Author

admin

Browsing

The Neretva River carves its way through Bosnia and Herzegovina’s impenetrable forest. A mesmerizing blue-green, it runs 140 miles (225 kilometers) from deep within the Dinaric Alps to the Adriatic Sea – at some points disappearing into subterranean channels before re-emerging in bubbling springs.

One of the coldest rivers in the world, it is home to unique ecosystems and myriad rare species, from marble trout and yellow-bellied toads to the elusive olm – blind salamanders that live in the river’s network of caves.

But this could change. The river, like many worldwide, is threatened by dams. According to the Center for Environment, a Bosnian conservation organization, more than 50 hydropower projects are proposed along its length and its tributaries, with almost half of these planned for the upper reaches, which have so far remained wild and unobstructed.

These dams could harm not only the river and its inhabitants but the wider environment that depends on this unique waterway.

At Ulog, a village on the Neretva, you can see the potential destruction firsthand. A 35 megawatt hydropower plant with a 53-meter high dam is in the advanced stages of construction: felled trees line the river bank, making way for what will become a reservoir, and access roads for logging trucks and construction vehicles cut like scars through the forested landscape.

It’s here, just upstream of the construction site, that more than 60 scientists from 17 countries converged in June for “Neretva Science Week.” Most had traveled there as self-funded volunteers, united in a common purpose: to save the Neretva.

“They want to help us save this remarkable river,” says Ulrich Eichelmann, CEO of Riverwatch and coordinator of the Save the Blue Heart of Europe campaign to protect Balkan rivers. “It’s probably one of the most biodiverse and valuable rivers in Europe, and at the same time, it’s the most threatened.”

Dammed up

Europe has the most obstructed river landscape in the world, with more than one million barriers, from dams and weirs to ramps, fords and culverts, according to an EU research project. This has taken its toll on wildlife, with one in three freshwater fish species threatened with extinction.

But the Neretva has managed to remain relatively unscathed, fostering a healthy ecosystem including what scientists believe could be one of the last spawning areas of the endangered soft-mouthed trout.

It’s probably one of the most biodiverse and valuable rivers in Europe, and at the same time, it’s the most threatened.”

Ulrich Eichelmann, CEO of Riverwatch

It is this brown, unremarkable-looking fish that brought Kurt Pinter, a freshwater ecologist, all the way from Vienna, Austria in his retro orange campervan to study the river. Using techniques such as electro-fishing – a process that creates an electric field in the water to attract fish towards a net – and environmental DNA samples, he hopes to find evidence of the species living and breeding in the upper Neretva and its tributaries, providing ammunition against the proposed hydropower projects.

Dams, weirs, and all shapes and sizes of hydropower projects can endanger fish species because they block or hamper migration, he explains. In a natural river system, fish usually spawn in upstream areas and feed and mate downstream.

“This open system is really important for the fish to migrate into areas where they have very high reproductive success,” he says. The proposed dams along the course of the Neretva would disrupt the soft-mouthed trout’s breeding cycle and, he fears, push the already-endangered species to extinction.

While the loss of a single species is devastating, the impact does not stop there. “If you take the fish out of this river, then the surrounding environment, the surrounding terrestrial species will be affected,” says Pinter.

At Neretva Science Week, it’s not just fish experts who are concerned. There are specialists studying bats, fungi, butterflies and bears, among others. All believe that hydropower projects could have dire consequences for their chosen species group.

“It’s all connected,” says Eichelmann, explaining that silt from construction builds up on the riverbed, killing small creatures such as mussels that filter and clean the water. As the water becomes dirtier, plants and animals in the river and along its banks are affected. And the nature of the river means that the pollution cannot be contained: “What you do to a little river, you do to the bigger one, and in the end to the ocean.”

Hydropower hotspot

There is, however, a delicate balancing act between these environmental challenges and the growing demand for renewable energy. In Bosnia, hydropower is a key source of electricity – responsible for 37% of the country’s total electricity production in 2021. As the country, and the world, transitions from fossil fuels, hydropower could offer a cleaner source of energy.

The Balkans is seen as an untapped resource, full of rivers that – unlike the rest of Europe – have not yet been developed. Initiatives, some funded by the EU, which aims to be climate-neutral by 2050, are driving hydropower development across the region. As of 2022, more than 3,300 plants were either planned or under construction in the Balkans, in addition to the 1,700 plants already operational.

Radomir Sladoje, mayor of Kalinovik (the local municipality), echoed this when speaking on the first day of Neretva Science Week. Addressing scientists, he acknowledged that many of them might be angry that the local authority had approved the Ulog dam, but he pleaded: “We are a small community which needed a financial boost.”

Related: Environmental hero’s mission to save the most over-fished sea in the world

The Save the Blue Heart of Europe campaign says its goal is not to ban hydropower altogether, but to ensure it follows a strict planning approach that prioritises nature conservation. It would also like no-go zones implemented in areas of key biodiversity.

“There is a purpose for hydropower,” says Eichelmann. “But like in medicine, while small doses might be correct and healthy, if you take too much of it, it’s deadly.”

Wild rivers

Preserving a free-flowing river can also bring economic wins through the development of tourism activities such as rafting, angling and trekking.

Earlier this year, in southern Albania, this argument was successfully won in the case of the Vjosa River, which was declared the world’s first wild river national park. The move granted protection of more than 248 miles (400 kilometers) of rivers and streams, covering the full length of the river and all its major tributaries. Through responsible tourism, Albania’s government says that it will benefit local communities and help address depopulation in the area.

The Vjosa has brought hope for campaigners. “(It) proved that you can win these cases against the government, and this created a little flush of waves across the Balkans,” says Eichelmann.

Related: Underwater photos showcase one of the world’s most-threatened ecosystems

Already dammed in parts, the Neretva would not qualify as a wild river national park, but preserving intact stretches is still valuable. Although it may be too late to stop the Ulog dam, which is due to commence commercial operations in 2024, there are signs that the campaign could prevent hydropower projects planned for the pristine waters upstream.

Recently, contracts for 15 small hydroelectric power plants planned for the Neretvica, a tributary to the Neretva, were terminated, and in 2022, the campaign gained the support of the Bern Convention, an international agreement to protect European fauna and flora.

For now, the current is running with them, but Eichelmann hopes this force can be sustained across the entire Balkans.

“We call it the ‘blue heart’ because it is the last area where we have this jewel. It’s like a gift to Europe, to the Earth, that these rivers survived the decades of destruction,” he says. “We have one chance to keep this blue heart beating.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, intends to hold a third round vote for speaker on Thursday, a source familiar told Fox News Digital.

‘We’re going to keep going,’ Jordan’s spokesman told Fox News Digital earlier when asked if there will be a third round.

All House Democrats and 22 Republicans voted against Jordan’s bid for speaker on Wednesday. That’s two more GOP lawmakers than who voted against Jordan on Tuesday.

But nevertheless, Jordan’s allies have insisted that it was not an immediate sign of his campaign for speaker faltering. 

‘Don’t lose faith if [Jordan] loses a few votes on the second ballot. I’m committed to voting as many times as we must to get Jim elected as Speaker, as long as he is putting his name forward,’ Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., wrote on X. ‘If that means we vote all night, then buckle up ’cause we will vote all night!’

And earlier, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry, R-Pa., also expressed optimism.

‘Just so there’s no surprises: Jordan will likely have FEWER votes today than yesterday — as I expected,’ Perry said on social media.

‘This is the fight — which Jim Jordan represents — to end the status quo, and it ain’t easy… Stay strong and keep praying.’

Rumors of a House GOP conference meeting immediately after the vote sprung up but dissipated quickly amid confusion over the next steps.

Meanwhile, a contingency is building of House Republicans who want to empower interim Speaker Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., with temporary abilities to move legislation, at least through Nov. 17. 

‘At some point, we’re going to have to make a rational decision as to whether or not we’re going to continue to fight over who the speaker is, or empower Patrick McHenry to allow us to go back to world,’ Rep. Marc Molinaro, R-N.Y., who has voted for Jordan in the last two rounds, told reporters. 

