fight

Faced with having to fight as technology rapidly transforms the nature of warfare, the U.S. Marine Corps on Wednesday unveiled its vision for the future of ground combat. Dubbed Ground Combat Element (GCE) 2040, the document lays out how Marines will fight and what kinds of equipment and training they will need to succeed, down to the squad level. Though the document doesn’t mention a specific adversary, it focuses heavily on the kind of littoral, anti-access battle a future Pacific fight would entail.

“I think that you would agree that the global security landscape today demonstrates an intensity for that kind of modernization,” Lt. Gen. Jay M. Bargeron, Deputy Commandant, Plans, Policies, and Operations, said today during a media roundtable to introduce GCE 2040 that TWZ attended virtually. “It’s a landscape that’s defined by rapid technological change and the reemergence, importantly, of peer-level adversaries like China and Russia.”

A working concept of the plan was presented for the first time back in April during a panel at the Modern Day Marine Expo held in Washington, D.C. 

Ground Combat Element 2040 Teaser

In a future fight against enemies with ubiquitous sensors, advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) capabilities, waves of expendable drones, offensive and defensive electronic warfare systems and long-range precision weapons, smaller Marine units like rifle squads will have to act more independently to defend themselves and execute successful attacks.

The new plan recognizes that “widespread use of drones underscores the need for effective organic protective measures across the GCE, down to the squad level. The evolving drone threat presents the most significant risk to ground maneuver, requiring layered active and passive counter-UAS capabilities to retain the initiative. Survivability must be addressed by comprehensively encompassing improved training, updated doctrine, and technological advancements.”

You can see an example of how small drones are being used against Ukrainian forces in the following video.

The ubiquity of drones on the battlefield has devastated both Russian and Ukrainian forces, which are each using these weapons to create an ever-growing no-go zone. Bargeron acknowledged that providing protection from drones for smaller Marine units presents a major challenge.

“The ability for our lowest echelon units – squad, platoon, company – to defend themselves against one-way attack systems is really maybe one of the biggest holes in our swing, and so we’re working hard on that,” the general admitted.

Protecting these forces will require a forward, layered approach involving ground-based air defenses (GBAD) and other means, Bargeron explained. From longer ranges, systems like the Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS), Light Marine Air Defense Integrated Systems (LMADIS) and Medium-Range Intercept Capability [MRIC], will defend Marines, he said.

In addition, Bargeron said the Marines will also rely on a system called “Home Alone,” which a spokesman for the service told us “is a Counter-small Unmanned Aircraft System (CsUAS) that is a semi-fixed site GBAD solution that supports our layered defense structure.” The Marines declined to provide any details about how that system works, citing its classified nature.

For protection at the squad level, “the GCE 2040 integrates both active and passive measures to ensure organic protection,” a Marine official told us. “A key component of this is the Organic Counter-small UAS, or O-CsUAS, initiative. This program has fielded dismounted kits directly to the squads. These kits provide Marines with the ability to actively and passively detect drone threats and to defeat them using both kinetic and non-kinetic means.”

Those kits are “complemented by the use of frangible 5.56 ammunition for standard-issue rifles, which is more effective against aerial targets, and the continued employment of passive countermeasures like multi-spectral camouflage, dispersion, and displacement to degrade enemy targeting,” the official added.

Bargeron noted that the Marines have already purchased 400,000 of the frangible counter-drone rounds and that they are undergoing training on how to use them.

You can read more about the Marines’ emerging doctrine for devolving air defense down to the individual Marine in our story here.

Drone Round: The Next Evolution of Counter-UAS

As noted earlier in this story, GCE 2040 also calls for providing squads with longer-range offensive weapons.

“What we’re trying to do is to bring precision strike capabilities down to the lowest level,” the general noted. “That’s a great example of using advanced technology to enhance the lethality of Marines that are already doing that job. The OPF [Organic Precision Fires] increases the individual Marine’s or Marine rifle squads’ ability to strike targets, at ranges that you had previously needed fixed-wing air or aviation fire support or indirect fire.”

The goal is for squads to be able to strike targets at a range of about 20 kilometers, Bargeron stated. 

“So in the hands of the individual Marines to be able to strike targets like that…will be dramatic,” he exclaimed.

Bargeron added that the Marines are currently using the Neros Archer first-person view (FPV) drones for this purpose. They are “capable of carrying a 2 kg/4.5 lb payload over 20 kilometers,” the company asserts on its LinkedIn page.

They are also being sent to Ukraine, where the use of these systems by small units is a daily fact of life, not a vision for the future.

Bargeron offered no other details on specific offensive squad-level longer-range weapons options that will be developed and fielded over the coming years.

The plan itself is vague in terms of overall timelines, noting that there will be a “phased approach to modernization” occurring across “three overlapping time periods.”

• Near-Term (2026-2030): This period focuses on refining and accelerating ongoing Force Design modernization efforts, addressing the immediate threat of drones, and setting conditions for future investments.
• Mid-Term (2031-2035): Investments in AI and autonomous systems will mature, enhancing headquarters functions, streamlining logistics, and improving operational tempo. Drone/unmanned formations and layered counter-UAS capabilities become critical.
• Long-Range (2036-2040): The GCE is transformed by AI-enabled command and control, widespread Human-Machine Teaming, and resilient, dispersed formations. It operates with increased combat power and survivability, providing the Joint Force with a decisive advantage on key littoral terrain.

Ukraine has shown American troops up close and personal how difficult it is to defend against drones. In a recent training exercise in Germany, U.S. Army soldiers were trounced by Ukrainian drone operators, only improving their performance after the lessons learned from initial engagements. While there are still many unknowns about the goals and rules put in place for that exercise, which accomplished its mission of learning, it underlines long-standing questions about why the U.S. military has taken so long to adapt to a glaringly different battlefield. Whether the new Marine Corps plan will do so fast enough, especially as major foes, especially China, are moving aggressively in employing new weapons and tactics based on lessons learned in global conflicts, is still up for debate.

That being said, the Marines acknowledge that GCE 2040 is a work-in-progress, but the changes it is trying to address are critical to operating against threats the U.S. military has yet to face at the scale it would against China or Russia.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

Moses Itauma says Filip Hrgovic’s comments are starting to “wind him up” before their IBF heavyweight world title fight on Saturday.

A victory at the O2 Arena would mean 21-year-old Itauma becomes the second youngest heavyweight world champion in history, behind only Mike Tyson.

The British fighter is the favouite going into the contest, but Hrgovic has been trying to taunt his rival by calling him a “kid” and “inexperienced”.

“I tell myself there’s nothing that this Hrgovic guy can do to get in my head but he’s starting to wind me up,” Itauma said.

“In an interview earlier, apparently he said I wake up and I just hug trees. He’s really starting to annoy me.

“In my mind if somebody’s trying to get one up on you, or trying to get in your head, it’s because they’re not confident in themselves. Obviously Hrgovic is a talker.”

Croatia’s Hrgovic, 13 years Itauma’s senior, has suggested that victory for his opponent could have a negative affect on Itauma’s future and that losing the fight would “save his soul”.

Kinshasa, DR Congo – President Felix Tshisekedi is due to leave office in 2028 under the current Constitution of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Yet with more than two years to go, a battle over the rules governing what happens when his mandate ends is already reshaping Congolese politics.

In May, Tshisekedi said he had not sought a third term but would accept one if the Congolese people wanted him to continue. The remarks revived opposition fears that constitutional reform could eventually open a path beyond the existing two-term limit.

Under the current constitution, the president is elected for five years, renewable once, while the number and length of presidential terms are protected from constitutional revision.

Tshisekedi’s camp says the country needs institutional reform. Opponents of the reform fear the process could ultimately be used to change the rules governing presidential succession.

The dispute is unfolding as the DRC fights a rebellion in the east led by M23, an armed group that operates within the broader Alliance Fleuve Congo (AFC), a political-military coalition that controls Goma and Bukavu, the capitals of North Kivu and South Kivu.

With an opposition mobilisation planned for September and Tshisekedi preparing to outline an inclusive national dialogue, the confrontation is entering a critical phase.

The referendum battle

The confrontation accelerated in June when the Parliament of the Democratic Republic of the Congo passed legislation setting out conditions for organising a referendum.

The Constitutional Court ruled in July that the law complied with the constitution, while raising concerns about some of its provisions. On August 10, Tshisekedi formally asked the presidents of the National Assembly and Senate to reconsider the legislation in light of the court’s observations. The National Assembly said the fresh deliberation would be placed on the agenda for its September session.

The legislation provides for a constituent assembly followed by a referendum in the event of what it describes as a “major dysfunction” of state institutions.

Critics of the process say the mechanism could eventually be used to alter provisions that currently prevent Tshisekedi from seeking a third term. The government, meanwhile, has presented constitutional reform as a broader institutional issue rather than an explicit bid to extend the president’s tenure.

The main opposition group campaigning against the process is known as C64, or the Article 64 coalition. Its name refers to Article 64 of the DRC’s constitution, which calls on citizens to oppose anyone who takes power in violation of the constitutional order.

C64 says it will resist any attempt to use constitutional reform to extend Tshisekedi’s mandate beyond 2028. The coalition announced a nationwide mobilisation for September 15, with demonstrations in Kinshasa expected to converge on the Palais du Peuple, the seat of parliament.

Taking the fight to parliament

The dispute has already spilled onto the streets.

Thousands demonstrated in Goma and Bukavu on July 28 against proposed constitutional changes and any attempt to extend Tshisekedi’s time in office.

