Connect with us

Opinion

US Veto of UAE-led UN Resolution: Implications for Gaza War and Alleged US Support for Brutal Mass Genocide by Israel in Gaza

Published

on

The United States has vetoed a United Nations resolution demanding a ceasefire in Gaza, which was led by the United Arab Emirates. The resolution called for an immediate cessation of hostilities in Gaza and for the protection of civilians. However, the US argued that the resolution was one-sided and did not address the root causes of the conflict.

This move by the US has raised questions about its stance on the Gaza war and its support for Israel. Many are questioning whether the US is supporting Israel in its alleged mass genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. The veto has also been criticized by other countries, including France and the UK, who have called for an end to the violence in Gaza.

The implications of the US veto are far-reaching and could have a significant impact on the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The question remains whether the US will continue to support Israel in its actions in Gaza or take a more neutral stance in the conflict. The world is watching closely as the situation in Gaza continues to escalate, and the need for a peaceful resolution becomes more urgent.

Background of the US Veto on UAE-Led UN Resolution

On December 08, 2023, the United States vetoed a UN Security Council resolution, which was led by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza. The resolution was introduced after weeks of escalating violence in the region, which resulted in numerous civilian deaths and widespread destruction.

The US veto was met with widespread criticism from many countries, including the UAE, which had drafted the resolution. The UAE’s ambassador to the UN, Lana Nusseibeh, expressed disappointment and frustration at the US’s decision, stating that the resolution was a “critical step towards ending the violence and protecting civilians.”

The US’s decision to veto the resolution was largely seen as a show of support for Israel, which had been accused of committing mass genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza. The US has long been a staunch ally of Israel and has provided the country with significant military and financial support over the years.

The veto also sparked renewed calls for the reform of the UN Security Council, which has been criticized for its inability to effectively address conflicts and crises around the world. Many countries have called for an expansion of the Security Council to include more countries and greater representation from the developing world.

The veto also sparked renewed calls for the reform of the UN Security Council, which has been criticized for its inability to effectively address conflicts and crises around the world. Many countries have called for an expansion of the Security Council to include more countries and greater representation from the developing world.

Overall, the US’s veto of the UAE-led UN resolution has raised important questions about the role of the US in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the effectiveness of the UN Security Council in addressing global crises.

ALSO READ :  Surviving Burning Man's Rainy Twist: Tips and Insights from the Event

Implications for the Gaza Conflict

Shift in US Foreign Policy

The US veto on the UAE-led UN resolution demanding a Gaza ceasefire has significant implications for the ongoing conflict. The veto indicates a shift in US foreign policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with the US appearing to support Israel’s military actions in Gaza.

This shift in policy is likely to have a profound impact on the peace process and the prospects for a resolution to the conflict. The US has traditionally played a key role in brokering peace talks between Israel and Palestine, and its support for Israel is likely to further polarize the two sides.

Impact on Gaza’s Humanitarian Situation

The US veto is also likely to have a significant impact on the humanitarian situation in Gaza. The ongoing conflict has already resulted in a humanitarian crisis, with thousands of civilians killed or injured and many more displaced from their homes.

The US veto is likely to further exacerbate this crisis, as it will make it more difficult for humanitarian aid to reach those in need. The international community has been calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza to allow for the delivery of aid and the evacuation of civilians, but the US veto makes this less likely.

Overall, the implications of the US veto on the UAE-led UN resolution are significant for the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The shift in US foreign policy towards Israel and the impact on the humanitarian situation are likely to have far-reaching consequences for the region.

Broader Geopolitical Consequences

US-Israel Relations

The US veto on the UAE-led UN resolution demanding a Gaza ceasefire has significant implications for the US-Israel relations. The US has always been a strong ally of Israel, and its veto on the resolution further solidifies this relationship. However, this move has also raised concerns among other countries in the region, who view the US as supporting Israel’s aggression against Palestine. This could lead to increased tensions between the US and other Middle Eastern countries, which could have negative consequences for the US’s interests in the region.

