Consumer health: Extent of added sugar to beverages revealed


By Dr. Tim Sandle
SCIENCE EDITOR

DIGITAL JOURNAL
September 19, 2025


Various soft drinks in a vending machine. Image by Tim Sandle

On average, people around the world consume 17 kilograms of sugar per year, almost three times the daily limit recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). This includes many beverages that contain high levels of sugar.

Sugar in drinks, particularly sugar-sweetened beverages like soda, sweetened teas, fruit drinks, and sports drinks, contributes empty calories with little nutritional value and is linked to health issues such as weight gain, type 2 diabetes, and increased risk of heart disease and early death.

A new study by Ben’s Natural Health, an online supplement shop, set out to identify which drinks contain the highest amounts of sugar.

The study looked at two key factors: the amount of sugar per 100 ml of each drink and how this compares to the WHO’s daily recommended limit (50 g of free sugars per day). The study also used the American Heart Association’s (AHA) stricter limits of 25 g/day for women and 36 g/day for men. These two measures, sugar per 100 ml and % of WHO’s daily limit, were then combined to create a Sugar Load Index. Additional factors, such as the number of teaspoons of sugar in one drink, the AHA’s recommendations, and the total sugar per serving size, were also considered to provide further context.

The drinks analysed were selected based on their popularity, especially among younger consumers, with dairy and alternative milks averaged in the coffee and milk-based categories.

Highest levels of sugar in soft drinks

Drink	Size (ml)	Sugar (g)	g/100ml	% WHO (50g)	Sugar Load Index
Monster	473	54	11.42	108%	79.4
Grape juice	250	36	14.40	72%	75.6
Fruit smoothie	450	49	10.89	98%	72.6
Chai Latte	355	42	11.83	84%	63.6
Pepsi	355	41	11.55	82%	58.1
Chai Latte (Alternative milks (avg))	355	41	11.55	82%	56.9
Coca-Cola	355	39	10.99	78%	52.6
Sprite	355	38	10.70	76%	52.5
Green smoothie	450	42	9.33	84%	52.0
Strawberry milk	250	28	11.20	56%	49.9

From the above table, Monster Energy contains the highest sugar content of all drinks, earning 79.4 on the sugar load index. A single can contains almost 14 teaspoons of sugar. It’s also the only drink where one serving alone exceeds the WHO’s recommended daily limit, quickly pushing people over the daily norm.

Grape juice takes second place, scoring 75.6 on the sugar load index. In just 250 ml, the smallest serving on the list, it contains 36 g of sugar, or 9 teaspoons, giving it the highest sugar content per 100 ml. That single serving accounts for 72% of the WHO’s recommended daily sugar limit.

Fruit smoothies hold third place, with a sugar load index of 72.6. Each serving contains 50g of sugar, the second highest on the list, accounting for almost the full daily sugar threshold recommended by the WHO. The AHA highlights this as especially concerning for women, as a single serving contains nearly double the recommended daily sugar intake.

Chai lattes rank in fourth place, scoring 63.6 on the sugar load index. A 355 ml serving contains 42 g of sugar, 6 g more than grape juice. Its sugar content per 100 ml is also high, at 11.83 g, the second highest on the list. Similar to fruit smoothies, women need to drink chai lattes carefully, as a single serving provides 68% more than the daily sugar threshold recommended by the AHA.

Pepsi rounds out the top five drinks with the highest contents of sugar, earning 58.1 on the sugar load index. A 355 ml can contains 41 g of sugar, sitting just below chai lattes for the same serving size. Its sugar content is also similar at 11.55 g per 100ml, which is nearly 11 teaspoons of sugar in a single serving.

Chai lattes made with alternative milks stand in sixth place, scoring 56.9 on the final index. It contains 41 g of sugar per serving, just 1 g less than a chai latte with regular milk. Overall, this drink mirrors Pepsi, with the same sugar density and proportion of daily sugar limits.

Coca-Cola takes seventh place as the drink with the highest concentration of sugar, scoring 52.6 on the sugar load index. Just one can delivers nearly 10 teaspoons of sugar, covering 78% of the WHO’s recommended daily intake, six percent more than grape juice.

Sprite comes in eighth place, scoring 52.5 on the sugar load index. A 355 ml serving contains 38 g of sugar, equivalent to 9.5 teaspoons, making it one of the sweetest sodas on the list. Its sugar density is similar to Coca-Cola at 10.7 g per 100 ml, and this serving accounts for 76% of the WHO’s daily sugar limit.