In Kinshasa, protesters are expected to converge on the Palais du Peuple.

For C64, the destination is deliberate: the coalition wants to take its protest to the institution at the centre of the constitutional process.

Jean-Marc Kabund, a Congolese opposition politician, told Al Jazeera that no constitutional revision, referendum or legal manoeuvre should be allowed to circumvent the current constitution.

He warned that this happening while the country is at war could deepen divisions and threaten national cohesion.

A constitutional fight during a war

The constitutional dispute is unfolding alongside a conflict that has transformed eastern Congo.

M23 and the AFC have seized large areas of territory, including Goma and Bukavu. The Congolese government accuses Rwanda of supporting M23, a charge that Kigali denies.

The war is also raising questions about the 2028 elections.

Tshisekedi has warned that elections may not be possible if the fighting continues, arguing that it would be difficult to organise a credible vote while parts of the country remain outside government control.

Emmanuel Bugama, a Congolese political analyst based in Bunia, told Al Jazeera that national interests should come before political disputes.

“The nation’s best interests should take precedence over these political squabbles,” he said.

The view from Goma

In Goma, the argument is being watched from a city no longer under Kinshasa’s control.

Gentil Mulume, a civil society activist in Goma, told Al Jazeera that any constitutional change extending Tshisekedi’s mandate would not be recognised in territory controlled by M23 and the AFC.

“If Tshisekedi dares to amend this constitution to extend his term of office, it will not be recognised here,” he said.

Mulume said the dispute was part of a deeper divide between Kinshasa and the east. He argued that continued Tshisekedi rule could be viewed there as a form of domination and that self-determination should be part of the political debate.

His comments illustrate how a constitutional confrontation in Kinshasa is being interpreted in territory already beyond the government’s effective control.

What do ordinary Congolese know?

There is also a more basic question: how much do ordinary citizens understand about the proposed changes?

Kevin Kalala, a 30-year-old mobile-credit retailer in Kinshasa, told Al Jazeera that he does not know enough about the constitution to take a position.

“We do not know what our constitution entails,” he said. “The Congolese state should start by teaching us about our constitution.”

Kalala said citizens should first be shown which provisions need changing, why they need changing, and what the benefits would be.

“I am neither for nor against amending the constitution,” he said.

An offer of dialogue

As tensions rise, Tshisekedi has proposed an inclusive national dialogue involving political parties, civil society and religious groups.

While in Libreville, Gabon, on August 16, he said he would soon address the nation to set out his vision and the contours of the talks. The date and format of the dialogue have yet to be announced.

Tshisekedi has ruled out sitting with people he accuses of siding with Rwanda or the armed rebellion.

Martin Fayulu, who challenged Tshisekedi in the 2018 presidential election, has called for former President Joseph Kabila and Corneille Nangaa, the political leader of the AFC, to participate.

For now, the constitutional dispute is running alongside the war in the east and the uncertainty over the 2028 elections.

The question is no longer only whether the constitution will change. It is whether Congo’s political forces can agree on the rules for what happens when Tshisekedi’s current mandate ends.

“We are certainly heading towards one of the most decisive periods in our recent history,” Bugama told Al Jazeera. “The country is under the control of an armed group, whilst the government in Kinshasa is posturing over constitutional reform instead of tackling what matters most.”

ABC went to court Tuesday in an attempt to halt the Federal Communications Commission’s early review of its TV licenses, claiming the move is an attack on the broadcast outlet’s right to free speech.

The Disney-owned network asked a U.S. District Court to issue a temporary restraining order to stop the FCC’s action. The agency says it is investigating ABC stations over whether the company’s diversity and inclusion policies are in violation of federal anti-discrimination laws.

But the suit alleges that the FCC is retaliating against ABC due to President Trump’s dissatisfaction with the network’s coverage of his administration. Trump has frequently threatened to have TV station licenses pulled when he believes he is treated unfairly on news and talk programs.

In late December, Trump posted on X that “If Network NEWSCASTS, and their Late Night Shows are almost 100% negative to President Donald J. Trump, MAGA, and the Republican Party, shouldn’t their very valuable Broadcast Licenses be terminated? I say YES!”

The suit claims the FCC “has not been shy about openly coercing ABC into changing its programming,” citing comments made last fall by FCC Chairman Brendan Carr about late-night host Jimmy Kimmel’s remarks about the president.

“We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said. “These companies can find ways….to take action…on Kimmel or there is going to be additional work for the FCC.”

Shortly after Carr made those remarks, two large TV station ownership groups had their ABC affiliates pull Kimmel off the air for a week after conservative blowback over the host’s comments regarding the shooting death of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.

The licenses for eight ABC-owned TV stations, including KABC in Los Angeles, were originally scheduled for renewal between 2028 and 2031. The suit said the current review is “extraordinarily early” and “that timing underscores the Commission’s true purpose: coercing and retaliating against a network that refuses to bow to the Administration’s demands.”

Trump recently called for ABC’s TV licenses to be revoked after the network did not carry his July 16 prime-time Oval Office address on election fraud. Carr said the network’s decision would be taken under consideration in the license review process.

Broadcast outlets have long had the option to determine whether to carry a presidential address. ABC presented Trump’s speech on its news streaming platform, as did NBC.

Carr has also questioned whether “The View” should be classified as a news program, which is exempt from the equal-time rule for political candidates who appear as guests.

ABC has asked the FCC to rule on the status of “The View,” which received an exemption from the rarely enforced equal time provision in 2002.

ABC has maintained that “The View” books politicians based on newsworthiness and not partisanship.

SACRAMENTO — A billionaire-funded political group gave a $5-million donation to the campaign opposing California’s proposed wealth tax, the first of many expected in the expensive fight over a ballot question dividing the state.

If approved by voters, Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% tax on the assets of billionaires who were residing in the state at the start of this year to pay primarily for healthcare.

The ballot measure has splintered California Democrats and their allies, who are at odds over which public services would receive a portion of the revenue and Proposition 40’s long-term impact on the state budget.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra and groups including Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and the California Teachers Assn. oppose the tax, arguing it could push many of the state’s biggest taxpayers to relocate and in effect destabilize the state’s finances.

On Monday, nine Democratic state lawmakers announced their opposition to Proposition 40, writing in an open letter to voters that “while well-intentioned, this measure will blow a massive hole in our state budget in the years ahead and undermine our ability to sustain investments in the very priorities Prop 40 claims to support.” Its signers included Assemblymembers Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks), Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) and John Harabedian (D-Pasadena).

The California Democratic Party, the California Federation of Labor Unions and progressive officials including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) support the tax, which is intended to raise roughly $100 billion over five years to backfill federal cuts to healthcare and other social safety net programs by President Trump and the Republican-led Congress.

To this point, Building a Better California — a group funded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other members of the Silicon Valley elite — has focused on qualifying two ballot measures meant to defang the billionaire tax while maintaining a neutral position on Proposition 40 itself.

That changed over the weekend when the group of billionaires officially came out against the measure and reported the $5-million donation to the anti-Proposition 40 campaign backed by teachers and firefighters unions.

A handful of billionaires have pumped more than $156 million into Building a Better California, mostly from Brin, who has given more than $100 million to the group. It has also received more than $17 million from venture capitalist L. John Doerr, $12 million from Ripple Labs founder Chris Larsen and $3 million from philanthropist and former Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt.

In addition to opposing the wealth tax, Building a Better California announced support for Proposition 3, which would permanently extend an existing tax on certain high earners, along with two housing bonds.

The group has already spent more than $127 million on two competing ballot measures written to weaken or nullify the billionaire tax: Proposition 41 would require audits for new state special taxes and prohibit new taxes from being excluded from the state spending limit. Proposition 42 would ban new taxes on assets such as as personal property, intellectual property and retirement accounts.

If Proposition 40 passes but either Proposition 41 or Proposition 42 receive more votes, the billionaire tax would be voided.

“A few controversial billionaires like Sergey Brin would rather spend millions to fund shady opposition campaigns than simply pay their fair share in taxes so millions of their fellow Californians don’t lose their healthcare. That’s shameful,” said Debru Carthan, executive vice president of Service Employees International United-Healthcare Workers West, the union that collected the signatures to put the measure on the ballot.

Abby Lunardini, a spokesperson for Building a Better California, said the state “is at an inflection point” due to its high cost of living and taxes.

“California’s future rests on both maintaining our economic competitiveness and making smart, accountable public investments that improve affordability and quality of life for all,” Lunardini wrote in a statement. “It’s rare for such a broad coalition to unite around any single cause in California, but it reflects the potentially devastating impact of this measure on healthcare, education, and our state’s economy.”

The $5-million donation is the largest reported by the Proposition 40 opposition campaign, which wrote in a statement that it “welcomes support from everyone — teachers, doctors, hospitals, community clinics, firefighters, housing advocates, blue-collar unions, entrepreneurs, small businesses, Democrats, and Republicans.”

The donation indicates that members of the opposition coalition — and not billionaires — will play a more visible role in campaign ads.

“Two groups in California that have the most credibility with voters are the teachers and the firefighters,” said Garry South, a Democratic strategist who has worked on past ballot measure campaigns. Making them visible messengers against Proposition 40 “is a very important credibility aspect for the No campaign.”

“Nobody likes political consultants or lawyers. They like firefighters and nurses and teachers,” Republican strategist Matt Rexroad agreed.

Aug. 14 (UPI) — British Prime Minister Andy Burnham imposed a temporary ban on the sale of disposable barbecues and deployed military personnel on Friday in a battle against widespread wildfires across the country.

