via Wikimedia Commons

Slovenia has imposed an arms embargo on Israel, banning the export, import, and transit of weapons to and from the country.

This decision was announced by Prime Minister Robert Golob following a government session on July 31, 2025.

Slovenia claims to be the first European Union member to take such a step, citing the EU’s inability to act due to internal disagreements.

The government stated that no permits for military exports to Israel have been issued since October 2023, when the conflict in Gaza began.

Officials emphasized that the embargo is an independent measure to address the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Slovenia has repeatedly called for a ceasefire and increased aid deliveries to the region.

In early July 2025, Slovenia declared two Israeli ministers, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, persona non grata, barring them from entry.

This action was based on their public statements regarding the conflict. Earlier, in June 2024, Slovenia recognized Palestinian statehood, joining countries like Ireland, Norway, and Spain in this move.

The conflict in Gaza started after the October 7, 2023, attack by Hamas on Israeli territory, which resulted in over 1,200 deaths and the taking of hostages.

Israel responded with a military operation aimed at dismantling Hamas infrastructure. Reports from Gaza’s health ministry indicate significant casualties, with ongoing international efforts to negotiate truces and provide aid.

Several other nations have taken similar diplomatic steps, including France, Britain, and Canada announcing potential recognition of a Palestinian state. Australia has also indicated that recognizing Palestinian statehood is under consideration.

Israel has criticized these declarations, arguing they could reward Hamas for its actions.

Israeli officials dismissed Slovenia’s embargo as insignificant, noting that Israel does not procure any defense materials from Slovenia.

An unnamed official stated that the country buys nothing from Slovenia, not even minor items.

Within the EU, there is growing pressure for measures against Israel, with Sweden and the Netherlands advocating for suspending parts of the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

The European Commission has proposed limiting Israel’s participation in the Horizon research program, though Germany opposes such steps.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul expressed concerns about Israel’s potential diplomatic isolation during a visit to Jerusalem.

The United States remains a key ally to Israel, with President Donald Trump warning that recognizing Palestinian statehood might benefit Hamas.

U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff recently met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to advance Gaza truce talks. These efforts aim to address the humanitarian crisis and secure a ceasefire.

The post Slovenia Imposes Arms Embargo on Israel, Citing Gaza Conflict appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Vicky

Biden National Bar Association

Calls to release the Epstein files have grown louder in recent weeks—from both sides of the political aisle. While it is understandable that the public demands transparency from the government, what is most surprising is that figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer are now criticizing President Donald Trump for not releasing the files. 

Schumer insists that all Epstein-related documents be made public. But under President Biden’s administration, no such effort was made.

The truth is simple: if Democrats had wanted to release the Epstein files, they had four full years to do so. Yet at no point did President Biden or his Department of Justice prioritize the issue. If the release of these documents is now considered an urgent matter, where was that urgency then?

It is dishonest to pretend that former President Biden lacked the legal authority to act.

The executive branch—particularly the Department of Justice—has immense influence over whether investigative records are withheld or released. 

While not everything is directly under presidential control, the priorities of any administration are set from the top. Biden’s DOJ had full access to Epstein-related material held by federal agencies, including the FBI. 

Many of these documents could have been declassified or made public, especially those not tied to active investigations. And even when certain records are under judicial seal, the DOJ has the legal authority to file motions requesting their release, particularly when compelling public interest is at stake.

The same framework now applies to President Trump. If he decides to release all Epstein-related materials, he will face the same legal and political constraints.

The difference is that Democrats stayed largely silent while they held power—until now, when they use the Epstein files as a weapon against Trump.

So the question is obvious: Why didn’t Democrats push for the release of the Epstein files when they had the power to do so?

The answer is just as obvious: partisanship. Democrat Party leaders did not suddenly develop a moral commitment to transparency. They discovered a convenient line of attack. For four years, they said nothing. But now, when they see political advantage in the issue, they claim to be outraged.