Green smoothies claim ninth position, with a sugar load index of 52. Each 450 ml serving contains 42g of sugar, surpassing both Coca-Cola and Sprite. While often perceived as a “healthy” choice, it contains sugar that exceeds recommended intake for men and women alike, 68% more of the daily limit for women and 17% for men, according to the AHA.

Strawberry milk comes in tenth, finishing off the list of the drinks with the most sugar, scoring 52 on the sugar load index. 11% of one drink is sugar, thanks to its 28 g, or 7 teaspoons. This single serving represents 82% of the WHO’s recommended daily intake.

These are important health findings. People who drink sugary beverages do not feel as full as if they had eaten the same calories from solid food, and research indicates they also do not compensate for the high caloric content of these beverages by eating less food.

'Wrong to weigh in': GOP senator condemns FCC chair's 'absolutely inappropriate' move

David Edwards
September 21, 2025 
RAW STORY




NBC/screen grab

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) condemned Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr after he pushed Disney to take late-night host Jimmy Kimmel off the air.

In a Sunday interview on NBC, host Kristen Welker noted that Carr had reacted to the shooting of Charlie Kirk by threatening Disney.

"We can do this the easy way or the hard way," Carr said at the time. "These companies can find ways to change conduct to take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or, you know, there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead."

Paul called the remarks "absolutely inappropriate."

"Brennan Carr has got no business weighing in on this," the Republican senator insisted. "But people have to also realize that despicable comments, you have the right to say them, but you don't have the right to employment."

"You can be fired," he continued. "So the FCC should have nothing to do with it."

"The government's got no business in it, and the FCC was wrong to weigh in, and I'll fight any attempt by the government to get involved with speech."

'Makes no economic sense': Trump adviser flips on tariffs five months after praising them

Tom Boggioni
September 18, 2025 
RAW STORY

Donald Trump holds a board while Heritage Foundation fellow Steve Moore speaks. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

With Donald Trump out of the country, one of his most prominent economic advisers is bashing him for costing America jobs.

The U.S. president is currently in the UK, being feted with banquets and parades, while the effects of his trade war with the world are taking effect and that has alarmed Stephen Moore, long associated with Trump going back to his first stint as president.

In a column for the Wall Street Journal, Moore lashed out at Trump’s aluminum tariffs, explaining it is not only crippling job creation but that they make no “economic sense.”

That is a far cry from the stance he took in April of this year when he told Fox News personality Sean Hannity, “Nobody in the media will give Trump, you know, a fair hearing here. It looks like he's getting these deals coming in, and that is good for America. In fact, frankly, it's good for some of these other countries -- to American farmers and American manufacturing products and our technology products. So it looks to me, Sean, like this is kind of going according to plan.”

Almost five months later, he is no longer so sure.

“If left to stand, President Trump’s June order to raise the tax on imported aluminum to 50% will almost certainly cost far more manufacturing jobs than it will save,” he wrote late Wednesday.

He went on to report that “Novelis alone is one of the world’s largest producers of aluminum for cans of beer and soft drinks,” and now a proposed $4.1 billion plan in Alabama is facing suspension and thousands of jobs may disappear.

"The U.S. manufacturers hit by Mr. Trump’s tariffs are frustrated. They provide good jobs to Americans yet are getting hammered. Many also compete directly with China—which will be the big winner of the aluminum tariffs. Mr. Trump promised that ‘there are no tariffs if you manufacture or build your product in the United States.’ That has proved utterly untrue," he accused.

With that, he advised, “If the administration really wants a return of good blue-collar jobs, the president should immediately cancel, or at least suspend, the aluminum tariffs. It could be prudent to offer firms a rebate for aluminum producers reshoring jobs to America, which many of these companies are."


"Punishing U.S. manufacturers and their hardworking employees is hardly putting America first,” he lectured.

You can read more here

What is behind Trump’s AI action plan?


By Dr. Tim Sandle
SCIENCE EDITOR

DIGITAL JOURNAL
September 21, 2025


Image: — © AFP

Looking at the ramifications of the plan for Digital Journal is deepfake and AI fraud expert Joshua McKenty: former Chief Cloud Architect at NASA and the Co-Founder and CEO of Polyguard.

With over 20 years of experience, McKenty has deep insights into the evolving threat landscape and the national security implications of AI misuse, the gaps in current policy, and how these executive orders may (or may not) shift the game when it comes to safeguarding public discourse and digital trust. This is because, at its heart, the plan is all about accelerating AI innovation through deregulation.


Trump is directing U.S. government departments to revise their artificial intelligence risk management frameworks.

The new Trump plan directs the U.S. Department of Commerce to revise artificial intelligence risk management frameworks. These could undo protections that were set to be put in place in order for a firm to do business with the federal government.

