranny caused by this narcoterrorist. The Venezuelan people overwhelmingly voted for a new day of freedom and democracy on July 28 when they elected Edmundo González in an effort led by opposition leader María Corina Machado. It's clear Maduro will not step down on his own, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill to rid Venezuela and the world of Maduro's oppression and make way for President-elect González to bring democracy, freedom and opportunity back to Venezuela," Scott said.

Rubio said in a statement that U.S. lawmakers must do more to stop Maduro, and the new legislation will help make that happen.

"The U.S. must do more to arrest narco-dictator Nicolás Maduro. I've called for Interpol to issue a red alert notice to facilitate this, and this legislation builds on that call by increasing the reward for his arrest to $100 million. Maduro is one of the Venezuelan regime's most corrupt schemers and it's past time he is held accountable for his crimes," Rubio said.

Maduro, who became interim president following the death of President Hugo Chavez in 2013, is a socialist who has plunged his once prosperous nation into poverty. During his rule, Maduro has become increasingly more authoritarian, which has led to attempts by opposition to have him removed from office. Maduro's competitor Edmundo Gonzalez was forced to flee Venezuela for Spain after Maduro issued a warrant for his arrest.

While at a cultural meeting in Caracas on Friday, Maduro warned his government officials against accepting any electronic devices as Christmas gifts, according to MenaFN.

Maduro's comments come in the wake of the mass detonation of pagers and walkie-talkies in Lebanon, which targeted terrorist group Hezbollah.

The detonation led to around 3,000 people being injured, while 37 people were killed.

"You've seen what happened in Lebanon; everyone should be on alert," Maduro reportedly said during the meeting.

According to the Miami Herald, a federal court in Argentina has court ordered the immediate arrest of Maduro, and Maduro's second-in-charge Diosdado Cabello, for alleged crimes against humanity.

The court order was issued in response to Venezuela's Supreme Court issuing its own arrest order for Argentina's President Javier Milei and two of his senior officials for seizing a Venezuelan cargo plane in Buenos Aires.

The Argentine Forum for the Defense of Democracy described the order against Maduro and Cabello as historic, after the case was first introduced in 2023, allowing countries to prosecute crimes against human rights no matter where they occurred.

"From now on, Maduro has become a fugitive from justice and the world has become increasingly smaller for those who have committed atrocious crimes," Forum secretary Elisa Trotta said in a statement to the Miami Herald.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Kamala Harris says that turning America in an abortion free-for-all is so important to her that she'd destroy the Senate filibuster in order to get it.

The filibuster is the longstanding practice in the chamber that requires support from at least 60 senators for a plan to advance.

Without it, a 51-49 majority could put anything into law, or in a federal court.

For instance, could a partisan like Merrick Garland, who has overseen the weaponization of the Department of Justice against President Donald Trump, ever gain the power of a Supreme Court post? Likely not with the filibuster, without it, easy.

USA Today reports Harris has confirmed she would support eliminating the filibuster "to reinstate abortion."

The report described the effort as reinstating the "abortion protections that were under Roe v. Wade," but that precedent, abandoned by the Supreme Court several years ago for not being based on the Constitution, allowed abortion at literally any time and under any circumstances.

"I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe," Harris during in an interview with Wisconsin Public Radio. "And get us to the point where 51 votes would be what we need to actually put back into law, the protections for reproductive freedom."

Those "protections" for "reproductive freedom" include a vast array of ways and times to kill the unborn, and according to some Democrats, even those who already have been born.

Just the News confirmed that Harris' anti-filibuster agenda has been in place since the 2022 Supreme Court Dobbs ruling confirmed that the nearly 50-year-old Roe ideology was not constitutional.

Newsweek reported a leftist commentator confirmed that Harris' comment shows "the value she puts on about codifying Roe."

In fact, for years already, Harris has insisted, regarding an abortion-at-will nation, "If the filibuster gets in the way, the Senate needs to make an exception to get this done."

One of the problems eliminating the filibuster would create, though, is that a Democrat majority of 51 could adopt anything at the time, but then be reversed immediately with a 51-vote GOP majority a year or two later, creating an atmosphere for virtually unending flip-flops in U.S. law.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

A large part of the political world in the United States, for years already, has been the "lawfare" schemes created by Democrats and leftists.

That's the use of legal cases, with or without evidence, to attack President Trump.

They have used the campaign, unsuccessfully, to try to make sure he could not run for the White House this year.

They've included wild claims about his business operations, his comments, his post-presidential activities and more, and he's expressed confidence that ultimately he'll come out a victor, as the prosecutors, the judges and even the jurors were biased.

He has evidence to support that, as a couple of the prosecutors who created cases against him ran for office on the public proclamations that they would "get" President Trump.

Now, longtime commentator Megyn Kelly, a lawyer, has destroyed the idea that the campaign is anything but a conspiracy against Trump.

She recently was a speaker at the All-in Summit in Los Angeles, where she was a panelist for which host Jason Calacanis brought up all of Trump's "guilty" results or "convictions."

The point that he was trying to make was that the campaign against Trump couldn't be a "conspiracy" because it's come from different prosecutors, different judges, different jurisdictions.

"Calacanis not only demonstrated his ignorance of the law but also set out to condemn Trump as guilty of bogus crimes in three cases (E. Jean Carroll, the Trump Organization, and the hush money trial)," explained a report in the Gateway Pundit.

