Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

• BP has reversed its commitment to cut oil and gas production by 40% by 2030.

• The energy transition remains challenged by economic realities, prompting BP and other major oil companies to scale down transition plans.

• BP’s pivot, along with similar moves from other oil majors, highlights the industry’s continued reliance on hydrocarbon.

In February 2020, then-brand-new chief executive Bernard Looney told the world that one of the oldest and biggest oil companies in the world was going to become a net-zero company by 2050. To achieve this, it would slash its oil and gas production by 40% by 2030.

Four years and one major crisis later, BP is abandoning not only the original production cut target of 40%, but also a revised, lower target of 25%. BP, in other words, is returning to its roots. And commodity investors who are not paying attention should be—and so are transition investors.

“This will certainly be a challenge, but also a tremendous opportunity. It is clear to me, and to our stakeholders, that for BP to play our part and serve our purpose, we have to change. And we want to change – this is the right thing for the world and for BP,” Bernard Looney said back in 2020 when he announced the company’s new course.

There was much enthusiasm in the climate activist world when that statement was made. Activists were not satisfied but did concede that it was a step in the right direction. Investors took the news differently—BP’s shares dropped precipitously immediately following the announcement of the newly charted course before rebounding later in the year.

Then came the pandemic, decimating demand for energy and leading to a price slump that BP at the time seemed to believe the industry wasn’t going to recover from, because, it said in one of its latest world energy outlook editions, global oil demand had peaked back in 2019 and it was never going to go back to those levels. BP still believed it was on the right track with its net-zero plans and a 40% cut in oil and gas production by 2030. And then it was 2022.

Oil demand had been on the rebound ever since the lockdowns began to be phased out. When China joined the party of ending lockdowns, the demand rebound really took off. The war in Ukraine took that momentum and added to it supply security fears for a price rally that had not been seen in years.

The rally resulted in energy companies becoming the best performers in the stock market, overtaking Big Tech, and in record profits, which in turn led to fatter dividend payouts and massive stock repurchases. It also led to a reconsideration of some of Big Oil’s transition plans. In BP’s case, the latest stark reminder that the world still runs on hydrocarbons prompted the company’s senior leadership to abandon plans to cut its oil and gas production by even 25% by 2030.

All these developments also made investors think again—about energy transitions and the security of energy supply. It made investors think so much that pro-transition outlets are sounding an alarm about oil companies being unserious about the transition and, worse, unclear about the direction of their business, which should make investors cautious.

“A decarbonizing economy threatens the fossil fuel industry’s core business model, and the sector does not seem to be offering a cohesive and consistent plan for navigating this changing world,” the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis said in a recent report. The report zeroed in on the latest BP news about the U-turn on oil and gas production cuts, suggesting that BP basically had no idea what it wanted to do with its future, and this should make investors nervous about the whole oil and gas industry.

That criticism certainly has a lot of merit in the context of a business world that is firmly on the way to a cleaner, greener energy future because the economics of such a future make sense. The actual business world in which BP and all other companies are operating, however, is different from that vision.

In it, the economics of the energy transition, as envisioned by its advocates and proponents, do not always make sense—which is why BP and other companies are abandoning their initial ambitious targets made, one might say, in the heat of the moment, following years of activist pressure that was warmly embraced by politicians in decision-making positions.

However, once these companies realized their transition efforts were not paying off, they pivoted. One might call it a lack of a “cohesive and consistent plan.” On the other hand, one might call it flexibility in the face of a reality that has proven different than hoped for. In addition to the news about BP abandoning its production cut target for 2030, the company was also reported to be considering reducing its exposure to offshore wind at a time when fellow supermajor Shell was also dialing back its transition ambitions and another fellow supermajor, TotalEnergies, just announced a $10.5-billion oil and gas development in Suriname.

The energy industry then appears to have a pretty clear view of the future. Hydrocarbons remain the energy source most widely used on the planet. Their alternatives do not seem to be living up to the hype. Therefore, Big Oil is shrinking its transition ambitions in favor of the business that has been proven to be profitable—for the companies and their investors. Sometimes, it really is as simple as that.’

Via Remix News,

The Council of the European Union has approved a financial support package, which includes an extraordinary macro-level loan of up to €35 billion, as well as a credit cooperation mechanism that will help Ukraine repay €45 billion of loans, the EU council announced.

As part of the new macro-level financial assistance (MFA) approved by the member states, interest income from the funds of the Russian central bank frozen in EU banks will be made available to Ukraine.

The funds will help Ukraine cover the costs of the EU loan and loans provided by G7 partners and to also repay these loans; however, Kyiv can use the amount from the MFA at its discretion. 

As Remix News reported just a year ago, the EU approved €66 billion to Ukraine. Between contributions from individual member states and the EU itself, the Kiel Institute Ukraine Support Tracker indicates that Europe has allocated €118 billion in aid, with €74 billion yet to be allocated but slated to go to Ukraine. That does not include huge sums sent to Ukraine from the United States and other countries.

The amounts from the new macro-level financial support will be disbursed until the end of 2025. The disbursement of the loan is conditional on Ukraine’s continued commitment to maintaining effective democratic mechanisms and respecting human rights.

As part of the sanctions introduced by the EU against Russia, since February 2022, the assets of the Russian central bank stored in the financial institutions of EU member states, worth around €210 billion, have been frozen. The generated profit is estimated at around €2.5 billion to €3 billion annually, depending on the interest rate.

According to the EU, these revenues are not state assets and do not have to be made available to the Russian central bank even after the end of the freeze. Following the adoption by the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union approved the text through a written procedure with the aim of making the MFA loan available in 2024, disbursed in 2025, and repaid in a maximum of 45 years. The decree enters into force on the day following its promulgation.

Read more here…

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Brazil’s ruling Workers’ Party (PT per its Portuguese abbreviation) has presented itself as an Ibero-American champion of multipolarity since its inception, as has its leader President Lula since his first term began in 2003, but these narratives are now challenged like never before after last week.

Brasil de Fato cited diplomatic sources to report that Brazil vetoed Venezuela’s BRICS partnership request while Putin also acknowledged during a press conference that Russia and Brazil disagree on Venezuela.

This outcome was made all the more scandalous by Lula’s unexpected “head injury” that was allegedly responsible for him not flying to Kazan and Venezuelan President Maduro’s surprise visit to the event. Lula might have either made-up his injury or exaggerated it in order not to embarrass himself any further by arguing in person against his multipolar neighbor’s requested BRICS partnership. He might also have caught wind of Maduro’s plans and thus ducked out in order to avoid a potential confrontation there.

In any case, one of the world’s top energy producers wasn’t able to achieve the consensual support required for partnering with the world’s top financial multipolarity platform, though this analysis here from last month explains how non-members and -partners can still coordinate their associated policies with BRICS. Be that as it may, it was still a blow to Venezuela’s prestige not to be inaugurated as an official partner, but Lula’s PT harmed its own reputation in a much worse way by reportedly vetoing this.

Keeping in mind the abovementioned insight about how any country can voluntarily coordinate its associated policies with BRICS even in the absence of formal membership or partnership status, Brazil could have let Venezuela join in order to keep up the PT’s charade about being a multipolar champion. Instead, it maliciously prevented this, which only served to virtue signal support for the US’ ruling Democrats’ shared policy towards that country at the expense of the trust that Brazil built within BRICS.

It was explained in August how “Ortega’s Condemnation Of Lula’s Meddling In Venezuela Debunks A Top Alt-Media Lie”, which hyperlinked at the end to a list of over 50 related analyses from October 2022 till then about Lula’s post-imprisonment ideological alignment with that aforesaid imperialist party. In brief, he and his party were never true multipolar champions like they presented themselves as, but were always more akin to “social democrats” or what’s been called the “compatible left” by traditional leftists.

All the while, however, the PT’s social media influencers and cultish clique of supporters across the world aggressively gatekept the false narrative that their “heroes” pushed. This most often took the form of viciously “canceling” anyone who dared to even remotely question this debunked dogma. This charade was thus kept up until last week when it became impossible to deny that Lula’s PT had betrayed regional multipolar leader Venezuela solely to curry favor from what might soon be the US’ outgoing ruling party.

There shouldn’t be any question about the veracity of Brasil de Fato’s diplomatic sources either after Venezuela’s Foreign Ministry came out with an official statement slamming Lula’s veto. They described it as an “immoral aggression” that “reproduce[ed] the hatred, exclusion and intolerance promoted from the centres of power in the West.” They then added that “The Venezuelan people feel indignation and shame” after what Lula just did. These are very strong words that should be taken very seriously.