Speaking from the hard-hit West Midlands of England, Burnham said the measures were made necessary by continuing waves of hot weather and extreme drought.

“We cannot accept this as the new normal,” he said in a video address while recounting how fires the region “have destroyed homes, forced people to evacuate and left firefighters injured while protecting others.”

Much of England and Wales remains in a deep drought and is facing another period of extreme heat a day after the Met Office reported temperatures reaching 100.6 degrees in London for the fifth-hottest day on record in the nation’s history, the British leader noted.

“Farmers are watching crops fail and firefighters have faced hundreds of wildfires in a matter of weeks,” he said. “This is what climate change looks like here and now.”

The prime minister said the barbeque ban, emergency funding for fire and rescue services and deploying military support were decided during a meeting of COBRA, the government’s emergency response committee, earlier this week.

But, he added, “we also have to tackle the causes of climate change and make Britain more resilient to the extreme weather we’re already experiencing. We shouldn’t just accept this as inevitable and I don’t.”

The British government has already announced plans to support the development of nine new water reservoirs and improve resilience to future droughts, floods and extreme weather, as well as a investment of nearly $135 million million “to strengthen the country’s response to wildfires and extreme weather.”

Thursday’s extreme temperatures meant Britain this year has already seen the most number of days reaching or exceeding 97 degrees (four days) and 98 degrees (three days), as well as equaling 2022 for seeing two days of 100 degrees.

As the weekend began, forecasters predicted a gradual cooling from north to south across the country but with much-needed rainfall remaining scarce.

“A front moving south eastwards across the U.K. on Monday and Tuesday could bring northern areas some rain but amounts of rain in the south will be small at most and the majority will fall over Northern Ireland and Scotland,” Steven Keates of the Met Office said in a release.

“The next meaningful rain forecast for these very dry areas could be towards the end of next week as an area of low pressure influences our weather from the southwest.”

President Trump’s goal of ending gender-affirming care is not improper and cannot be the basis for quashing a subpoena issued by the Justice Department against a provider of medical treatment for transgender youth, a divided federal appeals court ruled Friday.

The Justice Department announced last year that it had issued more than 20 subpoenas to doctors and clinics that provide gender-affirming care as part of an effort to investigate healthcare fraud. Federal judges have quashed many of the subpoenas as illegitimate efforts to intimidate providers into ending care.

In a 2-1 decision, a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the efficacy and long-term risks of the treatments are “uncertain,” and the president has the power to align the Justice Department’s enforcement priorities with his broader policy goals.

“Every President has law enforcement priorities, just as every President has signature policies (often, the former are components of the latter),” wrote Judge Carlos Bea.

Bea, a nominee of Republican President George W. Bush, was joined in the opinion by Daniel Bress, a Trump nominee. They reversed a ruling that quashed the subpoena against telemedicine provider QueerDoc, sending the case back to the district court to consider other arguments.

The subpoena seeks QueerDoc’s personnel files, billing documents, communications with drug manufacturers and records of patients who were prescribed puberty blockers or hormone therapy, among other information, according to the 9th Circuit decision.

American Civil Liberties Union attorney Adrien Leavitt, who represented Washington state-based QueerDoc, said the ACLU would continue fighting the subpoena in district court. QueerDoc has also argued the subpoena is overbroad and burdensome. The Justice Department has said it has reason to believe the company may be misleading people about puberty blockers and hormones.

“We’re ready to continue defending one of the most fundamental principles of healthcare: every patient’s right to confidential medical care,” Leavitt said in a statement.

He said the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit was the first appeals court to weigh in on the subpoenas.

Trump has signed one executive order defining sex as only male or female — and as unchangeable — and another that seeks to end federal funding of the care for patients under 19. The latter order also directs the Justice Department to “prioritize investigations” into violations of a drug safety law by “any entity that may be misleading the public about long-term side effects of chemical and surgical mutilation.”

Gender-affirming care includes a range of medical and mental health services to support a person’s gender identity, including when it’s different from the sex they were assigned at birth. It encompasses counseling, medications that block puberty and hormone therapy to produce physical changes as well as surgeries to transform chests and genitals, though those are rare for minors.

Most major medical groups say access to the treatment is important for those with gender dysphoria and see gender as existing along a spectrum.

The 9th Circuit majority called discussion around gender-affirming care “an unsettled scientific debate” and said the Trump administration could also justify its opposition to the treatment on ethical or philosophical grounds.

Thanawala writes for the Associated Press.

Fourth in a series of stories profiling top high school football players by position. Today, Luke Gazzaniga, Santa Margarita tight end.

You’re unlikely to feel sympathy for 6-foot-4, 235-pound tight end Luke Gazzaniga, a senior at Santa Margarita High who enjoys the idea of running over tacklers after catching a pass or sending an opponent crashing to the ground with a bone-crushing block.

Except understand that he’s the smallest brother in his family. The others are 6-7 and 6-5, so imagine the little brother in the front yard doing the Oklahoma drill, a legendary one-on-one football drill from years ago that tested toughness via collisions.

“We’d literally just run at each other,” he said.

Some brothers play video games or collect baseball cards. The Gazzanigas were into seeing who would be the last one standing.

“It was fun,” Luke said. “I was quick when I was a little kid. I wouldn’t go down. I’ve had to fight for myself. I had to find my way to win.”

Their father, David, who played football at Dartmouth and became an orthopedic surgeon, welcomed the competition. If any of the boys came into the house before a game was over, Dad’s response was, “Suck it up and go back.”

“He taught us how to be tough,” Luke said.

You can sense the enjoyment Luke has on a football field. After he catches a pass, he looks up and gets excited if there’s a defender nearby.

“I love seeing people there,” he said. “I’m letting them know if you’re going to try to tackle me, it’s going to hurt you more than me. I’m glad someone thinks they can tackle me.”

Future Hall of Fame tight end Rob Gronkowski has been the player he’s most admired, and Gazzaniga has been able to see pro players up close because his father worked as a physician with the Chargers. Luke got to hang out in the training room and on the field.

“They’re impressively big and impressively fast,” he said. “People were huge.”

During Santa Margarita’s run to the Southern Section Division 1 and Open Division state titles last season, Gazzaniga became an important offensive weapon over the middle, even though he suffered an ankle injury and missed six weeks. He caught 20 passes for 332 yards and four touchdowns.

“God gave me the blessing to catch anything,” he said.

Santa Margarita coach Carson Palmer used to take advantage of throwing to the tight end when playing at USC and in the NFL, and there’s no doubt Gazzaniga feels comfortable in the Eagles’ offensive schemes. Tight ends continue to gain attention at the highest levels.

“It’s a super important position,” Gazzaniga said. “People love looking at receivers and forget the tight end is almost the glue between passing and running. The Rams use three tight ends and there’s a bunch of big personnel types all over the league. I can envision myself being there one day and making an impact.”

Gazzaniga is committed to Kansas. He comes from a family of athletes. Two older sisters played water polo at USC, with Rachel now a candidate to play for the U.S. Olympic team in 2028. Brother John is a quarterback at Alabama. His mother is an avid mountain climber. John used to throw bullet passes to Luke growing up, which helped prepare him for any and all quarterbacks.

Thanksgiving always has produced an interesting dynamic with five tall, energetic kids circling for a turkey leg.

“It’s hard to know how much we eat,” Luke said.

Saturday: Vincent Shields, Murrieta Valley offensive lineman.

Tight ends to watch

Luke Gazzaniga, Santa Margarita, 6-4, 235, Sr.: Kansas commit makes big catches in traffic

JJ Haley, Corona del Mar, 6-3, 200, Jr.: The next top tight end from the tight end school

Max Markofski, Mission Viejo, 6-4, 230, Sr.: Arizona commit is known for his receiving skills

Hudson Ploog, Orange Lutheran, 6-5, 235, Sr. Nevada Las Vegas commit is like a sixth offensive lineman to clear defenders

Jaylin Smalls, Rancho Cucamonga, 6-4, 230, Jr.: This is the season he begins to show his talents

In less than a month, Paramount Skydance Chief Executive David Ellison has exhibited a dizzying range of emotions as the goal line for the coveted $111-billion Warner Bros. Discovery deal has moved farther away.

The tech scion initially exuded confidence that Hollywood’s biggest merger in decades was on a fast track to completion by September. Ellison and others downplayed efforts by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta to challenge the acquisition — until Bonta and 11 other Democratic state attorneys general gained momentum in their antitrust lawsuit, which now threatens to derail Paramount’s Warner Bros. deal or, at least, make it significantly more expensive.

Ellison and his executives have vacillated from anger to acceptance. Last week, Ellison attempted a high-profile reputation reboot, extolling his love for movies and blaming politics for opposition to the deal.

The mogul has told investors the company is willing to negotiate a settlement with Bonta in hopes of completing the massive merger as soon as possible.

But Ellison also is making contingency plans to shift Paramount’s historic home base from Melrose Avenue to Tennessee — or perhaps Texas — as early as this fall.

Paramount’s board has approved Ellison’s relocation plans, according to people familiar with the situation who were not authorized to speak publicly. Ellison shared the concept with his executive leadership team in a meeting last Wednesday but said his preference was to remain in California, these people said.

The proposal includes potentially selling the 65-acre Paramount lot in Hollywood — as well as the larger Warner Bros. campus in Burbank, should Paramount prevail in the merger battle. Such sales would generate revenue to help pay merger costs, one of the knowledgeable sources said.