According to McKenty, this latest proclamation does not fully help the U.S. to leap forward in the development of AI: “On the creation of “AI Information Sharing and Analysis Center” led by the Department of Homeland Security to overwatch AI-linked cybersecurity threats:

The US is dangerously behind in their response to emerging AI-powered cybersecurity attacks, as evidenced by the recent mishandling of deepfake attacks on Marco Rubio, Rick Crawford and others.”

However, the proclamation will help the sector to develop: “It’s encouraging to see the White House finally take AI threats seriously – but urgency without coordination risks compounding the problem. The challenge ahead isn’t just standing up new programs, it’s making sure they actually work.”

AI-specific cybersecurity guidance for the private sector

In terms of the cyber-threats and where AI can help, McKenty observes: “As we work to establish bilateral communication channels between the federal government and the private sector, it’s important to build on the existing cybersecurity guidance already coming from the FBI, CISA, NSA and the DOD Cybercrime Center. What’s needed is clever coordination and actionable intelligence.”

On workforce development

It is also important, according to McKenty , that the U.S. develops the skills necessary to meet the AI development challenge: “The U.S. faces a growing talent gap in AI. While demand for skilled professionals is accelerating, our pipeline of trained engineers, researchers, and cybersecurity experts isn’t keeping pace. Closing the gap will require long-term investment in STEM education, immigration pathways for top talent and stronger industry-academic collaboration.”

AI Risk Management Framework

Returning to the topic of risk, McKenty sets out the policy framework that should be adopted to mitigate the risks faced by the sector: “NIST’s framework is one of the few widely respected tools for managing AI risk. Revisions should focus on technical clarity, threat modelling, operational usability, and science – not politics. Stripping out key areas that address misinformation or emergent behaviour would make the framework less relevant just as the stakes are getting higher.”

Oxford exposé: How chatbot “therapy” is failing vulnerable users


By Dr. Tim Sandle
SCIENCE EDITOR
DIGITAL JOURNAL
September 21, 2025


Can we rely on mental health apps? Image by Tim Sandle

AI “therapist” chatbots—such as ChatGPT, Woebot, Replika, and Wysa—have surged in popularity, promising instant, affordable mental-health support at any hour. According to a recent Global Overview of ChatGPT Usage report, approximately 17% of U.S. adults now consult AI tools like ChatGPT monthly for health or personal advice, making them a common first stop for sensitive issues.

This usage is rising in response to overwhelming need: the World Health Organization estimates a global shortfall of 1.2 million mental-health workers, creating long wait times and high treatment costs that push millions toward digital alternatives. Some tech executives now envision a future where “everyone will have an AI therapist”—if not a human one.

But a study from the University of Oxford published this year reveals that these AI-based “therapists” may carry profound risks. Corroborating research from institutions like Stanford warns that these tools may not only fall short—they can actively harm vulnerable users.
Oxford Study: AI Missing Empathy and Judgment

Oxford researchers recently conducted a broad evaluation of AI health tools, testing several popular chatbots across simulated clinical scenarios. Their conclusions were critical:Lack of nuanced judgment: While AI can rapidly generate responses based on massive datasets, it “lacks the emotional intelligence and context-sensitivity” that human therapists bring—especially in culturally complex or overlapping cases.
Risk of misinterpretation: Chatbot responses, when not clarified by a human, can lead to misdiagnosis or misinformed coping behaviors—potentially delaying essential treatment.
Exacerbation of disparities: Marginalized or under-resourced communities may be disproportionately affected, as they rely more heavily on low-cost AI solutions. The study emphasizes that these are systemic risks, not isolated glitches.

Oxford’s researchers concluded that AI must never replace human care, and should be used only under strict ethical guidelines, with real-time human-in-the-loop oversight and rigorous clinical validation.
The Empathy Deficit: Why Machines Can’t Truly Care

At the core of therapy lies empathy—something AI simply cannot replicate. According to Oxford neurophilosopher Nayef Al-Rodhan:AI has no real emotions: Without lived experience or emotional consciousness, machines can’t truly “feel” empathy.
Scripted comfort: Chatbots use algorithmic pattern-matching to simulate concern—what Al-Rodhan bluntly calls “pretending to care.”
Biological absence: Human empathy arises from complex mirror-neuron networks; machines have no equivalent.