ALSO READ :  Steelers' Charter Flight Home from Las Vegas Makes Safe Emergency Landing in Kansas City

International Response and Criticism

The US’s veto has been met with widespread criticism from the international community. Many countries have condemned the US’s move, with some calling it a blatant disregard for human rights and a violation of international law. This criticism could further damage the US’s reputation on the global stage, particularly in the eyes of countries that have been affected by the conflict. Additionally, the US’s veto could lead to increased anti-American sentiment in the region, which could have negative consequences for the US’s interests and security in the long run.

Overall, the US’s veto on the UAE-led UN resolution demanding a Gaza ceasefire has significant geopolitical consequences. It has further solidified the US-Israel relationship but has also raised concerns and criticism from other countries in the region and the international community.

Analysis of the “Mass Genocide” Accusation

Legal Definitions and Interpretations

The term “genocide” was first defined by the United Nations in 1948 in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. According to this convention, genocide is defined as any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group:

  • Killing members of the group
  • Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
  • Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
  • Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
  • Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

Based on this definition, the accusation of “mass genocide” implies that Israel is intentionally committing acts with the intent to destroy the Palestinian people as a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.

International Law and War Crimes

Under international law, the intentional targeting of civilians or non-combatants is considered a war crime. The Geneva Conventions prohibit the killing, torture, and ill-treatment of prisoners of war, civilians, and other non-combatants. Additionally, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines war crimes as serious violations of international humanitarian law committed during armed conflict.

Conclusion

The accusation of “mass genocide” suggests that Israel is committing war crimes by intentionally targeting civilians and non-combatants in Gaza. However, it should be noted that determining whether an act constitutes a war crime or genocide requires a thorough investigation and legal analysis of the specific circumstances and intent behind the act.

In conclusion, the accusation of “mass genocide” is a serious allegation that requires careful consideration and investigation. While international law provides a framework for defining and prosecuting acts of genocide and war crimes, it is ultimately up to the international community to hold accountable those responsible for such acts.


Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Finance

Jennifer Garner’s Latest Projects: Business Ventures Beyond Hollywood

Published

on

Most celebrity business ventures are licensing deals wearing a founder’s costume. The name goes on the label, the cheque clears, and an operating company nobody has heard of does the actual work.

Jennifer Garner’s is not that. On 6 February 2026, she rang the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange as Once Upon A Farm went public at $18 per share with a valuation of $724 million.

The company she co-founded is now a listed public entity with audited financials, a board seat in her name, and a stock price that has since gone down. That last detail is the most interesting part of the story.

Key Takeaways

What Once Upon A Farm Actually Is

The company sells organic, cold-pressed refrigerated food for children — pouches, smoothies, applesauce and oat bars — through grocery retail and direct-to-consumer channels.

It was founded by serial entrepreneurs Cassandra Curtis and Ari Raz, with Garner and CEO John Foraker joining as co-founders two years later. Foraker’s background matters to the credibility of the operation: he ran Annie’s Homegrown for more than a decade and served as a president at General Mills.

Note: founding-date reporting varies between 2011 and 2015 depending on the source. Verify before publication.

The Financial Trajectory

MetricFigure
Annual revenue (yr ending Sept 2025)$225 million
Year-on-year growthOver 40%
CAGR since 2018More than 60%
IPO valuation$724 million
Capital raised$197.9 million
Shares sold by company~7.6 million
Shares sold by existing holders~3.4 million
Lead bookrunnersGoldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase

A compound annual growth rate above 60% sustained over seven years is not a celebrity endorsement outcome. It is a consumer packaged goods outcome — and CPG is one of the hardest categories in which to build distribution from scratch.

What Her Actual Job Is

This is where the Once Upon A Farm story diverges most sharply from the celebrity-brand template, because the terms are public.