Paramount’s sudden relocation plan has further rattled Hollywood, which already is reeling from thousands of job losses in recent years.

Bonta, in a statement Tuesday, blasted Paramount’s latest strategy, calling it “another attempt to blackmail the state into letting an illegal deal through.”

“Paramount has lost the plot as it continues to lose in court,” Bonta said. “My office remains committed to stopping illegal consolidation and protecting a vibrant California economy for businesses that play by the rules.”

Behind Paramount’s pivot is a desperate scramble to bolster its legal case and muster funds to help finance a deal Warner shareholders approved in April.

Paramount offered to pay Warner investors $31 a share as well as so-called “ticking fees” of 25 cents per share for every quarter after Sept. 30 until the transaction closes.

That sweetener was intended as a show of confidence that Paramount’s deal would sail through its regulatory reviews, unlike a Netflix acquisition that faced more regulatory scrutiny. Netflix subsequently dropped its bid.

Paramount was banking on the swift approval of the U.S. Department of Justice, which arrived in June. President Trump is friendly with the Ellison family, and he has been eager for a shakeup at CNN, one of Warner’s properties.

“Ellison thought he had an ace in the hole with Trump [and] the DOJ, but it backfired on him because the clearance was so obviously rubber-stamping,” London-based media analyst Alice Enders said. “Now, the issues have resurfaced and it’s a costly potential delay.”

The ticking fees could add $7 million a day — or $650 million a quarter — to the $81 billion that Paramount had already anticipated paying Warner shareholders. (Paramount also agreed to absorb about $30 billion of Warner Bros. debt left over from last merger, in 2022.)

Ellison has repeatedly defended his proposed purchase, saying the tie-up does not threaten competition because Hollywood has been transformed by Netflix and other deep-pocketed tech giants.

Already, Paramount has received clearances from 65 foreign regulators, including Britain and the European Commission.

To accelerate California approvals, Paramount requested a November trial date for Bonta’s suit. Instead, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín scheduled a March 2 trial — dealing another blow to Paramount.

Ticking fees alone could add $2.1 billion to the cost of buying Warner Bros. In addition, Paramount said that delaying the transaction until next spring will add $190 million in bridge loan financing costs.

Paramount disclosed that it had $1.6 billion in cash on hand and a revolving loan of $3.2 billion available for its use.

If the deal fails to close by June 4, Paramount would have to pay Warner Bros. a $7-billion breakup fee. That’s when Warner’s board could pull the plug on the Paramount deal.

Puck News first reported Ellison’s latest plan to quickly move Paramount’s operations as soon as October.

“This is a plan — not a threat,” said a person who was in the room when Ellison discussed his plans but who was not authorized to comment.

The relocation campaign echoes a tactic employed by software giant Oracle Corp., co-founded by Ellison’s billionaire father, Larry Ellison.

Oracle was based in Redwood City for three decades, but in late 2020, the company moved its headquarters to Austin, Texas, joining other California tech firms leaving in protest of the state’s high taxes and steep cost of living.

Then, two years ago, the elder Ellison announced that Nashville would host Oracle’s new headquarters. At the time, Oracle saw that state’s healthcare industry as a promising growth business. Oracle since has bet heavily on artificial intelligence.

In contrast, it would be difficult for Paramount to pack up its operations because it depends on producers, directors, writers and stars to make its TV shows and movies. The two studio lots also boast dozens of soundstages; century-old fortresses that would not be easily duplicated. And many Paramount executives are not eager to leave Los Angeles.

Some observers questioned Paramount’s willingness to carry out a move, which surfaced a week after David Ellison’s guest essay in the New York Times, which described his love of Hollywood and movies ever since he was a boy.

Ellison believes the proposed Warner merger is the best way to save Hollywood, saying the combination of two storied studios would strengthen not harm the film industry.

“One moment he’s promising to reinvigorate theatrical releases. The next he’s talking about uprooting two historic companies and moving them 2,000 miles away in order to avoid a lawsuit,” said Gabriel Kahn, journalism professor at USC Annenberg School for Communication.

Paramount’s corporate headquarters are in New York but after the Ellison family’s acquisition last year, the center of gravity shifted west. Ellison and other top executives live in Los Angeles.

Another corporate move wouldn’t disrupt Bonta’s lawsuit, experts say.

Instead, they suggested Paramount’s flurry of recent activities — including winning the support of two large theater chains, AMC and Regal, with promises of a robust movie pipeline post-merger — appeared to be part of a public relations and pressure campaign.

“They lost a lot of leverage now that the trial is set for March,” said Abiel Garcia, a former prosecutor and partner at the Manhattan Beach firm Kesselman Brantly Stockinger.

“And when you don’t have leverage in court, you go the political route,” he said, adding that Paramount seems to be angling for Gov. Gavin Newsom to join the fight.

Newsom, who has presidential ambitions, has been sensitive to the flight of companies from California. However, he has avoided picking a side in the messy merger squabble.

What’s more, the governor lacks authority to intervene in the lawsuit brought by Bonta and 11 other state attorneys general.

“All I know is that if I was governor, I wouldn’t want to lose Hollywood from this state, I wouldn’t want to lose a major company like Paramount to another state,” Paramount Chief Legal Officer Makan Delrahim said late Tuesday at a Politico Live conference in Sacramento. He had been asked about the stances of Newsom and his potential successor, Xavier Becerra, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee.

“I hope it settles before court,” Becerra said at the conference. “It is easier to stand in a conference room and settle than it is to stand in a courtroom.”

Delaying the trial until March has been “devastating,” Delrahim said, adding that Paramount proposed settlement terms on May 19 — but the state attorneys general instead moved forward with their suit.

“It’s costing jobs. It’s costing a lot of uncertainty for a lot of our employees, for Warner Bros. employees,” Delrahim said.

Still, Garcia and others expressed doubts about Paramount’s full-court press.

“It just feels a little over the top. It feels like a PR blitz,” Garcia said. “It suggests to me that they think their case is weaker than I even thought.”

SANTIAGO, Chile, Aug. 10 (UPI) — Chilean President José Antonio Kast signed a constitutional reform bill Monday that lays the groundwork for his government’s new agenda to combat organized crime.

The initiative seeks to give the state stronger and more explicit tools to confront sophisticated criminal activity. Kast urged Congress to move quickly and approach the legislation with a willingness to reach agreements, with the goal of enacting the measures before the end of the year.

The government’s agenda includes more than 30 bills aimed at strengthening efforts to combat criminal organizations.

Key measures include creating a new state of emergency provision that would allow the deployment of the armed forces, establishing a registry of criminal organizations and creating separate high-security prisons for criminal leaders.

The measures would also streamline the seizure of illicit assets, extend the period in which authorities can make arrests in cases of flagrante delicto — caught in the act — to 24 hours and increase penalties for serious crimes.

Luis Toledo, a former prosecutor and director of the Center for Studies on Security and Organized Crime at San Sebastián University, said expectations about what the agenda can accomplish should be conservative.

“In the short and medium term, it is entirely possible to reduce homicides, regain control of certain territories, improve prison control and dismantle specific organizations, but structurally reversing the penetration of organized crime is another matter,” Toledo told UPI.

He said Chile is confronting not only criminal gangs, but also illicit markets with demand, sources of financing, money laundering mechanisms, recruitment capabilities and international connections.

“And those markets have an extraordinary capacity to adapt: When one structure is dismantled, smaller cells emerge, changing their leadership, communications, routes or financial mechanisms,” he said.

Toledo said Kast’s agenda contains significant proposals, but also has shortcomings, including combining measures targeting organized crime with broader public security and immigration enforcement policies.

“That distinction is important because not everything that increases the state’s coercive capacity necessarily dismantles a criminal organization,” he said.

He said the initiatives with the greatest potential are those aimed at targeting the assets of criminal organizations, seizing their property and preventing them from reinvesting illicit profits.

With organized crime expanding across Latin America, Toledo said tighter controls on illegal entry into the country and other measures proposed by Kast are necessary, but insufficient to address the problem on the scale required.

A transnational criminal organization cannot be fought exclusively through a national response, he said, adding that “international cooperation is one of the essential operational capabilities of a policy against organized crime.”

“We have to see whether Chile will be able to build a state policy that, on a sustained basis, creates a coordinated public security system capable of stripping organized crime of its money, command capabilities, territory, impunity and ability to recruit,” Toledo said. “That is where the possibility of truly reversing the phenomenon lies.”

Alfonso Kaiser, a risk management expert and professor in the Master of Engineering Management program at the University of the Andes, questioned the agenda’s lack of concrete objectives for measuring its results.

“A plan is being presented that does not have clear objectives. We don’t know how we are going to measure them or how much we want to achieve,” Kaiser told UPI.

“We need to take a more measured approach and conduct a somewhat more technical analysis of what goals we want to achieve and when we expect to achieve them.”

Kaiser agreed that border control should be a priority and said the government should strengthen the authority of Carabineros, Chile’s national uniformed police force, and the Maritime Police to deter illegal entry into the country. However, he said the main challenge lies within Chile itself.

“The main failure is internal. It is not that we are facing an extraordinarily intelligent enemy,” Kaiser said. “Our own mistakes are what have led to this situation.”

Betfred Super League

Wakefield (16) 22

Tries: Vagana, Hamlin-Uele, Myers, Sinfield Goals: Sinfield 3

Leeds (6) 24

Tries: Croft, McDonnell, Smith, Hankinson Goals: Connor 4

Leeds Rhinos edged a thrilling top-of-the-table clash against Wakefield Trinity with late drama to go four points clear in Super League.

