Six radical Islamic terrorists responsible for the deaths of 32 people in the Belgian capital of Brussels seven years ago have finally been found guilty, with Salah Abdeslam, Mohamed Abrini, Oussama Atar, Osama Krayem, Ali El Haddad Asufi, and Bilal El Makhoukhi convicted of terrorist murders at the Brussels Airport and the Maelbeek metro station.
Two others, identified as a Rwandan and a Tunisian, beat their murder charges but were still convicted of taking part in terrorist activities, while brothers Smail and Ibrahim Farisi were acquitted on all counts.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
In addition to the 32 people killed directly by the bombings, the courts ruled that the Islamic State operatives were responsible for the deaths of three other people, including a cancer patient who had to halt his treatment due to injuries sustained in the attack, one survivor who later died by suicide due to post-traumatic stress, and one who was euthanized by the state for similar reasons.
Not all of the terrorists are in custody, actually with Oussama Atar being tried in absentia. He is believed to have possibly been killed in Syria. Like Abdeslam, Attar is also connected to the radical Islamic terrorist attacks in France in 2015, which saw 137 people murdered in a concert gun massacre, a series of bombings, and several random spray shootings of cafés and restaurants across the city.
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
More From The Pulse
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Trump administration announced plans to intensify immigration enforcement in five major U.S. cities, including Chicago, with federal officials considering a naval base as an operations hub.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: White House Border Czar Tom Homan, President Donald J. Trump, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D).
📍WHEN & WHERE: August 28, 2025; cities include Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Portland, and Seattle.
💬KEY QUOTE: “All these sanctuary cities… refuse to work with ICE,” said Tom Homan.
🎯IMPACT: The move could expand ICE operations and potentially increase federal intervention in sanctuary cities.
IN FULL
The Trump administration has announced an effort to ramp up immigration enforcement in five major U.S. cities, including Chicago. Federal officials are reportedly considering utilizing a Lake Michigan naval base as an operations hub for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations.
White House Border Czar Tom Homan, speaking to reporters on Thursday, stated that a “large contingent” of ICE agents would be deployed to sanctuary jurisdictions that continue to undermine federal immigration laws. Cities targeted include New York, Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle, and Chicago.
President Donald J. Trump has also criticized Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D) for violent crime in Chicago, suggesting that the city’s leadership has failed to protect its residents. Trump reiterated the federal government’s readiness to intervene if necessary.
“Governor Pritzker had 6 murders in Chicago this weekend. 20 people were shot. But he doesn’t want to ask me for help. Can this be possible?” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. He added: “The people are desperate for me to STOP THE CRIME, something the Democrats aren’t capable of doing. STAY TUNED!!!”
Homan confirmed ongoing discussions about expanding ICE’s presence near Chicago, emphasizing the administration’s stance against sanctuary city policies. “All these sanctuary cities… refuse to work with ICE,” Homan said.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: A secretive dark money group linked to the Democratic Party is reportedly paying influencers up to $8,000 per month to spread left-leaning talking points through the “Chorus Creator Incubator Program.”
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Influencers such as Olivia Julianna, Loren Piretra, Barrett Adair, David Pakman, and Leigh McGowan, among others, are tied to the program, which is reportedly funded by the Sixteen Thirty Fund—a project of Arabella Advisors.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The program is ongoing, with activities spanning various social media platforms, including TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram.
💬KEY QUOTE: “It avoids a lot of the public disclosure… that you see on political ads.” – Graham Wilson, Chorus attorney, during a Zoom call with influencers.
🎯IMPACT: Critics argue the program lacks transparency and could undermine democratic accountability, while also serving as a legally dubious conduit for foreign-sourced campaign money.
IN FULL
A number of prominent Democratic Party social media influencers have been outed as recipients of political dark money funneled through the Chorus Creator Incubator, a campaign program run by the 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization Chorus. A series of leaked text messages and video calls has revealed that Chorus and its pro-Democratic Party influencer operation are backed by the Sixteen Thirty Fund, itself a project of the shadowy progressive political consulting firm Arabella Advisors.
According to the leaks, the Chorus Creator Incubator pays influencers up to $8,000 a month to promote left-leaning narratives. The program involves over 90 influencers, including prominent names like Olivia Julianna, Loren Piretra, Barrett Adair, and David Pakman.