The S-1 discloses that Garner serves on the public company’s board of directors and continues as co-founder and spokesperson — “Farmer Jen” — a role for which she was paid $1 million in the prior year, with $2 million to $3 million in expected annual compensation through 2028, separate from stock options and an IPO-linked bonus.

ALSO READ :  Clarence Thomas Unfiltered: The Ted Cruz Interview on Ethics and Identity

She also worked the roadshow directly. Garner described the investor meetings to Forbes as rooms full of existing customers, noting that families already trusted the product.

That is a meaningful distinction for anyone assessing celebrity-backed companies. There is a difference between a founder who licenses a likeness and a founder who sits on the board, pitches institutional investors and has compensation disclosed in a registration statement.


The Mission Structure

Once Upon A Farm is a public benefit corporation — the “PBC” in its legal name — which means its charter permits management to weigh mission alongside shareholder returns.

Garner has framed the IPO itself as a mission decision. Selling to a major food conglomerate would have cost the existing team control of the business; a listing preserved it while raising capital.

The concrete expression of that mission is WIC certification. Getting products approved so low-income families can purchase them through the federal nutrition programme has been a stated priority, and the brand now holds that distinction in more than 20 states. Garner has called it the company’s north star.

It connects to a longer track record — she had been a trustee for Save the Children for several years before joining the company in 2017.

The Risks the Prospectus Discloses

A public listing forces disclosure that private celebrity ventures never face. Three risks stand out.

Tariff and sourcing exposure. The prospectus highlighted risks related to tariffs and trade barriers, particularly against Mexico and South America, from where the company sources a significant portion of its fruit and vegetable ingredients.

Key-person concentration. A brand built substantially on one founder’s public identity carries a risk no diversified CPG company does.

Acquisition framing. Ahead of the listing, Hedgeye analyst Bennett Cheer characterised the company as an acquisition “play” — a view that treats the IPO as a staging post toward a strategic sale rather than a destination.

The Post-IPO Slide, and What It Tells You

The stock’s path is the honest part of this story. Priced at $18, up 17% on day one, close to $25 within a week, then down roughly 15% for the year by August.

Garner’s stated response has been to ignore the daily price and focus on execution — her position being that the stock follows the mission rather than the reverse.

Whether or not one finds that convincing as investor communication, the underlying pattern is common and worth understanding. Consumer IPOs frequently pop on scarcity — the listing was described as a rare food offering that excited investors — and then reprice once the float settles and quarterly results replace the narrative.

ALSO READ :  Adila Hassim: The Great Lawyer of Muslims for Gaza People

For investors, the lesson generalises. A founder’s celebrity generates demand at listing. It does not generate gross margin.

The Broader Commercial Portfolio

Beyond Once Upon A Farm, Garner’s commercial activity follows a consistent pattern: long-term brand relationships rather than one-off endorsements.

She has been the recurring face of Capital One’s advertising campaigns, continuing through 2026. She brokered Once Upon A Farm’s first sports sponsorship in 2024 — a multi-year deal making it Angel City FC’s exclusive children’s snack partner.

She was named to the Forbes 50 Over 50 class of 2026 at age 54, alongside continued acting work.

What This Means for the Global Market in 2027

Coverage of celebrity businesses stops at the launch. Here is what actually determines outcomes.

Public listing is the real test of a celebrity brand. Private valuations are negotiated; public ones are voted on daily. Expect more celebrity-founded consumer companies to attempt listings after this precedent — and expect most to trade below their debut.

Governance disclosure becomes the differentiator. Once Upon A Farm published its founder compensation structure. Investors evaluating the next celebrity IPO should ask for the same and treat its absence as a signal.

Tariff exposure is the underpriced risk in food CPG. Companies sourcing produce from Mexico and South America face input volatility that margin models built in a stable trade environment do not capture.

The PBC structure will be tested. A public benefit corporation’s mission commitments have not yet been stress-tested against a sustained share price decline. Once Upon A Farm may become the case study.