This “empathy gap” creates dangerous illusions of connection. As it is warned AI cannot replicate genuine human empathy. At best, you get a clever simulation; at worst, a hollow façade.
When Chatbots Get It Dangerously Wrong

A June 2025 study by Stanford researchers found that popular therapy chatbots frequently stumble in ways that would be unthinkable for licensed clinicians:Stigmatizing bias: Some bots showed discriminatory responses—for example, treating schizophrenia or addiction more harshly than depression, reinforcing stigma.
Missed crisis signals: In one scenario, a suicidal user asked about high bridges. The chatbot replied cheerfully with bridge-height data, missing the obvious red flag.
No crisis intervention: Unlike a therapist who would respond with a safety plan, the chatbot kept sharing irrelevant or harmful information.

These findings echo real-world incidents. In 2023, the National Eating Disorder Association removed its chatbot after it advised teenagers to try dangerously restrictive diets. More recently, OpenAI was forced to retract a ChatGPT update after it began validating users’ paranoid delusions—raising serious concerns about unintended psychological reinforcement.
Emotional and Ethical Pitfalls

The risks of relying on chatbot therapists extend beyond the clinical:Erosion of social ties: Dependence on bots may weaken real human relationships, as users substitute AI for friends or family.
Worsening isolation: The illusion of companionship may intensify loneliness when users realize the machine cannot truly respond to their emotions.
Dependency risk: A 24/7 chatbot can deter people from seeking actual help, especially when it becomes a crutch.
Privacy violations: Unlike human therapists bound by ethics laws, chatbot logs may be stored, analyzed, or breached—as shown in several health-tech data scandals.
Unregulated manipulation: Some chatbots falsely claim to be licensed therapists, blurring ethical lines and preying on desperation.
Anthropomorphism risk: A University of Cambridge study found that children and adults often treat bots as human-like companions—only to feel abandoned or betrayed when they fail to respond meaningfully.
Augmenting, Not Replacing, Human Care

AI has a role—but only under careful guardrails. AI can help:Support users between sessions with mood tracking or CBT exercises
Guide users to resources like crisis lines or local clinics
Extend access during off-hours

But this support must come with:Clinical trials and outcome-based evaluations
Human oversight by licensed professionals
Data transparency, informed consent, and strong privacy laws
Strict regulation, akin to medical device standards

Therapy is a deeply human process—requiring empathy, ethical reasoning, and emotional presence. While AI can expand access, it cannot substitute what truly heals. As the Oxford study concludes, positioning chatbots as “therapists” without proper oversight risks harm, disillusionment, and systemic failure in mental-health care.

'What could possible go wrong?' Outrage as Trump announces the Murdochs could own TikTok

Rupert Murdoch by Eva Rinaldi, Wikipedia

Ailia Zehra

September 21, 2025 

ALTERNET

In an interview on Fox News aired Sunday, President Donald Trump said that conservative media moguls Lachlan Murdoch and his father Rupert Murdoch are expected to join a U.S.-based investor group that would assume control of TikTok’s U.S. operations.

Trump also named tech figures Larry Ellison and Michael Dell as likely partners in the deal.
“I hate to tell you this, but a man named Lachlan is involved. Lachlan is, that’s a very unusual name, Lachlan Murdoch,” Trump told Fox's Peter Dpocy.

“And Rupert is probably going to be in the group. I think they’re going to be in the group.”

The deal stems from the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), passed in April last year. Under that law, ByteDance (TikTok’s Chinese parent) must divest its interests in TikTok’s U.S. operations by a set deadline, or the app faces a ban in the United States.

Lachlan Murdoch is chairman and CEO of Fox Corporation, which owns conservative network Fox News and several other media assets. He recently consolidated his control over the family media holdings.

Rupert Murdoch is the elder Murdoch, the veteran media tycoon. He founded or built much of what is now Fox News, Fox Corporation, News Corp, etc.

The president's announcement led to strong reactions on social media.

Activist Melanie D'Arrigo wrote: "Trump’s mega-donors, and the owners of Fox News, will control what you see on TikTok. Elon Musk, who gave Trump $290M, controls what you see on X. Trump mega-donor Mark Zuckerberg controls what you see on Facebook, Instagram and Threads. Social media is now a right-wing op."

Journalist Jeremy Barr noted: "Trump seems to have broken the news that Lachlan and Rupert Murdoch are 'probably' going to be part of the TikTok group."

Podcaster and former Obama advisor Tommy Vietor wrote: "To sum it up: - Murdochs and Trump supporters will own TikTok - Elon Musk owns Twitter - Mark Zuckerberg is an amoral choad who is for whoever is in power - Bari Weiss will run CBS News - ABC bends the knee to any threat - MSNBC is dying Look at all the liberal media bias!"

Influencer Hayden Clarkin wrote: "TikTok owned by Fox News, what could possibly go wrong?"