The program is cloaked in secrecy, with contracts barring participants from disclosing their involvement or the identity of the funders. Breaches could lead to expulsion and loss of income. Graham Wilson, a lawyer for Chorus, explained to influencers in a Zoom video call that the arrangement avoids public disclosure requirements typically associated with political ads.
“It avoids a lot of the public disclosure… that you see on political ads,” Wilson said, adding: “Your names aren’t showing up on reports filed with the FEC.”
Critics, including ethics experts, have raised concerns over the lack of transparency. Elizabeth Dubois, a professor whose research focuses on the evolution of digital politics, stated, “For democracy to thrive, we need transparency around who is paying for political messages.” Don Heider from Santa Clara University’s Markkula Center for Applied Ethics added, “If the contract says you can’t disclose it, then it’s pretty simple—you can’t take the money.”
Despite these concerns, some creators defended the program. Loren Piretra stated, “The fund supports content creation sustainability while maintaining zero ownership, editorial control, or messaging input.” However, others, like TikTok star V Spehar, criticized Chorus for using their image in fundraising decks without permission.
The Sixteen Thirty Fund is a major player in Democratic funding, having poured hundreds of millions into left-wing political causes in recent election cycles.
The National Pulse reported in May that Hansjorg Wyss—an 89-year-old Swiss billionaire who has contributed an estimated $162 million to Arabella’s key left-wing dark money operations, Sixteen Thirty Fund and New Venture Fund—is the subject of a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by a 30-year-old employee at one of his California wineries. Notably, Wyss’s political contributions to far-left advocacy groups and Democratic Party-aligned nonprofits have been the subject of controversy as he lacks both U.S. citizenship and permanent residency.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Cracker Barrel has removed its Pride page from its website following backlash over woke rebranding efforts.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Cracker Barrel, conservative activists, and anti-DEI advocate Robby Starbuck.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Recent updates on Cracker Barrel’s website and statements on social media.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Cracker Barrel worked with the far-left HRC [Human Rights Campaign] organization and reportedly sponsored HRC events for 10 years.” – Robby Starbuck
🎯IMPACT: The company faces ongoing scrutiny and has already reversed some unpopular branding decisions to mitigate public backlash.
IN FULL
Cracker Barrel has removed its Pride-themed page from its website following growing criticism of its recent rebranding efforts. The page, which previously featured the slogan “bringing the porch to Pride,” now redirects users to a general “Culture and Belonging” section.
The updated page states, “At Cracker Barrel, welcoming people has always been at the heart of who we are. When we take care of one another, we are able to take even better care of the people who walk through our doors.”
The move comes as the company faces pushback over its branding strategy, including a short-lived attempt to introduce a modernist logo in place of its traditional imagery. The redesign faced swift backlash from both sides of the political aisle, prompting the company to reverse course.
“We thank our guests for sharing your voices and love for Cracker Barrel. We said we would listen, and we have. Our new logo is going away and our ‘Old Timer’ will remain,” the company posted on X, referring to the white man leaning on a barrel that the new logo had erased. “At Cracker Barrel, it’s always been—and always will be—about serving up delicious food, warm welcomes, and the kind of country hospitality that feels like family.”
Conservative voices online have criticized Cracker Barrel’s promotion of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) activism, highlighting its past support of LGBT causes. Activist Robby Starbuck accused the company of aligning with the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and hosting transgender and pronoun training at its Tennessee headquarters.
“Cracker Barrel worked with the far-left HRC organization and reportedly sponsored HRC events for 10 years,” Starbuck wrote on X. “They even brought an HRC representative to their Tennessee HQ to do a pronoun and transgenderism training.”
Cracker Barrel denied ongoing involvement with the HRC, saying it “has not participated in the Human Rights Campaign Index or had any affiliation with HRC in several years.”
The backlash mirrors similar responses to other brands that have adopted woke messaging. For instance, Jaguar saw a dramatic drop in sales after a rebrand featuring non-binary models and a shift away from showcasing newly designed vehicles. In April, the company sold just 49 cars across the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom.
Bud Light also suffered lasting fallout after partnering with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in 2023. The campaign led to a 27 percent drop in sales and significant damage to the brand’s image.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Seven illegal immigrants were transferred from the United States to Rwanda in August under a third-country deportation agreement, according to Rwandan authorities.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Trump administration, the Rwandan government, and seven unidentified deportees.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The deportees arrived in Rwanda in mid-August 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Three of the individuals have expressed a desire to return to their home countries, while four wish to stay and build lives in Rwanda.” – Yolande Makolo, Rwandan government spokeswoman.