Acquisition remains the likely endgame. If the Hedgeye thesis holds, a strategic buyer eventually acquires the brand. The question for shareholders is whether that happens above or below the $18 listing price.

Frequently Asked Questions

What company did Jennifer Garner found?

Garner is a co-founder and chief brand officer of Once Upon A Farm, an organic children’s food company. She joined in September 2017 alongside CEO John Foraker; the business was originally founded by Cassandra Curtis and Ari Raz.

When did Once Upon A Farm go public?

The company listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker OFRM on 6 February 2026, pricing at $18 per share for a valuation of $724 million and raising $197.9 million.

How much revenue does Once Upon A Farm generate?

The company reported $225 million in annual revenue for the year ending September 2025, representing growth of more than 40% year-on-year and a compound annual growth rate above 60% since 2018.

Is Jennifer Garner paid by Once Upon A Farm?

Yes, and the terms are disclosed. She was paid $1 million in the year before the IPO, with $2 million to $3 million in expected annual compensation through 2028, separate from stock options and an IPO-linked bonus.


Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Analysis

Inside Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon Speech Requirements: Structural Reforms and Defense Strategy

Published

on

Pentagon commanders told to nominate troops meeting waist-to-height and grooming standards for the Sept 30 State of the Force address. What the memo says.

Executive Summary / Key Takeaways

  • Internal emails reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show the Pentagon asked commanders to nominate service members meeting specific physical and grooming criteria to attend Hegseth’s “State of the Force” address on 30 September 2026.
  • Nominees must pass the Army fitness test, meet its waist-to-height ratio requirement, and maintain “impeccable” grooming and uniform standards with no exceptions.
  • Selection also weighs “demonstrated leadership quality and professional character,” with a clear record of integrity, discipline and selfless service.
  • Selected attendees may have the opportunity to take part in a physical training session with the secretary.
  • The event falls exactly one year after the Quantico address to senior officers, where physical standards were a central theme — making this a measurable one-year checkpoint on that policy agenda.

Attendance criteria for a cabinet secretary’s speech would normally be an administrative footnote. In this case the criteria are the policy statement.

The Pentagon has asked commanders to nominate troops to attend Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s “State of the Force” address, specifying that service members must meet waist-to-height requirements and exhibit “impeccable” grooming standards, according to emails reviewed by the Wall Street Journal and summarised by Newsweek and other outlets. Candidates will be selected based on demonstrated leadership quality and professional character, and will also have the opportunity to work out with the secretary.

The guidance was sent to Army commanders and specifies that nominees must pass the Army’s fitness test and meet its waist-to-height ratio requirement, with grooming standards applying without exception. Nominees are expected to be top performers within their units, with a clear record of integrity, discipline and selfless service, and to demonstrate strong presence, clear communication and sound judgment under pressure — serving as model representatives for peers and subordinates across the joint force. A Pentagon official declined to comment on the specific selection criteria.

2. Core Strategic Analysis

2.1 What the memo requires

RequirementStandard specifiedApplies toSource
Physical fitnessMust pass the Army fitness testNominated attendeesWSJ via Newsweek
Body compositionMust meet Army waist-to-height ratioNominated attendeesWSJ
Appearance“Impeccable” grooming and uniform standards, no exceptionsNominated attendeesWSJ
CharacterDemonstrated leadership quality, professional characterSelection criterionWSJ
RecordClear record of integrity, discipline, selfless serviceSelection criterionWSJ
Event date30 September 2026“State of the Force” addressWSJ
AdditionalPossible physical training session with the secretarySelected attendeesWSJ

2.2 The one-year policy arc

The address arrives exactly one year after Hegseth summoned senior generals and admirals to Marine Corps Base Quantico on 30 September 2025 for a speech centred on warrior ethos and combat readiness. Physical standards were a central theme of that address, which introduced new height and weight requirements across the armed forces. “It all starts with physical fitness and appearance,” Hegseth told the audience, framing his reforms as a matter of institutional standards and telling officers unwilling to enforce them to resign.