‘The world is burning. And I don’t think many people we represent want us spending days upon days deciding who sits in the chair.’

Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who voted for ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., on both rounds, called to empower McHenry immediately.

‘I think it is imperative that we pass the resolution empowering Patrick McHenry to serve as the temporary speaker, and, you know, hopefully we will be able to find consensus in short order on a speaker,’ Lawler said. ‘I continue to believe that Kevin McCarthy is the right person to lead this House. He never should have been removed as speaker.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, has lost a second-round vote to win the speaker’s gavel on Wednesday, calling into doubt whether he can ever be elected.

Twenty-two Republicans voted against Jordan on this round, after 20 did so on Tuesday during the initial vote. Jordan needs to secure a majority threshold of 217 votes to win.

Reps. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., Drew Ferguson, R-Ga., Marianette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, and Pete Stauber, R-Minn., all joined Jordan’s growing opposition, having voted for him in the first round and then for other candidates on Wednesday.

Two holdouts from the previous day, Reps. Doug LaMalfa, R-Calif., and Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., voted for Jordan on Wednesday.

Asked what his next move was, Jordan said he would ‘keep talking to members.’ 

‘We don’t know when we’re going to have the next vote, but we want to have conversations with our colleagues,’ Jordan said.

Even before the vote, the Ohio Republican’s allies conceded that he could likely lose support on the second round but remained optimistic that he would pull through. 

‘Just so there’s no surprises: Jordan will likely have FEWER votes today than yesterday — as I expected,’ House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry, R-Pa., said on X. ‘This is the fight — which Jim Jordan represents — to end the status quo, and it ain’t easy…Stay strong and keep praying.”

But some Republicans have suggested a second Jordan loss could mean it’s time to evaluate other options.

‘If the number keeps going up then that’s a great sign, and we should continue to try to build upon that consensus until we can reach the 217,’ said Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., a Jordan supporter.

‘And if it goes down, well then, we have to go back to the drawing board and have a conversation about what our other options are.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former President Donald Trump may not be the only 2024 Republican contender to rule out participating in next month’s third GOP presidential nomination debate in Florida.

Vivek Ramaswamy would not commit to the Nov. 8 showdown in Miami.

‘I’m considering my options,’ the multimillionaire biotech entrepreneur and first-time presidential candidate told Fox News on Wednesday after filing to place his name on the presidential primary ballot in New Hampshire.

Trump, who remains the commanding polling and fundraising front-runner for the Republican nomination as he makes his third straight White House run, pointed to his enormous lead over his large field of rivals as he skipped the first two debates. Late last month, Trump campaign adviser Chris LaCivita said Trump would not take the stage at the third debate.

Trump’s campaign is calling for all future debates to be canceled and that the Republican National Committee – which is organizing the debates – should ‘refocus its manpower and money’ on defeating Democrats in next year’s election.

As first reported last month by Fox News, the RNC raised the polling and donor thresholds that 2024 primary candidates must reach to make the stage at the third debate.

To participate, each candidate must have a minimum of 70,000 unique donors to their campaign or exploratory committee, including 200 donors in 20 or more states. 

The White House hopefuls must also reach 4% support in two national polls, or reach 4% in one national poll and 4% in two statewide polls conducted in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina – the four states that lead off the Republican presidential nominating calendar.

Candidates are also required to sign a pledge agreeing to support the eventual Republican presidential nominee. They must agree not to participate in any non-RNC sanctioned debates for the rest of the 2024 election cycle and agree to data-sharing with the national party committee.

Ramaswamy on Wednesday reiterated that he’s reached the criteria for the third debate but may join Trump in opting out. His campaign has been having internal discussions about whether he should participate in the Miami showdown.

The candidate, who took plenty of incoming fire from some of his onstage rivals at the first two debates, said that ‘my view is what best advances substantive debate for the future of the Republican Party and for the future of our country, and so we’re weighing what best accomplishes that.’

‘I’m going to be looking at what best does, and we’ll evaluate whether participating in that third debate really is something that moves the ball,’ he highlighted.

Ramaswamy was joined onstage at the second debate by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former U.N. Ambassador and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, former Vice President Mike Pence and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum.