A sell-out crowd at DIY Kitchens Stadium were royally entertained as the top two served up a match worthy of a Grand Final, but it was the Rhinos fans who were celebrating at the death.

Despite trailing for all but three minutes of the contest, Leeds held their nerve to land a sucker punch with two moments of skill from the boot of Jake Connor to snatch victory.

With 77 minutes on the clock, Connor’s grubber-kick was pounced on by Chris Hankinson to level the scores at 22-22. Connor then held his nerve to kick the extras from five yards inside the touchline as Leeds claimed a memorable success and remain on course to win the League Leaders’ Shield.

This was a match in which Leeds showed grit, discipline and character to hold on to Wakefield’s tail as the hosts withstood early pressure before stretching out into a 16-0 lead with three tries all converted by Jack Sinfield.

They came from Isaiah Vagana after a clever kick from Sinfield, a bullocking run from Caius Faatili, who broke two tackles and offloaded to Caleb Hamlin-Uele, while Jayden Myers went over in the corner as Wakefield delivered a commanding yet surprising advantage.

But Leeds have shown they rarely lie down so far this season and after Brodie Croft’s 25th Super League try of the campaign gave them hope, a stunning second-half comeback, in which Cam Smith was irresistible off the bench, helped them grab the win late on.

The second half began with Wakefield extending their advantage through Sinfield, who wrestled the ball over the line and then added the extras in an impressive overall display.

But in keeping with plenty of his team-mates, they faded as Leeds surged and after Cam Scott and Hamlin-Uele had rescued Wakefield with brilliant last-ditch tackles to deny two tries, the dam burst.

James McDonnell bullied his way through the home defence to make it 22-10 with Connor’s boot adding another two to put them within 10 points of Wakefield.

The excellent Smith – who will join Wakefield next season – was again aided by Connor as he powered through three minutes later as Leeds closed the gap to four points.

With the comeback definitely on, Wakefield were creaking under huge pressure, but to their credit they held on to their advantage until three minutes from time.

Connor’s kick to set up Hankinson out wide pulled the scores level, but last year’s Man of Steel is looking as shiny as ever and he produced a nerveless kick from the left flank to seal a remarkable turnaround.

Victory delivered a major step towards a top-two finish for Leeds, who are four points clear with five games remaining in the regular season and have a points difference of over 200 on Wakefield and Wigan Warriors, in second and third respectively.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – facing a crucial election later this year – has hinted that he may be considering taking unilateral action to prolong a costly war with Iran, even as Washington and Tehran appear to be close to an interim deal to open the Strait of Hormuz.

“We heard today the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Ahmad Vahidi, declare that Iran intends to continue developing a nuclear weapon,” Netanyahu claimed in an assertion, even though no official statement from Vahidi on the matter has been released by the Iranian government or official media.

Still, Netanyahu saw the opportunity to once again frame Iran’s nuclear threat as existential.

“As Israel’s prime minister, I am determined to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” Netanyahu told attendees at a state ceremony in West Jerusalem.

Describing the United States as “Israel’s greatest ally”, Netanyahu nevertheless added that he was prepared to do “whatever is necessary” to guarantee Israel’s security.

Israel has officially struck Iran only once since April’s initial ceasefire between the US and Iran took effect, even after it later broke down and the two sides resumed hostilities in the US-Israel war on Iran.

But observers – including US President Donald Trump – believe that Netanyahu wants to keep the US engaged in the fight against Iran, which began in late February with a joint US-Israeli attack that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Addressing reports that Netanyahu planned to bring fresh intelligence to Washington alleging that Iran was stockpiling uranium at its Pickaxe Mountain facility near Natanz in central Iran, Trump told reporters: “I don’t need Bibi to tell me that. Bibi is telling me that because he wants me to stay involved.”

He then sharpened his criticism of the Israeli prime minister, adding: “Why don’t you just tell it to me? Why do you have to announce it to the world?”

Fight alone

With the US and Israel unable so far to topple the Iranian state or force concessions on the Strait of Hormuz, many analysts believe that the war has been unsuccessful.

Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz – formerly a free waterway – has paralysed much of the world’s economy.

Global oil prices have increased, with shortages in the supplies of liquified gas, fertiliser exports, sulphur supplies, and petrochemical feedstocks all threatening to ripple through international supply lines.

“The war against Iran is a strategic catastrophe,” said Ahron Bregman, an Israeli security analyst and senior teaching fellow in the Department for War Studies at King’s College London. “None of the original aims has been achieved… Trump is desperate for an exit. Almost at any price. He only cares about opening the [strait].”

But in Israel, the focus is less on the world’s economy, and more on the perceived danger posed by Iran and its allied groups across the region.

Netanyahu has consistently pursued a hawkish line on Iran, a power he has repeatedly claimed is on the brink of crossing the threshold to nuclear weapons capability.

He is also thought to have been among the loudest voices that pushed for Trump to withdraw in 2018 from a nuclear deal agreed to by previous US President Barack Obama.

“Israel’s strategy is clear,” said Kobi Michael, a senior researcher at Israel’s Misgav Institute for National Security. “Iran remains close to achieving nuclear capacity and has shown it’s able to continue producing ballistic missiles and supplying its proxy forces in the region.”

The war on Iran was currently a fiasco from Israel’s perspective, Michael added, with both the US and Iran insisting that they had won.

Michael, however, framed the current negotiations as “useless”, and unlikely to produce lasting security in the region, reflecting the sentiment in the Israeli security establishment.

Israel, Michael said, was prepared to fight alone if necessary.

“Israel can only have one strategy,” Michael said, “to strike directly at the head of the octopus that threatens global civilisation and to do that alone, if necessary.”

That might inflame tensions with the US, Michael added, concluding, “I can’t see any other option.”

Inconceivable

However, while some in Israel were confident of the country’s ability to strike unilaterally at Iran in defiance of US wishes, others expressed caution, suggesting that Netanyahu’s talk of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon might simply be little more than rhetoric ahead of an election that could conceivably jeopardise both his legacy and, as a result of his long-running corruption trial, his personal freedom.

The US relationship is important to the Israeli electorate, but relations between Netanyahu and Trump appear to be frostier than normal.

Beyond friction over Israel’s reluctance to accept terms apparently imposed on it in Gaza by the Trump-sponsored Board of Peace, there have also been widespread reports of tensions over Israeli strikes in Lebanon that have repeatedly threatened to derail US negotiations with Iran. Those attacks, however, have stopped far short of the unilateral strikes on Iran hinted at by Netanyahu on Wednesday.

“Israel launching unilateral action against Iran is inconceivable,” the US author and former diplomat Aaron David Miller said. “Something like that might be possible if Iran or Hezbollah struck Israel directly, but talk of Israel striking Iran now, when US negotiations are so close to a conclusion, is impossible.”

Relations between the two allies were entering a unique phase, he said. While the US had never cooperated so closely with an ally militarily since its relationship with the United Kingdom during World War II, diplomatic ties had rarely been so fraught.

“Trump’s leaked, expletive-laden criticism of Netanyahu; his direct negotiations with Hamas over Gaza; his lifting of sanctions on Syria despite Israel’s objections; and his negotiations with Iran without Israel’s involvement all point to a changing relationship,” Miller said. “What that might mean for future US military assistance to Israel – including defence cooperation, intelligence sharing, research and development, and diplomatic support in international forums – remains to be seen.”

However, he added: “Let me be clear. Netanyahu had a hell of a role in how this war started. He’s not going to have a role in how it shifts to its next phase.”

The Federal Communications Commission has demanded for months that ABC prove its stations deserve to stay on the air — a proceeding with no precedent in the last half-century. This week, the network delivered a sharp retort, accusing the agency of waging a campaign of political retribution.

“The retaliation against ABC is a signal to every media company in the country: accommodate the Administration’s view of what news coverage should look like or pay the price,” Disney’s attorneys wrote in the 109-page filing.

ABC has enlisted prominent elected officials, community organizations and seasoned litigators for the 1st Amendment showdown that could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Burbank entertainment giant’s combative stance comes after the FCC, led by Chairman Brendan Carr, took the rare step this spring of demanding that Disney defend the broadcast licenses of its eight ABC stations — including KABC-TV Channel 7 in Los Angeles — years before the permits were set to expire.

The government’s move represents a significant threat to Disney because the loss of licenses would hobble the ABC network by forcing its largest stations off the air. Other ABC stations at risk include those in San Francisco, Fresno, Houston, Philadelphia and New York.

The FCC is expected to make a determination next month. It could require ABC to defend the stations in a hearing or before the commission.

The FCC, in a statement, defended its inquiry and hinted that it may go further.

“For decades, Americans of all stripes have been subsidizing broadcast media to the tune of many billions of dollars by giving TV stations free use of a valuable, public resource — the airwaves,” an FCC spokesperson said in a statement.

“Broadcasters are required by law to operate in the public interest — not in the narrow or partisan interests of a political party,” the spokesperson said. “The FCC is going to hold broadcasters accountable to the full extent of the law, regardless of any disinformation campaign that some of them may choose to run.”

ABC accused the FCC of overreach.

“The FCC has spent the last 18 months searching for some pretext for revoking the stations’ licenses,” ABC wrote in the filing. “The Commission has found none, because the stations easily meet the standard for license renewal.”