ALSO READ :  Trump’s Ascendance: What It Means for the Future of the Republican Party

Subsequent implementation showed the Quantico directives being treated as binding orders across the services, with wing-level distribution of memoranda and service-specific implementation guidance following. Reporting also noted the introduction of testosterone screening for service members over 30 as part of the broader fitness agenda.

That history is what makes the current memo analytically significant rather than merely unusual. It is the second consecutive September in which physical standards have been the organising theme of the department’s flagship internal address — which suggests a sustained programme rather than a one-off emphasis.

3. Structural Drivers and Competitor Gaps

Most coverage of this story has focused on the novelty of the attendance criteria. The more consequential questions for defence contractors, analysts and policy trackers sit one level down.

Retention and medical exemption policy. The grooming component intersects with a long-standing medical exemption framework. Many Black service members have historically received medical shaving waivers because the structure of their hair causes ingrown bumps, irritation and infection when shaved — a condition recognised in military medicine. How “no exception” language interacts with existing medical waiver policy is the practical implementation question, and it has direct workforce consequences across a force of roughly 2.1 million personnel.

Departmental renaming. Several outlets now refer to Hegseth by the title Secretary of War rather than Secretary of Defense, reflecting the department’s rebranding under the current administration. For procurement documentation, contract citations and regulatory filings, the nomenclature change is not cosmetic — it affects how policy documents are indexed and cited.

Signal versus substance for contractors. A standards-and-readiness agenda has budget implications that differ sharply from a platform-and-procurement agenda. Physical readiness, medical screening, training infrastructure and personnel systems are a different contracting universe from shipbuilding or munitions. Defence-sector analysts tracking where discretionary attention is going should read the repeated emphasis on personnel standards as a directional indicator.

ALSO READ :  How BRICS Can Push De-Dollarization and Avert a Global Dollar Disaster

Selection mechanics as message control. Hand-selecting an audience by physical criteria produces an audience that visually embodies the policy being announced. Whether that is read as reinforcing standards or as staging depends substantially on the observer’s priors, and both readings have been advanced in coverage of the memo. The verifiable facts are the criteria themselves and the date.

4. Key Implications for Stakeholders

Defence contractors. The consistency of the personnel-standards theme across two consecutive years suggests durable budget attention in human-performance, medical screening and training services rather than a passing emphasis. Watch the FY2027 budget request for corroboration.

Political and policy analysts. The 30 September address is the clearest scheduled opportunity to assess what has actually changed in the year since Quantico. Substantive markers to watch: whether new force-wide requirements are announced, whether existing standards are revised, and whether the medical waiver framework is addressed directly.

Military intelligence and HR professionals. Implementation guidance, not the speech, is where the operational content will sit. Last year’s pattern saw memoranda distributed across wings with service-specific guidance following separately.

Journalists and researchers. Original documentation lives at Defense.gov. Given the volume of secondary aggregation around this story, primary releases are the appropriate citation source.

5. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: What are the requirements to attend Pete Hegseth’s Pentagon speech?

Nominated service members must pass the Army fitness test, meet the Army’s waist-to-height ratio requirement, and maintain impeccable grooming and uniform standards with no exceptions. Commanders also weigh demonstrated leadership quality, professional character and a clear record of integrity and discipline.

Q2: When is the State of the Force address?

The address is scheduled for 30 September 2026 — exactly one year after Hegseth’s Quantico speech to senior generals and admirals, which also centred on physical standards and combat readiness.

Q3: Who selects the troops who attend?

Military commanders across the branches were instructed by internal email to nominate junior officers and enlisted personnel meeting the stated criteria. A Pentagon official declined to comment on the specific requirements.

Q4: Will attendees do anything besides listen to the speech?

The internal emails indicate selected troops will have the opportunity to take part in a physical training session with the secretary.


Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Analysis

Remembering Eliana Moreno: The Legacy of NBC LA’s “Eli in the Heli”

Published

on

Key Takeaways

  • Eliana Moreno, longtime aerial reporter for NBC4 Los Angeles and Telemundo 52, died September 15, 2026, in a helicopter crash in Chatsworth, Los Angeles, while covering a traffic collision.
  • Her pilot, veteran aviator George Marciniw, and a third person on the ground also died in the crash.
  • Moreno had covered Southern California from the air since September 2010, becoming known to viewers and followers as “Eli in the Heli.”
  • She graduated from Chapman University in 2010 with degrees in broadcast journalism and political science, and had said she knew she wanted to be a TV journalist since age 11.
  • She was engaged to Robert Barrientos, having announced their engagement in October 2025, and is remembered by colleagues as a source of steadiness during breaking news coverage.
  • The crash remains under investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board.

A Career Built in the Air

Eliana Moreno spent 16 years reporting Southern California’s biggest breaking news stories from above — traffic collisions, wildfires, police pursuits, and everything in between — for NBC4 Los Angeles and its sister station, Telemundo 52. She worked for Angel City Air Inc., the company that operates News Chopper 4, from September 2010 until her death.

Colleagues at Telemundo described her as, in their words, “the best airborne reporter in all of Los Angeles,” praising both her professionalism and her role as a calming, dependable presence in the newsroom during chaotic live coverage.

Moreno had wanted to be a television journalist since she was 11 years old. Rather than starting in a smaller regional market, as is common in local news, she moved directly into the Los Angeles market immediately after graduating from Chapman University in 2010 with dual degrees in broadcast journalism and political science. Before that, she anchored and reported in both English and Spanish for outlets in Orange County, where she was born and raised.

ALSO READ :  🌍 Shocking Revelations: Is the US Losing Its Grip Amid Israel-Palestine Chaos?

“Eli in the Heli”

Moreno’s Instagram handle, “Eli in the Heli,” became something of a personal brand among Southern California viewers who followed her aerial coverage and off-duty posts — sunsets over the city, long shifts during breaking news, and glimpses of life alongside her flight crew. In 2023, after working 76 hours over the course of several days covering a story, she wrote that she couldn’t complain because she had “the best job in the world.”

She and pilot George Marciniw began flying together in 2023 and developed a close working partnership, often crediting each other in the images and footage they shared publicly. Marciniw, who had more than 30 years of flight experience and graduated from Burbank High School in 1974, frequently attributed the photos on his own social accounts to “his companion and colleague, Moreno.”

Personal Life

Moreno announced her engagement to Robert Barrientos on October 28, 2025. She was also a mother. Friends and followers have described her as someone who balanced the demands of a physically and mentally grueling job — she guest-spoke at local high schools and colleges to aspiring journalists in her time off — with a full life outside the newsroom.

The Crash

The helicopter crashed the evening of September 15, 2026, between two buildings in Chatsworth while the crew was providing live coverage of a fatal collision between a bus and an SUV just blocks away. Three people died, including a person on the ground. The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating; no official cause has been determined at this time.

ALSO READ :  Torture is a Universal Sin and a Crime against Humanity

A Community in Mourning

Tributes poured in from colleagues, viewers, and fellow journalists across Southern California within hours of the confirmation. NBC Los Angeles and Telemundo 52 both issued statements honoring Moreno’s professionalism and her years documenting the region’s biggest stories from above.

Who was Eliana Moreno?

Eliana Moreno was an aerial reporter for NBC4 Los Angeles and Telemundo 52, known as “Eli in the Heli,” who covered Southern California breaking news from a news helicopter for 16 years. She died on September 15, 2026, alongside pilot George Marciniw in a helicopter crash in Chatsworth, Los Angeles.


Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2019-2026 ,The Monitor . All Rights Reserved .

Discover more from The Monitor

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading