Disney Movie Banned in Lebanon Due to Israeli Actress

April 17, 2025

Disney’s live-action remake of Snow White has been officially banned in Lebanon due to the inclusion of Israeli actress Gal Gadot, who portrays the Evil Queen in the film.

The decision was enacted by Lebanon’s Interior Minister Ahmad al-Hajjar, citing Gadot’s Israeli nationality and her prior service in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) as the primary reasons for the ban. This aligns with Lebanon’s longstanding policy of boycotting Israeli products and media, which includes prohibiting films featuring Israeli actors.

Gadot, a prominent figure in Hollywood known for her role as Wonder Woman, has been a vocal supporter of Israel. Her military background and public statements have previously led to the banning of other films she starred in, such as Wonder Woman and Death on the Nile, in several Middle Eastern countries, including Lebanon and Kuwait.

Gadot has since spoken out about the hate her community has received as of late, sharing that “this is a time when many of us in the Jewish community have had to find our voice and confront the hatred against us, even if it’s extremely uncomfortable. Even if speaking up wasn’t really your thing, none of us can ignore the explosion of Jew hatred around the world anymore.”

The ban of Snow White in Lebanon reflects the country’s adherence to its cultural and political policies regarding Israeli affiliations. While the film has been released in various international markets, its prohibition in Lebanon underscores the ongoing complexities at the intersection of entertainment and geopolitics in the region.

As of now, Disney has not issued an official statement regarding the ban in Lebanon. The film continues to be available in other countries, contributing to the global discourse on the influence of political considerations on media distribution.

Betrayal from Within: FAA Contractor Busted Spying for Iran

April 17, 2025

A former Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) contractor has pleaded guilty to federal charges after admitting he spied for the Iranian government while employed in the U.S. Abouzar Rahmati, a naturalized U.S. citizen residing in Great Falls, Virginia, conspired with Iranian intelligence officials to collect and deliver sensitive information on American infrastructure, including airport surveillance systems and the solar energy sector.

Rahmati’s activities date back to at least December 2017, during which time he maintained secret communications with Iranian operatives. By securing a role with an FAA contractor, Rahmati gained access to restricted information critical to national security. This included data on the National Aerospace System, Airport Surveillance Radar systems, and proprietary FAA radio frequency data.

Court documents reveal Rahmati downloaded over 175 gigabytes of data. He stored the classified information on removable media devices and personally transported it to Iran in April 2022. There, he handed the materials to Iranian government officials, violating federal law by acting as an unregistered agent for a foreign government.

In addition to compromising aviation systems, Rahmati also provided Tehran with intelligence on the U.S. solar energy sector. These disclosures represent a severe breach of national trust and raise alarms about foreign infiltration of U.S. technological infrastructure.

Rahmati pleaded guilty to charges of acting as an agent of a foreign government without prior notification to the Attorney General, and conspiracy to do the same. He is scheduled for sentencing on August 26, 2025, and faces a maximum sentence of 10 years for acting as an unregistered foreign agent and up to five years for conspiracy.

The Department of Justice continues to investigate the scope of Rahmati’s espionage activities and potential accomplices. His case underscores the ongoing threat posed by hostile foreign powers seeking to exploit vulnerabilities in the U.S. government and critical industries.

Trump Holds the Line as Japan Pushes to Ease Tariffs

April 17, 2025

Japan flag — Japanese flag (Fumiaki Hayashi/Unsplash)

President Donald Trump met with a Japanese trade delegation in Washington, D.C., on April 16, marking a pivotal moment in escalating trade tensions between the United States and Japan. Despite describing the discussions as “big progress,” no concrete agreements or tariff rollbacks were announced. The talks spotlight the administration’s continued push for tougher trade terms while protecting American manufacturing.

The meeting included Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick alongside top Japanese officials. Key issues revolved around tariffs imposed on Japanese imports, including a 10% baseline tariff and a 25% levy on cars, auto parts, steel, and aluminum. President Trump previously paused further tariff increases for 90 days, temporarily halting a proposed across-the-board 24% tariff on Japanese goods.

Japan, which maintains an average import tariff rate of just 1.9%, has expressed strong objections to the U.S. tariffs. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba emphasized Japan’s significant economic footprint in the U.S., highlighting billions in direct investments and the creation of American jobs. Tokyo’s concern centers on the economic damage the tariffs could cause to Japan’s export-driven economy. Already, the Nikkei 225 stock index has experienced notable declines, and Japanese economists warn of a potential GDP contraction if tariffs persist.

Despite these concerns, the Trump administration has shown no signs of backing down. Officials reaffirmed the president’s commitment to renegotiating trade deals in ways that prioritize American industries and reduce foreign trade imbalances.

Japan’s visit follows similar pressure faced by the European Union, with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni scheduled to meet President Trump later this month. The administration’s aggressive tariff strategy is part of a broader initiative to reset global trade dynamics in America’s favor.

No timeline was given for final resolutions, and the administration has left open the possibility of reinstating or expanding tariffs should negotiations stall.

Locked and Loaded IRS? Republicans Say Enough Is Enough

April 16, 2025

On April 16, Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL) introduced the “Why Does the IRS Need Guns Act,” aiming to prohibit the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from purchasing, receiving, or storing firearms and ammunition. The bill also mandates the transfer of existing IRS firearms and ammunition to the General Services Administration for auction, with proceeds directed toward deficit reduction.

The IRS website clearly states that its mission is “to provide America’s taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and to enforce the law with integrity and fairness to all.”

Rep. Moore, supported by co-sponsors Reps. Harriet Hageman (R-WY), Mary Miller (R-IL), and Clay Higgins (R-LA), argues that despite its mission, the IRS has been “weaponized” against American citizens.

The bill also proposes transferring the IRS Criminal Investigation Division to the Department of Justice, maintaining it as a distinct entity within the Criminal Division.

This legislative effort follows concerns over the IRS’s procurement of law enforcement equipment. Between 2006 and 2023, the agency reportedly spent $35.2 million on firearms, ammunition, and tactical gear.

In a press release, Moore asserted, “Arming these agents does not make the American public safer. My legislation, the Why Does the IRS Need Guns Act, would disarm these agents, auction off their guns to Federal Firearms License Owners, and sell their ammunition to the public. The only thing IRS agents should be armed with are calculators.”

The bill’s introduction aligns with broader Republican initiatives to reassess the IRS’s role and resources, including previous proposals to reallocate IRS agents to border enforcement duties.

UK Court Shocks Nation: Trans Women Not Legally ‘Women’

April 16, 2025

The UK Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Wednesday that the legal definition of “woman” under the Equality Act 2010 refers exclusively to biological sex, thereby excluding transgender women—even those with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs)—from this classification.

The case originated from a legal challenge by the advocacy group For Women Scotland against the Scottish government’s 2018 Gender Representation on Public Boards Act. This legislation aimed to ensure that 50% of public board members were women, including transgender women with GRCs in the count. For Women Scotland contended that this interpretation diluted sex-based protections intended for biological women.

The five-judge panel determined that interpreting “sex” to include gender reassignment status would render the Equality Act incoherent. They emphasized that while transgender individuals retain protections against discrimination under the characteristic of “gender reassignment,” certain sex-based rights and spaces—such as women-only shelters, hospital wards, and sports categories—can lawfully exclude transgender women.

Women’s rights groups and gender-critical activists celebrated the decision as a reaffirmation of biological definitions and protections. Author J.K. Rowling, a supporter of For Women Scotland, praised the ruling, stating it protected the rights of women and girls across the UK.

Conversely, LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations expressed deep concern. Stonewall described the ruling as “incredibly worrying” for the transgender community, warning it could lead to increased discrimination and exclusion from essential services.

The ruling has significant implications for public institutions and organizations across the UK. Entities such as hospitals, prisons, and sports bodies are now expected to review and potentially revise their policies to align with the clarified legal definitions. The Equality and Human Rights Commission has indicated it will update its guidance accordingly.

Puerto Rico Goes Dark: Massive Power Failure Sparks Outrage

April 16, 2025

On April 16, Puerto Rico experienced an island-wide blackout, leaving all 1.4 million power customers without electricity. The outage occurred as residents prepared for the Easter weekend, a time when hotels were nearly full with tourists. At least 78,000 residents also lost access to water. Power restoration is expected to take 48 to 72 hours, with only 5,000 to 7,000 customers regaining electricity by late Wednesday.

The cause of the outage is still unknown but is the latest in a series of blackouts since Hurricane Maria damaged the power grid in 2017. The growing frustration has led to renewed calls to end contracts with Luma Energy and Genera PR, responsible for power distribution and generation.

The blackout disrupted daily life, forcing businesses to close and public transportation to halt. With Puerto Rico’s poverty rate over 40% and limited access to backup power or renewables, the region remains vulnerable.

Officials, including the acting governor and Puerto Rico’s Congress representative, are seeking federal support to address the island’s persistent energy crisis, warning of deteriorating infrastructure and insufficient maintenance. The reliance on fossil fuels, combined with political uncertainty around renewable energy support, further complicates efforts to stabilize the grid.

This blackout is the latest in a series of significant blackouts that have plagued the island in recent years, following the devastation of Hurricane Maria in 2017, which destroyed much of the power grid.

The island’s aging power infrastructure has been a persistent source of frustration for residents, who face frequent outages and some of the highest electricity rates in the U.S.

Power outages have become so common in Puerto Rico that many residents have installed solar panels and batteries in their homes and businesses. The ongoing instability of the power grid has also led to protests, with many criticizing LUMA, which took over power transmission and distribution in 2021.

Puerto Rico has long dealt with chronic power outages, including a blackout on New Year’s Eve, as its infrastructure crumbles.

Genera added in a post on X it was working to bring backup units online and investigate the cause of the incident.

The island’s aging power infrastructure has been a persistent source of frustration for residents, who face frequent outages and some of the highest electricity rates in the U.S.

Power outages have become so common in Puerto Rico that many residents have installed solar panels and batteries in their homes and businesses. The ongoing instability of the power grid has also led to protests, with many criticizing LUMA, which took over power transmission and distribution in 2021.

Harvard’s Free Ride Is Over: Trump Launches IRS Bombshell

April 16, 2025

agreement — (Image by Pgiam/Getty Images)

Harvard University may soon lose its federal tax-exempt status, as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) advances action at the request of the Trump administration. The effort is part of a broader crackdown on what officials describe as ideological bias and political activism in higher education institutions receiving public funds.

The Trump administration has accused Harvard of resisting reforms to its academic and institutional policies. In response to the university’s refusal to comply with proposed federal mandates, the administration froze over $2.2 billion in federal grants and halted $60 million in government contracts previously allocated to Harvard.

President Trump took to Truth Social to criticize the institution, declaring that Harvard “should lose its Tax Exempt Status and be Taxed as a Political Entity.” The administration contends that Harvard has strayed from its educational mission and now functions as a politically active entity, using its resources to promote agendas inconsistent with its nonprofit status.

The IRS is expected to make a formal decision in the coming days. If approved, the move would have historic implications, marking one of the few times a major university could lose its federal tax-exempt standing due to alleged political activity. The decision would require Harvard to begin paying taxes on its massive endowment, which exceeds $50 billion, and could open the door for similar actions against other elite universities.

The administration’s push to reform higher education follows mounting criticism over campus policies perceived as hostile to free speech, religious values, and conservative viewpoints. Harvard has been at the center of controversy over its handling of antisemitism on campus and its response to national political events, leading to accusations of institutional bias and a lack of ideological diversity.

University officials have rejected the administration’s demands, arguing that the proposed changes would violate academic freedom and legal protections. Harvard maintains that it remains in compliance with federal law and its charter as an educational institution.

As the investigation concludes, the IRS’s final determination could significantly alter the financial and political landscape of higher education in the United States.

Top Cancer Center Scraps Key Program After Trump’s Bold Move

April 16, 2025

Seattle’s Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, one of the world’s leading research institutions, has announced the complete dismantling of its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in response to a new executive order by President Donald Trump. The decision follows a federal mandate tying future research funding to the termination of DEI-related activities, which the administration argues have politicized science and sidelined merit. Fred Hutch cancels DEI.

“Without these funds now or in the future, we can’t fulfill our mission,” Fred Hutch stated, noting that federal grants comprise more than 70% of its research budget—over $400 million annually. The cancer center has already removed its DEI webpage and scrubbed past program documentation from public view.

President Trump’s executive order, now being enforced across federal agencies, requires the elimination of DEI, DEIA (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility), and environmental justice initiatives. The order mandates a comprehensive review of hiring practices, contracts, and other DEI-linked performance standards, aiming to re-center agencies on mission-first objectives rather than ideological agendas.

The policy shift comes at a time of legal controversy for Fred Hutch. A former employee, Tammy Weitzman, is suing the institution for alleged antisemitism, political discrimination, and retaliation. Weitzman claims she was targeted and eventually fired after expressing concerns about radical messaging embedded in DEI training. Among the allegations: she was verbally harassed, mocked during DEI sessions, and reprimanded for treating the daughter of a former Trump official.

Weitzman recounted being called slurs including “white kke” and “white Canadian btch,” and said her complaints were ignored. Instead, she was directed to take more DEI training. When she objected to politicized materials being circulated in a healthcare setting, a DEI facilitator responded by accusing her of prioritizing her “white comfort” and referenced Trump-era politics to justify her stance.

Shortly after, Weitzman was fired for “ethnicity sensitivity” issues and “misalignment” with Fred Hutch’s mission. Her lawsuit, seeking at least $75,000 in damages, is ongoing.