Behind the curtain: Trump's mounting 'coup' takes a dangerous turn

In an article for Salon published Sunday, the outlet’s executive editor, Andrew O’Hehir, argues that Americans have been given a harsh reminder: Democracy isn’t guaranteed, and beyond merely consenting to be governed, citizens must take an active role to defend it.

He warned that many of the formal institutions, especially the U.S. Constitution, are showing signs of decay, undermined “from within” by what he sees as encroaching authoritarianism.

O'Hehir writes that the confrontation over late-night host Jimmy Kimmel’s show is presented not as just a media squabble, but a test case.

"Jimmy Kimmel’s cancellation is a test case, designed to measure the breadth and power of the accelerating authoritarian coup now underway in America," he said.

Late-night comedy and other cultural institutions become battlegrounds, in part because they sit at the intersection of public opinion, dissent, and broad reach, he noted.

O’Hehir added that large media companies, many now under oligarchic ownership or dominated by finance capital and big tech, are becoming more reliant on those in power.

"The MAGA assault on late-night comedy — which is doubly vulnerable, as both a fading cultural institution and the veritable definition of First Amendment-protected speech — represents a kind of pincer movement, bringing together multiple overlapping fascist tendencies," he wrote.

"On one hand, we see the consolidation of mainstream media companies, now increasingly under the oligarchic control of Big Tech and finance capital, and increasingly dependent on the corrupt Trump regime to approve their corrupt cartel-building mergers and acquisitions. On the other, we see the regime’s undisguised campaign to restrict and punish dissent, and to redefine 'free speech' as a conditional benefit conferred only on its most loyal grovelers and forelock-tuggers, and subject to revocation at any time.

He cited Sinclair and Nexstar as examples of companies that pushed against Kimmel, seemingly aligning with Trump-friendly narratives.

The editor argued that many of the pillars of democracy — courts, civil service, justice departments, regulatory agencies — are weakened, co-opted, or acting as enforcers of the regime rather than checks upon it.

"The Supreme Court has given Trump free rein, the FBI and Justice Department have become his enforcers, the civil service has been co-opted and subverted, the public health agencies have been conquered by moonbats and Republican state legislatures are doing their best to rig the midterm elections. As [Bill] Curry puts it, leaders at white-shoe law firms, elite universities and major foundations have repeatedly surrendered without a shot, revealing themselves as 'traitors, cowards, rank opportunists or simply inept.'"

MAGA'S HORST WESSEL

MAGA influencer calls on Trump to use 'the sword' against enemies of conservative 'martyr'

Robert Davis
September 21, 2025 
RAW STORY

RSBN screenshot


MAGA influencer Benny Johnson called on President Donald Trump and his administration to 'wield the sword' against the enemies of slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk during Kirk's memorial service in Glendale, Arizona, on Sunday.

Johnson, who hosts an eponymous MAGA podcast, made the comments during his speech at Kirk's memorial. The service was attended by high-profile administration figures like Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and Trump himself.

During his speech, Johnson compared the Trump administration to the "godly government" that the Apostle Paul wrote about in the Book of Romans. He said God saved Trump's life from an assassin's bullet so that he could lead the country through the aftermath of Kirk's death.

Johnson also lobbed a thinly veiled threat of violence against those he considers "evil men" following Kirk's assassination.

"And what does the Apostle Paul say in Romans about a godly leadership?" Johnson asked. "He says that rules wield the sword for the protection of good men and for the terror of evil men."

"May we pray that our rules here, rightfully instituted and given power by our god, wield the sword for the terror of evil men in our nation in Charlie's memory," he added.

Johnson also compared Kirk to Stephen from the Book of Acts. Stephen is the Christian tradition's first martyr because he was stoned to death for his faith.

"Charlie Kirk is a martyr in the true Christian tradition," Johnson said. "If you cut down a tyrant, his power goes away. If you take out a martyr, his power grows, and that's what we see time and time again. We're seeing it across this country."

"The power of Christ's blood and the power of martyrdom speak through Charlie," he continued

'MAGA is a cult': Observers slam Charlie Kirk memorial as 'weird and embarrassing'

Robert Davis
September 21, 2025 
RAW STORY


U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks during a memorial service for slain conservative commentator Charlie Kirk at State Farm Stadium, in Glendale, Arizona, U.S., September 21, 2025. REUTERS/Daniel Cole

Political commentators and analysts on Sunday slammed the MAGA-led memorial service for slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Kirk was killed almost two weeks ago when he was struck by a single bullet while speaking at a Utah university campus, while giving a speech. His death has become a political flashpoint, with conservatives seeking to lionize Kirk while some Democrats have criticized some of Kirk's ideas.