Disney‘s attorneys cited the unusual nature of the proceedings, linking the FCC’s action to Trump’s dislike of certain ABC network programs. The FCC launched its review in late April — one day after the president lashed out at ABC after late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel made a joke about Trump’s health and First Lady Melania Trump.

Until this spring, the FCC had not called for an early license review in more than 50 years.

“For the first time in history, the Federal Communications Commission has ordered an entire group of local television stations … to undergo simultaneous license renewal proceedings well before their current licenses expire,” Disney’s attorneys wrote.

The network asked the FCC to dismiss its review.

“This is as clearcut an example of retaliation as one could imagine,” ABC said in the filing. Damage has been done even if the FCC stops short of revoking the licenses, the network said.

“The mere investigation and the threat of finding a violation are sufficient: ‘the value of a sword of Damocles is that it hangs — not that it drops,’” ABC wrote.

The FCC has previously said the review grew out of an inquiry it launched early last year to scrutinize Disney’s internal diversity, equity and inclusion programs to see if they violated federal anti-discrimination laws — part of an expansive Trump-led campaign against DEI initiated as soon as he returned to the White House.

This year, the FCC opened a separate inquiry over whether ABC’s “The View” should keep an exemption granted to news programs so they are not obligated to provide equal airtime for opponents of various political candidates. The FCC had given “The View” the exemption in 2002.

Carr also has criticized ABC for not televising Trump’s live prime-time speech earlier this month to vent his grievances over past elections. Carr told reporters ABC’s decision could factor into the station license review.

By calling for the early review, the FCC allowed petitioners and ordinary residents to chime in on the stations’ operations and ABC network programming.

By Wednesday night’s deadline, the FCC had received more than 153,000 public comments. An estimated 96% of respondents wrote to support their local ABC station, the company said, including L.A. County Sheriff Robert Luna, L.A. Police Chief Jim McDonnell and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco.

In his letter, Luna said KABC — which has operated in Los Angeles for more than 75 years — provides residents with “timely and accurate information that has … undoubtedly saved lives.”

Lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and Reps. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) and Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), have called on the FCC to drop the review, saying the agency has politicized its regulatory powers.

Disney has hired prominent attorneys Beth Wilkinson, Jennifer Tatel and Paul Clement, a former U.S. solicitor general with experience arguing before the Supreme Court. Disney’s chief legal officer, Horacio Gutierrez, is leading the team.

Several conservative groups have questioned whether ABC was fit to hold its licenses.

“ABC’s rights are important, but they are not preeminent,” Center for American Rights President Daniel Suhr wrote in his 66-page petition to the FCC to deny ABC’s local licenses, adding that the commission must instead focus on “the right of viewers of ABC stations.”

“Disney’s lawyers can wish upon a star, but they cannot make this record disappear,” Suhr said in a statement Thursday. “Disney does not own the public airwaves, and an FCC license is not a corporate entitlement. The FCC should reject Disney’s effort to avoid meaningful scrutiny, require full answers, and designate these applications for a hearing.”

The FCC doesn’t license networks, only the local stations that carry network programming.

In one public comment, an ABC critic named Lawrence Caswell agreed with Suhr’s contention: “ABC is just a grossly biased propaganda arm of the Democratic Party.”

Jeffrey C. Illes, a Chicago-area viewer who identified himself as a Republican, wrote in support of Disney’s WLS-TV station.

“I rely on their broadcast for accurate, timely, and trusted local news, breaking weather updates, and essential public safety information,” Illes wrote. “ABC 7 Chicago is a vital institution in our community.”

Stations typically file for a license renewal once every eight years. The commission then determines whether the station has “served the public interest” and has not run afoul of the “rules and regulations of the Commission.”

The commission’s lone Democrat, Anna M. Gomez, blasted the station license inquiry.

“The FCC has no authority to police the ideological balance of the airwaves, and no matter what this Commission does next, the record now makes clear that this was never a genuine search for the public interest,” Gomez said in a Thursday statement.

There are three commissioners: Gomez and two Republicans — Carr and Olivia Trusty, who joined the panel last year.

Congress restricts the FCC from any regulatory moves that trample on free speech rights for broadcasters.

A coalition of progressive groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, urged Disney Chief Executive Josh D’Amaro to continue to defend 1st Amendment freedoms in the company’s battle with the FCC.

“When you’re standing up for yourself, you are standing up for all of us,” the group wrote. “All of our rights are in danger when the FCC is allowed to censor comedians, journalists, and critics.”

The “family fight” over setting the Fed Funds Rate that Federal Reserve Board Chairman Kevin Warsh has desired resulted in the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) maintaining its current 3.5% to 3.75% target at the second meeting under his leadership.

“I asked for a good family fight, and I got one,” he said at Wednesday’s FOMC post-announcement press conference. “That’s the purpose… Most of our discussions were on the big questions that matter to the conduct of monetary policy.”

The two-day fight addressed the impact of five years of high inflation on current policy, the effects of strained supply chains and resulting price increases, and the role of monetary policy and strategies in achieving price stability.

“There was nothing inertial about that discussion. It was an active, robust discussion about what’s in the full range of what we can do and might want to do in the period ahead,” he said.

Unlike June’s unanimous vote to maintain the FOMC’s target rate, Beth M. Hammack, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland; Neel Tushar Kashkari, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis; and Lorie K. Logan, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, voted to raise the Fed Funds Rate by 25 basis points.

The division nearly matched the CME Group’s FedWatch Tool, which estimated a 68.5% chance the FOMC would maintain its rate and a 31.5% chance of an increase to 3.75%-4%, based on the 30-Day Fed Funds futures price.

Inflation Target

Acknowledging that supply chain shocks in energy and other sectors have kept inflation above the FOMC’s 2% target, Warsh noted that little could be done to cure inflation in the nine weeks since he became chairman or to achieve a month of modest price decreases.

“For some households, businesses, and market professionals, five years of high inflation have left a mistaken impression… that the Fed’s implicit inflation target was somehow above 2%,” said Warsh. “Let me reiterate: There is no soft inflation target. There is no soft implicit target. Not on this committee’s watch. There’s only a target, and it’s 2%.”

No Jackson Hole Preview

Keeping true to form, Warsh shared that he has not yet begun his speech for the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium in August, which has historically set the stage for what the FOMC would do in the second half of the year.

He said he would like to ask the “big questions” about what is happening to productivity, demographics, and the global economy amid the current economic shocks.

“I haven’t made a decision whether it’s going to be a big-picture speech or whether it’s going to be a more traditional setup for all the action we’re going to have between September and December,” he said. “I will tell you one other thing I’m doing between now and Jackson Hole. I’m checking in with those task forces [that I announced in June].”

Another dramatic and emotional night in Anthony Joshua’s boxing career ultimately ended as just about everyone expected it would – with the countdown under way to a super-fight against Tyson Fury later in the year.

Joshua, 36, improved his record to 30-4, but he was almost on the end of one of the biggest shocks in his sport’s history when he was knocked down twice by little-known Albanian Kristian Prenga inside the first round.

The Briton regrouped in the second round to land a flurry of hard right hands, sending Prenga crashing to the canvas and getting the win he came to Jeddah for.

BBC Sport has selected some of the best pictures from the fight, which came seven months on from the car crash in Nigeria in which Joshua was injured and two of his closest friends died.

Noor Salem, 30, stands beside an incubator at a neonatal intensive care unit in central Gaza, where her baby, Yazan Al-Khalidi, lies attached to tubes and monitors.

She watches his tiny body behind a sheet of quartz glass, tracking his meagre breathing and the slightest movement he makes.

Yazan was born eight months into Noor’s pregnancy, his body appearing bluish in the first moments of life.

This required immediate transfer to the neonatal intensive care unit at Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital in Deir el-Balah, after it became apparent that Yazan was born with breathing issues.

Instead of being able to hold her baby in the first moments after his birth, Noor is now forced to sit by the incubator and wait for Yazan’s condition to improve.

Yazan is Noor’s second child, having lost her first baby shortly after birth during the famine in Gaza in 2025, brought about by Israel’s ongoing genocide in the enclave.

During her pregnancy with Yazan, she endured shortages of basic necessities and a constant fear of losing another child.

“I was afraid throughout my pregnancy because I had already lost my baby before. I was afraid I would go through the same pain again,” she said.

“When he was born, and I saw that he was not moving or crying like other babies, I felt terrified. I did not know what would happen to him. All I wanted was for him to survive.”

Noor waits for daily updates from doctors, hoping Yazan will overcome his health difficulties and return to her arms.

Rising premature births in Gaza

There has been a sharp increase in premature births and underweight newborns, as well as stillbirths and birth defects, since the genocide in Gaza began on October 7, 2023.

UNICEF has repeatedly warned about a crisis in premature births in Gaza, with one in every five newborns requiring intensive neonatal or thermal care. Maternal malnutrition, prolonged psychological stress and declining prenatal care services have all had an impact on both mother and child.

Dr Afnan Abu Hasaballah, an obstetrician and gynecologist working with UNRWA and Al-Awda Health Hospital in Nuseirat refugee camp, has personally witnessed the impact of this on the health of pregnant women and newborns.

She says many pregnant women arrive at hospitals suffering from severe stress and exhaustion after repeated displacement, deprivation of essential goods and bombings.

“Constant fear, repeated displacement, lack of food and clean water, and limited access to prenatal care all increased the risk of premature birth,” she says.

The Israeli siege on Gaza is also leading to severe malnutrition, and one of the main issues affecting both expectant mothers and their fetuses, leading to more premature births and low birthweights for newborns and requiring intensive care.

Inadequate nutrition also increases the risk of anemia, exhaustion for expectant mothers, pregnancy complications and restricted fetal growth.

“Many pregnant women during the war were unable to access sufficient or balanced food, and this directly affected the health of mothers and newborns,” Dr Abu Hasaballah says.

Pressure on Gaza health services

Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital is the only hospital with a neonatal unit in the whole of central Gaza, serving thousands of expectant mothers and causing immense pressure on overstretched health workers.

“We were working under enormous pressure, with shortages of incubators, ventilators, medications and basic supplies, in addition to repeated power and fuel shortages, which posed a direct threat to babies inside the incubators,” Dr Abu Hasaballah says.

Premature babies require continuous monitoring, oxygen, respiratory support, proper nutrition and treatment, something that health workers with their limited resources and time are not always able to provide.

“When these resources become unavailable, the risk of serious complications increases, including breathing difficulties, low body temperature, infections and low blood sugar,” Dr Abu Hasaballah says.

“Unfortunately, we may lose babies who could have survived if they had received basic care.”

The separation of mothers from their babies shortly after their birth is one of the hardest experiences for mothers to endure. This abrupt separation causes immense anxiety for both mothers and babies, with the most common question doctors at neonatal units are asked is whether their children will survive. Doctors and nurses do what they can to reassure the mothers and save the children.

“Instead of holding their baby and celebrating, mothers see them transferred directly to the incubator or intensive care unit. Their fear is doubled because the war has affected everything, from medical equipment and supplies to electricity shortages and overcrowding in hospitals,” says Dr Abu Hasaballah.

“We continued working day and night without sleep, and we did everything we could to save every child, but in many cases, the babies’ needs were greater than the resources available.”

New challenges for mothers

Once the parents and babies are discharged, a new struggle for families begins amid a landscape where a mother’s health has been impacted by deprivations and stresses of the war. Essential baby care items, such as sterilisation kits and baby formula, are absent or unaffordable.

“Many families have lost everything because of displacement, leaving mothers without baby clothes, diapers, blankets, formula or clean water,” Dr Abu Hasaballah says.

In Nuseirat refugee camp, central Gaza, Qutoof Al-Khair Foundation supports pregnant women and newborns by providing vitamins, nutritional supplements, medicines and essential medical supplies.

Akram Abu Jiab, head of the foundation, says his staff is dealing with growing demand for their services among pregnant women and new mothers who are unable to access enough food and healthcare to sustain their babies’ health.

“Premature babies require special care and continuous medical follow-up even after being discharged from incubators,” he says.

“However, many families are facing significant challenges in securing the basic medical and nutritional needs of their children.”

Despite the foundation’s efforts to reach as many mothers and children as possible, their efforts can only go so far.

“The scale of needs far exceeds the available resources. The gap between needs and support continues to grow every day,” he says.

“Behind every baby born in Gaza is a mother trying to protect her child under exceptional circumstances. Supporting mothers and children at this stage is not a luxury; it is a necessity to protect the lives of the next generation.”

WASHINGTON — With Whitewater investigations likely to continue well into next year’s presidential campaign, the White House has decided on a hard-line legal and public relations counterattack that carries serious political risks for President Clinton.

On the legal front, the White House is relying on executive privilege as well as lawyer-client confidentiality to justify withholding notes on a November 1993 meeting at which the president’s lawyers and aides discussed Whitewater.

The notes have been subpoenaed by the Senate Whitewater investigative committee, and White House aides fear that they will be demanded by special counsel Kenneth W. Starr as well. Today the committee will vote to enforce the panel’s subpoena for the notes. Panel Chairman Alfonse M. D’Amato (R-N.Y.) said that the full Senate would vote on the matter before adjourning later this month and that he plans to seek an expedited court review.

Republicans have suggested that the 1993 meeting, which occurred when several federal agencies were investigating the activities of Clinton associates in Arkansas, may have dealt with ways to cover up damaging facts and obstruct justice.

And such charges, whatever their substantive merits, create a politically dangerous problem for an already embattled president going into an election year.

Some sources who have seen the documents insist that they contain no incriminating revelations. They say that the president is invoking executive privilege because waiving it would open the administration to a massive fishing expedition by partisan investigators. Executive privilege is the constitutional principle that a chief executive can maintain the confidentiality of internal communication involving the legal pursuit of his duties.

Yet even if the meeting notes are innocuous and the White House is holding them back only to protect a larger principle, the failure to make full disclosure can raise voters’ suspicions. Already, political opponents and some newspaper editorial writers are using such Watergate-isms as “stonewalling” to describe Clinton’s reaction.

Said a former Clinton White House official knowledgeable about Whitewater: “The problem here is that the courts might ultimately sustain the president but politically it’s a loser.

“In cases like these, the political dimension quickly overwhelms the legal dimension,” said this source. He predicted that Clinton eventually would find a way to release the documents in some form while continuing to assert that they are protected by either attorney-client privilege or executive privilege.

The Senate panel revealed Wednesday that in addition to the notes of the Nov. 5, 1993, meeting, the White House has not turned over four other Whitewater-related documents:

* A draft chronology of the Whitewater saga prepared by the Clintons’ personal lawyer, David E. Kendall. It was drafted five days after the Nov. 5 meeting.

* A letter written Jan. 4, 1994, to the president from Washington attorney James Hamilton, who has represented the family of the late Deputy White House Counsel Vincent Foster and who worked for the 1992 campaign.

* A New York Times article from Dec. 20, 1993, with notations Clinton wrote in the margin.

* Undated notes of White House aide Joel Klein.

Democrats said that the Clintons have every right to invoke privilege in this matter, and they suggested that the Republicans should try to negotiate a compromise rather than move toward a court battle. D’Amato described the Clintons’ position as “extraordinary and troublesome.” Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes of Maryland, the committee’s ranking Democrat, accused D’Amato of trying to provoke a confrontation for political reasons.

The White House is more concerned that waiving confidentiality would open the door for Starr to seek notes and testimony from Clinton’s attorneys.

Lawyers, including White House Counsel Jack Quinn, have advised Clinton that he cannot waive the privilege for only one meeting. If he waives it once, he cannot reassert it on another Whitewater issue.

While the White House public relations campaign is aimed at explaining Clinton’s case and marshaling support for it, it also is designed to discredit D’Amato as a political enemy with ethical problems of his own–a ploy guaranteed to stir more controversy and criticism of the president.

Times staff writers John M. Broder and Sara Fritz contributed to this story.

Hull FC interim coach Andy Last told BBC Radio Humberside:

“Really disappointed, it would have been great to get two points. Unbelievable crowd came in on the back of a season where we have really struggled. The loyalty of the supporters is second to none.

“We got off to a great start. We felt the start was important for us to get that engagement with the supporters and we thought Rovers were a bit fragile after their last two performances, so it couldn’t have gone any better.

“The tries we conceded were real soft ones and that was down to fatigue.

“Second half, Rovers just did what they do which is suffocate you of field position. I ended up with a bit of a neck ache because I was looking to my left all the time. That pressure they put you under forced us into some uncharacteristic errors.”

Hull KR head coach Willie Peters told BBC Humberside:

“I’m really proud. The first 10 minutes was a nervous start, 12 [points] down, it could have got ugly but we fought.

“I thought Tom Amone and Kyle Lawton were outstanding. They made a big difference when they came on. I say it every week but what Dean Hadley brings to our team is incredible.”

[On Elliot Minchella and Jez Litten] “When times get a little bit tough you want your leaders to stand up and that is what I thought both of those guys did tonight and put in great performances.

“I said before the game that I thought this was the perfect game for us to show we’ve still got that fight. Being 12-0 down at your rivals to be able to kick on at the back end was what we needed.”

Hull FC: Moy; Barron, Hardaker, Litten, Briscoe; Arthur, Sezer; Salabio, Cust, Hill, Batchelor, O’Neill, Bell.

Interchanges: Bourouh, Clark, Ese’ese, Wood.

Hull KR: Broadbent; Davies, Hiku, Gildart, Burgess; Mourgue, May; Sue, Litten, Hadley, Whitbread, Batchelor, Minchella.

Interchanges: Amone, Luckley, Lawton, Dezaria.

Referee: Chris Kendall.

California has some of the nation’s toughest gun laws, but state lawmakers are concerned that a new technology is allowing criminals to obtain firearms by building them from scratch. By using 3-D printers, they warn, lawbreakers are able to make key components of untraceable “ghost guns” with the press of a button.

Ghost guns, which authorities say make it more difficult to investigate shootings because they lack serial numbers, have been a growing problem for law enforcement nationwide. According to federal data, the number of privately made firearms recovered in crimes surged from more than 1,600 in 2017 to nearly 27,500 in 2023. California leads the nation in recoveries over that period.

In response, legislators are seeking to mandate that all 3-D printers sold in the state come equipped with software that prohibits users from making triggers and other gun parts. A bill passed the Assembly in May and is advancing through the Senate.

But the proposal has drawn opposition from a diverse coalition, which includes civil liberties groups, tech companies and 3-D printing enthusiasts as well as Hollywood effects studios, who argue that “firearm blocking software” will also prohibit legitimate designs and expose makers to government or corporate surveillance.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Inside a San Fernando workshop, Samuel McBride makes movie monsters come to life for the camera. One of his latest creations, an animatronic hand, clutches when he pulls a trigger that he built using a 3-D printer.