Readers should also know that while Lula hasn’t acknowledged Maduro’s re-election, Putin proudly thundered during last week’s event that “Venezuela is fighting for its independence, for its sovereignty…We believe that President Maduro won the elections, won fairly. He formed a government.” His words threw the PT onto the horns of yet another narrative dilemma by suggesting that Brazil’s stance is against another fellow Global South country’s “independence” and “sovereignty”.

The Venezuelan Question is therefore a black-and-white issue: one either supports Lula and Biden’s regime change efforts in Venezuela, with each advancing this in their own but still coordinated way, or they support Maduro and Putin’s defense of Venezuela’s independence and sovereignty.

There’s no middle ground no matter what lies top PT influencers might soon spew. Honest members from the Alt-Media Community will accurately report this while dishonest ones will keep covering up for the PT.

Reid Hoffman, billionaire co-founder of LinkedIn and independent director on Microsoft’s board, appears to have donated a substantial amount of money to the “Progress Action Fund” — a PAC led by a far-left activist and former Obama administration alumnus. PAF pushed out one of the cringiest pro-pornographic political ads to drum up support from chronic masturbators for Kamala Harris. 

Let’s dive directly into the woke left’s cringe-fest ad… 

Here’s the original report from X user Collin Rugg: 

NEW: Democrat groups release an ad of a young man m*sturbating in an effort to get people to vote for Kamala Harris. The Democratic Party: The party of abortion and p*rn addicts. Progress Action Fund and Defend the Vote have released a $2.5 million ad campaign with the 30-second ad. The ad was called “Republicans Rubbing You the Wrong Way,” with an actor playing a Republican congressman watching the young man rub one out. The ad campaign is being displayed on streaming services in all seven swing states.

NEW: Democrat groups release an ad of a young man m*sturbating in an effort to get people to vote for Kamala Harris.

The Democratic Party: The party of abortion and p*rn addicts.

Progress Action Fund and Defend the Vote have released a $2.5 million ad campaign with the… pic.twitter.com/r8hFYYMnJc

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 27, 2024

PAF noted on its website that it “runs hard-hitting ads to defeat Republicans in swing districts, including the viral ad Keep Republicans Out Of Your Bedroom.” 

Heading PAF is former Obama activist Joe Jacobson, who identifies as a “he/him.”

Jacobson is a radical leftist with prior ties to the Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO, and the Obama administration. 

According to data from Open Secrets, billionaire Hoffman appears to have funded some of Jacobson’s woke adventures at PAF. Hoffman splurged on PAF this year, donating as much as $500,000 on Sept. 25 and $50,000 on Sept. 19. 

Daily Wire reporter Megan Basham wrote on X, “It’s a PAC run by an Obama administration alum. And a major funder is Reid Hoffman, co-founder and chairman of LinkedIn.” 

Who’s behind the pornographic pro-pornography ads being run in swing states on behalf of Kamala Harris? Not some porn actors or other such seedy, fringe folk. It’s a PAC run by an Obama administration alum. And a major funder is Reid Hoffman, co-founder and chairman of LinkedIn. pic.twitter.com/WvRSKv3L60

— Megan Basham (@megbasham) October 27, 2024

What a cringe-fest for Democrats… After unleashing the ‘Trump Nazi’ bazooka in leftist corporate media last week…

“Trump Hitler” story count pic.twitter.com/lP6pG6f6S6

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) October 26, 2024

Now, they are trying to drum up support from porn-addicted Americans funded by Palo Alto elites. Weird.

Well, it’s not weird unless you understand that this is desperation from Democrats and their billionaire funders. 

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Rail transit officials in California’s Bay Area have been ordered to pay more than $7 million to transit workers who were fired because they refused to get a COVID-19 vaccine years ago.

On Oct. 23, a federal jury in the U.S District Court for the Northern District of California sided with six former San Francisco Bay Area Regional Transit (BART) workers who had refused to get the vaccine for religious purposes.

BART was ordered to pay the group more than $7.8 million, with each individual receiving between $1.2 million and $1.5 million, the Pacific Justice Institute, which represented the transit workers in the trial, said in a statement on Oct. 24. The institute, a law firm representing the six former employees since 2022, said the eight-person jury deliberated for two days this week before returning the verdict that awarded the employees the compensation.

About a week ago, the federal jury also determined that BART had failed to prove that it suffered an undue hardship by denying accommodations to the ex-employees in the case.