A memorial service for Kirk was held in his hometown of Glendale, Arizona, on Sunday. It was attended by multiple high-profile MAGA members like President Donald Trump, his son Donald Jr., and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Several left-wing commentators and analysts responded to the memorial service on social media.

"MAGA is a cult," left-wing analyst Wajahat Ali posted on Bluesky. "Normies around the world, the majority, rightfully look at them as unhinged. We have the numbers. Don't bow down or be silenced. Also, don't make Charlie Kirk into a saint. Use your free speech to accurately call out his life that was lived in hate."

"Thing about this is that Charlie Kirk *was* a racist transphobic neonazi creep," podcaster Andrew Hickey posted on Bluesky. "Also misogynist and antisemitic. He was pure distilled hatred and evil. It's bad that he was shot, but that doesn't mean he was any less of a monster."

"All I can say is, this whole Charlie Kirk shit is weird and embarrassing," Josh Sternberg, executive editor of Morning Brew, posted on Bluesky.

"Charlie Kirk referred to slain civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as 'an awful' person," USA Today opinion columnist Michael Stern posted on Bluesky. "And MAGA are going crazy if liberals do the same?"

"I will not whitewash the white supremacist that was Charlie Kirk," writer Mona Eltahawy posted on Bluesky. "For someone so young, what an embarrassment of hatreds he left us to excoriate him with

'Teachers are terrorists': Steve Bannon amps up rhetoric at Charlie Kirk memorial

David Edwards
September 21, 2025
RAW STORY




Real America's Voice/screen grab

MAGA influencer Steve Bannon used a broadcast from Charlie Kirk's memorial to accuse many of America's teachers of being "terrorists."

Bannon made the remarks at State Farm Stadium on Sunday while hosting the memorial for Real America's Voice after co-host Gina Loudon noted that the late conservative activist had been "an advocate of marriage" and having "lots of children."

"These are not popular on college campuses right now, right?" Loudon said.

"Well, I actually think they are popular," Bannon replied, "but it's not the way those kids — look, from kindergarten all the way up, they are essentially, you know, a third of the teachers are terrorists that are trying to form them."

"You look at all this radical, the way they're formed," he added. "I think underneath, though, and that's why Charlie was supposed to — brought such a big audience, because it's a big part of Turning Point."

11 Questions the Western Media Should Be Investigating About the Gaza Genocide

Genocide thrives in darkness, so won’t some committed journalists shine a light?



TRT Arabi Reporter, Reba Khalid al-Ajami, reports from Gaza amid ongoing Israeli attacks in Rafah, Gaza on February 29, 2024.
(Photo by Abed Zagout/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Ralph Nader
Sep 21, 2025

Common Dreams


Some serious readers would like to see mainstream media and independent media cover several events and matters involving the Israeli war in tiny Gaza and the mass slaughter of its defenseless citizens.Israel keeps exaggerating the status and threat of the Hamas government, which is ridiculous. What about an article on what is left of Hamas, never a threat with a few thousand fighters with small arms and limited ammunition, hiding in tunnels, until the mysterious collapse on October 7, 2023 of the super-modern, multi-tiered border security system, all at the same time? What are the Israeli casualty figures in the past year in Gaza besides accidents and friendly fire? 

WHAT ABOUT THE VAST DEATH AND SERIOUS INJURY UNDERCOUNT? (See, “65 Doctors, Nurses, and Paramedics: What We Saw in Gaza” by Feroze Sidhwa, New York Times, Sunday, October 13, 2024; 

The Lancet, “Counting the dead in Gaza: Difficult but essential,” my column of March 28, 2025, “The Vast Gaza Death Undercount–Undermines Civic, Diplomatic and Political Pressures,” and my article in the August-September 2024 Capitol Hill Citizen).

What is the situation in the Israeli prisons housing many thousands of Palestinians without charges (they are hostages too), and their mistreatment, including torture, documented by some Israeli prison doctors and domestic Israeli reports? Most of the media attention has been on the Israeli hostages in Gaza.

What is the nature and scope of the Israeli resistance groups, dissenting reservists, and retired officials, the human rights groups, and others? It takes a lot of courage on their part to stand up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In May of this year, Yair Golan, former Israeli deputy minister of economy, said, “A sane country does not wage war against civilians, does not kill babies as a pastime, and does not engage in mass population displacement.”

When Netanyahu rarely admits a “mistake” in hitting, for example, the medic team, the World Food Program vehicles, the ancient Catholic Church, and just recently Nasser hospital with a “double tap,” is there any demand for payment of damages to next of kin and property? The US Army in Afghanistan paid families $20,000 when they admitted to a civilian homicide.