McBride says the technology has transformed the work at Legacy Effects, where he is a lab manager, but he’s worried it will soon be off-limits because of a proposed change in California law.

McBride fears the law would interfere with the making of devices like the one that activates his lifelike hand.

“If I just took apart this trigger and put it on a printer, how is anyone, computer or human, going to tell me how I intend to use it?” he asked.

Backers of the proposed law say it has the potential to help save lives.

“As gun violence continues to devastate our communities, we cannot allow 3-D printing technology to become a new pipeline for untraceable weapons,” said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, the bill’s author.

Critics of the proposed California law note that 3-D printed guns represent a small subset of ghost guns recovered by law enforcement at crime scenes. According to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, most “privately made firearms” recovered by police are assembled from mail-order kits or unfinished parts rather than printed at home.

Jorge Perez of Monster City Studios holds a sculpture made with a large, industrial 3-D printer.

(Ronaldo Bolaños / Los Angeles Times)

“This fight is not over whether ghost guns are dangerous,” said David Tobin, an independent creator leading the coalition. “It is over whether the state can or should require a consumer tool to surveil a person’s designs before they are allowed to make something.”

Everytown for Gun Safety, a national nonprofit that advocates for gun control and has pushed for the passage of California’s bill, pointed to rising 3-D printed firearm recoveries across 20 major cities and warned that homemade plastic parts can help people bypass background checks or turn handguns into automatic weapons.

Krystal LoPilato, who advocates for policy at Everytown, said the group has successfully guided a similar bill through the New York state Legislature.

A handgun frame made using a 3-D printer is held for display at the office of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

LoPilato said the policy aims to be proactive, rather than allowing more violence to take place before regulating the problem. Opponents counter that California already bars unlawful firearm manufacturing with 3-D printers, and that ghost gun recoveries have declined since the state adopted a series of new laws and enforcement efforts.

A June 1 letter to lawmakers, signed by a group of 3-D printing companies, stagecraft and prop-making studios and industry stakeholders, argued that AB 2047 raises 1st Amendment concerns and would harm businesses. The letter was signed by a wide variety of companies and individuals, including Prusa Research, a prominent 3-D printer manufacturer.

“To an algorithm, a gun barrel and a piece of pipe are the same grooved cylinder,” Jakub Kmošek, head of public affairs at Prusa, said in a statement to The Times. “This bill will only make it harder to build, repair, experiment, and innovate in California.”

Alan Scott, Legacy Effects’ co-founder, said 3-D printing has become central to the company’s survival in an industry where budgets are tighter and deadlines are shorter.

“Everything’s just got to be done faster these days. You don’t get to reduce the quality. We couldn’t stay in business if we weren’t 3-D printing,” Scott said.

To solve this problem, Bauer-Kahan put an entertainment industry exception in the bill, exempting “printers manufactured for and sold exclusively to entertainment industry stagecraft and propmaking studios” from the software requirement.

McBride, Legacy’s 3-D lab manager, said those printers do not really exist.

Legacy uses the same general-purpose machines available to other businesses willing to invest in the equipment, and no printers are marketed exclusively for Hollywood, he said.

1

2

1. A 3-D printed sculpture concept at Monster City, a special effects studio in Santa Clarita. (Ronaldo Bolaños / Los Angeles Times) 2. 3-D printing advocate David Tobin showcases a robotics kit at Monster City. (Ronaldo Bolaños / Los Angeles Times)

Legacy also worries about privacy. Major studios require strict secrecy before a movie or show is released. To accommodate this, the company shares design files through encrypted servers and protected internal systems.

“We’ve invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to bring all that technology here under the umbrella of our NDAs and our IP protection,” McBride said.

Bauer-Kahan noted at a Senate hearing that she is working to address concerns raised by 3-D printing users and industries that rely on the technology.

Paul Powers, chief executive of Physna, a company whose technology could be used to block gun parts on 3-D printers, said the strongest criticisms of AB 2047 “misunderstand how the software works.”

“Something that vaguely looks like a gun part is not considered to be a match,” he said.

Powers also responded to surveillance concerns by clarifying that his company’s software only blocks the printer from making prohibited parts — it doesn’t flag them to authorities or log users’ intellectual property.

“There’s no communication with anyone; it doesn’t go anywhere,” he said.

But Marleen Vogelaar, chief executive of Thangs3D, a platform for independent creators to share and sell 3-D printable designs, said that answer does not resolve her broader concerns about how AB 2047 would work in practice.

“These databases will always lag behind innovation and can be easily circumvented and generate false positives that block legal designs and wrongly flag everyday makers,” she said at a Senate hearing this month. “The bill also creates serious privacy and security risks by giving third parties access to analyze designer’s files. That threatens intellectual property and adds digital surveillance in a state that values data privacy.”

If the bill passes, the state’s Department of Justice would publish a roster of compliant printers. Printers not on the list would be banned from sale or transfer in California beginning in December 2029.

Aubrey Rodriguez, a legislative advocate with American Civil Liberties Union California Action, an advocacy organization formed by the ACLU’s three affiliates in the state, said the bill would ask ordinary users, schools and businesses to accept a new layer of control based on software they still do not trust.

Rodriguez said the proposal risks creating “a permanent back door into the privacy of our own homes, ripe for exploitation.”

“Once this new infrastructure exists, it is a simple software update away from tracking political dissent or preventing 3-D printing designs deemed inappropriate,” Rodriguez said.

As renewed fighting between the U.S. and Iran has entered a seventh day with no signs of letting up, the Pentagon appears to be sending more forces to the region. The move comes as the conflict took a sharp turn overnight, with both sides carrying through on threats to hit infrastructure targets. That marks a major change from the previous tit-for-tat barrages as the two sides continue to struggle for control over the Strait of Hormuz.

“The Trump administration notified Israel it is sending dozens more refueling planes to the country ahead of a potential expansion of military operations against Iran,” Axios reported, citing three U.S. and Israeli officials.

“Israeli officials say the U.S. wants to send several dozen more refueling planes in the coming days, bringing the number of planes to the same level it had at the beginning of the war,” Axios added. “Israeli officials say the U.S. military prefers operating the refueling planes from Ben Gurion Airport, because other air bases in the region are more exposed to Iranian attacks and less safe for U.S. planes. At the moment, the Iranians are still deterred from launching attacks on Israel, because it will likely trigger a massive retaliation.”

This move comes after Israel placed a limit of 20 on the number of tankers at Ben Gurion Airport due to the impact all those jets were having on passenger air service operations. There are currently about 30 KC-46 Pegasus and KC-135 Stratotanker aerial refueling jets at the airport. There had been about 75 refuelers and cargo planes there during the height of Operation Epic Fury.

It remains unclear how that issue will be resolved, however, boosting the number of tankers in Israel will certainly give the U.S. greater flexibility in being able to refuel aircraft attacking and surveilling Iran. As we noted yesterday, there was a concern that moving aircraft around to other bases farther away could cause sortie rates and durations for receiver aircraft missions to suffer in a sudden crisis.

In addition, more combat jets appear to be headed back to the Middle East. According to online open-source flight trackers, at least 12 F-16 Fighting Falcons are heading to Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan from Spangdahlem Air Base in Germany. Whether this is a plus-up or a routine rotation is unclear, but either way it shows that the U.S. is continuing to add assets to the region.

Meanwhile, as we have noted in earlier reporting, the U.S. has already returned F-22 Raptors that were flying out of Ovda Air Base in Israel back to the United States. Other aircraft, such as A-10s and F-15Es, have also returned home from or have been replaced in the CENTCOM region. So clearly there is a lot of shifting of aviation assets taking place even amid current operations.

Friday afternoon, CENTCOM announced a new wave of strikes on Iran.

“CENTCOM launched a round of strikes against Iran at 3 p.m. ET today for the seventh consecutive night,” the command stated on X. “The strikes are designed to continue degrading Iranian military capabilities at the Commander in Chief’s direction.”

Last night, American forces struck several bridges and energy plants in the southern part of the country, according to Iranian media. In retaliation, Iran hit several targets across the region, including what Kuwait says is a desalination plant, another step up the escalation ladder. In this arid part of the world, countries rely heavily on desalination plants to provide potable water.

Officials in Hormozgan province, where Bandar Abbas is the capital, say six bridges were hit in the latest attacks, along key transport routes linking the city with surrounding towns, Al Jazeera reported. Bandar Abbas, which has a key naval base on the Strait of Hormuz and is frequently targeted, was also reportedly struck again.

The attacks appear to be isolating Bandar Abbas and other parts of the south along the Strait, which has been a key flash-point. Iran claims control of the strategic chokepoint while the U.S. says it remains under international auspices.

Former CENTCOM commander Joseph Votel told us that while it “may be possible” that the U.S. is preparing for a ground invasion of southern Iran, “I don’t really think that is what this is about. I think our kinetic targeting is principally focused on elimination of IRGC capacity to influence the Strait of Hormuz or attack our partners in the region.”

Friday morning, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) declined to comment on the claims that it struck bridges, referring us to its X post from the previous night.

“U.S. forces, including fighter jets, aerial drones, and warships, launched precision munitions that hit dozens of Iranian military targets such as coastal surveillance and air defense sites, military logistics infrastructure, and maritime capabilities,” the command wrote. “This was the sixth consecutive night of U.S. strikes against Iran. At the Commander in Chief’s direction, CENTCOM is further degrading Iranian military capabilities and holding Iran accountable for recent attacks on commercial shipping.”

Several videos emerged on social media showing the destroyed and damaged bridges.