On Oct. 23, the jury further found that the six employees met the burden of showing that there was a conflict between their religious beliefs and the BART vaccine mandate, which was implemented in 2021.

According to the law firm, the jury also agreed with the figures that the plaintiffs had provided for lost wages that they had suffered after losing their jobs. The jury then added $1 million each to those figures, the firm said, describing the verdict as a “legal earthquake.”

“The rail employees chose to lose their livelihood rather than deny their faith. That in itself shows the sincerity and depth of their convictions,“ Kevin Snider, the Pacific Justice Institute’s chief counsel, who served as lead trial attorney, said. ”After nearly three years of struggle, these essential workers feel they were heard and understood by the jury and are overjoyed and relieved by the verdict.”

The law firm stated: “During the trial, jurors heard compelling testimony from dedicated employees. One of the plaintiffs had worked for more than 30 years for BART, with a stretch of 10 years perfect attendance, before being unceremoniously dismissed. Another had been out on workers comp for months, with no scheduled return date, when she was fired.”

Lawyers for BART argued that multiple employees who had conflicts with receiving the vaccine had secular—rather than religious—reasons. But the jury disagreed with those arguments, the Pacific Justice Institute said.

The vaccine mandate was approved by BART’s board of directors in October 2021 and stipulated that all employees must get the COVID-19 vaccine. It allowed some employees to be exempt from the vaccine, including for religious reasons.

A year later, BART employees filed a class-action lawsuit accusing the operator of denying religious accommodations that violated state law.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup, who presided over the lawsuit against BART, ruled that the operator’s policies did not violate the employees’ right to religious freedom, according to an order he issued in March.

A separate order issued by Alsup in January found that BART received 188 requests for a religious exemption and accommodation, and of that figure, 40 chose not to complete the process. They were either terminated from employment or ultimately got the vaccine.

“Plaintiffs’ putative class fails because its members have little in common beyond their request for religious accommodation,” the judge further said in his order. “They do not share a common religious objection. They do not share a vocation or a set of contractual rights. They do not present a similar set of potential accommodations and associated burdens. They do not present similar health and exposure concerns.

“Potential accommodations do not impact the same pool of coworkers. Those coworkers do not have the same bargained-for rights.”

The Epoch Times contacted BART for comment on Oct. 25 but received no reply by publication time. The rail operator’s spokesman, James Allison, told local news outlet SFGate that it had “no comment” on the verdict.

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

New York City Mayor Eric Adams rebuffed recent claims that former President Donald Trump is a fascist and said that Trump’s Madison Square Garden event should go ahead.

“I have heard those terms hurled at me by some political leaders in the city, using terms like [Nazi leader Adolph] Hitler and fascist,” the Democratic mayor said at a news conference in New York City on Saturday.

“I know what Hitler has done, and I know what a fascist regime looks like. I think, as I have called for over and over again, that the level of conversation, I think we can all dial down the temperature,” Adams said at the conference in which he also detailed a significant police presence planned for Trump’s event at Madison Square Garden in Manhattan Sunday.

He made the comment after Vice President Kamala Harris and her surrogates criticized Trump in recent days after his former chief of staff John Kelly accused him of praising Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Germany dictator’s generals while he was in office. Trump has refuted Kelly’s comments.

Referring to the claims, Harris told voters Wednesday at a CNN town hall that “I invite you to listen and go online to listen to John Kelly” make the allegations against the 45th president. “This is a serious, serious issue. And we know who he is. He admires dictators,” Harris said.

Kelly told the New York Times and the Atlantic that the former president wanted generals like Hitler had.

“He commented more than once that, ‘You know, Hitler did some good things, too,’” Kelly told the New York Times.

Kelly’s comment was not publicly corroborated by other former Trump White House officials and was refuted by Trump in the past week.

During a media event, Trump told reporters that he never said positive things about Hitler during his time in the Oval Office, saying that he “would never say that” and criticized The Atlantic and its reporting.

Former Vice President Mike Pence’s former chief of staff Mike Ayers has also rebutted the claims.

“I’ve avoided commenting on intra-staff leaks or rumors or even lies as it relates to my time at the White House but General Kelly’s comments regarding President Trump are too egregious to ignore,” Ayers posted on X. “I was with each of them more than most, and his commentary is *patently false.*”

After Harris’s statement, Trump’s campaign spokesman Steven Cheung accused the Democratic candidate of spreading “outright lies and falsehoods.”

Adams, who is currently facing federal bribery charges, said Saturday that he disagrees with the notion that Trump’s rally should be scrapped over Kelly’s comments.

“This is America. This is New York, and I think it’s important that we allow individuals to exercise their right to get their message clear to New Yorkers,” the mayor said. “And our job as a city and as a Police Department is to make sure they can do that … in a peaceful way.”

Adams’s comments about lowering “the temperature” also appeared to echo a comment made by President Joe Biden earlier this year in the immediate aftermath of the first assassination attempt against Trump in Pennsylvania. At the time, Biden called on Americans to “cool it down” after the shooting, in which a bullet clipped Trump’s ear.

Trump became the subject of a second assassination attempt in mid-September after the Secret Service engaged with an individual who was pointing a rifle through a perimeter fence while the former president was golfing in Florida.

In mid-October, Trump spoke at the Al Smith charity dinner in New York and made reference to the federal charges Adams is facing, as well as those he is facing. “They’ve gone after me, Mr. Mayor, and you’re peanuts compared to what they’ve done to me,” he said on Oct. 18. “And you’re going to be OK.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

With China continuing to conduct military drills near Taiwan, as well as recently reaffirming that use of force will always remain an option to bring Taiwan under its control, concerns have grown over how potential Chinese actions in the region could impact global trade through the Taiwan Strait.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu, visualizes the share of exports and imports that move through the Taiwan Strait, broken down by the G7 and BRICS countries.

The data comes from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and is updated as of October 2024.

Which Countries are Most Reliant on the Taiwan Strait?

Below, we show the share of exports and imports that transit through the Taiwan Strait by both G7 and BRICS countries.

BRICS countries overall are more exposed to disruptions to trade routes in the Taiwan Strait, specifically China, the United Arab Emirates, and Iran. The latter two have 24% or more of its exports pass through the strait.

China and Japan are the most reliant on the Taiwan Strait for both imports and exports, specifically imports. Almost a third of both countries’ imports pass through the Taiwan Strait.

According to CSIS, over 95% of Japan’s crude oil comes from a select group of Middle Eastern countries, much of which is transported through the Taiwan Strait, making this route integral to Japan’s energy security.

As for China, while CSIS estimates that 15% of its exports pass through this waterway—a relatively lower share than other countries—the total value of these exports is still over $551 billion.

The Taiwan Strait is not only essential for China’s international trade but also plays a key role in its domestic commerce. More than half of the voyages through the strait connect the numerous ports along China’s eastern seaboard, according to CSIS.

Aside from Japan, G7 countries generally have much lower reliance on the Taiwan Strait. The U.S., UK, Canada, Italy, Germany, and France each have single-digit percentages for imports and exports through the strait.

The Taiwan Strait has been the site of multiple major crises between China and Taiwan since the 1950s, many of which involved military confrontations such as artillery bombardments, missile tests, and naval deployments.

To learn more about how G7 and BRICS stack up agains eachother in other areas, check out this graphic that compares G7 and BRICS countries by GDP.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Sirius XM host Megan Kelly Absolutely crushed Bill Maher’s tired assertion that Donald Trump is a fascist, prompting him to immediately try to change the subject and then end the interview on his HBO show.

Maher said of Trump, “the things that he’s been saying, and all the people in his administration who’ve said he’s a fascist, he wants to be fascist, his friends are all dictators.”

Kelly told Maher she doesn’t care about any of that “Because they’ve been saying that about Trump for years, they’ve been saying that about Republican candidates for years. It has a long, storied history. If you are at all center or center-right, you are used to having your candidate of choice completely demonized, whether it’s the f-word, the r-word, the misogynist word.”

I would never want to debate @megynkelly. She dismantles everyone’s arguments.

Bill Maher is left waving the white flag at the end of this😆😆 pic.twitter.com/2PE2mv4Z8T

— Spitfire (@DogRightGirl) October 26, 2024

She continued, “They tried to tell us Mitt Romney was a raging sexist because of binders full of women. They tried to tell us John McCain was a raging racist, notwithstanding the fact that he adopted a daughter from Bangladesh. They’ve been doing this for every Republican, and they get to Trump, and we are no longer listening to them.”

“Trump has incendiary rhetoric, there’s no question, but we have four years to judge him by, and the country was going pretty well, unlike the four we’ve had with these two,” Kelly urged, referring to Harris and Biden.