🎯IMPACT: The deportation agreement highlights ongoing efforts by the Trump administration to facilitate mass deportations by sending migrants who cannot be sent hom directly to third countries, including Rwanda.
IN FULL
The African nation of Rwanda has begun accepting illegal immigrants removed from the United States as part of a third-country deportation agreement. According to Rwandan government officials, the country received seven illegal immigrants deported from the United States in August, with the agreement currently allowing the transfer of up to 250 deportees.
Yolande Makolo, spokeswoman for the Rwandan government, confirmed that the first group of seven vetted illegal immigrant deportees arrived in mid-August. She added that the migrants have been accommodated by an international organization, with visits from the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and Rwandan social service representatives.
Makolo stated, “Three of the individuals have expressed a desire to return to their home countries, while four wish to stay and build lives in Rwanda.” Those approved for settlement in Rwanda will receive workforce training and access to healthcare, she said.
Rwanda is one of four African countries that have reached deportation agreements with the U.S., alongside Uganda, Swaziland (Eswatini), and South Sudan.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Susan Monarez disputes her firing, claiming only President Donald J. Trump has the authority to remove her from the position.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Susan Monarez, President Donald Trump, attorney Mark Zaid, and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Monarez was removed from her position by the White House personnel office on August 27, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “[W]e reject notification Dr. Monarez has received as legally deficient and she remains as CDC Director.” – Mark Zaid, attorney for Susan Monarez
🎯IMPACT: The CDC faces significant turmoil amid leadership reforms and debates over vaccine policy.
IN FULL
Susan Monarez, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), is pushing back against reports that she has been fired, asserting that only the President has the authority to remove her. Monarez’s lawyers stated that White House staff informed her of her termination, but they argue the notification is legally invalid.
“Contrary to govt statements, Dr. Monarez has neither resigned nor yet been fired,” Monarez’s attorney Mark Zaidclaimed in a post on X (formerly Twitter). “Our client was notified tonight by White House staff in the personnel office that she was fired. As a presidential appointee, senate confirmed officer, only the president himself can fire her.”
“For this reason, we reject notification Dr. Monarez has received as legally deficient and she remains as CDC Director,” Zaid insisted. The statement came after the White House announced Monarez’s firing, citing her refusal to resign.
Zaid also noted Monarez’s resistance to what he described as “unscientific, reckless directives” and her refusal to dismiss certain health officials. He claimed this stance made her a target. Monarez has been at odds with her boss, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., over vaccine policies.
Kennedy, a longtime vaccine skeptic, has called for significant changes to U.S. immunization policy. In an interview, he stated that the CDC “has problems” and requires strong leadership to align with President Trump’s vision of restoring the agency’s credibility. He remarked, “We need to fix it, and we are fixing it, and it may be that some people should not be working there anymore.”
The National Pulse reported on Wednesday that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved updated COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer, Moderna, and Novavax, but with significant limitations for younger populations. The updated shots, targeting the LP. 8.1 variant, are approved for seniors and those with at least one high-risk health condition, such as asthma or obesity. However, access for healthy adults and children has been curtailed, with Pfizer’s vaccine no longer authorized for children under five.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Advance UK, an Elon Musk-backed British political party formed by disaffected former members of Nigel Farage’s Reform Party, has an “effectively 0 out of 100” chance of winning Britain’s next general election, according to Musk’s Grok AI.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Advance UK, Elon Musk.
📍WHEN & WHERE: August 28, 2025, on Musk’s X platform (formerly Twitter).
💬KEY QUOTE: “Their odds of winning the next election are effectively 0 out of 100.” – Grok
🎯IMPACT: Advance UK is unlikely to influence the British political landscape.
IN FULL
Advance UK, a British political party launched in June 2025 by disaffected former members of Nigel Farage’s Reform Party embraced by Elon Musk, has “zero” chance of winning Britain’s next general election, according to the tech mogul’s Grok AI.
Asked by a user on Musk’s X platform (formerly Twitter), “[What are] the odds of Advance UK winning the next general election,” Grok was blunt: “Based on current polls and analysis, Advance UK, a new party launched in June 2025, isn’t registering in major surveys (e.g., YouGov, Ipsos). With no seats or established support, their odds of winning the next election (by 2029) are effectively 0 out of 100.”
Musk was initially friendly with Farage, whose Reform Party is currently polling far ahead of Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour Party and the formerly governing Conservative (Tory) Party. However, following a seemingly productive meeting between the tech mogul and the Brexit champion at President Donald J. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate at the end of 2024, Musk picked the side of now-former Reform politician Rupert Lowe in an internal party feud.
Lowe has formed the breakaway Restore Britain party, but Musk has instead backed Advance UK, founded by Ben Habib—who left Reform after he failed to win a seat in Parliament at the last British election and was replaced as deputy leader—as his preferred alternative to Reform.
Neither minor party has any traction with the British public compared to Reform, however, with commentator and political scientist Matthew Goodwin noting on Wednesday, “No disrespect to the people involved but if you think Ben Habib, a person 99 percent of Britain have never heard of, and his party, which 99 percent of the country have never heard of, is the way forward then you really don’t know all that much about British politics.”
Notably, Musk appears to have given up his ambition to establish a third party in the United States, instead attempting to reconcile with President Trump and position himself as an ally of Vice President J.D. Vance ahead of a possible Vance presidency after 2028.
Based on current polls and analysis, Advance UK, a new party launched in June 2025, isn’t registering in major surveys (e.g., YouGov, Ipsos). With no seats or established support, their odds of winning the next election (by 2029) are effectively 0 out of 100.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Lisa Cook has filed a lawsuit challenging her removal from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Lisa Cook, President Donald J. Trump, and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The lawsuit was filed in federal court in the District of Columbia on Thursday, August 28, 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “President Trump’s conception of ‘cause’ has no limiting principle. It would allow him to remove any Federal Reserve Board member with whom he disagrees about policy based on chalked up allegations.” — Lisa Cook’s lawsuit
🎯IMPACT: Cook is seeking an emergency injunction that would prevent her removal from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
IN FULL
Lisa Cook has filed a lawsuit in federal court against President Donald J. Trump and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell over her removal from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. The lawsuit, filed in the District of Columbia, challenges the legality of her firing and asks the District Court for emergency injunctive relief to prevent her removal.
“President Trump’s conception of ‘cause’ has no limiting principle,” the lawsuit contends, adding: “It would allow him to remove any Federal Reserve Board member with whom he disagrees about policy based on chalked up allegations.”
Cook’s lawsuit describes her removal as “unprecedented and illegal” and disputes the allegations of mortgage fraud that were cited as justification for her firing. Her legal team argues that the removal violated the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and court precedent set in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which requires “cause” for such actions. The filing argues that because Cook has not yet been criminally charged, there is no “cause” for her firing.
Additionally, the lawsuit claims that Trump’s actions infringed upon Cook’s Fifth Amendment due process rights and her statutory right to notice and a hearing under the Federal Reserve Act. Cook is seeking an immediate injunction against the firing and her reinstatement to the Board of Governors.
While Cook may initially prevail at the District Court level, many legal scholars argue her case is unlikely to survive appeal as higher courts may be more hesitant to intervene in the executive branch’s determination of what constitutes “cause.”
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The transgender mass shooter who targeted the Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis, Minnesota, regretted his gender transition, reports reveal.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Robin Westman, a 23-year-old male-to-female transgender originally named Robert, carried out the attack. Victims included students and staff at the school.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The shooting took place on Wednesday morning, August 27, at Annunciation Catholic Church and School in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
💬KEY QUOTE: “I am tired of being trans, I wish I never brainwashed myself,” Westman wrote in a manifesto-like document.
🎯IMPACT: The attack, which left multiple victims dead or injured, raises concerns about a growing number of disturbed transgenders engaging in extreme violence.
IN FULL
Robin Westman, responsible for yesterday’s mass shooting targeting Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis, Minnesota, during a morning prayer service, regretted his transgender transition. “I only keep [the long hair] because it is pretty much my last shred of being trans. I am tired of being trans, I wish I never brainwashed myself,” he wrote in a manifesto-like document uploaded to YouTube.
“I can’t cut my hair now as it would be an embarrassing defeat, and it might be a concerning change of character that could get me reported,” he continued, complaining that “It just always gets in my way” and that he would “probably chop it on the day of the attack.”
Elsewhere, he wrote, “‘I know I am not a woman but I definitely don’t feel like a man.”
Westman, who changed his name from Robert in 2019 to align with his transgender identity, inscribed phrases like “Kill Donald Trump” and “Where is your God?” on the firearms and firearm accessories he used to carry out his attack.