Former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, who qualified for the first debate, fell short and failed to make the stage at the second showdown.

The RNC announced Monday that it selected NBC News, Salem Radio Network, the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) and Rumble as partners for the debate, which will take place at the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts of Miami-Dade County.

The third debate will be held almost two months before the Jan. 15 Iowa caucuses, which is the leadoff contest in the 2024 GOP presidential nominating calendar.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The al-Ahali Hospital in Gaza City was struck Tuesday night, and hundreds were reportedly killed in the blast. Hamas initially claimed the hospital was attacked in an Israeli strike; Israel countered after an investigation that it was hit by an errant missile launched by terrorists in Gaza itself. 

Online video making the rounds on social media suggests the al-Ahali Hospital in Gaza City was not directly hit by a rocket on Tuesday, but instead the missile appears to have struck a nearby parking lot, leading to many conflicting claims of who was responsible, where the missile struck and how many people died.

Who’s responsible?

Hamas was targeting Tel Aviv with rocket fire on Tuesday, and has been targeting central Israel multiple times each day.

Shortly after the blast, senior Hamas officials told Fox, ‘After the barbaric attack, it’s too early to talk about this.’

After an investigation, Israel said on Tuesday the rocket was fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a State Department designated foreign terrorist organization backed by Iran.

‘An analysis of IDF operational systems indicates that a barrage of rockets was fired by terrorists in Gaza, passing in close proximity to the al-Ahli [Baptist] hospital in Gaza at the time it was hit,’ IDF officials said. ‘Intelligence from multiple sources we have in our hands indicates that Islamic Jihad is responsible for the failed rocket launch which hit the hospital in Gaza.’

While Israel rebutted the claims immediately, President Biden, who was in Israel on Wednesday, stated intelligence from the Pentagon supports Israel’s assertion that the blast originated from rocket fire in Gaza.

Biden reiterated his belief that Israel was not to blame later on Wednesday. National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson also reaffirmed the U.S. position.

‘While we continue to collect information, our current assessment, based on analysis of overhead imagery, intercepts and open source information, is that Israel is not responsible for the explosion at the hospital in Gaza yesterday,’ she wrote.

Where the rockets fell

The failed rocket launch was initially reported to have been a direct hit on the hospital.

Israeli media showed footage from their own cameras that appears to show at least one rocket fired by Palestinians in Gaza falling short and landing on a hospital in their own territory.

Shared by Keshet 12 News, the footage clearly shows multiple rockets launching toward Israel on Tuesday. Moments later, a blast is seen in Gaza midway along the rockets’ trajectory.

Images and video making the rounds on social media tell a different story from the one Hamas initially told.

The images depict a parking lot with several damaged cars, and in the middle, a divot from where an object exploded.

When compared to images of typical Israeli missile strikes that show craters after the explosion, the parking lot had a small indentation, showing a different type of missile may have been responsible for the blast.

While the rocket appears to have struck a parking lot, the Hamas-run hospital treating wounded Palestinians and sheltering many others was certainly damaged, but not destroyed.

Casualty numbers

Another conflict point centers around the number of deaths from the blast.

The blast in the parking lot was enough to damage the hospital, but according to sources at the scene, it was not enough to destroy the facility, calling the reported number of deaths into question.

The Gaza Health Ministry initially reported that at least 500 people were killed at al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza City, and Hamas said it was the result of an Israel airstrike.

At this time, the number of people killed in the blast is unconfirmed, though Reuters quoted the Hamas-run Palestinian health ministry saying there were 471 people dead as of 3 p.m. on Wednesday.

Biden met with Israeli officials throughout Wednesday, pledging further support for the country and warning Iran and Hezbollah not to intervene.

Anders Hagstrom of Fox News Digital contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The U.S. has no responsibility to keep its allies on the ‘cutting edge’ of artificial intelligence (AI) development — unless it is a matter of national security, a former CIA director and retired Army officer tells Fox News Digital.

‘First and foremost is to ensure that we are on the cutting edge,’ retired four-star Gen. David Petraeus said during a recent Zoom interview.