When Maher then attempted to argue that Trump inherited a good economy from Obama, Kelly responded “So, walk me through it. So Trump has Obama to thank for his economy, but Biden can’t thank Trump for anything?”

“Okay, let’s get off this,” Maher responded, before going back to calling Trump a fascist and literally Hitler.

“I see; he hid his Hitlerism the first four years and is going to come out in full force the second four years,” Kelly told Maher, highlighting how stupid the assertion is.

Kelly then urged that Kamala Harris and Joe Biden are the ones acting like fascists, running through their weaponisation of the Justice Department against Trump and the fact they they have ignored Supreme Court rulings.

Maher then quickly ended the interview.

Megyn Kelly destroys the phony fascism argument once and for all after Bill Maher compared Trump to Hitler repeatedly:
Bill Maher: “What did Hitler and the Japanese have in common? Nothing, except they saw the world in the same way: Fascism. If your guy gets in, we’re going to be… pic.twitter.com/hAMSg64QLh

— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) October 26, 2024

Earlier in the interview, Maher also managed to lose an argument about Democrats denying election results for a second time to Kelly.

Megyn Kelly tells Bill Maher that Democrats will deny the 2024 election if Kamala loses, and Bill Maher loses it:
Megyn Kelly: “Don’t think there won’t be denialism if Kamala Harris loses too. They’re already laying the foundation for lawfare.”
Bill Maher: “There’s no evidence of… pic.twitter.com/NvUGlW7XbK

— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) October 26, 2024

Kelly also hit Maher’s lefty audience with some other horrific facts they didn’t want to hear about what is being done to children in the name of ‘inclusion’.

Megyn Kelly stuns the Bill Maher audience by laying out the facts about transitioning. After they recoil in disgust, Bill Maher corroborates Megyn Kelly ‘We are definitely doing that’:
Megyn Kelly: “What we’re doing to our children with this trans insanity. We are chopping off… pic.twitter.com/3ZIVKPFkim

— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) October 26, 2024

After Megyn Kelly lays out the facts about the harm of transitioning to children, Bill Maher responds with ‘But what about fascism!?’:
Megyn Kelly: “It’s the issue of our time, with respect to children and women’s rights.”
Bill Maher: “We’re the only country that still does it… pic.twitter.com/DLEieXh02C

— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) October 26, 2024

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

An area north of Tel Aviv was scene of a Sunday morning incident being dubbed in Israeli media a “terror truck-ramming attack” at a bus stop, which left one person dead and at least 32 wounded. Subsequent reports said that 35 were injured, with five in serious condition.

The perpetrator and only deceased has been identified as Rami Nasrallah, an Arab Israeli driver who lives in Qalansawe, in central Israel. However, there remains some ambiguity over whether it was an intentional ‘terror attack’ or possibly the result of a horrific accident.

The event is still under investigation, with the Times of Israel reporting of the deceased bus driver that “His body was sent to the Abu Kabir Forensic Institute for an autopsy to check if he suffered a medical condition that caused the accident.”

Suspicion has widely fall on the intentional attack theory, given it happened just outside the well-known Glilot military base in central Israel, and in a location near the Mossad headquarters and several IDF intelligence units.

Additionally, police said that that the suspect was “shot and neutralized” at the scene, while still not saying necessarily that it was an attack.

A lot of the injured were senior citizens who had just stepped off a bus at the moment the bus was rammed. They were planning to attend a museum exhibit memorializing the fallen of the Oct.7 Hamas terror attack.

While not directly taking responsibility for the apparent terror incident, Hamas praised the “heroic ramming attack” that was carried out near “Mossad headquarters.”

The group described that it was “a natural response to the crimes of the Zionist occupation against our Palestinian people in Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem, and its ongoing brutal massacres, especially in the northern Gaza Strip.”

Truck ramming attack near Tel Aviv. pic.twitter.com/hxVYToM1YB

— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) October 27, 2024

“Photos and videos on social media showed several people pinned down under the truck as medics and rescuers tried to help,” Al Jazeera has described of the gruesome scene. Police cordoned off the area and a security helicopter hovered above.

A number of the injured were witnessed lying on a sidewalk near the truck. One source said that armed civilians may have shot the driver as it was clear he was about to ram people. Another eyewitness saw eight people “trapped under the truck.”