Hundreds gathered for a vigil led by community leaders and clergy, including Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) and Archbishop Bernard Hebda. Hebda highlighted the resilience shown during the tragedy, saying, “In the midst of that there was courage, there was bravery, but most especially there was love.”
Principal Matthew DeBoer and Pastor Dennis Zehren grieved the loss of two students aged eight and ten, saying, “No words can capture what we have gone through, what we are going through, and what we will go through in the coming days and weeks.”
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: A new poll shows 54 percent of voters support President Donald J. Trump’s crackdown on crime in Washington, D.C., including the deployment of the National Guard.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, the National Guard, federal officers, and the federalized Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The poll was conducted online in August 2025, among 2,025 registered voters in the U.S.
🎯IMPACT: The poll shows public support for addressing crime in major cities.
IN FULL
New survey data reveals that 54 percent of voters believe President Donald J. Trump‘s crackdown on crime in Washington, D.C., is justified and necessary. The poll, conducted last week by Harvard CAPS/Harris, found that 85 percent of Republicans and 47 percent of Independents supported Trump’s actions, along with 28 percent of Democrats.
Earlier this month, citing unique provisions in the District of Columbia’s Home Rule Act, President Trump federalized—for 30 days—the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), and deployed federal law enforcement officers from various agencies to support them, along with the National Guard. Seventy-three percent of respondents believe that the National Guard deployment signals that Trump may take similar action in other cities.
The survey highlighted broader concerns over crime in American cities, with 56 percent of voters agreeing that, in general, large cities are unsafe. Specifically, 63 percent of respondents pointed to New York City and 62 percent to Los Angeles as examples of unsafe urban centers. A plurality of voters, 40 percent, said crime in the U.S. is on the rise.
The poll was conducted online on August 20-21, 2025, surveying 2,025 registered voters nationwide.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Russian air strikes on Kiev, Ukraine, have hit the British Council building and the European Union (EU) delegation headquarters, killing at least 17 people and causing significant damage.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Russian forces, Ukrainian residents and emergency workers, EU officials, and British Council personnel. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have issued statements.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The attack occurred early on Thursday morning in Kiev, Ukraine, targeting civilian and diplomatic sites.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Putin is killing children and civilians, and sabotaging hopes of peace. This bloodshed must end.” – Keir Starmer
🎯IMPACT: The attack has escalated tensions between Russia and the West and led to calls for stronger sanctions on Russia. The EU summoned Moscow’s envoy in Brussels.
IN FULL
Russia has carried out an allegedly “deliberate” missile attack on the British Council building and the European Union (EU) delegation headquarters in Kiev during a massive assault on the city. The strikes reportedly killed at least 17 people, including a 14-year-old girl, and caused extensive damage.
The British Council, partly funded by Britain’s Foreign Office, suffered severe damage from two missiles that struck within 20 seconds of each other. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen denounced the attack, accusing Moscow of “targeting the EU” and labeling it deliberate.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called the attacks “horrific and deliberate killings of civilians,” pressing allies for tougher sanctions and a stronger stance against Russia. British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer condemned the strikes as “senseless,” accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of undermining peace efforts.
Starmer declared, “Putin is killing children and civilians, and sabotaging hopes of peace. This bloodshed must end.” Britain’s Foreign Office—roughly equivalent to the U.S. State Department—also summoned the Russian ambassador in response.
The assault also hit residential buildings and civilian infrastructure, with Kiev’s military administration reporting the use of ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as Iranian-designed Shahed drones. In one neighborhood, a five-story apartment building was split in half, and residents searched for loved ones as emergency services cleared debris.
The Kremlin says it remains open to talks but that military operations will continue for the time being. Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s spokesman, said, “The Russian armed forces are fulfilling their tasks. At the same time, Russia remains interested in continuing the negotiation process.”
Zelensky rejected these claims, stating, “Russia chooses ballistics instead of the negotiating table. It chooses to continue killing instead of ending the war.”
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
Share Story
FacebookTwitterWhatsappTruthTelegramGettrCopy Link
Real News Fan? Show It!
Many people are shocked to learn that because of active censorship, we currently have to spend more time making sure you can even see The National Pulse, than on producing the news itself. Which sucks. Because we do this for the truth, and for you.
But the regime doesn’t want you being informed. That’s why they want us to go away. And that will happen if more people don’t sign up to support our work. It’s basic supply and demand. So demand you get to read The National Pulse, unrestricted. Sign up, today.
We don’t sell ads, and refuse corporate or political cash. It all comes down to you, the reader. I hope you can help.