Why isn’t there a follow-up every time the Israeli government promises an investigation? What are the findings and sanctions of these many official inquiries that are announced to get the media off the Israeli government’s back on the day of the atrocity?

What about a story on the sadistic snipers, who operate without rules of engagement, in this Palestinian Holocaust, and savagely kill infants, children, people desperately digging into the rubble to rescue loved ones, etc.? How are they chosen? They compete with one another with the most brutal, touted examples of their executions, their favorite prey being pregnant women, according to Israeli reporters.

Why isn’t more made of what is being denied the American public (aka taxpayers) when no US journalists are allowed into Gaza, along with other foreign and Israeli journalists similarly barred? Genocides thrive in darkness.

What about some reporting on claims that some Israeli opponents of the Netanyahu regime believe it has a devastating dossier on US President Donald Trump, which accounts for the 100% backing by toady Trump, even more than by toady Joe Biden?

Why is so little written about Israel enforcing an illegal embargo on Gaza that became far more savage after October 7—“no food, water, medicine, healthcare, fuel, electricity,” etc.? How come there seems to be an ample supply of shrouds? Some observers in Israel believe there is an underground trade in this product. There is no capacity to produce them in the tens of thousands or more inside Gaza, which is almost totally destroyed.

What about long-overdue features on the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s power or a feature on Veterans for Peace blacked out by the major newspapers? 

Go to veteransforpeace.org and see for yourself if they are newsworthy. More coverage of the 50 Flotilla ships, which have passengers from 43 countries, and their safety is in order.

Why is the “other antisemitism” totally ignored by the media? This “other antisemitism” is far more violent, with F-16s and other American-built weaponry daily and genocidally mass slaughtering starving civilian Palestinian semites.

Scholar Dr. Jim Zogby delivered an address years ago at an Israeli University titled “The Other Antisemitism,” and also engaged two Jewish Americans on this topic in a civil exchange seen on the website DebatingTaboos.org.

UN votes to let Palestinian leader address General Assembly by video after US visa denial

Associated Press
Fri, September 19, 2025 

 Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas addresses the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Sept. 26, 2024, at U.N. headquarters. (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II, File)

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The United Nations General Assembly on Friday voted to allow Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to address its annual meeting of world leaders by video after the United States revoked his visa last month. The motion passed by a vote of 145-5, with six abstentions.

Abbas had hoped to attend a meeting next week called for by France and Saudi Arabia aimed at advancing a two-state solution to the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict. France, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia plan to recognize a Palestinian state.

The United States is opposed to those efforts, saying the promise of statehood has emboldened Hamas and made it more difficult to reach a deal for a ceasefire and hostage release in the Gaza Strip. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government was opposed to Palestinian statehood before the war triggered by Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack, and now says it would reward the militant group.

The ceasefire talks stalled after the Trump administration's Mideast envoy, Steve Witkoff, walked away from them in July, blaming Hamas, and suffered another blow when Israel carried out a strike targeting Hamas leaders in Qatar, which has served as a mediator throughout the war.

The U.S. State Department revoked the visas of around 80 Palestinian officials last month, including Abbas, accusing the Palestinian leadership of undermining peace efforts.

Days ahead of the General Assembly vote, a number of U.S. allies including France and the U.K. had tried to urge the U.S. to reconsider its visa ban for Abbas. The decision by the Trump administration has received widespread backlash. The U.N. has called it a violation of the Host Country agreement the U.S. made with the international organization that requires it to allow heads of state and government to travel to New York for diplomatic work and for the annual gatherings.

France and Saudi Arabia have advanced a phased plan for the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, territories Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war. It would be governed by Abbas' Palestinian Authority with international assistance.

The Palestinian Authority is led by rivals of Hamas and currently administers parts of the Israeli-occupied West Bank. It recognizes Israel and cooperates with it on security matters, but the Israeli government says the authority is not truly committed to peace and accuses it of incitement.

Many Palestinians view the Palestinian Authority's leaders as corrupt and autocratic. Polls in recent years have shown that a vast majority want the 89-year-old Abbas, whose mandate expired in 2009, to resign. There have been no national elections since 2006, when Hamas won in a landslide.

American History Is Black History: We Will Not Be Erased

We will become loud about who we are, what we have experienced, and how we have overcome the impossible.


Guests tour the “Slavery & Freedom” exhibit at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History & Culture in Washington, DC, on Friday, February 3, 2017.
(Photo by Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler
Sep 21, 2025

Common Dreams

The Trump-MAGA-white supremacist administration is ordering the removal from displays information and depictions of the era of slavery in the United States. One of the most emblematic images of enslavement is the graphic and soul-shocking image called “The Scourged Back” that depicts the back of Peter Gordon photographed circa 1863 in Louisiana. It shows graphically his healed but black keloid bareback. The photograph of his scarred back yells loudly the horrors and brutality of enslavement. The wounds on Peter Gordon’s back were inflicted on him by his so-called owner.