‘Certainly, we should share to varying degrees with our closest partners, and they share with us — again, no one of us is smarter than all of us together in these kinds of endeavors — but it’s not our job entirely to ensure that they are proceeding along these lines, unless it’s, of course, in our national interest to do so, and it is in a number of different cases,’ he explained.

The pace of AI development has dominated conversation since public access to ChatGPT in November 2022, particularly with concerns over who will stay at the top of the game — a race that drove countries to reassess their investments in the burgeoning field. 

China and the U.S. in particular have focused on developing AI as much as possible in different fields, though the U.S. has discussed a far more regulated approach, as opposed to China’s more hands-free environment, as long as the AI passes certain reported threshold tests for reflecting socialist values. 

The U.K. over the summer announced that it would invest $125 million in computer chips to keep pace with the AI development from nations like the U.S. and China, but experts and officials argued even that significant investment was not nearly enough to stay at the top of the field. 

Cooperation has therefore remained a key point of the discussion, especially when the U.S. has certain bilateral intelligence agreements, such as the Five Eyes Alliance with the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. 

The White House touted one such agreement, the ‘Atlantic Declaration,’ signed in June of this year, as something that would ensure that the ‘unique alliance is adapted, reinforced and reimagined for the challenges of this moment,’ including the ‘handful of critical and emerging technologies’ such as AI that are ‘forming the backbone of new industries and shaping our national security landscape.’ 

Petraeus highlighted ‘interoperability’ as one of the chief reasons the U.S. might look to keep allies at the ‘bleeding edge’ of development, saying that in those cases, ‘it’s incumbent on us to share together,’ because any such agreement is a ‘two-way street.’ 

‘The closer you are as a partner, the more we should be focused on that, but it’s not our job to ensure that everybody is making the most of any more than it is that we ensure that they’re doing well in all the other areas,’ he argued, noting that uneven development of technology and weapons has remained a challenge ‘for decades’ and that a gap in AI development does not present ‘a massive issue.’ 

Such shortcomings in the past have required the U.S. at times to figure out how to compensate and help a country deal with ‘lack of certain capabilities,’ which Petraeus acknowledged often required the U.S. to share what it had or link the country into the larger American mechanisms, as in the case of air support or drones or aerial medevac.

‘Some countries in NATO were on the cutting edge, the bleeding edge of technological advances, [with] the U.S., of course, leading the way and then others are well behind, but we’ve always had this in some respects,’ he said. 

‘That’s the job of the country that leads coalitions, and in the most important cases, that is going to be in the United States.’ 

Petraeus served 37 years in the military, achieving the rank of four-star general and overseeing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan before taking over as director of the CIA — a post he left in late 2012. 

AI at the time remained in a nascent stage and did not have much integration: Petraeus said the most he saw was machine learning and that development ‘galloped ahead’ in more recent years, which he has witnessed through his work at an investment firm.

That pace of development has been ‘nothing short of breathtaking,’ the general said, stressing that it is ‘incumbent on all of us… certainly incumbent on those in the defense world, but also the business world, in the intelligence world, all the other worlds… to identify how this can be employed in ways that improve productivity, efficiency, effectiveness.’ 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former President Donald Trump and President Biden are running neck-and-neck in a new 2024 presidential election poll, but the data suggests an independent bid by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. could upend the race in Biden’s favor.

According to a Marist poll released Tuesday, 49% of registered voters said they would support Biden, 46% Trump and 5% remained undecided — all without Kennedy in the race.

Those numbers shifted dramatically for Trump and Biden with Kennedy running as an independent candidate, but appeared to hurt Trump’s chances for reclaiming the White House more than Biden’s odds of winning a second term.

The poll showed Kennedy winning 16% support among voters, Trump 37% and Biden 44%. Just 3% were undecided.

The biggest shift with a Kennedy candidacy came from independent voters, showing a massive drop in support for Trump (49% to 34%) and Biden (43% to 33%), according to the poll. Kennedy received support from 29% of independents.

Republican support for Trump also dropped significantly from 91% to 81%, with Kennedy receiving support from 11% of GOP voters.