But Kelly called him out, corrected his wrong assumption that Trump was "guilty" in civil cases, and "hammered home the corruption of each case in rapid-fire fashion to a stunned host."

Kelly, who took her law degree from Albany Law School in 1995, said that the cases are "100%" conspiracy against Trump."

"(In the) E. Jean Carroll (case Democrats) changed the law so that they could bring a civil lawsuit against him. New York went 87% for Joe Biden, and that fix was in place from the start.

"The fraud trial that Letitia James brought against him has never been brought before. There are no victims. The banks involved didn't lose a penny. Nobody was complaining except Tish James, who ran for office, saying, 'I will get him.'

"Then you have Alvin Bragg, a George Soros-funded prosecutor who doesn't like to prosecute any crime in New York City except if your name is Donald Trump!

"Let's go down to Georgia. Fani Willis and Nathan Wade couldn't keep their libidos in check long enough to bring this case against Donald Trump. It's a repeat of what was happening in the case of Jan. 6 with Judge Chutkan, who loathes Trump and has sentenced almost every J6 defendant to more jail time than any of her counterparts," she said.

"Those cases are falling apart because of presidential immunity that was handed down by the Supreme Court…Those cases have been gutted. And that leaves us with Florida and the documents. And Trump has torn that apart because Jack Smith was not properly appointed and is not the right counsel…They haven't even gotten to presidential immunity there so that one is going nowhere. They're going to appeal (Smith's appointment) up to the 11th Circuit of Appeals, and it's conservative, and thank God, so is the current Supreme Court. They're not going to tolerate that nonsense."

The facts are that the leftists did change a law so E. Jean Carroll could bring an otherwise-barred civil case against Trump, at which he was found not liable for her allegation of rape, but liable for sexual abuse. His lawyers on appeal have charged besides the law change, the case "is a textbook example of implausible allegations being propped up by inflammatory, inadmissible" evidence.

James brought a business deals case in which the judge decided on his own that Trump should be liable for a judgment of hundreds of millions of dollars for practices described by witnesses under oath as ordinary business practices. The institutions the judge claimed were defrauded said they were not defrauded and wanted to do more business with Trump.

Alvin Bragg took allegations of business reporting misdemeanors and claimed they were felonies because they were in pursuit of another crime, which wasn't identified. That jury convicted Trump, but in doing so violated a legal requirement that they be unanimous all on parts of their verdict.

In the Willis-Wade fiasco, the prosecutor Fani Willis, assembled an "organized crime" case against Trump by paying her boyfriend, Wade, hundreds of thousands of tax dollars.

It's falling apart on appeal.

The case being handled by Judge Chutkan was facing all sorts of headwinds because of the Supreme Court's immunity decision.

And the last case, over government documents Trump apparently had after his presidency, revealed the absolute weaponization of the DOJ, as Joe Biden was given a pass for essentially the same offense.

Further, the prosecutor, Jack Smith, was hired by the DOJ but never was confirmed by the Senate, as required.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

JERUSALEM – The United Nations, with the backing of the United States Department of Justice filed an official document in a U.S. court, arguing UNRWA employees implicated in the Oct. 7 massacres should be immune from prosecution, according to a report on Israel's Channel 12 Saturday evening.

In the document submitted to the court, the U.N. claims the UNRWA employees who participated in the massacre have immunity: "Since the U.N. has not waived their immunity in this case, its subsidiary organization, UNRWA, continues to enjoy absolute immunity from prosecution, and the lawsuit should be dismissed."

Furthermore, the U.S. Justice Department under the questionable stewardship of the Attorney General Merrick Garland, backed the U.N.'s play: "The plaintiffs' complaint does not present a theory under which the United Nations waived its immunity. Therefore, since the U.N. has not waived their immunity in this case, its subsidiary organization, UNRWA, continues to enjoy absolute immunity from prosecution, and the lawsuit against the defendant UNRWA should be dismissed due to the lack of subject matter."

We are not talking unpaid parking tickets in New York City, here, which can simply be waived away. At issue is the participation of hundreds of UNRWA employees – at various levels of seniority – in the worst anti-Jewish pogrom in some 80 years.

It is estimated some 10% of UNRWA's 14,000 or so Gaza staff (pre-war) also moonlight as Hamas operatives.

In August, UNRWA itself acknowledged nine of its staff "may have been involved in the Oct. 7 massacre," although this figure seems unrealistically low. Additionally, credible reports have emerged of high-ranking UNRWA employees stealing and hoarding the aid which has flowed into Gaza to offset a non-existent threat of famine.

In July, Israel's parliament – the Knesset – passed the first reading of a trilogy of bills aimed at shuttering the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East amid evidence the organization is increasingly indivisible from the Gaza Strip's rulers, Hamas. Indeed, on the evidence, it branded UNRWA a "terrorist organization."

If further evidence of the dystopian nightmare many of us have felt we are inhabiting over the last few years – and particularly since the Hamas onslaught against southern Israel – then this might just be the concluding piece.

It is also a particularly nasty and capricious piece of lawfare, with Channel 12 explaining the onus would now be on the surviving family members having to demonstrate why the immunity protecting UNRWA workers should be revoked.