To remove the histories and experiences of Black people in the US is part of the educational pogrom enacted to “whitewash” America’s real history. To “whitewash” history is the political project to change the narrative of America and make that narrative into the blessings and triumphs of white people, while ignoring the blemishes, scars, and overcoming that is as great a part of America’s history as any other.
RECOMMENDED...



‘We Are All DC’: Tens of Thousands March to White House



‘We Won’t Be Silent’: 1,000+ Students Protest Trump’s DC Takeover

The beginning and institution of slavery in North America’s British colonies commences in 1619 in Jamestown, Virginia. It doesn’t legally end until 1865. A Civil War had to be fought to settle the question and end the legal institution of slavery. And even when slavery had legally ended, new systems and schemes were developed, particularly in the Southern US, to reinstitute slavery de facto. This system called Jim Crow would continue through to its painstakingly dismantlement by courageous individuals and movements that exposed it and brought about its demise. This means that formal enslavement lasts for 246 years. Then the era of Jim Crow lasts for at least another 100 years, and its effects still persist for many today.

In 2026 the United States of America will celebrate its 250th birthday. In those 250 years of existence, in comparison, there are 89 years of enslavement. Then, there is de-facto enslavement, called Jim Crow or American Apartheid, that lasts for at least another 100 years. So, there is no way that America was born, existed, nor its story told without the story of Black people, and for most of us our saga from enslavement to liberation, and from hardships to overcoming. To remove the histories and narratives of Black people in North Americas is like removing the heart from a living body and along with its heart it also loses its soul. The body and its story without Black history is really a dead and empty narrative and will remain so until America has the courage to tell the whole story.

Not recognizing the presence and history of Black people is to render in perception, historical understanding, and official narrative the pronouncement and indoctrination that the United States is a white Christian nation without blemish or scar.

The American narrative is the Statue of Liberty greeting scores of people arriving at Ellis Island. The words on a bronze plaque invites: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.” And in the statute’s left hand in the form of a tablet is the date July 4, 1776.

There is a limitation in knowing the full history of most Black people. This is because we were treated as property and given names for inventory—bought, sold, raped, and worked to death. Doing genealogies there is usually a brick wall that Black families encounter. What we do know exists through oral traditions that attempt to teach and convey to us experiences and history in a world where we live and work but never existed.

The other story for me is before Ellis Island. My family arrived on Sullivan’s Island, South Carolina. This was a major marketplace and auction block for the precious and enriching cargo of Black people. When talking to my family, it seems from the narrative, that they and their descendants were on the same plantation in South Carolina for at least 200 years—46 years, more or less, shy of the existence of this country.

There have been ludicrous reasons presented for removing images and memories of slavery. One is that it makes white people feel guilty. The Trump-MAGA-white supremacist administration says that it is “corrosive ideology,” which means that a new ideology is being fomented. Evidently the current ideological narrative that includes slavery and overcoming that ordeal somehow eats away and corrodes the so-called American narrative.

But in reality, who is being bothered and feels corroded are the people who want to sanitize and de-color the real history of America. It is not that they are embarrassed by the brutal history of enslavement, but for them they embrace a politically racialized framework proffering that the history, experiences, and existence of Black people don’t really exist. This administration has proven how racialized it is. Their efforts through the Department of Government Efficiency cost 350,000 Black women their jobs. Mobs called law enforcement, some in masks and with no identification, roam the streets removing brown and Black immigrants. They have succeeded in some circles in criminalizing immigrants so that they could carry out their agenda of removing non-whites from the population. And not recognizing the presence and history of Black people is to render in perception, historical understanding, and official narrative the pronouncement and indoctrination that the United States is a white Christian nation without blemish or scar.

A scripture says that “you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk to them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise up.” Our story will be told despite this racist agenda of erasure. We will talk about the good, the bad, and the ugly. We will tell the story unto generations, and we will become loud about who we are, what we have experienced, how we have overcome the impossible with possibilities, and declared, no matter how hard we have been pressed down and ignored, in the spirit of Maya Angelou, “Still I rise!” And so will the history of our experiences rise to the heavens and invade all of American history, and we will not be erased.



Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler
Rev. Graylan Scott Hagler is an advisor with FOR-USA and the founder and president of Faith Strategies USA. Until retiring from his position in 2022 Hagler was Senior Minister at Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ in Washington, D.C.
Full Bio >