What makes this shift even more troubling is that the Democrat Party routinely presents itself as the champion of victims, of women, and of the abused. Epstein’s crimes were monstrous. If anyone should have led a national push to expose every detail of his criminal network, it should have been those in power who claimed to represent the vulnerable. But they did not. 

Now, with Biden no longer at the center of the issue, they act as if they care.

That said, there is a legitimate debate over whether full disclosure of the Epstein files—particularly sealed grand jury material—is in the public’s best interest. Grand jury records are not evidence.

They are not the product of trial, nor have they been scrutinized through legal due process. In many cases, they consist of unverified allegations.

We’ve already seen the damage this can cause. Take Alan Dershowitz, who was never charged with a crime but was Epstein’s lawyer. His name was dragged through the media for years. Despite ultimately clearing his name, he spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal battles—and his reputation will never fully recover. That kind of damage cannot be undone.

Do we want to risk subjecting dozens of others to the same treatment simply because they once interacted with Epstein?

There are serious, good-faith arguments on both sides. Transparency matters. So does justice. But so do due process and the presumption of innocence. Whatever decision is made regarding the files will carry legitimacy.

What is not acceptable, however, is the cynical use of this issue as a partisan tool. Either both administrations had the authority to act, or neither did. Democrats cannot rewrite history. They had the chance to release the Epstein files. They chose not to.

The post BIDEN COULD HAVE RELEASED THE EPSTEIN FILES… HE DIDN’T appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Vicky

Credit: Court TV screenshot

A stunning verdict was reached earlier this week in the case of two Muslim immigrants living in Washington State who stood accused of one of the most unimaginable crimes.

As Fox 13 reported, both the mother and father were found not guilty on Thursday of attempting an “honor killing” of their 17-year-old daughter. Back in October, they were accused of trying to murder their daughter after she refused to go to their native Iraq and marry an older man.

A jury in Lacey, Washington found 44-year-old Ihsan Ali, the victim’s dad, not guilty of second-degree attempted murder and first-degree assault. Instead, they found him guilty of second-degree and fourth-degree assault and unlawful imprisonment.

The victim’s mom, 40-year-old Zahraa Ali, was found guilty of violating a protective order but acquitted of second-degree attempted murder, second-degree assault, and second-degree burglary.

Here is the moment the verdict was rendered:

The jury reaches a verdict in the case against Ihsan and Zahraa Ali, who are facing attempted murder charges. #CourtTV What do YOU think? https://t.co/4EMLGk13Zx pic.twitter.com/AvS6cfINTC

— Court TV (@CourtTV) July 31, 2025

This verdict came despite the video showing them apparently doing exactly what they were accused of. Moreover, their daughter openly stated she feared for her life.

WATCH:

Attempted Islamic honor killing: Two fundamentalist Muslim migrants from Iraq are on trial in Olympia, Wash. over a horrific attack on their teen daughter outside Timberline High School last year. Prosecutors say Ihsan Ali and Zahraa Ali strangled the girl to try to kill her as… pic.twitter.com/UnUbCvyefx

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) July 17, 2025

As The Gateway Pundit reported, court records state Ihsan Ali was choking his 17-year-old daughter to the point where she had lost consciousness as other students, including the girl’s boyfriend, tried to pull her away.

Witnesses revealed the daughter’s eyes rolled back as her father tried to suffocate her.

Court documents also note that the girl’s mother, Zahraa Ali, attempted to choke the girl. She was in a headlock after her mother grabbed her and was “knocked out” for an indeterminant period of time.

Amid intervention from others, the girl ran into the school and told officials, “My dad was trying to kill me, he was trying to kill me.”

School officials then ordered a lockdown and barred the girl’s parents from entering the school.

“The dad was on his back, and his daughter was on top of him, and he had her in a choke hold,” witness Josh Wagner said.

The post Muslim Migrants Found NOT GUILTY of Attempted “Honor Killing” Despite Being Caught on Tape Violently Assaulting Daughter Allegedly For Not Wanting to Marry Older Muslim Man (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Vicky