Biden also saw a drop in support from Democrats with Kennedy in the race, from 91% to 86%, but not as a significant a loss as Trump’s among Republicans. Kennedy received support from 9% of Democrats.

Kennedy announced on Oct. 9 he would be running as an independent after attempting a run against Biden and fellow Democrat Marianne Williamson for the party’s presidential nomination. He ultimately made the decision after the Democratic National Committee maintained its backing of Biden and refused to hold any primary debates.

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

JERUSALEM — There are growing fears among Israelis and some Palestinians that, according to a controversial law aimed at rewarding Palestinians who murder Israelis in ‘nationalistic attacks,’ the Palestinian Authority may be compelled to shell out nearly $3 million a month in compensation to the families of hundreds of Hamas terrorists who carried out the deadly massacre against Israel on October 7th. 

According to Israeli military estimates, nearly 3,000 Hamas terrorists infiltrated into Israeli territory from the Gaza Strip during the attack, murdering, raping and even beheading more than 1,300 civilians and Israeli soldiers. 

As the IDF fought to regain control over the dozens of towns and communities that sit close to the border with the Palestinian enclave, it reportedly killed more than 1,500 of the terrorists and captured an additional 100 or more. 

Palestinian Media Watch, an Israeli organization that draws attention to Palestinian extremism, including among its leaders, surmised in an article published on its website Tuesday that the Palestinian Authority, the body that governs Palestinians in the West Bank, may now be obliged to pay salaries to the families of the dead terrorists and fund those who are now being held by Israel. 

‘The Palestinian Authority pays salaries to every single terrorist and to anyone who is arrested fighting Israel,’ Itamar Marcus, director of Palestinian Media Watch, told Fox News Digital. 

Marcus claimed the controversial payments, which are often referred to by critics as ‘pay for slay,’ have been steadfastly defended by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and members of his government. And he said they are applicable to any Palestinian who ‘dies as a martyr from any faction, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.’

‘The Palestinian Authority has been adamant about paying these salaries,’ said Marcus, adding that the payments continue to be made even though the Palestinian Authority has been forced to slash salaries across the board for all government workers due to an economic crisis in the Palestinian territories, sparking protests.

President Abbas had been scheduled to meet with President Biden in Jordan Wednesday but canceled after a deadly blast at a hospital in Gaza Tuesday night reportedly killed and injured hundreds. He has yet to outright condemn Hamas’ atrocities Oct. 7. 

Palestinian news agency WAFA reported last week that Abbas had stressed that the Palestine Liberation Organization was the sole representative of the Palestinian people. However, he stopped short of condemning Hamas’ brutal actions. Hamas is not represented in the PLO due to an ongoing rivalry with Fatah, Abbas’ political faction. 

Lt. Col. (res) Shaul Bartal, a senior researcher at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar Ilan University near Tel Aviv, said it was unlikely the Palestinian Authority would find the funds to extend this policy to the families of such a large number of terrorists. 

‘Right now, the PA does not have the money to pay them even if they wanted to, and Abbas has already said that what Hamas did does not represent the Palestinian people,’ he said. He added that due to the dire financial situation in the West Bank, the PA has already ceased paying salaries to employees in the Gaza Strip.

However, Marcus pointed out that, following the 2014 war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, in which a large number of Palestinian terrorists were killed, residents in Gaza demanded the Palestinian Authority extend the compensation to them.

Abbas and the Palestinian Authority have received sharp criticism for these payments, which include a bonus in the first month and then a monthly stipend that increases with time. 

In 2018, in a sign of protest, Congress passed the Taylor Force Act aimed at cutting economic aid to the Palestinian Authority until it ends the payment policy. In addition, Israel, which collects some taxes on commerce and income on behalf of the Palestinian governing body, has also passed a similar law. 

Taylor Force was a West Point graduate who served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He was pursuing his MBA at Vanderbilt, and the 28-year-old was savagely knifed to death March 8, 2016, during a tour of Israel by a Palestinian terrorist. President Trump signed the Taylor Force Act into law in October 2018.

Even with the new law, Palestinian Media Watch said the Palestinian Authority law continues to award the family of every terrorist who is killed attacking Israel an immediate grant of $1,511 and a $353-per-month allowance for life.