Fred Hutch’s leadership insists its core mission remains intact despite the DEI rollback. “Fred Hutch promotes the belief that everyone deserves a life free from cancer,” the center stated. But for critics, the lawsuit and sudden shutdown of DEI programs expose deeper issues of political overreach and ideological bias in institutions intended to serve all patients—regardless of background or belief.

Top Trump Allies Suspended: Pentagon Leak Scandal Explodes

April 16, 2025

Three senior Pentagon officials appointed under President Trump have been suspended amid an internal investigation into national security leaks. The probe targets unauthorized disclosures of classified military activities and foreign policy decisions, raising alarms over internal breaches within the Department of Defense.

Dan Caldwell, a senior adviser to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth; Darin Selnick, deputy chief of staff; and Colin Carroll, chief of staff to Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg, have all been placed on administrative leave. These moves reflect the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance stance on security breaches and internal sabotage.

The investigation centers on a series of high-level leaks, including classified plans for military action in the Panama Canal zone, the strategic deployment of a second aircraft carrier to the Red Sea, and the suspension of intelligence activities tied to Ukraine. Also implicated in the leaks was information surrounding Elon Musk’s private visit to the Pentagon, which had not been previously disclosed to the public or Congress.

The effort to clamp down on these leaks accelerated after a March 21 memo from Joe Kasper, chief of staff to Secretary Hegseth. The memo directed all defense department staff to prepare for heightened security scrutiny, including polygraph testing, to root out internal threats to national security.

These administrative actions are not disciplinary at this stage but signal the seriousness of the breach. President Trump’s administration has consistently prioritized national defense integrity and has made clear that internal leaks will not be tolerated.

The Department of Defense has yet to comment on the identities of other potential subjects in the investigation, but officials confirm the probe remains ongoing. The timing of the leaks and the high-level access of the suspended officials indicate a coordinated effort to undermine operational security.

The Pentagon has not released a timeline for concluding the investigation, but officials have indicated that further actions—including possible criminal referrals—are on the table, depending on the findings.

Democrats Just Gutted a Parental Rights Law

April 16, 2025

Trans Flag — NEW YORK, NY - OCTOBER 24: L.G.B.T. activists and their supporters rally in support of transgender people on the steps of New York City Hall, October 24, 2018 in New York City. The group gathered to speak out against the Trump administration's stance toward transgender people. Last week, The New York Times reported on an unreleased administration memo that proposes a strict biological definition of gender based on a person's genitalia at birth. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Tensions erupted in the Washington State House on Monday as Democrats pushed through Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5181 (ESSB 5181), a move Republicans say effectively dismantles Parental Rights Initiative 2081—less than a year after it passed with broad bipartisan support and backing from nearly half a million voters.

In a fiery response, House Republicans condemned the process, calling it a “disgrace” and an “unprecedented abuse of power.” The outrage centers on a procedural rule change adopted earlier this session by House Democrats, replacing a 132-year-old rule requiring a two-thirds vote to end debate with a simple majority threshold. That change allowed Democrats to twice shut down Republican debate in under 90 minutes on one of the most consequential parental rights battles in state history.

Deputy Republican Leader Chris Corry (R-Yakima) blasted the move: “Democrats rewrote the rules at the start of session to muzzle the minority,” he said, adding that the suppression of debate on key amendments shows that “they don’t trust or value the will of the people.”

One of the most controversial moments came when Democrats blocked an amendment to remove the bill’s emergency clause—a provision that prevents the public from challenging the law via referendum. “The debate was about whether the people’s voice matters,” said Corry. “Democrats made it crystal clear: it doesn’t.”

House Republican Leader Drew Stokesbary (R-Auburn) declared April 14 a “dark day for representative government.” He warned that SB 5181 doesn’t just undermine Initiative 2081—it “erodes public trust in our schools” and sidelines parents. “Democrats didn’t need to silence us—they chose to,” he said. “That tells you everything you need to know.”

Common-sense Republican amendments were also struck down, including:

Same-sex locker room default access, with separate accommodations for transgender students.
A ban on biological males in all-girls competitive sports.
Parental notification when minors excuse themselves from class without consent.

Rep. Travis Couture (R-Allyn) highlighted that 229 of 280 Washington school districts currently allow self-excusal without notifying parents. “It’s outrageous. It’s dangerous. It could be deadly,” he said. “All we asked was that parents be told. Democrats said no.”

Despite the setback, Republicans vow to continue fighting for transparency and parental involvement. Rep. Dan Griffey (R-Allyn) summed up the stakes: “This is bigger than one bill. It’s about whether the people’s voice matters. Right now, House Democrats are making sure it doesn’t.”

BlockChain