Bassem Eid, a Palestinian human rights activist and political analyst, said this ‘pay-to-slay policy has put a huge financial burden on the Palestinian Authority, and yet they continue to demand more financial aid from the Europeans and the Americans.

‘In my opinion, the Palestinian Authority is using this policy to encourage more terror against Jews and Israelis,’ Eid told Fox News Digital. ‘The international community knows this money is going to terror via the Palestinian Authority, but they continue to accept it.’

However, Eid said he did not believe Abbas would ‘pay any money to Hamas terrorists’ after this month’s attack. More likely, he said, Hamas would reward its own fighters directly. 

Attempts by Fox News Digital for clarification on the issue from the Palestinian Authority were not answered.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

I tried to become a boy at 12. I tried to change back to a girl at 16. Now I’m 19. The ‘care’ I received has left me with physical and mental challenges that I’ll probably carry for the rest of my life. 

I was abused and lied to by the medical professionals I was told to trust. They lied to my parents, too. They’re still abusing and lying to countless young boys and girls.

My transition happened fast. At age 11, I knew I was a girl, even though I had a tomboy streak and struggled to make friends with other girls. While puberty was rough, it never occurred to me that I was ‘supposed’ to be a boy. 

Then I got a cellphone and discovered social media. I was constantly told I was a boy trapped in a girl’s body. I came to believe it. I decided I was a boy and my body had to reflect it, or life wasn’t worth living.

At age 12, I talked to therapists who repeated what I heard on social media. My parents tried to protect me. They pointed out that I’d been diagnosed with ADHD and showed signs of autism. But the therapists and doctors said my parents could either have a dead daughter or a living son, manipulating them into giving consent. 

They also said that transitioning genders was reversible. By age 13, I was on puberty blockers and testosterone. At age 15, I had a double mastectomy. I didn’t hate my breasts, but the doctors told me I should cut them off anyway.

The puberty blockers gave me menopausal symptoms like hot flashes and lethargy. The testosterone lowered my voice and gave me muscles. I developed urinary tract issues. My chest was left with major wounds. And my mental health spiraled, especially when I realized that I wanted to have a family. I didn’t know if I could anymore. I lost 25 pounds and started struggling in school.

My detransition started at age 16. The medical professionals who pushed me to transition have shown zero interest in helping me. Some have tried to manipulate me into continuing my transition. They want to add insult to literal injury. And it turns out transitions aren’t reversible at all. 

My chest is still bandaged where my breasts should be. My urinary tract issues have gotten better, but they’re still bad. When I look in a mirror, I sometimes don’t recognize my face, because the testosterone changed it. I’m a girl, but I sometimes see the boy those doctors tried to create.

I couldn’t be more grateful for the 22 states that have banned or restricted gender transition procedures for minors. I’ve testified in many state legislatures and I hope more states will act. Yet many state lawmakers have also asked me what the next step is. My answer is simple: 

Now it’s time to protect the rights of detransitioners like me and countless others who’ve had their bodies altered and lives ruined.

I’ve worked with Do No Harm to develop a ‘detransitioner bill of rights.’ It’s built around some of the things I wish I’d known when I started down this road at age 12.

I needed the facts. No one told me about the utter lack of reliable studies justifying the procedures I received. No one told me that I was getting experimental procedures based on off-label prescribing. No one told me about their side effects. 

If I went through the process again, I bet no one would tell me that European countries are now restricting these procedures because the harms outweigh the risks. Our bill would give young patients and parents this information, so they can give the informed consent I couldn’t.

I needed transparency. When my parents and I first went to a gender clinic, we had no idea what it did, and my parents didn’t think it would immediately move me toward medication. 

DETRANSITIONER WARNS GENDER IDEOLOGY COULD HAVE ‘LONG-TERM RAMIFICATIONS’ FOR KIDS: THEY ‘CANNOT CONSENT’.

Doctors and surgeons need to tell the state what they’re doing to whom, and at what age. They also need to disclose whether the patients they’re treating have conditions like autism, depression, bipolar disorder and so on. 

Our bill would bring this information into the open, making clear how unhinged these doctors are.

I needed insurance coverage. While my parents’ provider paid for all the transition work, it doesn’t cover the enormous costs of de-transitioning. If insurance is going to ruin a young person’s body, it should pay the price for the rest of their life. Our bill makes it happen.

Most of all, I needed – and still need – justice. Those therapists and doctors stole my teenage years. They nearly broke a mind and a body that were still forming. I will be dealing with the consequences for the rest of my life. 

Our bill ensures that every medical professional who helps a minor transition can be held personally liable for the damage they do. I know many people who waited a lot longer than I did to detransition. Our bill lets them sue their doctors for up to 25 years after they turn 18.

The transgender craze is sweeping the country. It’s only a matter of time before the wave of detransitioners swells, too. Every state should pass this ‘detransitioner bill of rights’ to ensure that people like me get honesty, care and justice.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The House of Representatives is heading into yet another day without a speaker, and likely another day of votes amid Republican infighting and a failure to rally enough support — twice over — for Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., announced the next votes in the House would take place no earlier than 12:00 p.m. Thursday.

That’s when Jordan, R-Ohio, intends to hold a third round vote on the floor for speaker.

‘We’re going to keep going,’ Jordan’s spokesman told Fox News Digital Wednesday.

A Jordan spokesman doubled down Wednesday night, saying they have all intentions of going for a third round vote.

Republicans nominated Jordan to be the next House speaker, but he needs support from 217 members.

All House Democrats and 22 Republicans voted against Jordan’s bid for speaker on Wednesday. That’s two more GOP lawmakers voting against him than on Tuesday. All Democrats voted for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

But Jordan allies insist that is not a sign of a failed speaker campaign.

‘Don’t lose faith if [Jordan] loses a few votes on the second ballot. I’m committed to voting as many times as we must to get Jim elected as Speaker, as long as he is putting his name forward,’ Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., wrote on X. ‘If that means we vote all night, then buckle up cause we will vote all night!’

And earlier, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry, R-Pa., also expressed optimism.

‘Just so there’s no surprises: Jordan will likely have FEWER votes today than yesterday — as I expected,’ Perry said on social media.

‘This is the fight — which Jim Jordan represents — to end the status quo, and it ain’t easy…Stay strong and keep praying.’

But even as at least 199 Republican lawmakers rally around Jordan, some are looking for alternate paths, including how to empower Rep. Patrick McHenry, who is currently serving as interim speaker, also known as speaker pro tempore.

Rep. Dave Joyce, R-Pa., chairman of the Republican Governance Group, is calling to flesh out McHenry’s role in leadership, particularly in light of the urgency for Congress to approve aid for Israel as it fights a war with terror group Hamas.

The idea is also gaining steam among lawmakers who voted against Jordan. Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla., who has said he will keep voting for McCarthy on the House floor, told Fox News Digital that he was supportive of the effort.

‘If we don’t get to a speaker in a day or two, I think we need to move forward in getting the House back in business, and so any resolution that would give McHenry more power to do that… I would be in favor of,’ he said.

The House of Representatives is very much charting uncertain territory now — Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s removal was the first in the chamber’s history — and it’s not clear that McHenry’s current powers extend beyond just overseeing the election of the next speaker.

While McHenry has said that he has no interest in the role, he is rapidly emerging as a likely consensus candidate that at least some Democrats could agree to.

Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said McHenry was ‘respected on our side of the aisle’ when asked on Tuesday evening if he could be a viable candidate. Jeffries also said there were ‘informal conversations’ about making a deal on a GOP speaker that he hoped would ‘accelerate’ after Jordan’s rocky performance.

On Tuesday night, former Republican Speakers Newt Gingrich and John Boehner both endorsed the idea of empowering McHenry.

Still, sources told Fox News Digital that Jordan has a path to the speakership, with some suggesting he just simply may need more time to garner support. That source said a temporary solution could help Jordan do just that. 

The uncertainty in the House comes after Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., earlier this month, introduced a motion to vacate against then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. When all Democrats and eight Republicans voted together, McCarthy was ousted from his post — a first in United States history. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS