The way the world is going, she and her children might be the precursor of the dwelling habits of the future generations, those who manage to survive the coming nuclear war between the rising bloc of rising nations and decaying bloc of decaying nations, the war between the BRICS and the Pricks.

The BRICS ─ Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and five new members — have no “biggest BRIC,” each Bric nation relishes its independence and the group is cemented by their distaste for the offensive Pricks. Fortunately, for the BRICS, their entourage contains China, the new superpower that encourages cooperation rather than domination and has initiated a “Belt and Road” that facilitates free trade throughout the world.

The Pricks — United States, Great Britain, and the European Union — have the United States as their power Prick, which is led by their president, the biggest Prick. In slavish obedience to genocide Israel, the U.S. identifies itself as the Super Prick. This bloc has recently featured severe discord, lack of cooperation, and inauguration of high tariffs that impede global trade. Domination is its focus. with cooperation a temporary means to enable domination.

For one simple reason, the Pricks are finding it difficult to control and use the BRICS for their personal gain ─ the BRICS have economic dominance.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
GDP PPP, Int$: 2025

Coming into 2025, the BRICS have a greater share of the economic pie, six times the population digesting the pie, and are growing in principal categories — GDP/PPP, population, and adherents at a faster rate.

The Pricks devalue the Brics by claiming they are a loose and uncoordinated confederation, unable to agree on vital issues. Brazil is accused of harassing former President Jair Messias Bolsonaro and may be subjected to sanctions; Russia is led by an irresponsible tyrant and is heavily sanctioned; India gets a pass despite the heavy-handed tactics toward its Muslim community; China is led by a despotic dictator, and South Africa is guilty of genocide toward its white population.

The Pricks pose themselves as a model of decency and decorum. They have ballot boxes and freedom of speech, which enables their citizens to elect the biggest pricks and then freely criticize their selections by vocal erections. In the U.S. the next presidential election process — fund raising, organization, public relations, the “eye on the prize”— starts shortly after a new president takes office. Winning candidates in elections expend more time and energy in gaining victory and preparing for their next victory than performing their duties during their term in office.

The economic, social, and political advancements of their principal superpowers, China for the BRICS and the United States for the Pricks, determine the success of the BRICS and the Pricks. A brief examination of each nation’s potential to rise in the firmament or descend into chaos tells the story.

The Trump administration shows the hidden failures of the United States pluralistic democracy. The past has no continuity; just the opposite, many of the legislations from previous administrations are discarded. and the country, rather than advancing to a progressed new, returns to a rejected old. One example from Understanding AI:

…. Sen. Hawley asked Donald Trump to cancel a federal loan guarantee for the Grain Belt Express, an $11 billion transmission line that is supposed to carry electricity from Kansas wind farms to homes in Illinois and Indiana. The proposed line would pass through Hawley’s state of Missouri, annoying farmers whose land would be taken by eminent domain.

According to the New York Times, Hawley “explained his concerns to the president, who has repeatedly expressed his distaste for wind power, saying he would not permit any new wind projects during his administration.” Trump then called Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who agreed to cancel a federal loan guarantee for the project, throwing its viability into question.

Impulse overrides soul searching, allegiance to leader is more important than professional education and experience; rash and subjective action replaces careful thought. The America of 2025, with its decaying infrastructure, troubled inner cities, dependence on fossil fuels, continuous problems of crime, drug addiction, health care, and immigration, closely resembles the America of 2010. One big difference ─ adversity and polarization of the population has increased, Americans are at the breaking point with one another. The country, which is rich in resources, has extensive farmland, enjoys suitable and varied climates, and contains an educated and diligent population, is not well managed; it is mismanaged.

The Xi JInping administration shows the hidden success of China’s people’s democracy. The past has continuity; legislations and plans from previous administrations are massaged and enhanced, and the country, rather than remaining stagnant, advances to a new level. Soul searching from millions of cadres provides suggestions for millions of improvements. All leaders have professional education and experience; careful thought displaces rash and subjective action.

The China of 2025, with its continually increasing infrastructure of roads, bridges, tunnels, dams, superhighways, high speed trains, and airline routes that link every remote place in China with central cores, with modern building complexes that replace the shanty towns and provide agreeable living space for an aging population and marginalized rural farmers, with its expanded megacities that are considered technology and planning marvels, and with a unified and obedient population ─ no adversity or polarization here ─ has only a fleeting resemblance to the China of 2010.

Dubbed an engineering marvel, the highly anticipated Raffles City Chongqing project is nearly complete. CapitaLand Group

Sheltering their deficiencies, the Western democracies shift the critical analysis to public relations stunts that highlight the supposed and exaggerated deficiencies of the Chinese system. The Westerners make no effort to learn and understand the workings of China’s political, social, and economic systems. Fabrications are added to the limited “don’t care to know” and conveyed to the public as authorized knowledge. One example is the “debt trap” verbiage, applied to Chinese lending, which began during Sri Lanka’s first debt crisis and has stuck around as an effective means to vilify the PRC.

We have the falsehood. Washington Post (WAPO), “This China has a hand in Sri Lanka’s economic calamity,” analysis by Ishaan Tharoor, July 20, 2022:

One of the major players in Sri Lanka’s calamity is China. Beijing is Sri Lanka’s lone biggest creditor, accounting for some 10 percent of the country’s foreign debt. Between 2000 and 2020, it extended close to $12 billion in loans to the Sri Lankan government, largely for a slate of major infrastructure projects that turned into white elephants — including a costly port facility in the Rajapaksas’ hometown of Hambantota, which was effectively ceded to Chinese control half a decade ago after Sri Lankan authorities recognized they could no longer pay off the loans.

Examination of the Sri Lanka debt crisis exposes the mendacity and viciousness of the WAPO report. Almost every sentence is spurious; China does not engage in “debt trap diplomacy” and has been one lender who makes financial sacrifices that rescues nations from debilitating borrowing.

We have the truth. The Atlantic, “The Chinese ‘Debt Trap’ Is a Myth,” by Deborah Brautigam and Meg Rithmire, February 6, 2021, had already contradicted WAPO statements.

Steep payments on international sovereign bonds, which comprised nearly 40 percent of the country’s external debt, put Sirisena’s government in dire fiscal straits almost immediately. When Sirisena took office, Sri Lanka owed more to Japan, the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank than to China. Of the $4.5 billion in debt service Sri Lanka would pay in 2017, only 5 percent was because of Hambantota. The Central Bank governors under both Rajapaksa and Sirisena do not agree on much, but they both told us that Hambantota, and Chinese finance in general, was not the source of the country’s financial distress.

There was also never a default. Colombo arranged a bailout from the International Monetary Fund and decided to raise much-needed dollars by leasing out the underperforming Hambantota Port to an experienced company—just as the Canadians had recommended. There was not an open tender, and the only two bids came from China Merchants and China Harbor. Sri Lanka chose China Merchants, making it the majority shareholder with a 99-year lease, and used the $1.12 billion cash infusion to bolster its foreign reserves, not to pay off China Eximbank. The China impressed on our minds is not the China that exists.

The United States moves on fumes, on the energies of its past without renewable energies for an improved future. China moves on constantly reinforced energy, all engines operating at top speed, each day becoming a new future. The Pricks know they will not be able to compete economically with the BRICS. They have a choice of consolidating and working together and maintaining reduced economies, cooperating with the Brics in mutual agreements, or, by the usual United States method, resolving the situation by military action.

The threat of military force alarms and subdues the BRICS. They may be compelled to yield much in order to save all. China, guided by its Mandate of Heaven, “a political and religious doctrine that justifies the rule of an emperor based on virtue and ability to govern,” and which it has extended to relations between all nations, might do what it did in the fifteenth century. At that time, China was, by far, the leading commercial power in the world, and huge Chinese fleets sailed the world for markets for its surplus products. After meeting the imperial powers of France, Great Britain, and the Netherlands and observing their nefarious methods in subduing the Africa and Indian peoples, stripping them of resources, and forcing upon them the products manufactured from the resources, China scuttled its fleet and went into solitary confinement.

The reason for Xi Jinping’s self-sufficiency drive is clear. Save the world from nuclear conflagration and let the rest of the world rot. Pricks always lose and always think they have won.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Dan Lieberman.

UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy, addressing the UN Conference on The Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution, said it was “660 days since the Israeli hostages were first cruelly taken by Hamas terrorists. There is no possible justification for this suffering.” Lammy had spent most of that time deliberately misinterpreting the Genocide Convention and insisting that no genocide was being committed.

“Our support for Israel, its right to exist and the security of its people is steadfast,” he said. Considering Israel’s massacres and other crimes against humanity since the first day of its statehood in 1948 this frequently repeated statement has never convinced anyone.

“However, the Balfour declaration came with the solemn promise ‘that nothing shall be done, nothing which may prejudice the civil and religious rights’ of the Palestinian people’…. This has not been upheld and it is a historical injustice which continues to unfold.” True, but he misquotes Balfour even here. That part of the declaration actually reads: “… it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine….”

The Balfour declaration also came with dire warnings. Lord Edwin Montagu, the only Jew in the Cabinet at the time, called Zionism “a mischievous political creed, untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United Kingdom”. Lord Sydenham remarked: “What we have done, by concessions not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, is to start a running sore in the East, and no-one can tell how far that sore will extend.”

Well, we know now. And it will stain Britain’s reputation forever.

Lammy continued: “Hamas must never be rewarded for its monstrous attack on October 7.” Of course, he said nothing about Israel having been continuously rewarded for its monstrous attacks on Palestinians over the last 77 years and will likely be rewarded again for its genocide.

“It [Hamas] must immediately release the hostages, agree to an immediate ceasefire, accept it will have no role in governing Gaza and commit to disarmament.” Coincidentally Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have also called on Hamas to disband. Along with a number of other countries they’ve just signed a statement saying, “Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international engagement and support, in line with the objective of a sovereign and independent Palestinian State.” Quite how this squares with international law isn’t clear, and no-one explains. It is for the Palestinian people to decide who governs their sovereign state.

Lammy: “His Majesty’s Government therefore intends to recognise the State of Palestine when the UN General Assembly gathers in September…. unless the Israeli government acts to end the appalling situation in Gaza, ends its military campaign and commits to a long-term sustainable peace based on a two-state solution. Our demands on Hamas also remain absolute and unwavering.” So what happens if Israel actually complies, or appears to comply? Does HMG then see no reason to recognise statehood? That would suit Israel very well. Note that there’s no requirement in all this for Israel to immediately end its illegal occupation of Palestinian territories, which is central to the whole problem. So the Starmer-Lammy proposal purposely misses the point.

Lammy maintains “there is no better vision for the future of the region than two states. Israelis living within secure borders, recognised and at peace with their neighbours, free from the threat of terrorism. And Palestinians living in their own state, in dignity and security, free of occupation.” Just a minute: how about Palestinians, whose land this is, “living within secure borders, free from the threat of Israeli terrorism and occupation”, the terrorists being (as if he didn’t know) the Israelis and their backers the US? Furthermore, UK leaders have banged the drum about a two-state solution for decades without ever describing what it would look like – especially now that Israel has been allowed to establish irreversible ‘facts on the ground’ that make a proper, workable Palestinian state almost impossible.

“The decades-long conflict between Israelis and Palestinians cannot be managed or contained,” he says. True, and that’s been obvious for decades.

“It must now be resolved.” True, and that too has been obvious for decades.

That same day, 29 July, Prime Minister Starmer was delivering “words on Gaza” from Downing Street.

“On the 7th of October 2023 Hamas perpetrated the worst massacre in Israel’s history. Every day since then, the horror has continued.” He makes it sound like the 660 days of horror have been Hamas’s doing.

“Ceasefire must be sustainable and it must lead to a wider peace plan, which we are developing with our international partners. This plan will deliver security and proper governance in Gaza and pave the way for negotiations on a Two State Solution”. Yes, but under international law Palestinians should not have to ‘negotiate’ their freedom and independence, it’s theirs by right regardless of what other nations think or say.

“Our goal remains a safe and secure Israel, alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.” Oh dear, the same old lopsided spiel. Parity isn’t on the West’s agenda.

“Now, in Gaza because of a catastrophic failure of aid, we see starving babies, children too weak to stand: Images that will stay with us for a lifetime.” The horror is not due to “a catastrophic failure of aid” but failure over the years to end Israel’s illegal occupation and, in particular, its cruel 18-year siege and blockade of Gaza and the sickening practice of ‘mowing the grass’. The UK especially has been complicit in enabling Israel to maintain its stranglehold.

Starmer: “I’ve always said we will recognise a Palestinian state as a contribution to a proper peace process, at the moment of maximum impact for the Two State Solution.” UK governments have been saying that for years. Britain was supposed to grant Palestinians provisional statehood under its Mandate responsibilities back in 1923 and failed to do so. We’ve been ducking the issue ever since while eagerly recognising Israeli statehood with their terrorist militia and Ben-Gurion’s plan to take over the entire Holy Land by force.

“This is the moment to act,” Starmer continued. “So today – as part of this process towards peace I can confirm the UK will recognise the state of Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly in September unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and commit to a long-term, sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a Two State Solution. And this includes allowing the UN to restart the supply of aid, and making clear there will be no annexations in the West Bank.” This is unbelievable vague and gives Israel endless wriggle-room. Much of the West Bank, of course, is already annexed. To give peace any kind of chance conditions must include Israel withdrawing its squatters, quitting all annexed lands and ending its illegal military occupation forthwith.

Starmer ends with the familiar mantra: “Our message to the terrorists of Hamas is unchanged and unequivocal. They must immediately release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza.” No mention of the Israeli terrorists disarming and no ban on Likud (Netanyahu’s demented party) from any future government of Israel.

Starmer and Lammy never use the terms ‘international law’ or ‘justice’. Don’t they understand that there can be no peace without justice? Perhaps they do but won’t admit it because their friends and allies Israel and the US, for selfish strategic reasons, don’t want peace and never have.

Starmer and Lammy compromised and untrustworthy

Starmer told The Times of Israel, “I support Zionism without qualification”. Lammy has made similar declarations. The Ministerial Code and Principles of Public Life state very clearly (seer ‘Integrity’): “Holders of public office should not place themselves under any financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might seek to influence them in the performance of their official duties.” How do they get away with it?

So it’s hardly surprising that Lammy and Starmer show no concern for the 7,200 Palestinian hostages, including 88 women and 250 children, held in Israeli jails on 7 October under appalling conditions. Over 1,200 were under ‘administrative detention’ without charge or trial and denied ‘due process’. Or the fact that in the 23 years up to October 7 Israel had been slaughtering Palestinians at the rate of 8:1 and children at the rate of 16:1. Actual figures: Palestinians killed by Israelis 10,651 including 2,270 children and 6,656 women. Israelis killed by Palestinians 1,330 including 145 children and 261 women (source: Israel’s B’Tselem). Were they and their friends in Israel expecting Palestinians to take all that lying down?

Our dynamic duo were not so appalled by the sight of “starving babies and children too weak to stand” that they provided protection for the British-flagged aid vessel Madleen and the Handala bringing much-needed supplies to Gaza. They allowed these vessels to be hijacked in international waters, their cargo stolen and crews abducted by Israel’s thugs, just as the Mavi Marmara, the Al-Awda and other mercy ships had been similarly assaulted. Israeli piracy is the new normal in the eastern Mediterranean and Western nations don’t give a damn. The British government are more than happy, though, to instruct the RAF to fly surveillance missions over Gaza in support of Israel’s genocide programme and to continue sharing intelligence with the apartheid regime.

And if their concerns about the suffering and devastation were ever genuine, why didn’t they proposed forming a UN multi-nation intervention force to take over the Gaza crossings to ensure aid gets through as it should? They have now been shamed and their ‘no genocide’ stance utterly discredited by two of Israel’s own human rights organisations – B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights – who declare that Israel is indeed committing genocide in Gaza and its Western allies have a legal and moral duty to put a stop to it. B’Tselem’s summing-up of the situation is worth sharing:

Since October 2023, Israel has shifted its policy toward the Palestinians. Its military onslaught on Gaza, underway for more than 21 months, has included mass killing, both directly and through creating unlivable conditions, serious bodily or mental harm to an entire population, decimation of basic infrastructure throughout the Strip, and forcible displacement on a huge scale, with ethnic cleansing added to the list of official war objectives.

This is compounded by mass arrests and abuse of Palestinians in Israeli prisons, which have effectively become torture camps, and tearing apart the social fabric of Gaza, including the destruction of Palestinian educational and cultural institutions. The campaign is also an assault on Palestinian identity itself, through the deliberate destruction of refugee camps and attempts to undermine the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA).

An examination of Israel’s policy in the Gaza Strip and its horrific outcomes, together with statements by senior Israeli politicians and military commanders about the goals of the attack, leads to the unequivocal conclusion that Israel is taking coordinated, deliberate action to destroy Palestinian society in the Gaza Strip. In other words: Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

The term genocide refers to a socio-historical and political phenomenon involving acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. Both morally and legally, genocide cannot be justified under any circumstance, including as an act of self-defense.

Genocide always occurs within a context: there are conditions that enable it, triggering events, and a guiding ideology. The current onslaught on the Palestinian people, including in the Gaza Strip, must be understood in the context of more than seventy years in which Israel has imposed a violent and discriminatory regime on the Palestinians, taking its most extreme form against those living in the Gaza Strip. Since the State of Israel was established, the apartheid and occupation regime has institutionalized and systematically employed mechanisms of violent control, demographic engineering, discrimination, and fragmentation of the Palestinian collective. These foundations laid by the regime are what made it possible to launch a genocidal attack on the Palestinians immediately after the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023.

The assault on Palestinians in Gaza cannot be separated from the escalating violence being inflicted, at varying levels and in different forms, on Palestinians living under Israeli rule in the West Bank and within Israel. The violence and destruction in these areas is intensifying over time, with no effective domestic or international mechanism acting to halt them. We warn of the clear and present danger that the genocide will not remain confined to the Gaza Strip, and that the actions and underlying mindset driving it may be extended to other areas as well.

The recognition that the Israeli regime is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, and the deep concern that it may expand to other areas where Palestinians live under Israeli rule, demand urgent and unequivocal action from both Israeli society and the international community, and use of every means available under international law to stop Israel’s genocide against the Palestinian people.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Stuart Littlewood.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

True to the words of the legendary 19th-century French novelist Gustave Flaubert, “there is no truth. There is only perception”. The truth may sound or taste bitter. But in reality, there is no singular truth and perception about anything and everything in this divine universe, even about the most abstract ones. Inherent truth is subjective, which lies in the hands of an individual’s interpretation. Together, they have a profound influence on shaping people’s views.

Its real-life exponent is none other than the dictator Hitler⸺thanks to his exceptional oratory skills, once dangerous and fascinating. On the other side of the coin lies the legacy of the great American social and civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. His non-violent liberal views on racial equality echoed deeply. Both historical figures left an indelible mark on the world courtesy of their respective mindsets strategically manifested, intertwined with truth and perception.

To shape public perception, key news sources include print and electronic media. These include newspapers, television, books, magazines, and radio. Newspapers and television are naturally the most widely ubiquitous, commanding massive audience coverage and deep penetration.

India has one of the largest newspaper circulations in the world. It endures and reveres the media, but here is the catch. According to media literacy index data, our homeland, India, ranked at a very low level globally. The magnitude of freedom is handy to the journalists at large, and it is alarming! Sadly, in India’s context, it is directionless. Ultimately, it is a wake-up call. The freedom of the press is inextricably linked to the democracy of a country. Apart from this, news channels on television are not behind in the rat race with their contemporaries. Selling content to the audience instead of ensuring quality content that informs them the most. Running for TRP, the real news gets diluted. The essence of informing and information gets killed long before through various media.

India’s complex emotional landscape

In a country as emotionally vulnerable and socially heterogeneous — as India. The longstanding challenges, such as Hindu-Muslim tensions, population explosion, poverty, illiteracy, and more. Labyrinths of other enigmas are often engulfed, which causes reactive, colloquial responses. They manifest vividly during nightmarish, complex — Kafkaesque episodes. Numerous instances of public unrest like riots, rapes, suicides, and more are evidence to it. Such emotionally charged reactions complicate the government’s ability to implement and administer policies in a consistent, transformative manner. This is where the truth and the press hold a critical role. In these complexities, the leakages of the internal machinery get highlighted.

A Press Under Siege

Having such a media state has major concerns and equally questionable consequences. They often tend to leave a painful scar later in the long term. On the contrary, the case is very different in countries as Russia, China, the US, and the U.K. They usually have concrete, strong, hassle-free, definite political motives and policies. They refrain from the ways India often tends to follow. The typical Indian answer to our emotional country goes back to our heated history textbooks. There have been countless deliberate attempts the whole world has made to conquer the roots of our ‘bhāratavarṣa’. It was not only for centuries but for millennia indeed. Starting from the advent of Alexander the Great in 326 BCE to the British Empire in 1947. The continual cycle of ‘sought and fought’ had fragmented and fractured the internal cohesion. This legacy left the nation in a difficult yet diverse situation. Still, it often backfires, creating an ironic, complicated situation of unity in diversity. Unlike other countries, the US and Russia. Unfortunately, India hasn’t enjoyed an uninterrupted political lineage with a uniform singularity of purpose. In our case, the press doesn’t report the truth. It often has to wrestle for it amid the noise of unresolved historical background, painstakingly.

Indispensable, twin forces — the truth is an expression, the press is the medium. Shaping and reshaping our views, then our beliefs. Eventually, it solidifies respective ideologies. The media are the purveyors of truth and freedom. Conveying information concisely under the instructions of the government. With such a vital authority and verdict resting on the press, it is a transparent, crystal-clear mirror of the country. It is a double-edged sword, bridging the supreme authority with the assurance of the people. Just exactly like Snow White’s enchanted mirror, today’s press undergoes examination, “Mirror, mirror on the wall: Who tells the truth among us all”? Publicly, things get amplified and complicated with social media. It affects the scenario, which itself is in an uneasy, lopsided state.

Social Media Perils and Content Pollution

True to the words of the legendary English poet Alexander Pope, the warmth of his lines is produced in his thought-provoking work, ‘An Essay on Criticism’. The lines “A little learning is a dangerous thing.” These are so apt to the complex content we consume today. The essence of the magnum opus is deeply felt even today in the 21st-century modern world.

In the essence of the digital age today, Social Media is the online medium that makes shallow learning among the masses a dangerous thing! It has a profound impact and internal pressure on one’s daily life. The ignorance of countless posts on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, and so on, will undoubtedly be bliss. In shades of innumerable benefits, it often results in ruining one’s privacy. Social media validation and accumulating more and more followers are blinding. It is infused with overloaded fake news, intense addiction, and the urge to form opinions and criticism (trolling). Everyone wants to express something without having the real knowledge about it. With this huge confusion and anxiety, it has emerged everywhere like wildfire. All of this has created misconceptions, prejudice, manipulation, censorship, ambiguity, rumours, and misuse. This mess is one of the major grey shades of social media.

Content is not just consumed; it is exaggerated, engineered, and fabricated. All this is exercised under legitimate knowledge claims. Ultimately, this flooding mechanism has blurred the line between what is reel and what the actual reality is. It has adulterated information to an unprecedented level. India itself produces a large number of content creators globally. In turn, Indians also tend to consume a huge volume of content. Thanks to insanely addictive reels and posts on apps like TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, and more. As a result, India also leads in average mobile screen time. The estimated screen time is more than 5 hours daily. Even sometimes creating obscene content for the sake of likes and comments is considered normal! At least for disseminating genuine content, social media proves to be an easy yet complex option. Consequently, it has driven the Indian media into peril.

The Collapse of Free Speech

Unearthing the truth in the crossword and its clues embedded in a web of lies is hard. It has paradoxically suffocated the very freedom of speech within the compound chaos altogether. Truth is born out of freedom and courage. The press, which once investigated the unknown, unbelievable, and the unthinkable, now tirelessly circles. Just hunting for the truth for the sake of real, meaningful truth. But alas, today, there is both speech and courage immersed deep. The axis of profoundly malicious, politically motivated actions and intentions is strongly holding it. Both truth and press now operate in a system they once sought to expose. Here, language often bought through bribes speaks loudly and boldly to rule over everyone. Often, institutions buy and sell the freedom of speech, putting their agenda forward to the masses. This dirty, unethical transaction not only trades monetary value but also corrupts the system. It hollows the society morally, emotionally, and socially, both intentionally and unintentionally, like a parasite.

The voice of the innocent (media professionals), who dare to speak the truth, often embraces unjust retribution and tyrannical faith. Their remarkable efforts peel back those thick layers of deception, corruption, and bribery, but go in vain. Pressure groups and others often bury uneasy truths and astonishing facts under the guise of national interest and public welfare. The beautiful irony is just showcased as normal in thin air! The menace is that it is paraded to the audience as a sideshow spectacle. Such skillful, shrewd wordplay and rhetorical acrobatics contribute significantly to it. As a result, even the sharpest person in the room can’t pose a question. This puppetry media manipulation in a performative democracy becomes art, not for informing, but for controlling.

The Legal Lens: Indian Constitution and the Press

Laws and the press share a valiant, intertwined relationship where both have the power and potential in society. The law acts as a watchdog over the duty of both the people and the press. The freedom of the media is not only linked to journalism but to the vocal freedom of a country. Leaving it in a deadly dilemma of oblivion if left unchecked.

Resorting to legal methods for a hand-to-hand confrontation and cleansing it eventually may be the tedious yet best remedy. Highlighting the pitfalls and sorting them to the roots, as there is no smoke without fire. Although this is an even bigger headache since the magnitude of the Indian media industry is a whopping amount of more than a billion dollars.

By turning through the pages of the most voluminous rulebook of the world, the Indian Constitution. It offers us both a better, comprehensive, and far-sighted view. Indian law is just and faithful enough to meet both ends and refine its application by drawing the light of wisdom over the respective case.

Article 19(1)(a) relates to the independent freedom of voice and their respective opinions against the actions of the government. The media is legally backed up to highlight the plight of truth ‘lying’ beneath the surface and above it. Likewise, some notable eye-opening cases include the Romesh Thappar vs State of Madras and the Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) (P) Ltd. vs Union of India. These astounding cases had thrust the freedom of the press and media into the limelight, concreting their status even more. These cases and many more are at the confluence of the political and social environment. The emancipation to advance facts and reports without any intervention, but with reasonable restrictions behind the fences.

Freedom and truth in the press should be carried sensibly within the thin line of legal demarcation relative to the audience. Sensitive news often triggers harmful ideas, and it can lead to both psychological and mental pain directly. Avoiding the spread of any fake news, defamation, contempt of court, blasphemy, voyeurism, and any threat to the sovereignty and integrity of India is of utmost national significance. There has been some progress over time to overcome the stagnant debacle; there is a long road to travel.

Press, Sacrifice, and Political Ironies

Dubbed as the 4th pillar of democracy, the press and media enjoy an ironic status owing to their gullible volatility. There remain shining examples of fearless Indian journalism that delivered the truth at the right place and at the right time, undeterred by mental pressure. But ironically, the most staggering report gathered is that our motherland, India, stands amongst the top countries to have the most journalist deaths.

Renowned cases of such ill-fated scapegoats include Gauri Lankesh, J.Dey, and Daniel Pearl; the list goes on. Their “sacrifice” bears a thought-provoking lesson. These media professionals fearlessly tried to unmask the bitter truth of the wrongdoers and guilty minds. To combat such authoritarian regimes, often influential political ideals march forward carrying the baton, calling for a major upheaval or revolution. In the process, this leads to doublespeak from the other side in a counterreaction. Often, when things take a U-turn, these political ideals later turn into political prisoners! Eventually, their descendants find their lives embroiled, burdened with defining and redefining their ideologies and legacy.

Such a misuse or mistake can lead to an Orwellian dystopia in a totalitarian manner, as pointed out by the great 20th-century English author George Orwell. In his magnum opus novel, 1984, he showcases the political nightmare the caged media and press cast upon it.

In the dynamics of India, the silver lining is certainly visible. The architectural Gandhian values of truth and freedom will be followed and resonate. Both the sanguine prospects and outputs of journalism will emerge rooted in integrity and moral duty, without fleeting urgency. But rather with an imperative role, a pillar of democracy, not with transience but with transparency.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Prabhav Khandelwal.

As part of the 21-member international collective aboard the aid ship Handala, a flotilla that was headed to Gaza to protest and break the blockade on the Palestinian people collectively being starved to death, Smalls was the only member of the group beaten and choked by IDF agents. He was also the only Black person aboard the ship. While the IDF stopped, boarded, and abducted all the activists on board, they did not use the same level of force against the other passengers or crew that they brutally applied against Smalls.

The special brutality meted out to Smalls is another example of the racist, white supremacy at the core of Israeli settler colonialism and explains both their genocide against Palestinians and the relative silence and support for it by the West. This racist violence reflects the reality of how African Jews from various countries are viewed and treated in Israel. Even as we have seen African Jews in the IDF carrying out unconscionable violence upon Palestinians, they are subjected to the forms of racist hatred that the same IDF meted out to Smalls, and worse. The lack of response from the U.S. government regarding the treatment of Smalls also reflects the way this state views Black/ African residents in the country, and highlights the continuity of white supremacist settler colonialism across both of these violent and genocidal nations.

For some time now, Small’s example has highlighted a vital understanding that the liberation of any domestic working class is inextricably linked to the defeat of U.S.-led Western imperialist domination. This attack on a working-class, anti-imperialist leader further highlights the connection between domestic oppression and Western imperialism, where the U.S. and its allies— including Israel— act with impunity.

This lack of meaningful action against the zionist occupation and genocidal acceleration of the state of Israel, as well as the U.S.’s consistent support and own human rights violations, motivates BAP’s call to ban the United States and Israel from hosting or participating in international sporting events. While this is but one strategy, what is clear is that more efforts toward anti-imperialist multilateralism are needed, represented through movement efforts like the Friends of The Hague Group (FOTHG), state-based support by The Hague Group, and consistent solidarity with the Axis of Resistance. It is this impunity that has allowed this genocide in Gaza to continue unabated for almost two years, that has contributed to the deepening siege and theft of the West Bank, and that has permitted the brutalization of Chris Smalls to occur with little uproar from so-called progressives and liberal elites.

The capture, brutalization, and imprisonment of Smalls by the fascist and racist IDF underscores the urgent need for solidarity between African/Black and Palestinian struggles. The lack of consequences for Israel reflects not only the hypocrisy of so-called democratic nations but also the complicity of the U.S.’s own Black Misleadership Class, which too often aligns with sustaining pan-European, capitalist, patriarchal interests.

Justice for Chris Smalls!

Smash Zionism!

End the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination!

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Black Alliance for Peace.

Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of a particular group. When it is your country, your troops, your government and its officials committing genocide, many people will stubbornly refuse to acknowledge such a fact. Such is the propagandic effect of patriotism that it erodes critical thought processes and even causes people to overlook extreme evil.

On 28 July 2025, NPR wrote, “Two prominent Israeli rights groups on Monday said their country is committing genocide in Gaza, the first time that local Jewish-led organizations have made such accusations against Israel during nearly 22 months of war.”

The genocide is undeniable as Afkār noted, “Since October 7, 2023, Israeli cabinet ministers, political figures, military officers and media pundits have openly and endlessly incited for the destruction of Gaza and its Palestinian inhabitants.”

Moreover, Israel is trying to spin this genocide as a necessary transfer of the Gazan population: “In recent months, Israel has shifted its messaging on Gaza, acknowledging that it has rendered the territory unlivable and is pushing for the removal of its surviving population. ”

What explains the thinking that leads to the carrying out of such a hideous crime?

Psychopathy is a personality disorder rooted in a lack of empathy and remorse, manipulation, and antisocial behavior. That clearly describes people committing genocide and people aiding and abetting genocide.

Thus, people perpetuating or enabling the commission of a genocide fit the definition of psychopaths.

It is undeniable that Israeli Jews are committing genocide in Palestine. Their prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is therefore a genocidaire and a psychopath, as well as the many supportive establishment types in Israel. (For more on this read Hamid Dabashi’s After Savagery) The genocide of Gazans has much support among Jewish Israelis. This begs the question of whether psychopathology is widespread among Israeli Jews?

And, when a state or agency knowingly aids and abets Israeli Jews in committing genocide against the Palestinians, then such complicit governments and responsible authorities ought also to be considered genocidaires and psychopaths. Legally, as well:

… one can be held liable for aiding and abetting genocide, even if one does not share the specific genocidal intent of the principal perpetrator.

The Rome Statute contains a provision about criminal responsibility that is not found in either of the U.N. ad hoc tribunal statutes or the Genocide Convention but which further illuminates the mens rea of genocide. Under Article 30 of the Rome Statute, “knowledge” and “intent” are the two components of mens rea. A person has “intent” when the person “means to engage in the conduct” and “means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events.” (Grant Dawson and Rachel Boynton, “Reconciling Complicity in Genocide and Aiding and Abetting Genocide in the Jurisprudence of the United Nations Ad Hoc Tribunals,” Harvard Human Rights Journal, 21, 2008: 250.)

Consequently, Israel is not alone in executing its genocide of Palestinians. Countries are called upon to “Stop Arming Israel and Abetting Its Crimes.” Among those governments supplying armaments to Israel are the US and Europeans (“How top arms exporters have responded to the war in Gaza,” and that “European countries use 3rd-party countries to keep arming Israel: British journalist,” “Australia,” “Report suggests arms still flow from Canada to Israel despite denials,” “Infrastructure of genocide: the case confronting Dutch support for Israel’s war machine,” etc) giving political cover, the companies seeking profit from the genocide. Hence, their actions reveal them to be genocidaires.

Many of the common people in many of these countries are opposing the genocide-supporting stance of their governments; for example, Sweden, Netherlands, Canada, even in the US, and worldwide. The leaders are out of touch with masses of their citizens.

Therefore, Canada’s Mark Carney, France’s Emmanuel Macron, Britain’s Keir Starmer, Germany’s Friedrich Merz, Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen, and others are joining avowed Zionists Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump. Are Netanyahu and Trump really the people other country’s “leaders” should follow in making common cause to wipe Palestinians off the map?

Why is this psychopathy exhibited as a common trait among many Western government heads?

Worse, it seems to point to there being something inherently malevolent in the so-called democratic systems of these countries, such that it promotes psychopaths into leadership positions.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Kim Petersen.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

Mao was speaking to an audience of Chinese industrialists and merchants at a time when the country was desperately poor, its resources stretched by decades of Japanese invasion, civil war with the nationalist Kuomintang, and ongoing US aggression in Korea, where China had intervened in support of the forces of national liberation.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Tricontinental Asia.

This email I received in my gmail box. With the following typical letter to me, my email, but who knows if he sent it to the editor, I may already be banned by the editor, and I will never know because these fellows never answer direct emails back.

Here, from that person who shall be unnamed, telling me …

All you do is criticize this country and the president, as if you are a spoil sport, mad that your guy didn’t win. My advice is leave. Go to Cuba, go to your great communist country of your choice. You do nothing for our community writing these screeds from your high horse. Love it or leave it is something I think everytime I read your junk. I’m shocked that some local patriot hasn’t read-ended your shitty mini-van or taken a swing at your smug face. Leave, and DO let the door hit you on your fucking anti-AmMerican ass.

Oh, well, my feelings aren’t hurt, but again, I’ve said this time and time again: I get people texting me thanking for my radio shows and my op-eds, but they just will not go on public record, i.e., a letter to the editor in support or agreement with me and my short “screeds.”

Today, with my Meals on Wheels gig and with my volunteer work at the senior center here, amazing social workers and folks with federal grants for their AmeriCorps workers lamenting about the Trumpism in the Senior Center — old flagging people, again, eating taxpayer paid for Meals on Wheels, and a Senior Center not just funded by local taxes, and these  octogenarians no less, vaunting Trump, going on and on about, “well Obama and Clinton never served in the military either.”

That comment came after I had entertained them, made these people laugh, served them food and drinks and gave them to-go boxes, and then, well, someone mentioned cuts in the Meals on Wheels program here and nationwide, and then I stated that Trump is laughing at that, that he’s a mean gene, and wants my butt gone, and he’s especially laughing at “you older folk relying on Medicare and Meals on Wheels and who voted for him.”

I mentioned that Trump’s a felon and criminal and just a faker, among other things, and he is a wimp, who declared bone spurs as his out for military service. Yep, me, atheist and communist AND someone who spent time in the Army, man, sure, less than honorable discharge I got,  but still, that, and then working with homeless veterans and even teaching college courses for various military outfits in my part-time faculty gigs.

These old people couldn’t square all those corners to the guy (me) who had just done all this service to the community work FOR them.

The social workers are tired. They are tired of people. They have family, and one I talked with, she even has a father who supports Trump Hands Down, like the freaks that in do. And, alas, I asked — Why no estrangement from these toxic folk in your life? These people, your fucking father, want you fired, essentially, because your AmeriCorps folk are being sacked because the grants have ended, and you too will be on the chopping block.

The system is winning when social workers hate people — not all, but most people, she told me — and when teachers hate their kiddos and the parents. This is what the design is all about — losing confidence in EVERYTHING except the price of toilet paper bundles at Costco.

More than just the Reagan way of getting people to believe government is too big, too cumbersome and too much an impediment in the American Way of Free-for-All Markets.

Chip chip chip those rotten democrats and republicans have enforced for decades.

Schizophrenia here by the Pew Research group:

Americans remain deeply distrustful of and dissatisfied with their government. Just 20% say they trust the government in Washington to do the right thing just about always or most of the time – a sentiment that has changed very little since former President George W. Bush’s second term in office.

The public’s criticisms of the federal government are many and varied. Some are familiar: Just 6% say the phrase “careful with taxpayer money” describes the federal government extremely or very well; another 21% say this describes the government somewhat well. A comparably small share (only 8%) describes the government as being responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans.

The federal government gets mixed ratings for its handling of specific issues. Evaluations are highly positive in some respects, including for responding to natural disasters (70% say the government does a good job of this) and keeping the country safe from terrorism (68%). However, only about a quarter of Americans say the government has done a good job managing the immigration system and helping people get out of poverty (24% each). And the share giving the government a positive rating for strengthening the economy has declined 17 percentage points since 2020, from 54% to 37%.

Yet Americans’ unhappiness with government has long coexisted with their continued support for government having a substantial role in many realms. And when asked how much the federal government does to address the concerns of various groups in the United States, there is a widespread belief that it does too little on issues affecting many of the groups asked about, including middle-income people (69%), those with lower incomes (66%) and retired people (65%).

*****

When participatory democracy never flourished, and when mutual aid is gone, and when people are doggedly dog-eat-dog and “I’ve got mine, so good luck getting yours” is the prevailing attitude, we are a disconnected “nation.”

Will this resonate?

For a decade, scholars, pundits and other analysts have been searching deep in the American political experience to understand why democracy seems so stressed. Now a new UC Berkeley report based on extensive surveys finds that Americans are confused about the meaning of democracy and frustrated with the leaders and institutions responsible for guiding the country — but also open to hope for repair.

In an interview, lead author David C. Wilson detailed the findings of this plunge into our political psyche, surveying a tangle of concerning trends. Americans are struggling with epidemic mistrust, but they’re also eager for solutions. For democracy to flourish, the report finds, its people must be flourishing, too.

Wilson, a political psychologist, offered a potentially innovative course of therapy: Just as the nation has economic and health policy, local, state and federal leaders need a commitment to democracy policy to strengthen the system and nurture commitment to democratic values and practices.

Wilson is the dean of the Goldman School of Public Policy at Berkeley and a professor of public policy and political science. The report, “Delivering on the Promises of ‘We the People’,” is based on surveys of more than 2,400 Americans conducted before and after the November 2024 election.

The report was produced by the Goldman School’s Democracy Policy Lab.

*****

Snake Oil, PT Barnum and Postmortem for July 4

I remember telling my daughter, who never got to meet my old man, her grandfather, that I was diametrically opposed to his 32 years in the US military. I told her that I even ended up in Viet Nam two years before she was born to work with a science team from England.

I visited all parts of Viet Nam, after doing intensive biodiversity studies along the Laotian border.

She has some of my large prints of kiddos on motorcycles piled high with live chickens. She has a photo I took of a female Buddhist monk near where a more famous monk self-immolated in protest of the US and French-backed repressive South Vietnamese president.

That is Ho Chi Minh City, called Saigon back then.

It was just before 10 in the morning on June 11, 1963, when 300 monks and nuns marched down a busy Saigon street. This 73-year-old monk named Thich Quang Duc emerged from a car at this crowded intersection and sat down in the lotus position on a cushion. Two fellow monks poured gasoline from a five-gallon can. As the fuel was emptied over his head, Duc chanted, “Nam mo amita Buddha,” — “return to eternal Buddha.”

Sixty years later a similar event was repeated here in the USA, although in this intentionally amnesiac and superficial society, it seems like a distant memory. But my friend from Wisconsin talks of this hero much.

That distant memory occurred just over a year ago—February 25, 2024. Remember? Twenty-five-year-old Air Force serviceman Aaron Bushnell died after setting himself on fire outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington in an act of protest against the Gaza genocide.

Less than two years ago, and I have students who are afraid of calling “it” a genocide. I have fellow faculty in many parts of the country who are not just chastised for supporting innocent Palestinians but are fired.

Is this newspaper going to get the “hammer” or “ax” for republishing Aaron’s words before he set himself on fire?

“I am an active-duty member of the United States Air Force. And I will no longer be complicit in genocide. I am about to engage in an extreme act of protest. But compared to what people have been experiencing in Palestine at the hands of their colonizers—it’s not extreme at all. This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal.”

The last words of his life were ‘Free Palestine.’

Recall my professional soldier — CW4 — father. He was a 19-year-old in the so-called Korean Conflict, wounded there. He was then made a chief warrant officer in the Army and took his family to Paris, France, and Hamburg as part of his work.

He was shot in the chest in a Huey helicopter in Viet Nam with his blackbox of codes handcuffed to his wrist. He was 36 years old, and he survived.

I went to Viet Nam at age 36, leaving my home of El Paso behind. I visited villages near where my old man’s team set up communication towers and signal corps facilities.

I was against that illegal war when I was still in junior high school.

My father was a smart guy with graduate degrees in history and education. He always wanted me to go to college, and he supported my journalism and science studies at the University of Arizona. He read my newspaper articles.

What he was for —  as a first-generation American whose father was a WWI pilot in the Kaiser’s Navy —  included expanded services for the poor, safety nets for the elderly, massive cheap public services to include health care for all, seven-day-a-week libraries, a post office that handled payroll and served as a credit union.

He wanted more state and national parks. He was a Republican, and I was a Ralph Nader independent who was deeply leftist. As left as the liberators of Viet Nam under Ho Chi Minh.

Oh, if CW4 Marvin Haeder was alive today, man oh man. He knew European history and the history of the world, so having this perfume salesperson as his commander in chief would have chaffed him. Bone spur deferment from military service, Donald professed?

PT Barnum may have said: “There’s a sucker born every minute.” Trump is that purveyor and protector of rip-off artists.

My old man supported expanded prosecution of grifters ripping off old people in all industries and services. He was for expanded consumer rights and expanded rights to unionize.

These were his Republican values, with his two bronze stars, purple hearts and 32 years in combined AF and Army service.

He was once an airman too, as we lived on Terceira Island in the Azores outside 65th Air Base Wing at Lajes Field.

Now, POTUS is selling perfume.  Trump’s perfume is called “Victory 45-47” because “they’re all about Winning, Strength, Success.”

Everywhere in Lincoln County the silence —  as I stated in a previous Op-Ed —  is deafening. Active genocide of the Holocaust variety, and people just go on with their rah-rah Fourth of July lives. We’ve been sold a bill of goods. Amnesia? Dis-education? Worse?

I recommend David Swanson’s website where you can peruse collected sources on how much snake oil we’ve consumed. You won’t like this last paragraph on David’s website, so try studying it:

“Since World War II, during a supposed golden age of peace, the United States military has killed or helped kill some 20 million people, overthrown at least 36 governments, interfered in at least 86 foreign elections, attempted to assassinate over 50 foreign leaders, and dropped bombs on people in over 30 countries. The United States is responsible for the deaths of 5 million people in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, and over 1 million just since 2003 in Iraq.”

***** The End *****

The U.S. government provides weapons, military training, and/or military funding to almost every dictatorship and oppressive government on earth. See my 2020 book 20 Dictators Currently Supported by the U.S.

U.S. weapons are used on both sides of many wars.

In an attempt to quantify U.S. warmaking, I’ve copied below lists from these sources:
David Vine: The United States of War
William Blum: America’s Deadliest Export: Democracy
Dr. Zoltan Grossman: A Century of U.S. Military Interventions
James Lucas: U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People
William Appleman Williams: Empire As a Way of Life

I can link to some others first. Here is a PDF from 2022 from the U.S. Congressional Research Service admitting to hundreds of U.S. military interventions abroad between 1798 and 2022.

And here is a PDF of a journal article about something called the Military Intervention Project, which can also be found here and here and here. The authors claim to have a list of 392 U.S. military interventions between 1776 and 2019, but do not seem to actually produce the list. There are, however, extensive descriptions of it at those links, including:

“The United States has carried out 34 percent of its 392 interventions against countries in Latin America and the Caribbean; 23 percent in East Asia and the Pacific region; 14 percent in the Middle East and North Africa; and just 13 percent in Europe and Central Asia, according to a newly refined version of the Military Intervention Project (MIP) dataset — a venture of the Center for Strategic Studies at Tufts University’s Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.”

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul Haeder.

We will not have any form of arms or parts of arms be sent to Gaza, period.
— Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, March 20 2024

It was a cynical lie. Now we have the evidence.

A damning new report from the Arms Embargo Now coalition traces hundreds of shipments of Canadian-made weapons and military tech that continued to reach Israel during its ongoing genocidal assault on Gaza.

Bullets. Explosives. Aircraft parts. High‑end surveillance and targeting systems. All from here — from factories in Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, the GTA, Halifax — to the runways and ports in Israel that feed Israel’s war machine.

Most of us already understood this was happening. Individual contracts and bits of evidence kept slipping through the cracks. But every time they did, the government would play whack-a-mole. This report ends that game. We now have ironclad evidence that Canadian weapons never stopped flowing to Israel. It shows a sustained, ongoing pipeline that continues to this day. It also exposes how the government systematically deceived Canadians about arming Israel.

In the frantic first three months after October 7th, the Trudeau government quietly approved a record-breaking number of export permits to Israel. Then you — and tens of thousands of people like you across the country — roared in protest. The pressure worked. By March 2024, then Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly announced a “pause” on new permits. She publicly insisted that no more arms would reach Gaza.

However Joly’s “pause” froze only new licences, leaving every previous permit untouched. Ottawa tried to soothe the public, claiming the ongoing shipments were only for “non-lethal” or “defensive” goods (i.e. Iron Dome parts, bullet-proof vests). In reality, a steady stream of lethal cargo kept moving: bullets, explosives, aircraft and helicopter parts, F-35 targeting tech. All funnelled from 21 suppliers in seven Canadian cities to Israeli arms companies like Elbit Systems.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t some bureaucratic oversight. It is a calculated breach of the Export and Import Permits Act, the Arms Trade Treaty, and the ICJ’s warning not to aid genocide.

Ottawa’s claim that it was no longer arming Israel served as a diplomatic fig leaf: soothing words that hid uninterrupted weapons shipments. This report rips that fig leaf away. The government must now own its complicity and decide — end the exports, or stand exposed before the world.

This report also shows something else: the power of civil society. A small group of researchers — activists with day jobs, family responsibilities, and limited resources — spent hundreds of hours digging through tax records, shipping manifests, flight records, and obscure government PDFs. They followed the paper trail and uncovered the reality that our government was trying to hide.

In the UK, a similar report created a political scandal that is still reverberating. This Canadian report is arguably even more damning and the potential impact is enormous—if we seize this moment.

On Tuesday, CJPME, Independent Jewish Voices, World Beyond War, and the Palestinian Youth Movement held a press conference in Parliament to share the findings. You can watch the recording of the press conference here.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East.

Tornado

It is set in Scotland in the 1790s and follows the travails of a young Japanese woman called Tornado who is on the run from a local violent gang led by Sugarman. The story is told in a series of set pieces played out in a remote country setting as the gang pursues Tornado for two bags of gold which she had obtained from a young boy who in turn had taken from the gang members while they were busy watching a puppet show put on by Tornado and her father, Fujin.

The narrative begins with Tornado running into a decaying, dilapidated mansion and hiding while the gang threatens the family. While searching throughout the house one member of the gang falls from the floor above onto an old grand piano.

A flashback shows Tornado working with Fujin, a former samurai swordsman, who has trained Tornado in the skills of martial arts and puppetry. However, Tornado is bored of both and is looking for excitement and a change in lifestyle. The gold provides the possibility of a new life which prompts Tornado to ask her father about doing something else with their lives [“Don’t you ever wish our lives were different?”]. The gang eventually catches up with their wagon but Tornado runs into the woods and hides the gold. However, all ends in disaster as Fujin is shot by the gang’s archer, but with all the speed of a former samurai, he manages to cut Sugarman across the stomach as he falls, injuring him fatally.

Back in the present Tornado has joined up with a circus troupe who she knows well. Once again the gang catches up and then goes on a killing and burning spree. Tornado flees again and finds the gold which she brings to a local lake. Taking a small rowing boat she goes out  to the middle and drops the two bags into the water, keeping a small amount of the gold for herself.

At this point Tornado’s samurai skills kick in and she exacts revenge on the gang, unable to contain her grief and anger over the deaths of her father and her friends in the circus.

Minimalism

The style of the film music, editing, and dialogue, is minimalist. The action scenes are interspersed with quiet, empty countryside scenes, like moving from one mini play to the next, each mini play containing its own symbolism.

For example, Sugarman believes in honour among thieves [“Alright, get this to the safe spot, and equal share as always.”] A democratic bent which none of the gang members seem to share, as they are depicted as conniving to get all of the gold to themselves [“the work wasn’t equal, so why should this split be?”].

The mansion symbolises the declining aristocracy and the growing strength of a robber class – they had robbed the gold from the church which in turn had ‘robbed’ it from the peasantry. The piano is a symbol of former cultural glory destroyed by contemporary ignorance and criminality.

The confrontation between Sugarman and Fujin represents the conflict between the raw violence of the gang and the controlled, learned, violence of the samurai warrior. Twice Fujin states he has no wish for violence [“I do not want to hurt anyone.” “I do not want to fight you.”]

The gang attacks the circus, a symbolic confrontation between one group of people that uses violence to extort, and another group that uses their skills and knowledge to earn their living.

Tornado slowly realises that the gold has caused her and her friends nothing but destruction and death and so she reverts back to her survival skills and decides to dump most of the gold into the lake, thereafter attacking and killing the gang members one by one.

Tornado is a pared down, sparse film that operates not only as a revenge movie but also as an eighteenth century morality play, a genre of medieval drama:

Morality plays typically contain a protagonist who represents humanity as a whole, or an average layperson, or a human faculty; supporting characters are personifications of abstract concepts, each aligned with either good or evil, virtue or vice. The clashes between the supporting characters often catalyze a process of experiential learning for the protagonist, and, as a result, provide audience members and/or readers with moral guidance, reminding them to meditate and think upon their relationship to God, as well as their social and/or religious community.

Tornado’s ‘experiential learning’ teaches her that money may be the root of all evil but running away from oppressors merely emboldens them. By standing up to the gang and ultimately joining up with the circus she finds solace in solidarity with her social community. Her father’s comment during the puppet show that “They always cheer when evil is winning”, to which Tornado replies, “Because good is boring” is turned on its head as Tornado realises that the world of evil is irrational and unpredictable as those nearest and dearest to her fall prey to its  destructive forces. This new opposing view falls in line with Simone Weil’s comment that: “Imaginary evil is romantic and varied; real evil is gloomy, monotonous, barren, boring. Imaginary good is boring; real good is always new, marvelous, intoxicating.” (Simone Weil Gravity and Grace)

In the end, the multicultural aspect of the circus community symbolises the positive aspects of external, international influences on the home community / local people as a force for good to which Tornado aligns herself with.

Tornado (2025) is John Maclean’s second feature film after Slow West (2015). Slow West has a similar structure depicting a young Scotsman’s search for “his lost love in the American West, accompanied by a bounty hunter played by Michael Fassbender.” As the pair head West through forests and plains, a similar style of theatrical set pieces tell many different aspects of the story with a comparable respect for and understanding of ordinary people in conflict with murderous gangs. Similarly peace only comes after a major confrontation with the main gang (of cowboys) who are usually portrayed as heroes in the cowboy genre.

John Maclean’s films are measured, intelligent and beautifully filmed works of art with a human face that eschew the ‘might is right’ ideologies of much contemporary cinema.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Caoimhghin O Croidheain.

In the end, did the bank compensate any of the money my friend had lost? None, zero, zilch, nothing, not even a penny.

“You feel so left out, as if my family and friends and the rest of the world had all abandoned me. The first couple of weeks, I would wake up and find myself crying. I had lost a good chunk of my savings, and there was NOBODY that I could turn to.”

“I started looking for an attorney to help me recover, at least part of the money from the bank, but even if I found one, what were our chances of beating the full team of lawyers working for the bank?”

One attorney said his office would not accept cases dealing with dollar amounts less than $100,000.

To further mislead and disappoint the victim, the hackers had even set up internet links to fake lawyers’ offices in Canada and Mexico.

SO WHAT CAN BE DONE? I should say here that the following statements do not apply to all financial institutions. Some have already implemented features, such as those recommended by experts (in diverse ways), but a large number worry more about their transaction volume and the bottom line. In addition, the bank’s attitude towards client losses, and its responsibility towards the customer is, pretty much the same everywhere, and it derives from the banks’ attitude profits before people.

If you are willing to go back to the days of “manual banking”, the solution is very simple. Just call up the bank and disable or remove online banking, but you will have to visit the bank for the smallest of things.

Here is one interim solution before a definitive one is worked on.

A large percent of thefts are done through online banking. The money is lost when an online transfer (wire transfer, of some sort, Zelle, etc.) is initiated. The function is triggered when a request is received to do transfer online. This service should fail at this point if the destination of the transfer is a financial institution outside the bank’s network and the request is through online banking. The bank should then ask the client to visit a branch and show ID.

Nice and simple as it is, many banks refuse to implement this additional feature because it eats into their profits, as transaction volume is slowed and reduced, but the heck with the customer who might lose her/his life’s savings. After all, even though the banks are too big to fail, bank customers are not.

Business as usual in a neo-liberal world: profits before people when it should be people before profits.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Andres Kargar.

This recent trend is most conspicuous in an ongoing regulatory war being waged against the Internet and the corporate citizens that inhabit it. Terrified that Australia’s tender children will suffer ruination at the hands of online platforms, the entire population of the country will be subjected to age verification checks. Preparations are already underway in the country to impose a social media ban for users under the age of 16, ostensibly to protect the mental health and wellbeing of children. The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 was passed in November last year to amend the Online Safety Act 2021, requiring “age-restricted social media platforms” to observe a “minimum age obligation” to prevent Australians under the age of 16 from having accounts. It also vests that ghastly office of the eSafety Commissioner and the Information Commissioner with powers to seek information regarding relevant compliance by the platforms, along with the power to issue and publish notices of non-compliance.

While the press were falling over to note the significance of such changes, little debate has accompanied the last month’s registration of a new industry code by the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant. In fact, Inman Grant is proving most busy, having already registered three such codes, with a further six to be registered by the end of this year. All serve to target the behaviour of internet service companies in Australia. Not all have been subject to parliamentary debate, let alone broader public consultation.

Inman Grant has been less than forthcoming about the implications of these codes, most notably on the issue of mandatory age-assurance limits. That said, some crumbs have been left for those paying attention to her innate obsession with hiving off the Internet from Australian users. In her address to the National Press Club in Canberra on June 24, she did give some clue about where the country is heading: “Today, I am […] announcing that through the Online Safety Act’s codes and standards framework, we will be moving to register three industry-prepared codes designed to limit children’s access to high impact, harmful material like pornography, violent content, themes of suicide, self-harm and disordered eating.”  (Is there no limit to this commissar’s fears?) Under such codes, companies would “agree to apply safety measures up and down the technology stack – including age assurance protections.”

With messianic fervour, Inman Grant explained that the codes would “serve as a bulwark and operate in concern with the new social media age limits, distributing more responsibility and accountability across eight sectors of the tech industry.” These would also not be limited in scope, applicable to enterprise hosting services, internet carriage services, and various “access providers and search engines. I have concluded that each of these codes provides appropriate community safeguards.”

From December 27, such technology giants as Google and Microsoft will have to use age-assurance technology for account holders when they sign in and “apply tools and/or settings, like ‘safe search’ functionality, at the highest safety setting by default for an account holders its age verification systems indicate is likely to be an Australian child, designed to protect and prevent Australian children from accessing or being exposed to online pornography and high impact violence material in search results.” This is pursuant to Schedule 3 – Internet Search Engine Services Online Safety Code (Class 1C and Class 2 Material).

How this will be undertaken has not, as yet, been clarified by Google or Microsoft. The companies have, however, been in the business of trialling a number of technologies. These include Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) cryptography, which permits people to prove that an aspect of themselves is true without surrendering any other data; using large language models (LLMs) to discern an account holder’s age based on browsing history; or the use of selfie verification and government ID tools.

Specialists in the field of information technology have been left baffled and worried. “I have not seen anything like this anywhere else in the world,” remarks IT researcher Lisa Given. This had “kind of popped out, seemingly out of the blue.” Digital Rights Watch chair, Lizzie O’Shea, is of the view that “the public deserves more of a say in how to balance these important human rights issues” while Justin Warren, founder of the tech analysis company PivotNine, sees it as “a massive overreaction after years of police inaction to curtail the power of a handful of large foreign technology companies.”

Then comes the issue of efficacy. Using the safety of children as a reason for censoring content and restricting technology is a government favourite. Whether the regulations actually protect children is quite another matter. John Pane, chair of Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), was less than impressed by the results from a recent age-assurance technology trial conducted to examine the effect of the teen social media ban. And all of this cannot ignore the innovative guile of young users, ever ready to circumvent any imposed restrictions.

Inman Grant, in her attempts to limit the use of the Internet and infantilise the population, sees these age-restricting measures as “building a culture of online safety, using multiple interventions – just as we have done so successfully on our beaches.” This nonsensical analogy excludes the central theme of her policies, common to all censors in history: The people are not to be trusted, and paternalistic governors and regulators know better.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

The debate is over. The Israel apologists lost. And we are seeing this reflected in mainstream discourse.

Pop megastar Ariana Grande has started speaking out in support of Gaza, telling her social media followers that “starving people to death is a red line.” This is a new threshold. Opposing Israel’s genocide is now the most mainstream as it has ever been.

MSNBC just ran a piece explicitly titled “Israel is starving Gaza. And the U.S. is complicit.”, featuring a segment with the virulently pro-Israel Morning Joe slamming the mass atrocity. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, himself a former AIPAC employee, has done a 180 and is now raking Israel over the coals on the air for its deliberately engineered starvation campaign. The New York Times finally overcame its phobia of the g-word with an op-ed titled “I’m a Genocide Scholar. I Know It When I See It.”

We’re now seeing notoriously Zionist swamp monsters in the Democratic Party like Barack Obama, Hakeem Jeffries, Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar changing their tune and attacking Netanyahu and Trump for their joint genocide project in Gaza, with increasingly forceful pushback from some on the right like Marjorie Taylor Greene as well.

As western pundits, politicians, and celebrities suddenly pivot to denouncing Israel’s genocidal atrocities after two years of silence, it’s hard to believe that just a few weeks ago, we were being told that saying “death to the IDF” is a hate crime.

People who’ve been staring at this genocide from the beginning have been asking the entire time, what is it going to take? What will it take for our society to stop sleepwalking through inane trivialities and vapid distractions and start opposing the holocaust of our day?

Raining military explosives on a giant concentration camp packed full of children wasn’t enough.

Burning children alive wasn’t enough.

Systematically destroying Gaza’s entire healthcare infrastructure — up to and including entering hospitals they’ve attacked and destroying individual pieces of medical equipment one by one — wasn’t enough.

Killing more journalists than were killed in both World Wars, plus the US Civil War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Yugoslav Wars, the War in Afghanistan, and the ongoing war in Ukraine wasn’t enough.

The systemic rape and torture of prisoners wasn’t enough.

IDF soldiers routinely sharing photos and videos of themselves mockingly dressing in the clothes of dead and displaced Palestinian women and playing with the toys of dead and displaced Palestinian children wasn’t enough.

Israeli officials openly expressing genocidal intent for the people of Gaza wasn’t enough.

The US president and Israeli prime minister openly declaring their goal of the complete ethnic cleansing of a Palestinian territory wasn’t enough.

Field testing new weapons of war on Palestinians like they’re guinea pigs in a laboratory wasn’t enough.

Leaving countless civilians to slowly suffocate or die of dehydration, trapped under the rubble of bombed buildings, wasn’t enough.

Creating an AI system to ensure that suspected Hamas fighters are bombed when they’re at home with their children and naming it “Where’s Daddy?” wasn’t enough.

Using Palestinians as human shields wasn’t enough.

Burying injured civilians alive with bulldozers wasn’t enough.

The IDF admitting to running a popular Telegram channel called “72 Virgins,” which posted extremely gory and sadistic snuff films of people in Gaza being butchered by Israeli forces, wasn’t enough.

IDF snipers routinely shooting children in the head and chest throughout the Gaza Strip wasn’t enough.

The IDF flying drones, which play the sounds of crying babies at night in order to lure out hiding civilians to murder them, wasn’t enough.

IDF troops telling the Israeli press that they’re being ordered to massacre starving civilians seeking food from aid sites wasn’t enough.

Israeli snipers targeting different body parts of starving civilians on designated days — leg day, head day, genitals day, etc — wasn’t enough.

Far right Israeli citizens setting up blockades to stop aid trucks from entering Gaza while they enjoyed parties and barbecues at the blockade sites wasn’t enough.

Using lies and propaganda to dismantle the aid system for bringing essential food and life-supporting supplies into Gaza, to replace it with a US/Israeli op where aid seekers are massacred every single day, wasn’t enough.

Using siege warfare to starve Gaza for the previous 22 months deliberately wasn’t enough.

But now that starvation has hit a critical point and deaths from malnutrition are skyrocketing, now that images of dead skeletal children are filling our screens, now that the damage to organs and brains from starvation will be irreversible in many cases — now it’s enough.

That was the line, apparently. That’s what mainstream Western consciousness has decided is too much. Everything up until that line was fine, but now it’s not fine anymore.

And the killing is still going on. The sudden awakening of conscience hasn’t translated into any material actions or changes at all yet. If it had come in October or November 2023, like it should have, we might be seeing that opposition translate into actually saving Gaza by now, but the light has only just been switched on. It’s not even guaranteed that those who are speaking up will continue to do so.

I’m glad people are waking up to the cruel reality of this nightmare. I’m grateful to each and every influential voice who uses their platform to speak out, even at this late date. I truly am.

But I also think we need to take a very hard, very uncomfortable look at ourselves as a society right now. If all those monstrous abuses were tolerable for us over these last two years, there’s something deeply and profoundly sick about our civilization.

We are not living right. We are not thinking right. We are not feeling right. We are warped and twisted. The information we consume and the norms we’ve been conditioned to accept have corrupted our souls.

We have been made into something bad. Something ugly. Something shameful. Something we need to do everything in our power to change.

We need to rescue ourselves from what we have become. We need to transform, deeply and radically, into something that could never again allow something like this to occur.

The way things are clearly isn’t working. The mainstream worldview is clearly a lie. Everything we’ve been taught to believe about our society, our nation, our government, and our world was clearly false.

We need to fight our way through the cognitive dissonance of recognizing that our entire way of looking at things as a collective has failed, and we need to find a new way of being.

Otherwise, we’re going to keep being smashed in the face with increasingly horrifying reminders of what we have allowed ourselves to become.

The lessons will repeat until they are learned.

We had better start learning them.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Caitlin Johnstone.

This week, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) boarded the Handala, a ship associated with the Flotilla Freedom Coalition, that was attempting to reach Gaza with supplies for starving Palestinians. The IDF detained 20 activists, who had their hands held up, in graphic images that the Freedom Flotilla Coalition captured.

Among those on the ship was Chris Smalls, who gained fame when he led a successful union drive at Amazon in Staten Island in 2022. Not only was Smalls detained, but he was physically beaten by the IDF. He was the only Black member on the Handala.

“The Freedom Flotilla Coalition confirms that upon arrival in Israeli custody, U.S. human rights defender, Christian Smalls, was physically assaulted by seven uniformed individuals,” wrote the Freedom Flotilla Coalition on Instagram. “They choked him and kicked him, leaving visible signs of violence on his neck and back”.

Despite Smalls having been profiled by every major media outlet in the U.S. when he successfully led the union drive at Amazon, not a single major media outlet has covered his beating at the hands of the IDF.

In 2022, The New York Times even ran a Style section profile on his fashion choices among more than a dozen pieces that they ran on his organizing efforts, but the paper has not said anything about the beating of a high-profile labor activist at the hands of the IDF. Only three smaller, left-leaning outlets, Zeteo, The Grio, and Jezebel, covered it.

“This totally makes sense,” wrote University of New Brunswick Professor Nathan Kalman-Lamb on Bluesky. “A notable public figure in the US (Amazon labor organizer Christian Smalls) is illegally arrested by Israel and subjected to severe physical violence while on a hunger strike… and not one US media outlet of any type has decided that is news.”

This article is a cross-post from Payday Report and is a developing story. Payday Report will update it as more information becomes available.

You can donate to help Payday Report Cover Labor Activists for a Free Palestine.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Mike Elk.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by J.S. O’Keefe.

This form of reasoning, known otherwise as “Holocaust-ism” or “Shoah-tiyut”, is a moral conceit left bare in the war of annihilation being waged in Gaza against the Palestinian populace. Israeli human rights groups have taken note of this, despite the drained reserves of empathy evident in Israel proper. (A Pew Research Center poll conducted last month found that a mere 16% of Jewish Israelis thought peaceful coexistence with Palestinians was possible.)

In its latest report pointedly titled Our Genocide, the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem offers a blunt assessment: “Israel’s policy in the Gaza Strip and its horrific outcomes, together with statements by senior Israeli politicians and military commanders about the goals of the attack, leads us to the unequivocal conclusion that Israel is taking coordinated action to intentionally destroy Palestinian society in the Gaza Strip. In other words: Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”

The infliction of genocide, the organisation acknowledges, is a matter of “multiple and parallel practices” applied over a period of time, with killing being merely one component. Living conditions can be destroyed, concentration camps and zones created, populations expelled, and policies to systematically prevent reproduction enacted. “Accordingly, genocidal acts are various actions intended to bring about the destruction of a distinct group, as part of a deliberate, coordinated effort by a ruling authority.”

Our Genocide suggests that certain conditions often precede the sparking of a genocide. Israel’s relations with Palestinians had been characterised by “broader patterns of settler-colonialism”, with the intention of ensuring “Jewish supremacy over Palestinians – economically, politically, socially, and culturally.”

B’Tselem draws upon three crucial elements centred on ensuring “Jewish supremacy over Palestinians”: “life under an apartheid regime that imposes separation, demographic engineering, and ethnic cleansing; systemic and institutionalized use of violence against Palestinians, while the perpetrators enjoy impunity; and institutionalized mechanisms of dehumanization and framing Palestinians as an existential threat.” The attacks on Israel by Hamas and other militant groups on October 7, 2023 was a violent event that created a “sense of existential threat among the perpetrating group” enabling the “ruling system to carry out genocide.” As B’Tselem Executive Director Yuli Novak notes, this sense of threat was promoted by an “extremist, far-right messianic government” to pursue “an agenda of destruction and expulsion.”

Israeli policy in the Strip since October 2023 could not be rationalised as a focused, targeted attempt to destroy the rule of Hamas or its military efficacy. “Statements by senior Israeli decision-makers about the nature and assault in Gaza have expressed genocidal intent throughout.” Ditto Israeli military officers of all ranks. Gaza’s residents had been dehumanized, with many Jewish-Israelis believing “that their lives are of negligible value compared to Israel’s national goals, if not worthless altogether.”

The report also notes the use of certain terminology that haunts the literature of genocidal euphemism: the creation of “humanitarian zones” that would still be bombed despite supposedly providing protection for displaced civilians; the use of “kill zones” by the Israeli military and the absence of any standardized rules of engagement through the Strip, often “determined at the discretion of commanders on the ground or based on arbitrary criteria.”

Wishing to be comprehensive, the authors of the report do not ignore Israel’s actions in the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem.  Airstrikes have regularly taken place against refugee camps in the northern part of the territory since October 2023. Even more lethal open-fire policies have been used in the West Bank, with the use of kill zones suggesting “the broader ‘Gazafication’ of Israel’s methods of warfare.”

Another group, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHRI), has also published a legal-medical appraisal on the intentional destruction of Gaza’s healthcare system, finding that the Israeli campaign in Gaza “constitutes genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention.” The evidence examined by the group “shows a deliberate and systematic dismantling of Gaza’s healthcare system and other vital systems necessary for the population’s survival.” The evolving nature of the campaign suggested a “deliberate progression” from the initial bombing and the forced evacuation of hospitals in the northern part of the Strip to the calculated collapse of the healthcare system across the entire enclave. The dismantling of the health system involved rendering hospitals “non-functional”, the blocking of medical evaluations, and the elimination of such vital services as trauma care, surgery, dialysis, and maternal health.

Added to this has been the direct targeting of health care workers, involving the death and detention of over 1,800 members, “including many senior specialists”, and the deliberate restriction of humanitarian relief through militarized distribution points that pose lethal risks to aid recipients. “This coordinated assault has produced a cascading failure of health and humanitarian infrastructure, compounded by policies leading to starvation, disease, and the breakdown of sanitation, housing, and education systems.”

PHRI contends that, at the very least, three core elements of Article II of the Genocide Convention are met: the killing of members of a group (identified by nationality, ethnicity, race or religion); causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of that group and deliberately inflicting on the group those conditions of life to bring about its destruction in whole or in part.

In accepting that genocide is being perpetrated against the Palestinians, Our Genocide makes that most pertinent of points: the dry legal analysis of genocide tends to be distanced from a historical perspective. “The legal definition is narrow, having been shaped in large part by the political interests of the states whose representatives drafted it.” The high threshold of identifying genocide, and the international jurisprudence on the subject, had produced a disturbing paradox: genocide tends to be recognised “only after a significant portion of the targeted group has already been destroyed and the group as such has suffered irreparable harm.” The thrust of these clarion calls from B’Tselem and PHRI is urgently clear: end this state of affairs before the Palestinians become yet another historical victim of such harm.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

— James Baldwin, “Open Letter to the Born Again” (September 29, 1979). Quoted in Hamid Dabashi, After Savagery: Gaza, Genocide, and the Illusion of Western Civilization (Haymarket Books, 2025): 159.

Baldwin’s assessment is shared by many others, such as Noam Chomsky, who discussed in his book (The Fateful Triangle, 1999 edition) Israel’s role as a “strategic asset.” (p. 69, 70, 103, 137) However, others, such as Jean Bricmont and Diana Johnstone countered that assessment in a 2024 article, “The Myth of Israel as ‘US Aircraft Carrier’ in Middle East.” They write:

But the crucial evidence, totally missing from their analysis, is the slightest example of Israel actually serving American interests in the region.

If no examples are given, it’s simply because there are none. Israel has never fired a shot on behalf of the United States or brought a drop of oil under U.S. control.

We can start with a common sense argument: If the U.S. is interested in Middle East oil, why would it support a country that is hated (for whatever reasons) by all the populations of the oil producing countries?

Bricmont and Johnstone attribute the unstinting US support of Israel as being influenced by money injected into the US political arena by the Jewish lobby, in particular AIPAC.

The question of which side leads in determining US support for Israel is debatable. What is indisputable is that the US and Israel are in lockstep despite all the violations of international law by Israel (US is a serial violator of international law, as well), despite several massacres carried out by Israel, and despite the mightily ramped up genocide being perpetrated by Israeli Jews against Palestinians currently.

Genocide and the understanding of what unleashes the bloodshirtiest of human actions is the subject of Hamid Dabashi’s After Savagery, scheduled for release by Haymarket Books on 30 September — while the savagery is ongoing. The urgency for a worldwide response calls for informing those unaware or those insouciant to the Jewish Israeli genocide that is being perpetrated on Palestine (It is not just a genocide in Gaza, as a 1 July 2025 Al Jazeera headline makes clear: “Israel has killed 1,000 Palestinians in the West Bank since October 7, 2023.”). After Savagery, however, is not just about the genocide in Gaza, it is about why some humans commit genocide. So After Savagery is also about “before savagery.” What are the conditions that lead to savagery today. And most importantly, how genocide can be prevented from happening.

Dabashi quotes many sources to attest to the genocide that is happening now in Palestine.

“What we are seeing in Gaza is a repeat of Auschwitz,” says the Burmese genocide expert and Nobel Peace Prize nominee Maung Zarni. “This is a collective white imperialist man’s genocide,” he further explains. (154-155)

Asked to describe what he witnessed in Gaza, Dr. Perlmutter replied, “All of the disasters I’ve seen, combined—forty mission trips, thirty years, Ground Zero, earthquakes, all of that combined—doesn’t equal the level of carnage that I saw against civilians in just my first week in Gaza.” And the civilian casualties, he said, are almost exclusively children. “I’ve never seen that before,” he said. “I’ve seen more incinerated children than I’ve ever seen in my entire life, combined. I’ve seen more shredded children in just the first week … missing body parts, being crushed by buildings, the greatest majority, or bomb explosions, the next greatest majority. We’ve taken shrapnel as big as my thumb out of eight-year-olds. And then there’s sniper bullets. I have children that were shot twice.” (103-104)

“Yes, it is genocide,” has affirmed Amos Goldberg, a professor of Holocaust history at the department of Jewish history and contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem: “It is so difficult and painful to admit it, but despite all that, and despite all our efforts to think otherwise, after six months of brutal war we can no longer avoid this conclusion.” (142)

Dabashi traces the roots of Zionism to a longstanding settler-European colonialism. And the author lays bare the insidiousness of Zionism and how this racism impacted Palestinians:

Today, the birth of Palestine as a “question” rather than a nation-state marks precisely the birth of Palestine as a constellation of refugee camps. The land was stolen from Palestinians, the state stealing the land was a European settler colony garrison state that rules over Palestinians with cruelty, the rules for the inscription of life were dictated to Palestinians in draconian terms, and the camps as the fourth inseparable element are precisely where generations of Palestinians are born and raised, before being killed by the Israeli military. (127-128)

Part of this racism towards Muslims, of which the majority of Palestinians are, is the use of term “Muselmann.” Writes Dabashi, “This is perhaps a mini encyclopedia of European ignorance, Islamophobia and antisemitism all wrapped up in an attempt to unpack the word ‘Muselmann,’ but in fact loading it with more racist dimensions.” (120) And the new Muselmann, is the Palestinian, “the Untestifiable, the human animal, as Israeli warlords have said.” (xxvi)

Zionist Israel and its racism and discrimination is compellingly described. My colleague B.J. Sabri and I needed no convincing of Israeli racism.¹

And this racism, not exclusive to Israeli Jews, points to “what ultimately matters for the world at large is the categorical inability to fathom a Palestinian as a human being.” (96) Thus, “Witnessing this savagery in Gaza, we can clearly link the Jewish Holocaust to the Palestinian genocide, and see genocidal Zionism  as the logical colonial extension of European fascism.” (xv)

Before Savagery

Many personages appear in After Savagery, such as, to name a few, Sven Lindqvist, Frantz Fanon, Joseph Conrad, and James Baldwin who opposed racism; Edward Said, Giorgio Agamben, Ghassan Kanafani and his Danish wife Anni Kanafani (née Høver), Mario Rizzi, Mahmoud Darwish who spoke to the beauty of Orientalism and Arab culture; others such as Ilan Pappe and UN special rappateur Francesca Albanese who denounce unflinchingly the depredations of Israeli Jews against Palestinians. Dabashi delves deeply into the Eurocentric perspective on colonialism, borne of Western philosophy and figures like Immanuel Kant, Hegel Heidegger, and others who thinking was impoverished by being shackled by their own racism.

Dabashi writes:

“According to Hegel, Africans, or any other people, can only become civilized to the degree and so far as they abandoned their own cultures and convert to Christianity, founding a state according to Christian principles.” (91)

How are “we” to escape the indoctrination of feted philosophers and the inculcation of Western thought? How do “we” humanize Palestinians? The mere fact that the humanity of Palestinians requires affirmation for so many people points to the pervasiveness of racist Eurocentric narratives.

After the unbridled savagery in Gaza, it is not only European philosophy that reaches its ignoble ends. We need equally to think of the modes of knowledge production about Gaza itself, about Palestine, as the simulacrum of the world outside the purview of the discredited Eurocentric imagination. We no longer need to worry about the critique of Orientalism. We need to think of how to produce knowledge about Gaza and Palestine and the rest of the world. We need to reverse the anthropological gaze, to produce an anthropology of Zionism and Western Philosophy. (105)

The book covers a lot of ground. It delves deeply into ontology, epistemology, semantics, literature, art, filmmaking, poetry, politics, religion, exilism, and — especially — philosophy. After Savagery is not focused solely on the here and now of what is transpiring in historical Palestine. The book goes into the history, background, and philosophy that enables genocide. The book is scholarly and is well footnoted. If that is what the reader is looking for, then Hamid Dabashi’s After Savagery is well worth the read.

NOTE:

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Kim Petersen.

The importance of Latinos living and working in the US is enormous: if they were in a separate country, it would be the world’s fifth largest economy, bigger than even India. President Trump is recklessly attacking Latino migrants, inflicting calculated cruelty and disregarding the consequences for their home countries.

Disastrously, US immigration policy affects the very victims of Washington’s destabilization campaigns in Latin America and Caribbean, which drive people to leave their homelands in the first place. In effect, by exporting chaos, the hegemon paradoxically ends up importing immigrants. Then, the US contradicts itself by claiming that sanctioned countries are deemed safe for deportation.

Further, implementation is selective, privileging right-wing allies and punishing progressive states. The economic fallout from reduced remittances and mass deportations is not only politically opportunistic but has grave humanitarian consequences.

Take the case of Haiti, which Human Rights Watch says is on the “edge of collapse.” Armed gangs control most of the capital, over a million Haitians have been displaced and there is acute food insecurity. The State Department’s travel advisory puts Haiti at its highest level of risk (level 4): avoid travelling there because gun crime is “common” and kidnapping is “widespread.”

Yet, over at Homeland Security, Haiti is declared “safe” for people to return. Secretary Kristi Noem wants to force 348,000 Haitians who have temporary protected status (TPS) and another 211,000 who have humanitarian parole to leave for what Black Agenda Radio describes as “a country in turmoil.”

Migrants – a threat worse than communism to nativist America

Under President Biden, Washington’s ideology-driven immigration policy led to the “humanitarian parole” program. Citizens of the targeted countries – Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela – were said to be “fleeing communism” and warranted preferential treatment. Trump has ended the parole scheme for those countries and the TPS protection for Nicaraguans and Venezuelans (Cubans never had TPS protection), yet their revolutionary governments now suffer even tougher US coercive economic measures than with Biden.

Come Trump’s second term, US immigration policy sharply limits the pathways for Cubans to enter the US legally. Over a half a million Cubans in the US lost their status and work permission with the termination of humanitarian parole. Visa restrictions limit family, student, and visitor entry. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is now allowed to deport Cubans and other migrants to countries other than their own, with as little as six hours’ notice. Meanwhile US-Cuba bilateral immigration talks are indefinitely suspended.

Trump’s malice against Cuba – a nation already teetering under the six-decade illegal US blockade – is causing a mounting humanitarian crisis. Tightening the economic embargo followed further restrictions on foreign investment and expanded sanctions. Biden’s earlier attempts to strangle the Cuban economy cut remittances sent by migrants from about $800 million in 2019 to just $35 million by May 2024. Trump’s new measures could sever the lifeline completely.

Meanwhile Nicaragua, which has 93,000 in the parole scheme and about 4,000 under TPS, is deemed “safe enough” for its citizens to return home, according to US Homeland Security:

“Nicaragua has become a worldwide tourist destination, while also promoting sustainability and revitalizing local communities. Technological innovation is empowering local farmers and fishers, making the agriculture industry more competitive and profitable… Nicaragua continues to show stable macroeconomic fundamentals, including a record-high $5 billion in foreign reserves, a sustainable debt load, and a well-capitalized banking sector.”

No one seems to have told Kristi Noem that her cabinet colleague Marco Rubio regards Nicaragua as an “enemy of humanity.” His officials briefed the New York Times that the country was “perilous for tourists.”

Last month, President Daniel Ortega reassured Nicaraguans that the country’s “doors are open,” urging them to leave the “terror” of the US. Nicaraguan Eddy García, who along with 77 others arrived on a deportation flight in February, said that they were welcomed by officials, given refreshments and then offered transport home: “I’m extremely happy to be back because now no one is going to throw me out.”

Opponents of Nicaragua’s Sandinista government have, until Trump’s shift in policy, chorused that an “unprecedented wave” of migrants fled the country as a result of government “repression” following the failed coup attempt in 2018. Opposition figures are struggling to explain why, if this were the case, so few Nicaraguans are being sent back. In the six months until June, they accounted for less than one percent of the 239,000 migrants deported.

Another political shift has been the marked hostility to Venezuelan migrants. By the end of Biden’s term, over half a million Venezuelans had been accepted under TPS and 117,000 given “humanitarian parole.” Under Trump, these Venezuelans are denounced for “invading” the US. Some are even accused of being affiliated to the violent Tren de Aragua gang which, Trump baselessly asserted, is directed by Nicolas Maduro’s government.

Meanwhile, US-Venezuela talks on migration continue. The Venezuelan government, for its part, has welcomed returning migrants under its “Return to the Homeland Plan.” Over 200 Venezuelans dubiously linked to gangs, incarcerated and tortured in El Salvador’s CECOT prison, have recently been freed. Caracas’s other priority is to reunite children, thrust into foster care in the US, back with their deported Venezuelan parents.

Driven out by ICE

Apart from the prospect of being dispatched to one of El Salvador’s notorious prisons or being abandoned to an unknown fate in a remote country like South Sudan, thousands of Latino migrants are leaving the US on their own faced with escalating threats from ICE.

Wilfredo, from the city of Masaya, Nicaragua, had voluntarily flown back from Miami with two others. Many more Nicaraguans were on the same flight anxious to leave, he told us, before ICE officials kidnapped them, took all their belongings and put them, handcuffed, on deportation flights. “The ‘American Dream’ has become a nightmare,” he said.

Even long-time naturalized citizens in the US are terrorized. In liberal Marin County, CA, Venezuelan-born Claudia now takes her passport with her whenever she leaves the house for fear of being seized. It’s happened already to other naturalized citizens.

Costa Rica and Panama were persuaded by Trump to accept around 500 deported asylum seekers from third countries as diverse as Iran, Cameroon and Vietnam. These migrants are now in limbo, receive little assistance and – in most cases – are unable to speak Spanish. Those in Panama have been pressured to accept repatriation flights but many face persecution if they return to their home countries.

Duplicitous immigration policy

The treatment of migrants from most Latin American countries contrasts sharply with Washington’s approach towards El Salvador. It has 174,000 citizens living in the US with TPS and – like Haiti – this protection was offered after the country suffered severe earthquake damage. However, El Salvador has been conveniently judged as “unable” to accept the return of so many of its citizens; their TPS continues.

Despite the supposedly unsafe conditions used to justify TPS, the State Department downgraded the risk of travel to El Salvador to its lowest level, ranking it as one of the safest countries in Latin America. “Just got the US State Department’s travel gold star: Level 1: safest it gets,” Bukele boasted.

Remittances from the country’s estimated 1.4 million migrants in the US provide El Salvador with a vital 23.5% of its national income. Bukele’s White House visits, hosting Marco Rubio at his home and, above all, incarcerating migrants on behalf of the US – along with groveling before Trump – paid off.

In a further attack on migrants, Trump is hitting them with new taxes on the remittances they send, which provide 23% of Central America’s GDP. Migrants struggling for survival are taxed in this way while the wealthy can move money abroad – through bank wires, investment accounts, shell companies, and real estate purchases – without similar penalties.

Many Latin American economies will be further strained by a combination of falling remittances, returning migrants who initially lack jobs, and, in some cases, harsher economic sanctions. Meanwhile, their exports to the US are being hit by new tariffs. Trump appears to be exacerbating the economic conditions that drove many migrants north under his predecessor’s administration.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by John Perry and Roger D. Harris.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

On the other side, are three armed groups with the ethnic Amhara FANO/Patriots army at the forefront. Included is the former ruling class the Tigray Peoples Liberation Front (TPLF) and what’s left of its once powerful army, today pretty much holding coats in this conflict. The other armed group opposing the gangster Abiy Ahmed is the Oromo Liberation Army (OLA), not nearly as powerful or well lead as FANO but a threat nevertheless.

The Abiy gangster regime is backed by the west, to be counted on when it comes to supporting their puppets in Africa. Abiy is little more than the Mayor of the capital Addis Ababa having lost control of some 80% of the country. With the FANO fighters on one side and the OLA on the other side Abiy has only about a thirty mile radius between him and the loss of his capital city and, if he is lucky, an exile in his supporters capital Abu Dhabi (maybe Dubai?) in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The bankster criminal class in the west is continuing to back Abiy with a recent emergency grant of $260 million along side a “loan” for $1.5 billion as well a a “debt reduction” of $3.5 billion (Ethiopia has historically been the largest recipient of “debt reduction” in Africa). It seems even the banksters in the IMF have begun to realize they are backing a losing hand in Abiy Ahmed, admitting their western banksters investors are increasing skeptical about putting up more money to prop up another gangster regime in Africa on the verge of collapse.

And now we hear about another US/UN World Food Program “aid” scheme that will see the diversion of more millions of dollar$ of food from those millions of starving people in Ethiopia to the Ethiopian military of Abiy Ahmed. The same thing happened a few years ago until this scandal could no longer be covered up and this “aid” diversion scheme was “suspended”. Now the same scam has been restarted with the pious reassurances that those in charge have “learned their lesson” and “it wont happen again”.

FANO is on a roll militarily, steadily capturing territory around the capital Addis Ababa as the defeat of the Ethiopian Army under Abiy accelerates. In the last few weeks, maybe a couple of months, over 7,000 Ethiopian army troops, mainly from the Amhara ethnic group/nation, have surrendered to FANO with hundreds more surrendering almost daily. Some dozen generals from the Ethiopian Army, all Amhara, have either been “retired” or defected to FANO as PM Abiy grows increasingly paranoid of a coup de tat by those left in his inner circle of the army generals corp.

With the noose tightening around him Abiy’s days are numbered and its not if but when he makes a desperate dash for safety for exile in the UAE. Hopefully he will be captured and have to face justice for the genocidal crimes he has committed against the Ethiopian people.

Either way its seems that the once mighty Abyssinian Empire, what Ethiopia was known as up until the middle of the 20th century, is about to come apart at the seems. A prison house of nations, Abyssinia/Ethiopia has been Africa’s only indigenous empire, built on the conquest of its neighbors using western firearms provided mainly by the Italians. Machine guns against cavalry has an inevitable ending with the result being a particularly brutal colonial empire. The Oromo nation, the largest in Africa today numbering over 50 million with the second largest language in Africa was the main goal of the Abyssinian conquest, something they had failed to do for centuries until acquiring Italian machine guns and artillery.

The subsequent brutality of the Abyssinian subjugation of the Oromo’s should be recognized for what it was, a genocide, with an estimated 5 million Oromo’s dying as a result. The scale and sheer inhumanity of the Abyssinian subjugation of the Oromo’s remains equal if not surpassing the worst crimes of the western imperialists when they invaded and colonized Africa. When you hear names like Menelik and Haile Sellasie, heroes amongst many of those who have been deluded by historical fiction in the west, remember the Oromo genocide.

The Ethiopian empire is about to come apart at its seams with the birth of new nations with names like Oromia, Amhara, Tigray, Afar, Ogaden amongst others in the soon to be defunct Ethiopian prison house of nations.

Hopefully these newly independent nations will find enough common ground to establish a cooperative organization similar to the Sahel Alliance of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger.

A saying in the Horn of Africa is “all roads to peace run through Asmara, Eritrea” and the long, principled leadership role of the Eritrean Peoples Liberation Front, today’s Peoples Front for Democracy and Justice under the Lion of Africa, President Issias Aferwerki will help guide the newly independent nations that once composed the Ethiopian empire through the perilous times to come.

Behind the scenes President Issias has been preparing for this transition period from colonialism to independence with “unofficial official” spokespersons like Eritrean media star Awel Seid already providing guidance for what Horn of Africans should expect in the not to distant future.

Of course, the western bankster regimes are not going to sit idly by and watch their “policeman on the beat” in Ethiopia become a footnote in history for the Horn of Africa is to strategically critical to ignore, no matter the moronic programs the west will continue to promote. Western hegemony is being battered on all sides but they won’t go down without a fight so expect twists and turns in the coming months and years including all sort of lies and slander spewed against Eritrea as it begins to lead the transformation taking place from the Ethiopian empire to the birth of multiple new nations once imprisoned in Africa’s only indigenous empire, todays Ethiopia.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Thomas C. Mountain.

The statement as run by Doctors Without Borders on July 23 is stark: “As the Israel government’s siege starves the people of Gaza, aid workers are now joining the same food lines, risking being shot just to feed their families. With supplies now totally depleted, humanitarian organisations are witnessing their own colleagues and partners waste before their eyes.” Two months after the implementation of the controlled aid scheme by Israel, utilising the grotesquely named Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, over 100 organisations were “sounding the alarm and urging governments to act: open all land crossings; restore the full flow of food, clean water, medical supplies, shelter items, and fuel through a principled, UN-led mechanism; end the siege; and agree to a ceasefire now.”

Outside Gaza, and even within the Strip, abundant supplies of food, clean water, medical supplies, shelter items and fuel sat untouched. Humanitarian organisations had been prevented from accessing them. “The Government of Israel’s restrictions, delays, and fragmentation under its total siege have created chaos, starvation, and death.” A paltry figure of 28 trucks a day were being allowed into the Strip.

The relevant gore is recounted: massacres at food sites in the Gaza Strip are impossible to ignore; the figures from the UN suggest that 875 Palestinians had been slaughtered while seeking sustenance as of July 13. The frequency of these “flour massacres” is also receiving comment from those in the employ of the operation being run by GHF, policed by private contractors and the IDF. Retired US special forces officer Anthony Aguilar, who resigned from working with the GHF, told the BBC that he had “witnessed the Israeli Defense Forces shooting at crowds of Palestinians.” During his entire career, he had never seen such “brutality and use of indiscriminate and unnecessary force against a civilian population, an unarmed, starving population.”

The NGO statement goes on to note the rise of cases of acute malnutrition, most prevalent among children and the elderly. (The World Food Programme has warned that one in three Gazans do not eat for days at a time, with 90,000 women and children requiring treatment.) “Illnesses like acute watery diarrhea are spreading, markets are empty, waste is piling up, and adults are collapsing on the streets from hunger and dehydration.”

In the face of this, international law’s decrees appear like the neglected statues of a distant land. The three sets of Provisional Measures Orders from the International Court of Justice, handed down since 2024, have warned Israel to observe its obligations under the UN Genocide Convention and address the humanitarian crisis in the Strip. In its modifying order of provisional measures handed down on March 28, 2024, the ICJ instructed Israel to “take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address famine and starvation and the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in Gaza”. These include the provision of “food, water, electricity, fuel, shelter, clothing, hygiene and sanitation requirements, as well as medical supplies and medical care” and “increasing the capacity of land crossing points and maintaining them open for as long as necessary”.

The latest concession from Israel to deal with this engineered humanitarian catastrophe is a promise to open humanitarian corridors to permit UN convoys into the Strip. In addition to that, COGAT, the Israeli military agency overseeing humanitarian affairs in Gaza, has announced that Jordan and the United Arab Emirates will be permitted to parachute humanitarian aid to those in Gaza. UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has made a small team of British military planners and logisticians available to assist Jordan in this endeavour. On July 27, the IDF also released a statement claiming it had made the first airdrop including “seven packages of aid containing flour, sugar, and canned food”. These efforts, in their practical futility, are a reiteration of the humanitarian airdrops conducted by the US military and Jordan’s air force in March last year.

These drops will do little to alter the cruel, strangulating model of aid delivery in place, emboldening the fittest recipients capable of outpacing their adversaries. Those recipients will also be fortunate not to be injured or killed by the dropped packages, instances of which were recorded in March last year. “Why use airdrops,” asks Juliette Touma, chief spokeswoman for the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, “when you can drive hundreds of trucks through the borders?” Using trucks was “much easier, more effective, faster, cheaper.” Precisely why using them is so unappealing to the IDF.

Instead of focusing on isolating Israel, its allies prefer piecemeal approaches that prolong the suffering of the Palestinians. Measures such as those announced by Starmer to “evacuate children from Gaza who need medical assistance, bringing them to the UK for specialist and medical treatment” only serve to encourage the Israeli war machine. The aid drops serve to do much the same. The objective is one of inflicting a sufficient degree of harm that will encourage the eventual depopulation of the enclave. Israel’s allies, with intentional or unintentional complicity, will clean up.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

Below is a discussion of some of the collapsing myths. Myths are built on narratives which in turn are built on descriptive words. Much of the discussion centres around clarifying the deceptive nature of words, which in turn will expose the false narratives.

Rabble really

The army is venerated in Israel, and a lot of effort is put into glorifying the military; there are festivals with singers, balloons, and blue and white pom-poms galore.¹ American Jewish girls go giddy when meeting the tanned and smiling soldiers. Of course, if one glorifies the military, then all the units can only be “élite”; even the lowliest soldier is given a sergeant rank; and of course they must be “the most moral ” in the world. It is also known by its incongruous acronym: IDF.

Contrast the glamorous image of the Israeli military with its actions in Gaza, West Bank and beyond. Israeli snipers are targeting children – extra-points for pregnant women (you can even purchase a T-shirt with “one shot, two kills ” logo on it). Soldiers are cheering when blowing up hospitals, universities, mosques, schools,…. it is no secret, it is all visible in Telegram videos or on Al_Jazeera’s newscasts. To make matters worse, GHF, the so-called Israeli “humanitarian ” group, dispenses food and water in Gaza today in such a way as to concentrate refugees, and then target them.² Soldiers are looting everywhere, and even one unit has been set up with the express intention of looting areas they’ve conquered. Looting is tolerated throughout, and even made part of its tactics on the ground.³

The Israeli military is engaged in genocide and doesn’t hide the fact. Groups of soldiers engaged in ecstatic dancing chanting “death to the Amalek ” – a biblical term for the one to be killed en masse; including women and children.⁴ Early in October 2023, the Israeli military put a 95-year-old veteran of the infamous 1948 massacres on tour to lecture the soldiers. Dressed in a military uniform, he engaged in some motivational speeches: “Be triumphant and finish them off and don’t leave anyone behind. Erase the memory of them. Erase them, their families, mothers and children. These animals can no longer live.”⁵ The pronouncements made by the military official rabbis are even worse. And one cannot forget (former Minister of Defence) Yoav Gallant’s statement: “I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.”⁶

The Israeli airforce regularly drops huge bombs in the middle of densely populated refugee camps. According to Euromed, the total number of bombs dropped on Gaza are equivalent to all the bombs dropped on several of the major cities during WWII. And in order not to waste bombs, Israeli warplanes which couldn’t drop their ordnance in Iran during the June 2025 attack were instructed to bomb Gaza. Israelis also never miss an opportunity to profit from such events; Israelis flock to the border area to sit on sofas to witness the bombing spectacle. These war tourists have to pay extra for a cappuccino.

Israeli sadism only escalates; everyday there must be a new turn of the screw – it is not satisfied with merely bombing or shooting civilians. The latest Israeli military order is that from now on Palestinians will not be allowed to bathe in the sea.⁷ Israeli snipers, warships… will target civilians entering the sea. One Telegram video shows a gleeful Israeli soldier using mortar bombs to target civilians sitting on a beach.

The Israeli military used to be well organised and soldiers operated on the basis of strict orders. Today, the ethical rot has set in at all levels. Officers and lower soldiers alike murder, steal, torture everywhere. Soldiers perpetrate heinous crimes in full camera view, yet the perpetrators expect full impunity.

Simply put: the Israeli military can no longer be referred to as an army, but it must be described for what it actually is: a criminal rabble.

Israeli way of war

Israelis like to say that they “live in a bad neighbourhood.” In fact, it is so bad that Israel has bombed most of its neighbouring countries numerous times and attempted to murder most of the leadership in those countries.⁸ “Decapitation strikes” are deemed a great success and yet another proof of the Israeli cunning and prowess. Another target are the potential or actual negotiators. The Israeli military has murdered several negotiators in Lebanon, Gaza, Tehran (Ismael Haniyeh), and during the June 2025 attack against Iran the lead negotiator with the Americans was also murdered. And then Israel declares “ceasefires ” that impose conditions on the victims, but Israel continues to murder and bomb – there have been over 1,000 violations of the so-called ceasefire in Lebanon. Drones and warplanes fly overhead without regard to any declared ceasefire. Maybe all this is not surprising given the official Israeli (especially Netanyahu’s) disdain for “peace” which is considered to be a dirty word; they prefer “conflict management.” Ceasefires are merely meant to provide time for the Israeli military to reorganise and then bomb and murder in their “business as usual” fashion.

The Israeli military’s brutality even gets pompous sounding names like the Dahiya Doctrine. This refers to the levelling of the Dahiya neighbourhood in Beirut 2006 – it is a disproportionate level of violence “in response” to Hezbollah daring to resist the Israeli attack. And of course, Israelis justify this by seeking to reestablish “deterrence” which is yet another fraudulent military concept.⁹ But then the Israeli military applies other fraudulent and morally reprehensible doctrines, e.g., the Hannibal directive. This directive orders the Israeli military to kill Israeli Jews who may have been captured by Palestinians or other enemies. Officials prefer to kill Israelis rather than to have them taken as hostages. In fact, about half of the Israeli civilians killed on 7 October 2023 were killed by the Israeli military.¹⁰

The Israeli military justifies its actions because it is “at war.” The resistance in Gaza has no tanks, airplanes, etc. Thus the best equipped army in the world is attacking a mostly defenceless population; maybe it is a bit of a stretch to call this a “war.” Norman Finkelstein, the great historian, once made the same point and suggested that the Israeli “mowing the lawn ” attacks should be referred to as “massacres.” That is a rather more accurate and succinct descriptor; in the current historical context “genocidal actions” is perhaps more accurate.

Squatters really

A mythology surrounding the early Israeli colonists became pervasive early on. The brave sun tanned pioneers were “making the desert bloom”¹¹ conveying the notion that they were just taking over empty and unproductive land. The word that went along with this myth was that the Jewish interlopers were “settlers ” – another rather neutral word that has no association with the native population they came to displace. For some time while communal living had romantic appeal, settlers lived in kibbutzim. Young Europeans would flock to experience this only to find out a less glamorous picture often involving corruption and sexual abuse.¹²

After the 1940s, the program of ethnic cleansing saw hundreds of Palestinian towns and villages razed to the ground or simply taken over. Many Israelis took over houses and even helped themselves to furniture, carpets, etc. The takeover of houses is an on-going project with zealot usurpers using advanced mapping technology to target houses, especially in East Jerusalem. While a Palestinian family is out of a house doing normal daily chores, they find upon their return that their house has been taken over, and it is impossible to eject the squatters because the police sides with the latter.

During the late 1960s and early 1970s saw a wave of land confiscation in the West Bank, and the building of “settlements ” on top of hills. The real zealots went to Al Khalil/Hebron to take over houses, hotels, and other buildings.¹³ They even set about closing off streets so they could go undisturbed to the Ibrahimi mosque which also had been usurped by the zealots. The zealots’ aim is to constantly steal houses, and to make the life of ordinary Palestinians intolerable.

Other settlements were built as suburbs of Jerusalem or as cities with all the amenities provided at subsidised rates. Purpose-built “apartheid” roads connected these developments to the main Israeli cities, but also were meant to sever the links between Palestinian communities. And although the residents of such places are portrayed as mere suburbanites, they often clash with Palestinians when they seek to annex more land. Although annexation is such a neutral word, it hides the violence dispensed by the suburbanites to achieve their aims. The Jews recently arrived from Venezuela sought to expand the borders of their development and requested the zealots to do the dirty violent work.¹⁴ The condition for this assistance was that new arrivals would also participate in the violent eviction and usurpation of the neighbouring Palestinian land. Even the “suburbanites ” participate in violence; the soldiers are on standby to protect the usurpers.

It is important to avoid propaganda-tainted language, and to use words that clearly describe a reality and associated power relationships. For this reason many words cry out for an alternative description. The word “settler” demands a more accurate substitution, and the word “squatter” would certainly be a more suitable and accurate descriptor. It is time to stop calling the armed violent young men who harass and brutalise Palestinians in the West Bank “settlers”!

Where has “proper” gone?

Israel always has been a country with flexible and expanding borders. Yet, when it suited them, they would make a distinction between “Israel proper” and the occupied areas. The implication was that there could be negotiations regarding the occupied areas, there couldn’t possibly be negotiations about anything in Israel proper – this was conceded land, and there was nothing to talk about. And the “proper” areas expanded! After the wars of 1948, 1967, 2006… the borders of Israel “proper” expanded to incorporate newly stolen land.¹⁵ What the current batch of wars have revealed is that there is no more talk about “Israel proper”, and the reason for that is that Israel is expanding at present – stealing land in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza and the West Bank. While the borders keep expanding, the “proper” hasn’t incorporated the newly usurped land.

A feature of the “Israel proper” concept is that Israel desires to have buffer zones or no-man’s land between its “recognised” borders and its neighbours. But the buffer zones have to be on Lebanese or Syrian soil; the buffer is never on the Israeli side. The Israeli military has created a no-man’s land on the border with Gaza, but all the bulldozed land and acreage sprayed with herbicide is on the Palestinian side of the military-imposed border. And if the UN feels that it needs to conduct some face-saving military patrols, then the UN can defend Israel by sitting in the Lebanese “buffer zone”; UNIFIL shouldn’t even dream of sitting right on the border or having its soldiers cross into Israel for some R&R.

Never again?

All western societies have been indoctrinated with holocaust mythology; one constant refrain has been “never again”. Fair enough. But if any lessons were learnt then this slogan should apply to all; it should read Never again for Everybody. The Gazan population certainly should not be the victim of genocide today – yet there is no doubt that that is exactly what is going on. A brief perusal of the so-called “holocaust studies centres” around the world reveal that they have been silent during this period – they are immersed in studying the 1940s; there seem to be no lessons for the current situation. One such centre features a large “Find memory; Find humanity” slogan on its website, yet (July 2025) has absolutely nothing to say about the genocide in Gaza. It is all about selective memory and humanity.

Pogroms were violent attacks against a religious or ethnic group in the Russian Empire and usually depicted as criminal in nature. Yet today young armed Israeli Jews regularly invade Palestinian villages and towns and brutalise or murder the native population. If violence was deemed intolerable in the past, then why the silence about the ongoing pogroms in the West Bank today?

Careful what you wish for

Several so-called influencers, the contemptible creatures appearing on TikTok/Instagram, etc., called for genocide in Gaza. One of the influencers went so far as to state that if there were a button to get rid of all the Palestinians, he would press the button.¹⁶The calls for genocide are also commonly found at the podium of the Knesset. The wife of an Israeli soldier, hysterically shouted from podium not to let the sacrifice of her husband’s effort (having to work overtime) be wasted, and thus “don’t stop before…” the Israeli army exterminates all Palestinians.¹⁷

Israeli society is rather warped, and it is constantly polled about all sorts of unusual issues. One of the recent questions was “are Palestinian children in Gaza innocent?” 75% of the respondents said “no.” In one motivational speech given to the soldiers about to invade Gaza, a high ranking officer also stated “the children are not innocent” – this follows Deuteronomy’s edict to kill the women and the children.

After the first hearing about Gaza was held at the ICJ (26 January 2024) at a demonstration in London, dozens of counter-demonstrators wearing Israeli flag capes were chanting “no ceasefire.” By this time several hospitals and universities had already been destroyed. Is this what the counter-demonstrators wished to continue?

Maybe a thought experiment will demonstrate the extreme hypocrisy of these influencers and counter-demonstrators. Imagine that a Palestinian influencer were to ask for a button get rid of all Israeli Jews, or that a Palestinian politician were to utter a similar statement. What do you think the reaction would be? The ultimate hypocrisy is for Jews who bow to the mere mention of the holocaust to call for genocide against Palestinians.

While the London police did nothing to suppress the counter-demonstrators yelling support for the genocide, they do actively suppress pro-Palestinian statements against the genocide! In a recent video, the police in Scotland are even tearing down Palestinian flags.¹⁸ And in the US, Trump is actually suppressing all protests and commentary against Israeli brutality by labelling it as antisemitism.

My holy vs. your holy

About one thousand mosques and several churches have been obliterated since 2023.¹⁹ Some of the mosques/churches were centuries old and could be deemed cultural heritage sites – of course, they didn’t receive a UNESCO label because Israel blocked such designations.²⁰ The media tends to ignore the destruction of mosques or refers to Israeli justifications for their destruction. The few christian churches bombed in Gaza did elicit mention, and after the bombing of a Catholic church even Pope Leo XIV stated that “he was deeply saddened…” by the loss of life.²¹ What makes the Pope’s comment memorable is the fact that he didn’t mention that it was Israel that bombed the church. Anonymous bombs just seem to fall out of the sky.

While the intentional destruction of Palestinian holy sites or mosques doesn’t seem to merit any mention, when a synagogue is damaged this elicits a major outcry. But to highlight the double standard, the establishment of a synagogue, or purportedly finding a reference to a Tomb or mere place of sojourn by a well known rabbi, then Israeli Jews consider this to be a claim to the land. Thus an enterprising religious scholar found a reference to a Tomb of Rabbi Ashi in Lebanon, then this became a land claim.²² Israelis grab any justification to steal yet more land however flimsy the claim to the land may be.

Mind their comfort please

The many wars that Israel has waged recently have outraged many around the world giving rise to demonstrations and the like. Yet, the frequent media concern is with the “comfort ” of Jews witnessing the demonstrations! Although Israel is conducting a genocide, Jews should feel comfortable and not reminded of sordid events. Even a bake sale meant to raise funds for Gaza was deemed to interfere with Jewish comfort.²³ Did white South Africans living in Europe object to anti-apartheid demonstrations on the basis that it made them feel uncomfortable? Fat chance! However, in the current context several governments have appointed “anti-semitism ambassadors ” who will work to ban demonstrations or manifestations of support for the Palestinians. Maybe a case can be made that supporters of the Israeli genocide in Gaza or the unprovoked attack against Iran should be made to feel uncomfortable.

Western values and Israel

Much is made of “western values” purportedly freedom of speech, association, respect for the rule of law, and respecting immigrants. These values are what makes Europe a “garden” and everywhere else a “jungle.”²⁴ These values have also been used to justify the continued EU assistance to Ukraine, and thus war. Russia has invariably been castigated for not observing “western norms.” But, when it comes to genocidal Israel and its violent tendencies, the same insufferable politicians are silent or connive to send weapons and assistance to Israel.

Europe is meant to absorb huge migrant flows, yet Israel imposes a discriminatory migrant policy – only Jews need to apply. Israel’s incessant wars are creating migrant flows that inevitably end in Europe, and no European official seems willing to point this out. What we witness instead is that European officials travel to Egypt to offer enticements for Egypt to absorb Palestinian refugees; a few years ago the same gang offered several billion Euros to Erdogan to reduce the Syrian and Iraqi migrant flows.

Myopic history

Reading the mainstream media one would get the impression that Palestinian history started on 7 October 2023. Everything before that doesn’t seem to merit mentioning. All the “mowing the lawn” military operations aren’t a thing of the past, they are in a memory hole. The Goldstone report documenting the mass crimes committed in 2009 is also in the memory hole. Of course, it is too much to expect the mainstream media to even mention relevant history that goes back a few more years. The media don’t report on the caged nature of Gaza, surrounded by razor wire and watchtowers. And as Dov Weissglas, the advisor to Ariel Sharon, stated the residents of Gaza would be kept “on a diet” – that is, Israeli bureaucrats would calculate the minimum caloric intake needed to survive, and they would allow just this amount of aid to trickle into Gaza.

Watch our words!

While it is important to use accurate words to describe Israeli state policy, it is also important for pro-Palestinian activists to change the words they use to refer to the current reality. One finds that the word “occupation” is used often to describe the Israeli military, and even to the extent that it is used as a synonym. Similarly, the “apartheid” descriptor is used without much reflection, e.g., apartheid wall, apartheid roads, etc. Both occupation and apartheid indicate a co-existence with the native population. Apartheid meant coexisting economically, but living separately – there was an interaction between blacks and whites. The word occupation suggests that it is temporary, and that interaction is possible. But the genocide in Gaza indicates that Israel prefers erasing the Palestinians, and that way ending the occupation. The three strategists drawing up the path of the wall built in the West Bank were explicit about the temporary nature of the structure. It would remain in place to control the Palestinian population, but they foresaw that the wall will be removed once the Palestinian population has been expelled.

There is another problem with the word “apartheid.” While much effort was placed to declare that Israel was guilty of the “crime of apartheid,” it only referred to the “occupied territories.” The third class status of Palestinians living in Israel was unmentionable to those drawing up the legal case. Apartheid was deemed a crime on one side of the line, but just fine on the other side (in “Israel proper”).

Worse than 1960s apartheid in South Africa

The so-called West slowly adopted some sanctions and divestment of South Africa beginning in the 1970s; the public had engaged in some form of boycott of South African products before that. Ronnie Kasrils, the great anti-apartheid fighter and member of the African National Congress, stated that the situation now for the Palestinians is worse than that experienced by the black population at the height of the oppressive apartheid years. While Western countries grudgingly sanctioned and divested from South Africa, one wonders when will there be some official opposition to Israel’s genocidal actions.

Tough times for the propagandists

The Israelis and their supporters spent much effort painting Israel as a valiant little country trying to become a success story surrounded by hostile neighbours. Israelis were portrayed as pioneers thriving despite the odds. The propagandists working for Israel had appropriated victimhood, and justified Israel’s actions as “self defence.” Alas, all this mythology has been ruined because Israeli officialdom chose to wage wars, expel the native population, commit genocide in Gaza, attack Iran, attack Yemen, and steal yet more land from its neighbours. It requires more than lipstick to doll up this pig. Today Israeli propaganda relies on threats, and strong armed techniques to censor and muzzle dissent. Much of this is done by control over the media which seems to work in tandem with Israeli propagandists. Student protestors are threatened and even imprisoned; conscientious journalists are fired….

For all moral world citizens, the task is to oppose all the ghastly things Israel does every day, to reject their sorry justifications ( “self defence”); reject the portrayal of Israel’s proclaimed enemies (demonising Hamas, and the Palestinians in general); reject the portrayal of the Israeli military (why should anyone want to be an “ally” of this country?), reject Israel as a ethnocracy where rights and status are determined by whether or not one is Jewish (reject “Jewish democracy” if it excludes or discriminates against segment of the population; it is not much different from “white democracy” during South Africa’s apartheid years). In many ways, if one appeals to “western values”, the mantra often repeated by western officialdom, then one must also be willing to judge Israeli’s actions and institutions by the same standard. Just because Israel holds a gay pride parade doesn’t make them a beacon of shared values. Our opposition can start with acts as simple as challenging the manager of our local supermarket why they stock Israeli avocados and oranges; indeed, the boycott against apartheid in South Africa started by boycotting their oranges. But these are small steps when bolder action is needed – it is long overdue.

Notes:

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul de Rooij.

Under Donald Trump’s FBI Director Kash Patel, federal attention to tracking far‑right groups has reportedly waned, enabling neo-Nazi, militia and accelerationist groups to mobilize and recruit new members more openly and easily. One of the most active of these  groups is The Base, a violent paramilitary network that promotes accelerationism; a doctrine calling on followers to hasten the collapse of society through acts of terrorism.

As the Guardian recently reported, “In its early history, part of what first piqued the interest of authorities was the Base’s courting of military veterans who could help drill its foot soldiers in a series of training camps across the US. Eventually implicated in an assassination plot, mass shootings and other actions in Europe, the Base went so far as to have a fortified compound and cell in Michigan, led by a US army dropout.”

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Bill Berkowitz.

Under Donald Trump’s FBI Director Kash Patel, federal attention to tracking far‑right groups has reportedly waned, enabling neo-Nazi, militia and accelerationist groups to mobilize and recruit new members more openly and easily. One of the most active of these  groups is The Base, a violent paramilitary network that promotes accelerationism; a doctrine calling on followers to hasten the collapse of society through acts of terrorism.

As the Guardian recently reported, “In its early history, part of what first piqued the interest of authorities was the Base’s courting of military veterans who could help drill its foot soldiers in a series of training camps across the US. Eventually implicated in an assassination plot, mass shootings and other actions in Europe, the Base went so far as to have a fortified compound and cell in Michigan, led by a US army dropout.”

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Bill Berkowitz.

Land cessions. Relevant history.

Colonial period. Between 1565 (when Spain established, in Florida, the first permanent European colony in what was to become the 48 contiguous United States) and 1783 (when the United States gained its independence from Britain), Euro-American colonial settler-states forcibly displaced the indigenous nations from most of the land east of the Appalachian divide. Said displacements were often effectuated through violent military action, often in wars provoked by abusive colonial-settler impositions upon their indigenous neighbors. Most of the displaced Indigenes, who survived, were thusly forced to relocate to territory further west.

US claims. During the War for United States Independence, some of the indigenous nations (and/or their internal factions) remained neutral, while others eventually took one side or the other. Of the latter, many more sided with the British than with the United States, because Britain (wanting to avoid costly armed conflicts) had attempted to protect indigenous territory from incursions by Euro-American land speculators and frontier settlers. With the end of the War in 1783, the United States laid claim to sovereignty over all of the territory between the Appalachian divide and the Mississippi River. At first, the US claimed the right to take ownership of all of the land in this new territory based upon a purported “right of conquest”. Naturally, the indigenous nations refused to accept either the claim of US sovereignty or the purported right of Euro-Americans to take their land.

Treaty cessions. As the United States seized indigenous land in response to pressure from wealthy land speculators and racist demagogues, war was the inevitable result. The US government soon recognized that negotiations for land cessions was an easier and far less costly means for enforcing the claimed sovereignty and obtaining the coveted land. In such negotiations, all of the advantages were with the US side, which used those advantages to gradually obtain nearly all of the coveted territory thru a series of unequal treaties. The treaties were, of course, always written: by the US side, in the language of the Euro-Americans, and using interpreters chosen by the US. US government agents (who often were territorial military governors) used intimidation, coercion, deceit, bribery, and exploitation of conflicts within and between the indigenous nations. Although the indigenous nations were paid for the land, that pay was a small fraction of its actual value and commonly included promised annuities. Said annuities were often subsequently withheld in order to extort cessions of additional territory. Moreover, the US side routinely recognized an indigenous go-between, who was willing to comply with US demands, as agent (or purported “Chief”) of an indigenous nation even though said go-between often had no authority to act for that nation. Naturally, the resulting treaties were generally fraudulent.

Principal source: Robert M Owens: “Indian Land Cessions” (encyclopedia.com, © 2019).

Land speculators. Until the middle of the 19th century, for Euro-Americans with money, the most popular and usual place to invest was in land, especially land on the frontier yet to be settled by Euro-Americans. Wealthy Europeans also often invested in such American land. Naturally, wealthy land speculators cast covetous eyes upon land owned and occupied by the indigenous peoples. Said land speculators were leading instigators of Euro-American aggressions and wars against the indigenous nations, aggressions thru which such lands were acquired by the governmental authority. Of course, “valid” title to land in frontier areas could only be obtained from the colonial governments or later the federal government. Politically connected land speculators used their influence with provincial and federal office-holders to purchase, on especially favorable terms, grants of large tracts of land newly extorted from the indigenous nations. Then, after the Indigenes had been expelled, said grant holders would contract surveys and sell the land in small lots at a great markup over their privileged purchase price. A notable example is the case of western New York.

Preemption. In the 1784 Treaty of Fort Stanwix, the US acknowledged that ownership of western New York belonged to the Six Nations Confederacy. A 1786 agreement to resolve conflicting claims over this territory gave its governance to New York, but gave to Massachusetts a preemptive right to buy the land from the Haudenosaunee. In 1788, Oliver Phelps and Nathaniel Gorham purchased (from Massachusetts) that preemptive right over nearly all of New York west of Seneca Lake (6 million acres occupying 14 present-day counties). The price was $1 million, but it was to be paid in Massachusetts scrip then worth about 20 cents on the dollar. The scrip rose in value to par, and Phelps and Gorham were then unable to complete payment. When they defaulted after having made their first of three payments, purchase rights over the western 2/3 (that is the part west of the Genesee River) reverted to Massachusetts. In 1791, Robert Morris (then the richest man in the US, also a signer of the Declaration of Independence, and [like half of his fellow signers] a slave owner) purchased the rights over most of that 2/3 (for $333,333.33).

Dispossession. In 1792 and 1793, Morris contracted the sale of most (3,250,000 acres) of his subject land to the Holland Land Company (a syndicate of wealthy investors in Amsterdam, Netherlands). In order to deliver clear title, Morris had to buy the land from the Haudenosaunee, its actual owners. In 1797, their agreement to sell (for $100,000) was fraudulently extorted in the Treaty of Big Tree thru a combination of: (1) threat that the US would likely not recognize their ownership rights, and (2) bribery of their leaders and negotiators. As a concession, the Haudenosaunee were left with 200,000 acres (about 6%) for reservations. The Holland Land Company hired a survey (cost $71,000) and divided the land into lots which it then sold between 1801 and 1840.

End result. Massachusetts, which had never paid anything to the Haudenosaunee, received from 9 to 15 cents per acre (respectively from Morris and Phelps-Gorham). The surveyors were paid about 2.2 cents per acre. The actual owners, the Haudenosaunee, received about 3 cents per acre. The land in post-survey lots was then sold, initially at $2.75/acre. Thus, the land speculators (Morris and the Holland Land Company) apparently received, between them, gross profits in excess of $2.50/acre.

Principal source: Wikipedia: “Treaty of Fort Stanwix” (1784) (2025 April 06); “Treaty of Hartford” (1786) (2025 July 11); “Phelps and Gorham Purchase” (2025 July 13); “Holland Land Company” (2025 July 10); “Treaty of Big Tree” (2024 February 26).

Purchasers. Land, in the fully settled eastern part of the newly independent United States, was mostly all privately owned, and it was relatively expensive. Consequently, working tenant farmers and farm laborers generally could not afford to purchase farms there. Meanwhile, land in the western frontier areas possessed certain relative disadvantages; specifically: less of it had been cleared of woods, its roads and other transportation infrastructure were few and crude, and access to markets and established Euro-American communities was more distant and difficult. So, whenever land became available on the western frontier, it was relatively cheap. With every tract of territory ceded by the Indigenes to the US, the federal government asserted ownership of the ceded land. In the old Northwest Territory (Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin), the Indigenes received pennies per acre for their land, which the US government then surveyed and offered at auction to individual family farmers at prices of no less than $1.00 or $2.00/acre, often after having previously sold large tracts to wealthy politically-connected speculators at lower prices. The speculators, who never settled on the land, purchased it only to re-sell at a sizable mark-up to later settlers. Moreover, such speculators were a major influence on US policy to take the land from its indigenous peoples, as they (along with racist demagogues and war-profiteering military contractors) lobbied their friends in government to induce said government to seize and/or extort ever more cessions of territory from the indigenous nations. ^[3]

Principal source: Paul W Gates: “Land Speculation” (encyclopedia.com, © 2019).

Interracial relations. In order to justify the dispossession of the original owners and to obscure the fraud and theft utilized in the process, the proponents (land speculators, other advocates of US expansionism, and their apologists) routinely resorted to rationalization, misrepresentation, and bigotry.

Firstly, although there was brutality on both sides in the “Indian” wars (invariably provoked by the Euro-American side), the expansionists dehumanized the Indigenes by one-sidedly vilifying them as murdering heathen savages.

Secondly, they portrayed white settlement as bringing civilization to an untamed wilderness and falsely portrayed the indigenous peoples as incapable of making productive use of the land. In fact, the indigenous peoples throughout almost the whole of the territory between the Atlantic Ocean and the Mississippi River were farmers, who cleared tracts of the woodland in order to raise the crops which included their staple foods (maize [corn], beans, and squash) plus various other vegetables. Meat obtained in the hunt was a supplement to the staples. If the Indigenes did not clear as much of the woodland as the Euro-Americans, this was: because their lower population density and their land rotation practice made it unnecessary; and (until after European contact) because they lacked the steel saws and axes and the draft animals of the Euro-Americans, which made forest removal much easier.

Despite the disparaging propaganda against the indigenous peoples, most settlers sought to avoid conflict with the remaining local natives. Some, as attested in contemporary reports, went further and established neighborly and mutually beneficial trade relations with neighboring Indigenes. It was the avaricious profiteering men of wealth and power who created the conditions for ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies.

Principal sources:

Jack Lynch: “A Principal Source of Dishonor: Indian Policies in Early America” (C W Journal, 2009 Spring).

R Douglas Hurt: “Agriculture, American Indian” (encyclopedia.com, © 2019).

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Charles Pierce.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul Haeder.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul Haeder.

The Betrayal of Divine Intention

If Creation painted us in earth’s full spectrum, who gave us the brush to redraw it in shades of exclusion? The problem lies not in our diversity, but in how we weaponize it. Color has too often been turned into caste; belief into boundary. And when skin and scripture become gatekeepers to love, something sacred is lost.

Region, Religion, and Restricted Love

Across communities—Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, and Christian alike—interfaith relationships often face resistance. A person may be cherished, yet denied partnership simply because of religious difference. This isn’t a condemnation of any one faith—it’s a call to all of them.

Consider the story of John, a man who brought Mariama, the woman he loved, from West Africa to the United States. They envisioned a shared life. Yet Mariama’s mother traveled all the way from Guinea to forcibly separate them—because John would not convert to Islam. The heartbreak wasn’t just theirs. It was the consequence of a system where love must pass through theological gatekeeping to be deemed acceptable.

Spirituality Versus Religious Dogma

John identifies as spiritual—not religious—a seeker of truth and compassion beyond rigid doctrine. But when love must conform to dogma, we must ask: Are we preserving faith, or strangling it? Must devotion be validated by religious identity to be sanctified? Should our spiritual traditions demand uniformity at the expense of unity?

Toward a Theology of Human Dignity

Let us reimagine our religions not as gates, but as gardens. Let faith serve love—not restrain it. Let skin be sacred. Let belief be fluid. Let marriage be a union of souls, not just scriptures.

We must honor Creation not through exclusion, but through empathy.

Love should not be conditional. It should be courageous.

The Final Cry

In an increasingly divided world, this article speaks to the urgent need for interfaith compassion and the reclaiming of love from the grip of exclusion. It is a call to soften the edges of doctrine, to widen the gates of empathy, and to remember that love, in its truest form, transcends creed.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Sammy Attoh.

The Betrayal of Divine Intention

If Creation painted us in earth’s full spectrum, who gave us the brush to redraw it in shades of exclusion? The problem lies not in our diversity, but in how we weaponize it. Color has too often been turned into caste; belief into boundary. And when skin and scripture become gatekeepers to love, something sacred is lost.

Region, Religion, and Restricted Love

Across communities—Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, and Christian alike—interfaith relationships often face resistance. A person may be cherished, yet denied partnership simply because of religious difference. This isn’t a condemnation of any one faith—it’s a call to all of them.

Consider the story of John, a man who brought Mariama, the woman he loved, from West Africa to the United States. They envisioned a shared life. Yet Mariama’s mother traveled all the way from Guinea to forcibly separate them—because John would not convert to Islam. The heartbreak wasn’t just theirs. It was the consequence of a system where love must pass through theological gatekeeping to be deemed acceptable.

Spirituality Versus Religious Dogma

John identifies as spiritual—not religious—a seeker of truth and compassion beyond rigid doctrine. But when love must conform to dogma, we must ask: Are we preserving faith, or strangling it? Must devotion be validated by religious identity to be sanctified? Should our spiritual traditions demand uniformity at the expense of unity?

Toward a Theology of Human Dignity

Let us reimagine our religions not as gates, but as gardens. Let faith serve love—not restrain it. Let skin be sacred. Let belief be fluid. Let marriage be a union of souls, not just scriptures.

We must honor Creation not through exclusion, but through empathy.

Love should not be conditional. It should be courageous.

The Final Cry

In an increasingly divided world, this article speaks to the urgent need for interfaith compassion and the reclaiming of love from the grip of exclusion. It is a call to soften the edges of doctrine, to widen the gates of empathy, and to remember that love, in its truest form, transcends creed.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Sammy Attoh.

The evidence discussed in the article points to a single Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA) as the original organism from which all life existing on earth today is descended and the appearance of this ancestor roughly 4.2 billion years ago. That ancestor appears to have been what is called a “prokaryote-grade anaerobic acetogen,” in other words, a very simple single-celled organism, neither male nor female and not requiring oxygen to survive. It procreates simply by creating copies of itself. Such cells continue to exist today, and our bodies contain large numbers of them.

As astonishing and significant as this statement is, it is important to recognize what it does not say. First, it does not say that other life forms did not precede LUCA. In fact, these even more primitive life forms (or pre-life chemistry) are presumed to have existed and evolved into LUCA, but we have no traces of them.

Second, LUCA is not presumed to have been the only existing life form at the time, but rather the only one that survived and evolved into all earthly life forms that exist today. To put this into perspective, let’s remember that our entire pre-human population of 900,000 years ago fell to only 1280 individuals, and remained that size until 117,000 years later, before starting to increase again. Furthermore, the entire human race today can trace its ancestry to a single woman, who existed around 200,000 years ago. Every human being alive today shares her DNA.

Both of these examples illustrate the fact that not all of the branches of a family tree ultimately bear fruit, so that even if the family is large, many individual members will themselves have no descendants. The continuation of my line, for example, depends entirely upon my two grandsons, who may or may not have children. That’s not unusual. Every family can ultimately trace its line to a single ancestor. In the case of LUCA, therefore, the common ancestor of all life on Earth is simply the one that survived. Others surely existed, but left no offspring that exist today.

The evolution of LUCA and the laws of evolution

Obviously, LUCA did not remain unchanged. It evolved into many other species and forms of life, through the processes first described by Charles Darwin. In fact, as the Nature article sets forth, it evolved into all other forms of life living today on Earth. How did it do that? Simply by following the laws of evolution. These laws have been described by many naturalists and biologists. The most famous of these laws with respect to evolution, is the law of natural selection, first articulated by Charles Darwin in his book, The Origin of Species. With some editing on my part to allow for the more recent discovery of DNA and its role in what Darwin called heredity, it can be stated as follows:

Evolutionary Law #1: Natural selection is the process by which an individual member of a species passes along traits encoded in its DNA to its offspring. To the extent that these traits contribute to the survival of the offspring, they propagate themselves (and therefore the species).

Natural selection operates over generations to select for the traits that help a species to survive, and to select out the traits that do not. This is often called “survival of the fittest,” with “fittest” being a relative term, depending on changes in the environment in which the species lives. In some cases, the entire species dies out, which we call extinction, when, for example a change in habitat is too great or too abrupt for natural selection to save the species. Some examples of extinct species are the trilobite, the Irish elk, and the Hawaii Chaff Flower. In other cases, one species can evolve into more than one, when populations of a species are isolated from each other for a long time in habitats that alter them in different ways. A common example is the donkey or burro and the horse.

The factors at play in evolution and extinction are many. Some examples are:

• climate change
• cataclysmic events
• loss of habitat
• invasive competing species
• loss of food source
• physical isolation of a species, or a population with the species

By the same token, some of the traits by which species propagate themselves in order to adapt to these changes are:

• strength
• speed
• rapid maturation
• defensive mechanisms
• access to prey or nourishment
• aerial flight
• prolific distribution of seed or offspring
• ability to store nutrients
• access to sexual propagation
• ability to survive hardship and deprivation

All of these are fairly obvious, but it is their common thread that can be consequential in ways that are well-known but not yet fully explored. That common thread is competition. All organisms compete with each other – both within and between species – for resources and sustenance, including food, shelter, mates/procreation, protection, etc. This is true for fungi and single-celled organisms as much as for higher species. It is a well-known, universally accepted statement (or law, if you prefer). It permeates the behavior of all life forms, including (obviously) the human species. It can also be stated as a second Law of Evolution:

Evolutionary Law #2: All living things compete for their existence with all other living things.

The role of cooperation

But does natural selection operate by competition alone? What about cooperation, such as symbiosis and other mutually beneficial relationships between organisms of both the same and different species?

There’s no doubt that cooperation is a factor, but what is its role? We can begin this line of inquiry by examining what eventually happened with LUCA. For well over a billion years, LUCA and its descendants remained prokaryotes. Evolution was not static during this time, but it was exceedingly slow, and dependent to a vastly greater extent upon chance mutations and interactions other than mating, which did not yet exist.

Nevertheless, prokaryotes eventually graduated to eukaryotes – single cells with a nucleus housing the DNA – sometime between 2.7 and 1.8 billion years ago. This means that for a minimum of 1.5 billion years, LUCA did not to evolve beyond simple anaerobic single-celled organisms with no nucleus. This is not to say that prokaryotes did not evolve at all during that time, only that before the appearance of eukaryotes, the potential of natural selection was not apparent. This all changed with eukaryotes – a fundamentally new form of life, containing a nucleus housing the DNA.

Eukaryotes were capable of combining with each other to form offspring that were a combination of two parent cells, and not merely copies of a single parent. As a result, the offspring would have combinations of the DNA from the two parents, and thus be different from either of them. This drove faster evolution, and eventually developed into male and female types, as well as a categorical distinction between plants, animals and fungi, starting as early as 1.5 billion years ago, with plants consuming carbon dioxide and expelling oxygen, and animals and fungi consuming oxygen and expelling carbon dioxide. Even more significant, eukaryote cells began to cluster in ways where some could specialize in certain functions – such as digestion and protection – that served other members of the cluster, and vice versa. These colonies of cells with specialized functions exist today in organisms like the Portuguese man o’war, and bear some resemblance to colonies of insects like ants, termites or bees. In any case, these clusters of eukaryotes can be considered early examples of cooperation, and these first cooperative groups of eukaryotes eventually evolved into the first multi-celled organisms, both plants and animals.

Competition vs. cooperation

There is no question that both competition and cooperation are inherent in all life forms on Earth, and that the origin of cooperation may be said to begin with the transition from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, some 2 billion years ago. It is no wonder that they are both part of our DNA, so to speak.

But I would argue that competition is in fact the only driving force in evolution. Why? Let me begin with a reductionist argument. Let us suppose that an organism exists that does not compete for its existence against organisms that do compete? With no motivation to defend itself against other organisms, how fast would it simply cease to exist?

But if that is self-evident, how can cooperation exist at all? The answer is that cooperation confers an advantage to the organisms that engage in it. It was true for the early eukaryotes, and it is true for social alliances today, from wolf packs to human nations and bee hives.

But what is the nature of the advantage that cooperation confers upon the organisms that engage in it? The simple answer is that it enhances the ability to compete. In French they say, “l’union fait la force.” Unity makes strength. Strength for what purpose? To compete.

Ungulates form herds. Why? For protection. Nations form alliances for the same reasons. Criminals form gangs. Wolves form packs. Fish form schools. Bees form hives. Eukaryotes form colonies and eventually multi-celled organisms. But the purpose is always the same: to compete more effectively, to survive and to pass one’s genes to one’s offspring. Cooperation is a means of competition, not an alternative to it, as far as natural selection is concerned. Life does not compete in order to cooperate; it cooperates in order to compete. This may be stated as:

Evolutionary Law #3: All living things cooperate in varying degrees with each other for mutual advantage over other living things.

Obviously, none of this is directly relevant to questions of morality, ethics, justice or religion. Right and wrong, as well as good and bad, are questions which must be answered in a different type of discussion. The analysis that is presented here is devoted to what is or is not, with respect to evolution and where it is leading the human species, life on Earth, and potentially life throughout the universe. I am not addressing the question of what should or should not be. But it always helps to start with what we know, in order to look at the effects and consequences.

The emergence of technological species

We come now to the question of the human species and its evolution. We know that evolution has led life in many different directions during its long history on Earth. It began in the sea, migrated onto land, and eventually into the air, as well. It has developed life forms that generate poison and perfume, change color at will, grow horns, fangs and armor and many other means and strategies for defending themselves, gaining advantage over other organisms, and propagating themselves. Evolution can be a very powerful process.

We are, nevertheless, at a particularly momentous juncture in the history of evolution. I refer not so much to the development of the human species per se as to the development of technology in the hands of the human species. Humans are of course the primary and almost exclusive agent of technology on Earth, and they are exceptional in its natural history. We tend to think of intelligence as the primary reason for the ascendance of the human species. But we know that other species possess intelligence as well, including cetaceans, corvids, elephants and cephalopods. And we can’t be sure about the power of their intelligence, their linguistic abilities, and their abilities to function in organized groups. Their intelligence and communication skills, as well as their social organization and life cycles may be so different that it can be hard to gauge their capabilities.

But the octopus is the only other intelligent organism that possesses anything like our hands, and cephalopods are handicapped by a very short lifetime and a lack of social structure. Our ability to fashion, with our hands, new and artificial objects and machines and to harness energy, i.e. technology, is unique. We are clearly the first technological species on this planet. This is why I prefer to emphasize the contribution of technology, rather than brain development or intelligence per se toward the age in which we find ourselves. Let us remember that our brains are essentially the same as they were tens of thousands of years ago. The last major change was the development of human language, which required some rewiring of the brain, but not a lot, because it had already proceeded in that direction, as it has in other species. Current estimates are that the capacity for modern language in Homo sapiens evolved prior to 135,000 years ago, but actual modern language may not be much older than 100,000 years. On the other hand, tool making is millions of years old. Neither tool making nor intelligence nor language nor even hands are unique to the human species, but the convergence of them is. And clearly, these capabilities have fed off each other in a systematic way, even if none of them has resulted in major physical changes in our species.

Some of this can be inferred from the growth and spread of human population, especially during the last 60,000 years or so. Equally astonishing has been the parallel and roughly simultaneous development of agriculture, urban architecture, and written languages, even in the Americas, which could not have known what was happening on the other side of the world. The reasons for this are not likely to be organic changes, since we are essentially the same organism everywhere on Earth. The process and the convergence appear to be largely self-driving, once all the elements are in place, perhaps when human settlements reach a critical size that creates a level of interaction that is in some ways exponential. No other species achieved these breakthroughs.

The process has now brought about the Age of Technology, which is accelerating at breakneck speed, challenging our efforts to keep up with and adapt to it, and potentially relegating our participation to that of mere cogs in a system controlled by algorithms, technical managers and organizations like Cambridge Analytica, who discovered that humans could be controlled to a significant degree through their electronic devices. The onset of the age may have begun with the first stone tool kits of hominids, millions of years ago, but today it has progressed to where technology increasingly drives itself, with humans as the pollinators of developments such as AI, artificial life forms and exploration of both the farthest and innermost reaches of the universe. We are often unprepared for the consequences. Most of us try to keep up, but it requires increasing vigilance to stay ahead of the forces arrayed to manipulate us and turn us into mere fuel for the vast machinery that is technology today. Think about your interaction with your smartphone. Who is controlling whom?

Perhaps most of this is the inevitable result of the convergence of forces that formed our species and its societal dynamics. Nevertheless, it is in our interest to try to understand what is happening to our species and our planet – and beyond – to the best of our abilities. This is a unique time in the history of life on earth, and it is due to the evolution of our species and its capabilities. Intelligent species existed in the distant past, especially among dinosaurs, but while we have found their remains, we have never found any signs of civilizations or technologies produced by them. And we surely would have, if they existed. Apparently, the convergence of developments that resulted in a species capable of creating a technological society has never existed on Earth until now.

Similarly, we have no confirmed signs of technology from other worlds, either on our planet or on the others that we have investigated thus far. At most, we have speculation about unexplained phenomena that remain unexplained, which has been true since the beginning of time. But we have no objects on Earth that could not have been produced on Earth, whereas we have transported earth-made artifacts to several other bodies in our solar system, which could not have been produced on those bodies. Where is the space junk from extraterrestrial civilizations?

A similar question was famously asked by nuclear physicist Enrico Fermi in 1950 at a gathering of his fellow scientists. After some debate about life on other planets, they concluded that it must exist, because there is nothing particularly unique about Earth. Planets with life may be rare, but there are so many planets in the universe that ours cannot be the only one to produce life. Even one in a million allows for a vast number. Furthermore, even though it took Earth more than 4 billion years to create its first technological species capable of interplanetary – and potentially interstellar – travel, there is no reason to think that we are necessarily the first in the entire universe, much less the only one. In fact, the odds are hugely against this being the case. This is the point at which Fermi asked his famous question, known as the Fermi Paradox, “Then where are they?”

This is more than an idle question. It is a troubling mystery and refers to an uncomfortable fact that deserves an answer. Why is there no evidence of any contact with extraterrestrial civilizations? Why would such civilizations not have left their traces during the billions of years of our planet’s existence? If we can find one-celled organisms from the earliest times, how much easier is it to find alien space junk? Even if aliens found our planet not worth very much of their time, how much more interesting are the moon and Mars, where we left our space junk? It is simply inconceivable that Earth would not have been visited, nor that we are the very first technological species to exist in all the universe.

The answer to Fermi’s question may help give us an idea about where we are headed as a technological species, and I believe it is possible to at least partially provide such an answer using the facts and analysis already discussed thus far. I apologize in advance if the answer is not to your liking; it is not to mine, either.

The evolutionary ceiling

What worries me is that there may be a law of evolution that has the effect of blocking technological species from developing beyond a certain point – that a technological species hits a ceiling above which it cannot rise, and that this law is the same everywhere in the universe, because the laws of evolution operate the same throughout the universe, as do the laws of physics. If we could pass that point, we would make contact with other technological species from other planets. But the available evidence points to the conclusion that no species anywhere in the universe develops beyond that point. Why?

Does it have anything to do with competition being the prime mechanism behind natural selection and cooperation secondary? I don’t know, but the idea that human nature is fundamentally different from the nature of all other life seems flawed and unrealistic to me. We’re not that different. The laws of the universe are universal.

Hollywood is full of films, like Dr. Strangelove and Don’t Look Up, about apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic visions of the world. We all agree that they have a plausible basis, because we know the power of existing weaponry and the potential to use it, as well as the weakness of human will. Our species is entirely capable of wreaking terrible destruction on our planet, and destroying many of its species, including our own. In fact, a significant number of species already trace their extinction to human activity. Did technological species on other planets and star systems meet the same fate? Is there a law of nature and evolution that dictates that when a technological species reaches a certain point of development, it destroys itself or sets itself so far back in development that it requires a long, arduous crawl to recover, at which time it once again hits its evolutionary ceiling? Perhaps we should take Hollywood more seriously.

We certainly have the means to accomplish such an apocalyptic outcome: nuclear war, climate change, biological warfare (such as experimental disease strains), chemical warfare, even artificial intelligence. If extraterrestrial civilizations have the same experience, this would certainly explain the absence of contact from or with them. But is it a law of evolution?

I believe that a strong case can be made that it is, that it is built into the nature of life and the primary mechanism of natural selection, as a corollary to Evolutionary Law #2, that all living things compete for their existence with all other living things. I therefore propose Evolutionary Law #4 as follows:

Evolutionary Law #4: When a technological species achieves the capability of self-destruction, its primary competitive drive sooner or later causes the exercise of this capability.

Is an evolutionary ceiling hanging over our heads like a sword of Damocles? Do natural laws of evolution dictate that sooner or later we will bring catastrophe upon ourselves? If so, how close are we to that point? In the last 2 million years, have we ever invented a weapon that we have not used? The answer is no, we haven’t.

The spectacular and unprecedented changes through which we are now living appear to be accelerating geometrically and perhaps exponentially. Compared to the period of the existence of life on Earth, the Age of Technology is no more than a split second, but its acceleration seems without constraint. My analysis is a modest attempt to suggest that there may in fact be a limit – an unplanned direction in which we may be headed, and which may be directed by universal laws that we as yet understand poorly.

Let me ask six questions for which I do not have answers but which may illustrate the problem.

1. How likely is it that we will stop inventing new means of destroying ourselves, either in part or in whole, whether deliberately or not?
2. How likely is it that all the nations of the world will agree to destroy all technology that endangers our entire species?
3. How likely is it that we will live with the tools of our own destruction for the indefinite future without using them, either by accident or on purpose?
4. If we agree to measures that will make us safe, how long will all the nations of the world abide by them, with no “Samson option” that destroys everyone?
5. If we achieve the previous objectives, how likely is it that we will manage to keep the means of destruction out of the hands of actors that are not party to the agreements?
6. If we manage to adhere to all of these control measures for ten years, how much longer will we be able to do so? Another 10 years? Another 50 years? Another 100 years? Another 1000? 10,000? 100,000? Will we really keep all of these weapons under control indefinitely?

We have no previous experience with this point in our evolutionary history. Nothing to compare it to. If or when we hit the Evolutionary Ceiling, what will it look like? Will we destroy all life on Earth? Will we destroy all human life plus some other species? Will we destroy ourselves only to the point of leaving behind enough population remnants to rebuild slowly, in the absence of the technological tools to which we will have become accustomed? If we succeed in rebuilding, will we find ourselves hitting the same Evolutionary Ceiling as before? In that case, will the result be as bad or better or worse than the first time, or is it totally unpredictable?

As I said, we have nothing to guide us. For us this is the first time in our planet’s history (and possibly the last) to face this situation. We also have no guidance from the rest of our galaxy or universe, at least not yet.

I don’t know about you, but I would find it very comforting to receive visitors from other planets telling and showing us that there is another option and explanation for Fermi’s Paradox.

• Image credit: NASA.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul Larudee.

It was an honor to have her on my show, which airs July 30, 6 pm PST at KYAQ.org. Finding Fringe. DV gets the show early! Listen here.

And, remember, Gaza now, but China in 2027, we will see blood. These fucking war lords and tech LGBTQ+ and straight/cis fucking devils want war with China.

TWENTY TWENTY SEVEN — the year of the GOAT: The US is conducting intensive military exercises around the Pacific on a scale, intensity and tempo, not seen since the Cold War. In the meantime, frontline US and NATO troops are actively deploying and rehearsing war. Some top-level US officials have calendared 2027 as the date for war to start. Is the die already cast for war with China?

Here, Abby Martin signed on to this petition, as I did, and this was 10 months (Jan 2023) before the most current Jewish State of Murdering Maiming Starving Polluting Poisoning Thieving Occupied Palestine GENOCIDE:

Open Letter to US Congressional Representatives marking our opposition to the US Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) January 25, 2022

WASHINGTON, DC: The undersigned chapters and members of the Democratic Socialists of America and other allied organizations and individuals strongly condemn Congress’s use of industrial policy and other elements of the proposed US Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) to counter China as part of a new Cold War fueled by US imperialist interests, which further destabilizes geopolitical relations and jeopardizes efforts toward greater global cooperation on issues affecting everyone worldwide.

We call on members of Congress to oppose this aggressive escalation and push back on the narratives that have fueled rising anti-Chinese sentiment in the US, marked by increased anti-Asian racism and violence. We oppose the USICA and other legislation that calls for increased military budgets, further militarization of the Asia Pacific region, and fosters anti-Chinese propaganda efforts, all based on nothing more than perceived threats to US geopolitical interests. Elected members of the US Congress have the duty to prioritize the needs and concerns of their working-class constituents instead of those of arms manufacturers and defense contractors who have fueled decades of endless war at the expense of genuine global cooperation and common prosperity for working-class people everywhere.

We believe that US industrial policy should not be built upon imperialist ambitions that serve only to drag the world into a new Cold War. We believe that working people in the US and elsewhere deserve policies that invest in public works programs, climate resilience, infrastructure, healthcare, and more. The US Innovation and Competition Act is not created for those purposes; instead, it is overwhelmingly focused on preserving US global hegemony by fabricating narratives aimed at painting China as a threat and riling up global conflict in an effort to undermine an increasingly multipolar world. If enacted, the bill would ramp up interference in the sovereignty of nations throughout the world, establish an anti-Chinese federal bureaucracy, intensify the militarization of US global policies, and continue the legacy of US industrial policy being weaponized against socialist movements globally. This legislation will promote confrontation and conflict with China, escalate the potential for military conflict between nuclear powers, and hinder global cooperation needed to address critical issues like climate change.

For these reasons, we strongly condemn the USICA and urge members of Congress to oppose the bill and call for an end to US policies that threaten hundreds of millions of people in the Asia Pacific region and could spiral into worldwide conflict.

Abby Martin and I talked about the fact that this empire of chaos, terror, amnesia and in my words, empire of agnotology, is on crack and Ritalin. In a 24-hour news cycle, there are literally hundreds of stories on the WWW that would be of interest to journalists and educators like myself and hard-working media mavens like Abby.

[Fifty Fucking Years Ago, published.]

One My Lai Massacre (500 killed, dozens wounded, raped, maimed) every week in Gaza. Where is the outrage? Real time genocide, as they say, Cell Phone/Telegram/TikTok produced fucking genocide:

Stop calling this “Netanyahu’s war” when the overwhelming majority of Jewish Israelis support the genocide. This is a fully radicalized society—that’s why Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions are necessary. on X, Abby Martin

Michael Fakhri, UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, has been warning of this — and argues there is an obligation to act:

“We knew that Israel had intended to starve the Palestinians in Gaza since October 9, 2023 when Israel announced explicitly its plan to starve the Palestinians in Gaza. For 20 months, the governments of the world were on notice and had many opportunities to stop what’s happening. There are arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court for the war crime of starvation against Netanyahu and former Minister of Defense Gallant. In fact, the International Court of Justice itself in January, recognized there is famine and starvation in Gaza. That creates a mandatory obligation. Countries MUST act to stop starvation. So it creates a legal obligation for every country in the world to step in and end this starvation and famine in Gaza today. So what must happen now? Governments can [should] act through the General Assembly because the United States keeps exercising its veto at the Security Council. When that happens, the General Assembly has the authority to call upon peacekeepers to accompany humanitarian convoys into Gaza to protect the convoys and bring aid.”

This below was Goddamn Five Months Ago:

Abby was just in Bogota, for that fiasco: The Hague Group. Listen to her go off on those countries that didn’t even sign on, that is, in the interview above.

She said that of all the folks she’s interviewed for her various platforms, but mostly Empire Files, the grassroots activists and organizers and on the ground folk she most closely aligns to. Or empathizes with, and/or valorizes with a small “v”. But Corbyn is her hero.

Bring in the fucking navies, man, all those logistics personnel to get the food, meds, doctors/nurses, clean water, psychologists, media, tents and prefab homes to these people NOW!

A CALL TO CONSCIENCE: AN APPEAL TO THE LEADERS OF THE WORLD

The tragedy unfolding in Gaza is a test of our shared humanity. Entire families are being murdered. Children — even babies — have been killed. Others are wasting away from hunger. This appalling disregard for human life and dignity must end, for it is a violation of the most basic moral code.

Malaysia calls on all world leaders to act with urgency. Every government that believes in international law, every nation that claims to value human life, must speak with one voice.

In this regard, I urge all those with influence over Israel to find the courage to act decisively. I especially appeal to US President Donald Trump to use that influence to press for an immediate end to the killing, stop the indiscriminate bombings, and ensure that humanitarian aid reaches those in need without obstruction.

This is the hour for moral leadership. This is the time to uphold the values we claim to defend.

Malaysia stands ready to work with all nations—North and South, East and West—to bring relief to Gaza, and to restore the basic principles of humanity. Let us not be remembered as those who stood by. Let us be guided by our conscience, to answer suffering with compassion, and to pursue peace for the sake of our humanity.

ANWAR IBRAHIM

I’ve followed Project Censored for a time, having my various college students tap into that, those 25 most under-reported and de-platformed or just not covered stories annual recognition (in the mainstream press, that is).

She appeared in this flick:

I gave her the honorific that she, like so many others, not only know what that leash is, but she and others just yank out the bloody peg holding truth back.

“The U.S. military is the largest institutional polluter in the world. There is no corporation or industry that compares to the damage and devastation done by the U.S. war machine,” Martin told Watchdog host Lowkey.

She’s got skin-kin-amigos-colleagues in the game — she did that documentary years ago, 2019. Gaza Fights For Freedom

Yes indeed, her work with Telesur is what got Empire Files up and running, and the sanctions against Venezuela, that forced EF to go to a subscription basis.

Abby Goes to Palestine

Sources and Links

Videos

• The Empire Files, run by Abby Martin and Mike Prysner
• The Empire Files on YouTube.
• Israelis Speak Candidly to Abby Martin About Palestinians

Podcasts

• Media Roots Radio, hosted by Abby Martin and Robbie Martin
• Abby Goes to Palestine
• “Great March of Return” Massacre, Killing Gaza: Interview w/ Max Blumenthal & Dan Cohen:

Support Abby’s Work

• Media Roots Patreon Page

We did not get into the new documentary on the military industrial complex under the umbrella of US’s Military:

She’s making the rounds now as the film is about to be final edited, cut, sound-enhanced and soon to be released:

There’s emphasis on the carbon and polluting and poisoning footprint of the military, for sure. I want to get into other issues tied to the +Military Legal Retail Energy Oil Chemical Mining Education Surveillance Prison Policing Finance Banking Real Estate Entertainment PR Congressional Transportation Ag Pharma Medical COMPLEX.

All the harms done not just through direct kinetic forces shooting and sniping, but the overall psychological harm, that collective consciousness of trauma, that epigenetic force of a military and the uniforms and badges and pips and medals and camo and flyovers and complete saturation of military mindset as well as the first hand, second hand and third hand damage wars do to entire generations and beyond.

Forget about just the toxins and the depleted uranium and land mines. It’s the terror of those drones, or the threat of war, or the respective countries in USA’s and 14 Eyes’ gun sights having to spend time and resources and valuable human lifetimes to fend off the enemy, or the threat of war, or coup or sanctions.

We need a Military Madness Offensive Weapons footprint calculator like we do for water (water footprint) or ecology (ecological footprint). Even those two standard bearers of sustainability education do not put in the PSYCHOLOGICAL and SOCIOLOGICAL harms done to places without water or those places with degraded and deadly water caused by industrial and post-industrial (data centers, AI, etc) for- profit endeavors.

Do this for each part and paint smear on a B-2 bomber. Life Cycle Analysis/ Assessment of a coffee maker? Or the coffee that gets put into that Kureig? Oh, that is a fun experiment — where the coffee is grown, how, by whom, in which system of exploitation, which systems, who owns the finca, who works the finca, which Western company owns the brand, and then where the coffee fruit goes, or gets dried and then roasted, and then the criss-cross of all this raw product throughout the global chain, and then, packaging, transporation, marketing, middle men, and alas, in that Trader Joe’s as Trader Joe’s brand organice (is that beyond organic, or shade tree or frair trade or co-op locally owned coffee?)

Check out this WordPress piece:

Life Cycle Assessment of Coffee Production Ben Salinas December 18, 2008

So, let’s do the same thing for just ONE US Mercenary product, hell, just a bloody set of boots, which ones, Timberline?

[Belleville Boot Company and Rocky Boots were recently selected to supply the U.S. Army with about 36,700 pairs of newly-designed Jungle Combat Boots.]

This system of destruction — the greatest polluter and enemy of the earth — relies on that complex +Military Legal Retail Energy Oil Chemical Mining Education Surveillance Prison Policing Finance Banking Real Estate Entertainment PR Congressional Transportation Ag Pharma Medical COMPLEX. And relies on the thousands of Boeing’s and GE’s and all the cool companies on planet earth who are hiring cool kiddos and youth and adults to do the bloody Faustian Bargain.

Hell, in fact, some of those major Defense/Offensive Industries have parent and partner companies, so, at GE, for example, you can work on sustainability:

About GE Vernova

GE Vernova Inc. (NYSE: GEV) is a purpose-built global energy company that includes Power, Wind, and Electrification segments and is supported by its accelerator businesses. Building on over 130 years of experience tackling the world’s challenges, GE Vernova is uniquely positioned to help lead the energy transition by continuing to electrify the world while simultaneously working to decarbonize it. GE Vernova helps customers power economies and deliver electricity that is vital to health, safety, security, and improved quality of life. GE Vernova is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S., with approximately 75,000 employees across approximately 100 countries around the world. Supported by the Company’s purpose, The Energy to Change the World, GE Vernova technology helps deliver a more affordable, reliable, sustainable, and secure energy future.

So your brother is at the other division of GE:

(GE) has a history of involvement in the military and defense industry, including the production of weapons and military equipment. While GE Aerospace focuses on engines and related systems for aircraft, they also have a history of manufacturing weapons and weapon systems. GE produced the M134 Minigun and the GAU-8 Avenger cannon, among other systems. They also supplied components and systems for various military aircraft and naval platforms. GE has also been involved in the development of jet engines for military aircraft.

We all get folded into this evil machine, this war machine, at every level, even all those community colleges with drone programs! Here, from California, where Abby and her family reside:

City College of San Francisco (Link)
Diablo Valley College (Link)
Gavilan College (Link)
Los Medanos College (Link)
Mission College (Link)
Ohlone College (Link)
Santa Rosa Junior College (Link)
Skyline College (Link)
West Valley College (Link)

Mt. San Antonio College (Link)

Santa Ana College (Link)
Coastline College (Link)
Orange Coast College (Link)
Cypress College (Link)
Fullerton College (Link)

In Israel, ‘Death to Arabs’ chants are common—but ‘Death to leftists’ is also heard. To ultranationalists, leftists are AIDS and Arabs are the common cold. You have to purge those tying your hands before carrying out the final solution — Abby Martin on X

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul Haeder.

A century ago there was no need for such a case to be made. Unions acted as the hammer of the working class, beating down the bosses and nailing down victory upon victory for workers. It is a sad day when the labor movement loses its militancy as that means that the working class has lost one of its weapons in the fight for its lot. As a class born out of contradiction and born into conflict, workers have deplorably few organizations representing their interests; unions are often the largest – spanning the most industries and amassing the highest membership. We have no other choice but unionization which means we have no other choice but to reinvigorate the militancy within the unions.

To be militant is to be open to and prepared for conflict in the aim of advancing a political goal. Our goal is to advance the cause of the working, and all other oppressed, masses. Are we so foolish as to suppress our own organs for carrying out that struggle? Unions were once home to close comrades in the struggle to noticeably improve their collective conditions, but now they are home to a class of labor lieutenants and aristocrats that, like the capitalists during the death of feudalism, have placed themselves outside and above the ranks of those they supposedly represent. By telling workers to “get organized” and join a union we may as well be selling them a shovel to dig their own grave with because that is what unionization in these dire and trying times amounts to. How far we have fallen when the organization that used to stand up to the bosses and demand more, demand something above bread crumbs, is now sitting at the table with the bosses, indeed, making backroom deals with them.

We need a return to militancy in the labor movement because that is what every landmark victory for working people was won on. Without a tough, militant labor movement there is no eight hour workday. Militancy proves to the working class that labor is innumerably more powerful than lobbying. These were movements that people could truly be proud of – that brought about meaningful change that we still feel today. Workers saw a grizzly bear that they knew would have their back, that they knew would say and do the things that they couldn’t say or to do to their greedy bosses; nowadays, workers see a lamb being led to slaughter by capitalists. According to Pew Research Center, over 40% of Americans hold that unions negatively affect the United States. This, of course, can not be chalked up to one reason definitively, but un-militant trade unions reflect a weakening in demands for labor-friendly legislation and education regarding worker organization.

How We Lost Our Way

We have abandoned workers. It is no surprise then that the workers have abandoned the organizations which have played a role in their own downturn. If we want to see a revitalized labor movement then we need to resuscitate the organization of the worker. More precisely, we must revive all that which is militant, strong, disciplined and revolutionary about the unions while firmly abandoning all that which is reactionary. Let’s be clear, the working class left unionization behind after unionization left us behind first. The reality remains that workers are sequestered from labor organizing while, in the United States at least, we are all victims of a fictitious two-party system where we are so lucky as we get to choose our oppressors. Looking at the history of the labor movement, we shouldn’t be surprised that when it comes down to bringing substantial change, the working class is on their own. It is time, no, rather it is long overdue, that we take back the organizations that make us strong in the fight for our rights. We can give unions their strength, their appeal, their working class tenacity back by reigniting the militant fire that sits at the very core of labor organizing.

Working people and their unions won massive victories for everyone by not being afraid of a fight, by not being afraid to stand up directly to employers, by not being afraid of things getting worse before they get better. How can unions be expected to stand up to employers when the union stewards are getting their pockets lined by the same folks they are supposed to be bargaining against? You cannot seriously expect workers to win against employers when the organization representing the workers takes bribes and backroom deals, yet it happens all the time. Labor racketeering may seem like a thing of the past, of the golden age of organized crime, but, sadly, this is not the case. Nowadays, threats of violence have been replaced by threats of retaliation against employees, but the effects are quite similar: the working class is screwed over, benefits are not received, and workers often end up in worse conditions than before “bargaining.” Unfortunately, our government has not noticed this problem, or more likely they have but they do not care to implement solutions.

The Path Forward

How do you get rid of bribery between employers and union officials in these organizations? There needs to be less incentive to take bribes and more incentive to report officials and incidents involving bribes. We must demand real consequences for corruption and real protections for those who expose it. On the other hand, I believe we need much greater incentive to speak up and speak out against this injustice. For that reason, I propose that whistleblowing in the labor movement be federally protected from retaliation and punishment. Workers need to know that it is not only their right but indeed their obligation to report such instances to the Labor Relations Board. But no working person, and rightfully so, is willing to put themselves in harm’s way to clean the unions; it isn’t their responsibility, they are likely to face whiplash, and they have zero incentive to do so when they feel truly powerless. A new labor movement that begins by cleaning its own ranks of those who only look out for themselves shows the working class a dedication to rebuilding a powerful, but clean and disciplined, labor movement willing to do whatever necessary for its workers, and indeed wanting all workers to take a much more active role in bargaining for better. We cannot revive militancy in the labor movement without first purging it of the corrupt elements that sap its strength and betray its mission.

At its core a union is a fighting organization. Hence, it must be willing and able to strike both figuratively and literally. Direct action such as employee walkouts, organized marches, picketing, rallies, etc. are how we project the strength and voice of workers everywhere. But militancy isn’t just about strikes and pickets, it’s about discipline, education, and mastery of the law. A sharp legal strategy can be just as powerful a weapon as a walkout. There is a severe lack of action being taken by unions because they fear a severe lack of discomfort and potential retaliation against them. Labor’s struggle is a protracted and vicious war against forces with better resources, connections, money, and influence. This is very clearly a guerilla war pitting the forces of David against a truly oppressive Goliath. Labor and law were once joined together in the fight, virtually inseparable from one another. Nowadays, labor occupies one side, the side of the working class, while law has found itself interlocking fingers with big business against workers. Unions have so much potential, but that potential cannot be fully realized, that is to say that the working class can not use its full power, unless they become experts on labor laws and rights. It’s quite like smithing a longsword but forgetting to sharpen it on the day of battle, we are blunting the revolutionary potential of working folks. A unified force of laborers and lawyers strikes fear into the hearts of exploitative capitalists. Our legal representation must be masters of their fields capable of fighting against expansive, and expensive, legal teams who do everything in their capabilities to firmly consolidate power into the hands of employers.

Unions were once the training grounds for the working class where they could become steeled in grassroots organization and labor politics. We must rebuild the labor movement around unions that are both prepared and willing to do whatever necessary to advance working causes. Unions will once again become revolutionary training grounds which take in the unorganized and give them the tools to unite as one against a more powerful enemy. Workers will rise from the unions as soldiers fighting on the side of labor. We are an unorganized, splintered, and, by all relativity, weak labor movement. We ought to study history and see that it is when militancy is introduced into the working class that we win victories once thought unimaginable. We only have to open our eyes to see that if we are not willing to be militant then our enemies certainly are. We cannot limit ourselves to a “parliamentarian” struggle against the very forces that dominate parliament and keep legislation from passing, or ever being introduced in the first place.

Let us learn from our labor forefathers that militancy is a great thing for an oppressed force to have. Change occurs when people are pushed past the limits of acceptance. Have we not been pushed past the limits of acceptance as we sit back and watch a dying labor movement that, in the United States, officially represents under 10% of workers? We run the dire risk of seeing the remnants of the labor movement, the movement that won us paid vacation, sick days, safe working conditions, an eight-hour workday, etc., reduced to ash. The solution to this might as well be slapping us in the face: get militant and get organized. Make unions a staple of the working class again. Make unionization the norm rather than a rarity. Make unions fighting organizations again. We have so much potential and untapped power, but we do the work of our opponents when we limit ourselves.

Let us become a class of fighters once more. Let us bring back the fight to employers!

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Andrew Lehrer.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

The fun began on July 17 when the country celebrates the day that the last Somoza president fled the country as well as most of the feared Somoza National Guard. It was clear that day that the Sandinista revolution had triumphed.

July 18 is filled with vigils in every neighborhood and town to welcome in July 19. At midnight beautiful fireworks displays are seen brightening the sky. I went to the vigils with family and friends first downtown to the Simon Bolivar avenue – named after the famous Venezuelan revolutionary leader whose dream was for all of Latin America to unify in order to resist colonizers like the United States and European nations. At the south end of the boulevard is a roundabout with a huge depiction of another Venezuelan revolutionary leader – Hugo Chavez – who came and spoke at a number of July 19 celebrations. I was fortunate to see him in 2004.

The atmosphere was like a huge party with dancing and singing and people just hanging out with family and friends. Then we went to another vigil nearby in the popular barrio known as San Antonio. They always go all out and this year was no exception. The Venezuelan band best known for Las Casas del Carton (the houses made out of cardboard) and No Basta Rezar (it’s not enough to pray) called the Guaraguao played at this vigil to thousands of people in this tiny neighborhood, filled up to overflowing with others like us who come to participate. Once again, at midnight there were fireworks everywhere.

July 19 begins with people all over the country carrying out “Dianas” which are car parades with FSLN (Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional) flags and signs and people chanting and singing. In every town and city there are festivities in commemoration of July 19 – the day celebrated as the culmination of the struggle against the Somoza (and US) dictatorship. The US supported 3 Somoza’s, a father and 2 sons, during 45 years of their governments’ imprisoning, torturing and killing anyone considered in opposition to their rule. My husband tells me that it was a crime to be a young man as the dictatorship assumed you were really a Sandinista.

As the 50,000 invited to the evening celebration are coming in by bus to the plaza down by lake Zolotlan, thousands of other people are lining roads – the roads that co-presidents Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo will pass to get to the Plaza del Fe. I drove down with my son and parked by a television station then walked about a half mile. We joined in the contagious anticipation. Daniel always drives himself – of course there are police cars in front and in back and police lining the road – but not getting in the way of onlookers who want to see their co-presidents. About six o’clock they slowly passed with windows down waving at everyone. I was particularly excited, like a kid on Christmas morning (even though I’m 70) and ran down about four blocks to get in front of the caravan in order to see them a second time – and I did (there is definitely a groupie atmosphere around Daniel – he started fighting for a free country at age 14, he was imprisoned and tortured for seven years and he’s won five elections, the last with more than 75% of the vote)!! Then families continue their parade and picnic-like evening accompanying the celebration and watching it on huge screens placed around the country. I was impressed that at every event I mainly saw families and friends – very few drunks!

Probably most Sandinistas spend the evening of the 19th at home with their families watching the incredible views of 50,000 mainly youth, dancing to the first 90 minutes of familiar revolutionary music. Then some of the special guests were introduced and given time to share a message. One of the things that Ana Kuznetsova the chairwoman of the Russian Duma said was “Under the leadership of our President Vladimir Putin, Russia fully supports those who defend their Freedom, their Values, their Children, their Future.” Then there was a joyful address by Ma Hui, Vice Minister of the International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. He said “I would also like to convey the sincere greetings of all the 100 million members of the Communist Party of China to our Sandinista Compañeros and to the Heroic People of Nicaragua.” “In a world full of transformations and turbulence, the risks and challenges faced by all countries on the planet are growing. We are pleased to note that under the leadership of Co-Presidents Comandante Daniel Ortega and Compañera Rosario Murillo, the Nicaraguan people, closely grouped around the Sandinista National Liberation Front, firmly defend their Sovereignty and Dignity, and persist in following the path of development adapted to the realities of their own country, constantly reaching new achievements in your socio-economic development, for which we express our congratulations.” To read all the speeches, including those of the Co-presidents.

 Daniel spoke of many of the wars waged today by the US: “And that is no more nor less a plan, by [Israel], concocted with the Yankee government and with the complicity of the European governments to disappear the Palestinian State, as they have said it very clearly and openly. They are self-confessed criminals! There they are armed, given weapons by the Europeans, by the United States, because they want to take over the whole Region, and they are doing it….”

“They are murdering every day! Even media in the United States or in Europe are now beginning to report the crimes. And what does the United Nations do? The United Nations is nothing but an instrument of the imperialist countries which want to dominate the world, even if the World itself disappears with the risk of Humanity disappearing, because they have no qualms about bombing everywhere.”

“We have already seen how they launched the armed provocation, via a plan put together by the United States and Israel to bomb Iran on the pretext that what the Iranians were working on were atomic weapons. Iran is a huge nation, it used to be the Persian Empire, it has a population of 90 million inhabitants, it has great wealth, undertakes a great deal of work, with a lot of resources. And the Iranians, complying with the United Nations standards, had presented a plan so as to work the uranium and use it in peaceful activities as they have done so for some time and that’s why they have many plants generating nuclear energy with uranium, which are energy producing plants which are cheaper and safer than the plants that are installed via traditional networks.”

As always Co-President Ortega takes the opportunity to give a history lesson since so many attendees are teenagers. This time he talked about the Spaniards, the British and the United States; especially the invasion by William Walker and his men which was supported by the US government. Walker named himself president, reinstated slavery and made English the national language. Needless to say he was expelled with help from Nicaragua’s neighbors. Walker tried again a few years later and the Hondurans put him in front of a firing squad. This reminds me of a popular song written and sung often during the years of Reagan’s war against Nicaragua called El Yanqui se Va a Joder (the Yankees are going to get their butts kicked). In spite of US sanctions on Nicaragua which cut off much needed loans, the Nicaraguans overall support their government because it is the only one that has brought progress and development to the majority of the people with free education and healthcare; with 90% food security; with the best roads and infrastructure in the region, with one of the highest percentages of renewable energy in the world and 90.6% of the population have electricity; with parks and stadiums everywhere – a real emphasis on the right to recreation and sports and so much more. This country won’t be easy to beat through coup attempts like in 2018, hundreds of millions of dollars from US institutions like USAID, the NED, Freedom House going to the opposition to try to undermine the government. The Nicaraguan example will not easily be stopped and many countries will follow in its foot prints.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Nan McCurdy.

As estimated from data published by a succession of expert epidemiologists in the leading medical journal The Lancet, 136,000 Gazans died violently by 25 April 2025 with  a “conservatively estimated” 4 times that number (544,000) dying from imposed deprivation for a shocking total of 680,000 deaths that is under-reported 10 fold by Western Mainstream media. In impoverished countries  about 70% of avoidable deaths from deprivation are those of under-5 year old infants (see Gideon Polya, “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” that includes an avoidable mortality-related history of every country). It is estimated that the 680,000 dead Gazans (28% of the pre-war Gaza population of 2.4 million) included  380,000 under-5 year old infants, 479,000 children in total, 63,000 women and 138,000 men (Gideon Polya, “Gaza Genocide By Numbers: Apply BDS Over 0.7 Million Gaza Deaths From Violence And Imposed Deprivation”, 4 July 2025 ).

Now the surviving Gazans are suffering man-made famine and mass starvation while the world looks on. This crime has been perpetrated many times in history, notably in the “forgotten” WW2 Bengali Holocaust  (WW2 Indian Holocaust, WW2 Bengal Famine; 6-7 million Indians deliberately starved to death in 1942-1945 for strategic reasons in Bengal, Bihar, Assam and Odisha by the British under fervent Zionist Winston Churchill with food-denying Australian complicity) (for details of this and some 70 other genocide and holocaust atrocities see Gideon Polya, “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History. Colonial rapacity, holocaust denial & the crisis in biological sustainability”).

The World’s major powers must (a) order Apartheid Israel to immediately leave  the Occupied Palestinian Territories (as demanded by the International  Court of Justice), (b) immediately provide life-sustaining  food and medical services to Gaza  (as demanded of any Occupier for its Occupied Subjects “to the fullest extent of the means available to it”  by Articles 55 and 56 of the  Fourth Geneva Convention), and (c) immediately impose rigorous Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Apartheid Israel and all its racist supporters, notably the US and neo-Nazi Germany, until reparations and war crimes trials are delivered.

28 countries (all European except for Japan) have  issued a statement demanding aid to Gaza, an immediate end to the killing and condemning the Zionist Israeli-imposed killing, deprivation, starving and ethnic cleansing of Gaza and Palestine. Words are cheap but something is better than nothing. Of these 28 countries (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK) only 9 actually recognize the State of Palestine (Cyprus, Iceland, Ireland, Malta, Norway, Poland, Sweden, Slovenia, and Spain). France will recognize Palestine at the September UN General Assembly.

Notably absent from this list of 28 concerned countries were the Zionist-perverted and fervently pro-Apartheid Israel US, neo-Nazi Germany and the perpetrator, nuclear terrorist and genocidally racist Apartheid Israel itself. The US has supplied most of Israel’s weaponry, supplied the bombs and bullets that have killed 28% of Gaza’s pre-war population, and vetoed any action  by the UN Security Council. Neo-Nazi Germany has supplied 30% of Israel’s weapons imports and like the US, the UK and Australia has a rotten record of  persecuting humanitarians  demanding  human rights  for Palestinians.

Australia is second only to the US as a fervent supporter of Apartheid Israel and is complicit in the Gaza Genocide in 20 ways and lies for Apartheid Israel in 35 ways but has merely applied sanctions against 2 far-right Israeli extremist politicians – something is better than nothing.  The Zionist-perverted and fervently pro-Apartheid Israel US, UK, German and Australian Governments assiduously refrained from criticizing Apartheid Israel for the nearly 2 years of the Gaza Massacre and actively sought to hide  the horrors of the Gaza Genocide by hysterical and false  campaigns alleging “antisemitism” by anti-racist Jewish and non-Jewish humanitarians demanding equal and full human rights for the sorely oppressed Palestinians.

Australians are repeatedly told by Zionists and the fervently pro-Zionist Australian Labor Government and Coalition Opposition that there has been  an asserted increase in “antisemitism”  in Australia. A Jewish Zionist “Antisemitism Envoy” and a Christian  Egyptian Australian “Islamophobia Envoy” were appointed to inform the government. Antisemitism  occurs in 2 equally repugnant forms, anti-Jewish anti-Semitism and anti-Arab anti-Semitism  (including Islamophobia) but these 3 key terms (and indeed about 80 related terms) were not mentioned in the recently released “[Antisemitism] Special Envoy’s plan to combat antisemitism” sent to the Australian Government.

I individually addressed the following Letter to major Mainstream Australian media under the Subject heading “Aussie anti-Jewish anti-Semitism against anti-racist Jews” and copied it to all Federal and Victorian State MPs (however, it was not published and the Silence has been Deafening in Australia):

Dear Editor,

For 3 decades I have been researching “deaths from violence and imposed deprivation” of subjugated peoples in the global South due to European-imposed war and hegemony, with the findings reported in a thousand  huge and exhaustively referenced articles and 9 huge books (this including massively updating editions). However Google the phrase “deaths from violence and imposed deprivation” and you will find that the West simply doesn’t want to know, even though UN demographic data show that 1,500 million people have died avoidably from deprivation since 1950, 70% of them under-5 infants.

Data published by expert epidemiologists in the leading medical journal The Lancet indicate that 136,000 Gazans died violently by 25 April 2025 with  a “conservatively estimated” 4 times that number (544,000) dying from imposed deprivation for a shocking total of 680,000 deaths. In Australia (as well as the US and UK) this carnage has been under-counted by a factor of 10 and deliberately masked by a massive “antisemitism hysteria” campaign that now threatens a McCarthyist curb on free speech in Australia. Also ignored by Mainstream Australian media and politicians are 30 ways Aussie anti-Jewish anti-Semitism against anti-racist Jews (anti-Zionist Jews) is entrenched in Zionist-perverted Australia (cc Mps).

Yours sincerely, Dr Gideon Polya

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Gideon Polya.

The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again, but already it was impossible to say which was which. (Internet Archive, p 71)

Orwell chose the pig to signify the smartest of animals, those who can learn quickly due to their high intelligence amongst the animal world. His reference to ‘Man’ was that of someone who is oppressive and tyrannical. Allow me to introduce you to Donald ‘The Trump’, ruler of Amerika.

So, we have a contradiction to all that we, as little school kids and civics students, were taught. Instead of honoring the ‘Salt of the Earth’ which Orwell’s pigs represented, Donald ‘The Trump’s’ Amerika honors the ‘Man’ from the novel. Herding up the undocumented then shipping them out, nullifying the right to dissent AKA Protest, cutting away a Safety Net to help us pigs, cutting medical care, AKA Medicaid, along with funding for proper government to give tax breaks for a fraction of 1% of Amerikans, all done to create a Big Beautiful Amerika following the guidelines of Project 2025.

The neighbor around our corner was out mowing her tiny lawn. She is a 50-something medical office worker who hollered this to my wife: “No one is going to lose their medical coverage, except those damn illegals. That is where the fraud is bankrupting us!” By her anger, one could see her in 1930’s Germany waving her finger at those ‘Damn Jews’, wishing them all away. In Donald ‘The Trump’s’ Amerika there have to be scapegoats to ease the pain of the corporate noose around her neck. When she or her family member needs an emergency operation and or a nursing home bed, who will be there to pay the $ hundreds of thousands? When her son’s young daughter needs food sustenance and there is no SNAP money to keep her nourished after he is out of work and his unemployment is terminated…

Who else becomes the ‘Man’ in a new Amerika? Could it be the absentee landlord who keeps raising the already too-high rent? Or the cable TV provider that gets away with higher charges? Perhaps the private medical insurance company that pushes everyone into Medicare Advantage so as to NOT have to cover them properly. Maybe it’s the politicians who have the BEST health coverage our tax dollars pay for, and turn a blind eye (for decades) to us pigs in need.

What the MAGA phenomenon should teach us is what Orwell meant by the end of his novel.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Philip A. Faruggio.

The failure of diplomatic attempts to reach peace agreements in Ukraine amid increased military support from the USA and the EU has led to a major reshuffle in the government. The large-scale reshuffle is taking place against the background of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine with vague prospects for its cessation. Volodymyr Zelensky, fearing failure in future presidential and parliamentary elections, is making active efforts to clean up the political field and discredit possible rivals for the post of the Ukrainian president.

Thus, on July 16, 2025, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky nominated Economy Minister Yulia Sviridenko as the new prime minister with a simultaneous reshuffling of the majority of cabinet members1

As a result of the mass reshuffle, Ukraine’s military industry will be placed under the leadership of the Defense Ministry, which will be headed by former Prime Minister Denys Shmygal, who has held this position since March 4, 2020. Under pressure from Zelenskyy and the head of the Ukrainian president’s office, Andriy Yermak, Denys Shmygal was forced to tender his resignation on July 15, 2025. The Ukrainian parliament voted for the resignation of Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmygal on 16 July 2025.

The decision to dismiss Shmygal, 49, was supported by 261 MPs, while the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine was also dissolved during the government reshuffle.

In mid-July, Zelenskyy also said that he was considering acting Defense Minister Rustem Umerov as Ukraine’s ambassador to the USA. Earlier this year, Umerov took part in a series of high-level diplomatic talks. Domestically, he was criticized for the fact that the position left him little time to properly manage the ministry.

Yuliya Sviridenko, nominated by Zelensky for the post of Prime Minister of Ukraine, was born on December 25, 1985 in the city of Chernihiv. Until 2019, she worked in various positions in the administration of Chernihiv region, in 2019 she was appointed Deputy Minister of Economy of Ukraine, since 2020 she was deputy head of the office of the President of Ukraine, headed by Andriy Yermak. She is a member of the pro-presidential Servant of the People party.

According to Zelenskyy, the appointment of Yuliya Sviridenko as the new prime minister is based on her extensive experience in supporting Ukrainian industry and the urgent need to attract foreign funding for Ukraine’s military needs. Sviridenko gained influence thanks to the support of the head of the president’s office, Yermak, and her work with the USA, where she played a key role in signing an agreement with the USA on rare earth minerals in May 2025.

Next year, Ukraine will face the difficult task of financing its growing budget deficit amid cuts in foreign aid. The Ukrainian Finance Ministry estimates that the country’s financing needs from the US and the EU for 2026 amount to 40bn dollars.

According to Sergiy Marchenko – Minister of Finance of Ukraine, now the government does not know where to find these funds in case of a decrease in funding from the European Union and international funds. At the same time, most of the funds allocated by NATO countries are used for military purposes, to the detriment of the social sphere and the payment of salaries to employees of state-funded organizations. In mid-July, the Ukrainian parliament supported a bill on amending the 2025 budget, which envisages an increase in defense spending by 412 billion hryvnyas ($10 billion) this year.

Meanwhile, Russia has started signaling its desire for a third round of talks with Ukraine after US President Donald Trump said that the USA would supply Ukraine with more long-range weapons through NATO members. Trump also warned that if Russia did not agree to a ceasefire within 50 days, Washington would impose 500% duties on the country’s goods.

These circumstances against the background of widespread corruption, forced mobilization, deterioration of the social status of Ukrainian citizens, illegitimacy of the country’s leadership and disregard for the norms of national and international law contribute to the intensification of the internal political struggle for the future posts of the President and members of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine.

Strange as it may seem, the first place in this internal political struggle is occupied by Andriy Yermak, the head of the Ukrainian president’s office and the shadow leader of Ukraine. Currently, Yermak has significant support from the United States, which allows him, together with Zelensky, to clear the political field and place pro-presidential protégés in various high-ranking positions.

Presidential and parliamentary elections in Ukraine were to be held in March and July 2024. However, due to another extension of martial law in May this year, these procedures have not been carried out.

Zelenskyy’s powers as president ended on May 21, 2024. At the same time, the decision of the Parliament of Ukraine – the Verkhovna Rada – to extend his powers in accordance with the national law No. 389-VIII dd. 12.05.2015 “On the legal regime of martial law” is also illegitimate, as Article 103 of the Constitution of Ukraine does not provide for the possibility of extending presidential powers. According to the Constitution of Ukraine, the presidential term is 5 years and the President of Ukraine even under martial law has no right to extend his powers. Only the Parliament has the right to extend the powers. Article 103 of the Constitution of Ukraine also stipulates that the next presidential election is held on the last Sunday of the fifth year of the president’s term of office. In the event of early termination of the powers of the President of Ukraine, elections are held within ninety days from the date of termination of his powers

According to the Ukrainian constitution, the prime minister’s candidacy should be proposed to the president by the parliamentary majority faction (currently, it is the pro-presidential Servant of the People party). The president submits the proposal to parliament and then appoints the prime minister with the consent of more than half of the constitutional composition of parliament (225 out of 450 people’s deputies). Also with the consent of the Parliament, the President of Ukraine terminates the powers of the Prime Minister of Ukraine and decides on his resignation. Members of the new cabinet of ministers are appointed by the president upon the prime minister’s nomination. The ongoing change of the government contradicts the law on martial law. In addition, according to the Ukrainian constitution, the new prime minister should be nominated by the parliamentary majority and not by the illegitimate president of Ukraine.

Many Ukrainian and international lawyers note that under national laws and international law, any agreements and legal acts signed and introduced by Zelenskyy into parliament after May 20, 2024 are effectively illegitimate, contradict Ukrainian legislation and can be canceled or easily legally challenged. In this regard, Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s decision to appoint Yuliya Sviridenko as prime minister also contradicts the current Ukrainian legislation and norms of international law.

As for the parliamentary elections in Ukraine, they were held on July 21, 2019, the deputies were elected for a term of 5 years and their powers ended in July 2024. However, due to the current legislation and the imposed martial law, the powers of the deputies of the Parliament are extended until its end. According to Article 20 of the Electoral Code of Ukraine No. 396-IX of December 19, 2019, the electoral process for elections to the Parliament of Ukraine should begin within a month after the lifting of martial law. Therefore, in fact, in accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine, Ruslan Stefanchuk, the Speaker of Parliament, has been the legal head of Ukraine since May 21, 2024.

For this reason, Zelensky’s decisions to extend martial law, appoint a new prime minister, Yuriy Sviridenko, reshuffle other members of the Ukrainian government, sign an agreement with the United States on rare earth minerals and transfer the port of Odessa to American companies are legally unauthorized and can be easily overturned both in Ukrainian legal proceedings and in international arbitration courts.

Realizing this legal precedent-casus, the leadership of the United States of America and a number of EU countries, primarily Great Britain, France and Germany, in cooperation with the Ukrainian side, are currently trying to develop a legal mechanism to give legitimacy to the legal acts already adopted by Mr. Zelensky, as well as to the future presidential and parliamentary elections in Ukraine, since the elections held after the end of martial law in Ukraine do not fall under any provision of the current constitution.

To this end, at the end of June 2025, the Chairman of the Parliament Ruslan Stefanchuk announced the preparation of a law on post-war elections, which is scheduled to be considered at the next sessions of the Ukrainian Parliament. Although Ruslan Stefanchuk himself notes that the said law will also be illegitimate if martial law is lifted in the country.

Against this background, the internal political struggle between various parties and candidates for the post of the future president of Ukraine is intensifying. The main direction of this interaction is the development of a normatively grounded strategy for future presidential and parliamentary elections in Ukraine. Allies of Volodymyr Zelensky from Great Britain and the USA announcing continuation of his support and new deliveries of weapons paid for by them realize that without interference in pre-election processes and vote counting procedure it is difficult to predict the results of future elections. That is why Volodymyr Zelensky has now started an active reshuffle of the government and clearing the political field of possible competitors in the upcoming elections.

The Economist previously wrote about the fact that the USA and EU countries are negotiating with Ukraine to start election processes after the ceasefire at the end of 2025 7 . However, in order to hold elections in Ukraine, martial law, which the authorities imposed on February 24, 2022 and extend every three months, must cease to be in force. The sixteenth extension for 90 days will come into force on August 7, 2025.

The Ukrainian mass media name Valeriy Zaluzhnyy, a former commander-in- chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces who is currently ambassador to the UK, as Zelenskyy’s main rival.

From November 2024 to the end of June 2025 a number of sociological centers (KIIS – Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, SOCIS – Ukrainian Center for Sociological Studies) and the EU (Statista – German Statistical Data Center from February 5-11, 2025, June 6-11, 2025, Survation – English Polling and Marketing Research Agency from February 25-27, 2025) conducted opinion polls on the topic of presidential elections in Ukraine in order to determine the trust rating of Ukrainian citizens. According to the results of opinion polls as of the end of June 2025, more than 65.3% of respondents support holding presidential elections at the end of 2025.

According to the results of the conducted research, as of the end of June 2025, out of 14 possible candidates for the post of the future president of Ukraine, the highest results were shown by: V.Zelensky, V.Zaluzhny, P.Poroshenko, Y.Tymoshenko. If V.Zaluzhny and V.Zelensky make it to the second round of voting and there are no violations at the elections, the population of Ukraine will give preference to V.Zaluzhny. The candidacy of Andriy Yermak, the head of the Ukrainian president’s office, is also being considered as a gray cardinal and a dark horse. A number of experts do not rule out that if the USA agrees to support his candidacy as the future president of Ukraine, Yermak is capable of making efforts to physically remove Zelenskyy, for example, due to a sharp deterioration of his health, as was the case with the poisoning of the wife of Kyrylo Budanov, head of the main intelligence department of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry.

Against this background, many Ukrainian experts expect a large number of violations, scandals and kompromat at the future presidential election in Ukraine, as well as possible influence on the pre-election processes by the US, UK, Germany and France.

While the Ukrainian people are eagerly awaiting the resolution of the conflict, members of the Ukrainian parliament continue to scuffle. Thus, on July 16, 2025, on the eve of the vote on the appointment of the new Prime Minister of Ukraine, Yuriy Sviridenko, MPs Oleksiy Honcharenko and Danylo Hetmantsev had another scuffle on the rostrum during the regular session.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Valeriy Krylko.

Frick was the chairman of the Carnegie Steel Company. He had recently used 300 Pinkerton agents to break up a picket line in Homestead, Pennsylvania sparking a fierce battle that killed at least 10, including 7 striking workers.

Berkman took a train to Pittsburgh where Emma Goldman wired him money for supplies for his attempt. His assassination would ultimately fail and Berkman spent 14 years in prison.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by subMedia.

The nature of that misconduct lay in foreign students supposedly engaged in any number of scurrilous acts vaguely described as “known illegal activity”, “known dangerous and violent activity”, “known threats to other students or university personnel”, “known deprivation of rights of other classmates or university personnel”, and whether those activities “occurred on campus”. Harvard had failed to provide any useful data on the “disciplinary records” of such students. (The information on the three miscreants supplied in the lists was not just inadequate but useless.) Just to make Trump foam further, Harvard had “also developed extensive entanglements with foreign countries, including our adversaries” and flouted “the civil rights of students and faculty, triggering multiple Federal investigations.” While the proclamation avoids explicitly mentioning it, the throbbing subtext here is the caricatured concern that the university has not adequately addressed antisemitism.

In various splenetic statements, the President has made no secret of his views on the university. On Truth Social, we find him berating the institution for “hiring almost all woke, Radical left, idiots and ‘birdbrains’”. The university was also hectored through April by the multi-agency Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism to alter its governance processes, admissions and hiring policies, and academic programs. The administration demanded via an April 11 letter to Harvard’s president that a third party be hired to “audit” the views of students, faculty, and staff to satisfy government notions of “viewpoint diversity” that would also include the expulsion of specific students and the review of “faculty hires”.  Extraordinarily, the administration demanded that the audit “proceed on a department-by-department, field-by-field, or teaching-unit-by-teaching-unit basis as appropriate.” Harvard’s refusal to accede to such demands led to a freezing of over $2.2 billion in federal funding.

On May 22, the Department of Homeland Security cancelled Harvard’s means of enrolling students through the SEVP program or employing J-1 non-immigrants under the Exchange Visitor Program (EVP). In its May 23 filing in the US District Court for Massachusetts, the university contended that such actions violated the First Amendment, the Due Process Clause, and the Administrative Procedure Act.  They were “in clear retaliation for Harvard exercising its First Amendment rights to reject the government’s demands to control Harvard’s governance, curriculum, and the ‘ideology’ of its faculty and students.”

The June 4 proclamation proved to be another sledgehammer wielded by the executive, barring non-immigrants from pursuing “a course of study at Harvard University [under the SEVP program] or to participate in an exchange visitor program hosted by Harvard University”.  The university successfully secured a temporary restraining order on June 5, preventing the revocation from taking effect. On June 23, US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs granted the university’s request for a preliminary injunction, extending the temporary order. “The case,” wrote Burroughs, “is about core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, each of which is a pillar of a functioning democracy and an essential hedge against authoritarianism.” The “misplaced efforts” by the government “to control a reputable academic institution and squelch diverse viewpoints seemingly because they are, in some instances, opposed to this Administration’s own views, threaten these rights.”

On July 21, the parties again clashed, this time over the issue of restoring the funds frozen in federal research grants. Burroughs made no immediate decision on the matter but barely hid her scepticism about the government’s actions and inclinations. “If you can make decisions for reasons oriented around free speech,” she put to Justice Department senior attorney Michael Velchik, “the consequences are staggering to me.”

Harvard’s attorney Steve Lehotsky also argued that the demands of the government impaired the university’s autonomy, going beyond even that of dealing with antisemitism. These included audits of viewpoint diversity among faculty and students, as well as changes to the admissions and hiring processes. The demands constituted “a blatant, unrepentant violation of the First Amendment.” The issue of withdrawing funding was also argued to be a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which requires an investigation, the holding of a hearing, and the release of findings before such a decision is made.

Velchik, very much in the mood for sophistry, made less of the antisemitism issue than that of contractual interpretation. Under government contracts with institutions, language always existed that permitted the withdrawal of funding at any time.

If Trump were serious about the MAGA brand, then attacking universities, notably those like Harvard, must count as an act of monumental self-harm. Such institutions are joined hip and all to the military-industrial-education complex, keeping America gorged with its complement of engineers, scientists, and imperial propagandists.

Harvard has also shown itself willing to march to the music of the Israel lobby, which happily provides funds for the institution. The extent of that influence was made clear by a decision by the university’s own Kennedy School to deny a fellowship to Kenneth Roth, the former head of Human Rights Watch, in early 2023. While the decision by the morally flabby dean, Douglas Elmendorf, was reversed following much outrage, the School had displayed its gaudy colours. Little wonder, given the presence of the Wexner Foundation, which is responsible for sponsoring the attendance of top-ranked Israeli generals and national security experts in a Master’s Degree program in public administration at the university.

Trump is partially right to claim that universities and their governance structures are in need of a severe dusting down. But he has shown no interest in identifying the actual problem. How wonderful, yet unlikely, it would be to see actual reforms in university policies that demilitarize funding in favor of an enlightened curriculum that abhors war.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

DK:  I was there for a little more than three decades. Before that, I taught at UCLA and USC, and before that at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. There, I got into some trouble. I was arrested for taking over a U.S. Senator’s office along with half a dozen Quakers in protest of weapons to the Nicaraguan Contras. I also had a little run-in with the Ku Klux Klan and was sued by right-wing Central American students for bringing in speakers they didn’t like. They sued me for “mental anguish”. Of course, the suit was thrown out of court, but it was a distraction. So, when I got the position at CSUN, I was very happy to get a permanent position there.

Q:  So “mental anguish” …. that’s a recurring theme of the critics.

DK:  Yes, it’s one of their tools. Claiming to feel bad about what we talk about.

Q:  How did you become interested in Israel-Palestine?

DK:  Well, it was kind of gradual. When I was a kid, I was very pro-Israel. And then in college, I started to have doubts and talked to more people. And the more I learned, the more obvious it was that this was a settler colonial state that was engaged in pretty much what the United States did to the Native Americans. And then there was a real spike in my understanding and activity with the 2009  “Cast Lead” assault on Gaza by Israel. That really increased my activism. It was just a new level of outrage that I and many people felt.

Q:  I understand you didn’t talk about politics in your mathematics classes, but that you were otherwise active. What did you do, and what attacks or censorship did you experience?

DK: That’s right. I was careful not to bring it up in my classes since it didn’t really have direct relevance. But I was the faculty advisor for Students for Justice in Palestine and for the Student Green Party and a few other student groups. So, I created a webpage, a BDS resource webpage on the university server from my faculty webpage. Then, I wrote an open letter that was signed by many CSU faculty, administrators, and students to the chancellor of the entire CSU system, demanding that CSU end the study abroad program in Israel for a variety of reasons.

That got some news coverage and brought a lot of attention to my website. So, that was the start of a lot of attacks.

There were hundreds of calls to my university president that I be fired. There were some threats, some kind of death threats. There were some threats to the administration to withhold financial contributions. There was just lots of slander. Some of it came from the campus itself, but it was mostly outside from the Zionist Organization of America, a group called AMCHA, and other groups. And then there were some politicians who joined in the attacks. The local congressman, Brad Sherman, and a California assembly member, Bob Blumenfield, who later became a city council member.

An Israeli-supported law firm pressured then Attorney General Kamala Harris to prosecute me. And they separately asked the Los Angeles City attorney to do that. But those requests came to nothing. Still, I was required to produce massive amounts of emails, anything regarding Israel-Palestine, and regarding logistical planning to bring in guest speakers Ilan Pappe and Norman Finkelstein. These threats and demands went on and on for a long time. And on my website, I  posted a page of the threats, the nasty comments, and the calls for my removal. They were signed by doctors and other professionals, but used really low-level language.  The ugliness that it brought out was amazing.

Q: So you were part of organizing and hosting famous academics such as Norman Finkelstein and Ilan Pappe. How did those visits go, and what were the results?

DK: The Norman Finkelstein visit lasted a week. He gave three lectures, and there was a group of us who wanted to hire him at CSUN after he lost tenure at DePaul University. And so that included 30 faculty members from various departments, including the science departments and social studies, social science departments, and a wide range. And it was going well. We got the approval of a department that wanted to hire him, the journalism department, and it went up to the top, and we were all set to go. And then, at the last minute, it was vetoed by the campus president. Norman asked me to write an article about the whole thing, which I did.

The visit of Ilan Pappe came later in 2012.  We had to have campus police escorts because of the threats. But he was very persuasive and compelling. Both of these guests were. The students were very engaged and it went well.

Q:  I know that there was a big campaign to prevent the tour by Ilan Pappe, but ultimately, the presidents of several CSU universities defended his right to speak. Is that correct?

DK: Three of the campus presidents wrote a letter defending academic freedom. It was an open letter, but it went to the chancellor of the entire CSU system. The visits went smoothly logistically because of that. And it was pretty rare that campus presidents would stand up for academic freedom and freedom of speech for speakers like Ilan Pappe, who very strongly promotes Palestinian human rights.

Q: You’ve been an active supporter of the cultural and academic boycott of Israel. Why do you think this is important?

DK: It’s an important part of the general Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement. Academics and culture are very important within Israel. And so this particular aspect of BDS lends what we think is special leverage to isolate the Zionist state because of its actions. Israeli universities are deeply complicit in the persecution and genocide of Palestinians. Maya Wind’s new book, “Towers of Ivory and Steel”, documents that very clearly. Focusing on academics is very pertinent to what’s going on. And the cultural boycott has a very large impact. Everybody recognizes when a famous artist, a singer, or a musician refuses to go to Israel and states the reasons.

Q: But critics of Israel and supporters of BDS are under attack. Do you think the censorship and attacks are the same as in the past? Or is it getting worse?

DK:  It’s getting much worse. The accusation of anti-semitism has been weaponized. Students, teachers, and professors are facing frivolous lawsuits. Students are facing expulsions. Faculty are facing job loss. Both are facing arrests and deportations for opposing genocide because it might hurt the feelings of the killers. Zionist students and outside advocates of genocide claim to feel unsafe because of demonstrations against Israel’s genocide. And they call human rights activists “anti-semitic”.  Even the Jewish activists. And so it’s much more intense now than in the past. They were just sort of getting warmed up on people like me, and now they’ve really sharpened their knives.

Q:  Do you have any strategy suggestions for campus activists who oppose the genocide happening in Gaza?

DK: Yes. I think we would do well to be less defensive and go on the offense. Pleading academic freedom and denying that we’re anti-semites is not really going very far. I think we need to move in the direction of accusing the accusers. Israeli soldiers are intentionally killing babies and children, shooting boys in their testicles, torturing doctors to death, and more broadly, carrying out the extermination of the entire Palestinian people. These are the worst of the worst. And we need to point to them, not just defend ourselves from their empty accusations.

By defining opposition to genocide as antisemitic, they’ve turned antisemitism into a virtue. Hitler could have only dreamed of this kind of linguistic transformation. And in this sense, the Zionists are the biggest antisemites on the planet. They’re the worst of humanity. So I think that the least vulnerable among us should take the lead, especially US-born tenured professors.

And we should focus on where the real power is.  For K-12 schools, it is the school boards. But for almost all colleges and universities in the United States, whether they’re public or private, the board of trustees is the institution’s highest decision-making or governance body.

Members of the board are typically very rich. They have a lot of political power within the country, not just in universities. To give one example, Miriam Adelson is on the USC Board of Trustees. Miriam Adelson was married to the late Sheldon Adelson. He was a very rich billionaire. Both of them are rich billionaires. And Miriam Adelson’s Foundation contributes $200 million each year to Israel. And she was one of the biggest Trump donors as well. So, there are a lot of university trustees like that. They come from weapons manufacturers, the oil and gas industry, and other major corporations. And they’re overwhelmingly Zionist.

University presidents, who appear to be in charge of their campuses, serve at the pleasure of the boards and can be hired and fired at the whim of these boards of trustees. So the boards of trustees are the real power at universities. They are behind the persecution of opponents of genocide. The college presidents who do cave in to the Zionist censors should face no-confidence votes from their faculty senate on campus. But, there really hasn’t been enough focus on the boards of trustees. And I think that’s the next step. There are a number of people who are coming to the same conclusion on campuses and universities.

A lot of research would be involved to find out who these people are, what their background is, expose them to the public, and show what they’re doing, and try to get them kicked out. Replace them with decent human beings. It’s like you’re either for genocide or against it. If you don’t care, that doesn’t say much good about you. So being anti genocide is the minimal criterion for human decency. After all, if they’re going after and attacking people who are trying to stop a genocide, that makes them horrible human beings, and they shouldn’t be in charge of anything.

Q: Do you have any final comments?

DK: I think the importance of the Palestinians’ fight for survival can hardly be overstated. Their struggle is not only for themselves, but it’s at the forefront of a worldwide struggle against global fascism. And that includes the climate catastrophe, because global fascism can only accelerate planetary suicide.

David Klein is Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at California State University, Northridge (CSUN). 

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Rick Sterling.

The shift to post-industrialism was associated with the rise of a powerful new set of capitalist elites and new corporate centers of production, finance, and communication. In the 21st century, Silicon Valley became the symbol of the new post-industrial high-tech world. It would become the showcase of the new high-tech companies, such as Microsoft, Amazon, and Apple, which were becoming the first trillion-dollar companies, led by tycoons such as Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Steve Jobs, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Peter Thiel, all fabulously wealthy members of the Big Tech power elite. Silicon Valley introduced itself as a modern miracle, bringing unprecedented new productivity and prosperity that would benefit both owners and workers, and contribute to the betterment of the general population with magical new products such as the personal computer, the iPhone, and the new internet-based world of online culture and communication on social media. This new world revolutionized the economic and social spheres, while also having major uses and implications for politics and the military. Because billions of people globally now have iPhones or personal computers, with access to the new online universe of the internet and social media, Silicon Valley seemed to open up not only a transformative new economy for entrepreneurs and knowledge workers but a transformed, newly connected world of online social communication and relationships.

This is not entirely an illusion. The online world does open up new social connections and political connections, with social media being a powerful new tool for the younger generation to build new friendships, communities, and politics. But Silicon Valley’s fantastic new array of electronic communications and online connections may also prove to be a gateway to weak social relations and ultimately the end of strong face-to-face social relationships, as well as democracy itself. We face a sociocidal transformation fueled by high tech, with Silicon Valley also proffering its own politics of authoritarianism. Sociocide is the process by which human connection is largely severed, and individuals are only concerned for themselves. A sociocidal society is one in which solidarity is nonexistent and meaningful human relationships are destroyed.

Several sociocidal forces emerge directly from the economic restructuring created by huge Big Tech firms, especially the “Magnificent Seven,” whose individual worth now reaches into the trillions:  Microsoft, Apple, NVIDIA, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Meta (Facebook), and Tesla. One is the interest of these corporate high-tech elites, much like their corporate counterparts in other spheres, in eroding the face-to-face workplace and social ties that can challenge their power. In the workplace, that translates into the intensified attack on secure employment, unionism, and a collective physical workplace. The intent is to weaken the social relations of workers in the workplace – and more broadly, to subvert the solidarity and face-to-face connections of people throughout society that can challenge authoritarianism in both work and politics.

Focusing first on the workplace, the Magnificent Seven play a special role here by creating and developing the technology – including the personal computer, iPhone, internet apps, AI, robots, and social media — that allows corporate elites to create a precariat of dispersed and contingent workers, increasingly separated from each other, while also replacing millions of workers and transferring their jobs to robots and other AI inventions.

The most rapid replacement of workers by robots and AI is in high-skill jobs. Matt Sigelman, president of the Human Resources Institute, summarized his Institute’s widely circulated report on AI, saying, “There’s no question the workers who will be most impacted are those with college degrees, and those are the people who always thought they were safe.” He indicates that: “Companies in finance, including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley, have some of the highest percentages of their payrolls likely to be disrupted by generative A.I. Not far behind are tech giants like Google, Microsoft and Meta.”

Tech workers, talented and highly trained, are developing the tools allowing their companies to eliminate many of their own jobs. Meanwhile, employers are also using robots to replace low-skill workers. The sociocidal tech impulse of Silicon Valley, as in other sectors, is embraced because of its profit-saving capacity. And the fastest way to increase profit is to reduce wages, usually by weakening relations among employees or busting unions.

The Magnificent Seven have used their overwhelming economic power to directly undermine unions, the most effective form of worker social relations and organization. In January 2024, Elon Musk, now legendary for his anti-union and broader right-wing views, filed a lawsuit in federal courts to declare unconstitutional the National Labor Relations Board, which protects and regulates workers’ right to organize. In August 2024, just before his re-election, Trump joked with Musk about firing workers, complimenting Musk during a two-hour conversation on X for firing Tesla workers who wanted to strike. “They go on strike,” Trump said to Musk, “and you say, ‘That’s OK, you’re all gone.’” Trump then added, “You’re the Greatest!” The UAW filed labor charges against both Trump and Musk for the unfair labor practices that the two had celebrated; Musk’s Tesla had clashed with union activists for years, and the NLRB in 2021 had found that the non-union Tesla violated labor laws when it fired a union organizer.

One of Musk’s Magnificent Seven compatriots, Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, quickly joined in Trump and Musk’s union-busting party, filing a copycat suit to make the NLRB and unions unconstitutional. Here, we see the world’s two richest men, leaders of the High-Tech Robber Barons, exploiting economic size to reap the fruit of their technology’s economic power. They are seeking a revolutionary breakdown of workplace social relations, moving from the sociopathy of the first Gilded Age to the sociocide of today’s Gilded Age.

The Magnificent Seven’s power undercuts workplace social relations and fiercely attacks union solidarity in the name of free-spirited libertarianism running rampant in Silicon Valley. The broader corporate success in drastically weakening unions is key to sociocide in the entire US labor force and has been achieved not only by the anti-union fervor of corporations since the New Deal but also by the zeal of the Republican Party from Reagan through Trump to make the destruction of labor solidarity and unions a top political priority.

_________________________________________

The above is an excerpt from Charles Derber’s most recent book, Bonfire: American Sociocide, Broken Relations, and the Quest for Democracy.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Charles Derber.

Call it the “new cold war,” the “beginning of World War III,” or – in Trump’s words – “endless war,” this is the era that the world has entered. The US/Zionist war against Iran has paused, but no one has any illusions that it is over. And it won’t likely be resolved until one side decisively and totally prevails. Ditto for the proxy war with Russia in Ukraine. Likely the same with Palestine, where the barbarity of war worsened to genocide. Meanwhile, since Obama’s “pivot to Asia,” the empire is building up for war with China.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, the empire’s war on the world assumes a hybrid form. The carnage is less apparent because the weapons take the form of “soft power” – sanctions, tariffs, and deportations. These can have the same lethal consequences as bombs, only less overt.

Making the world unsafe for socialism

Some Western leftists vilify the defensive measures that Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua must take to protect themselves from the empire’s regime-change schemes. In contrast, Washington clearly understands that these countries pose “threats of a good example” to the empire. Each subsequent US president, from Obama on, has certified them as “extraordinary threats to US national security.” Accordingly, they are targeted with the harshest coercive measures.

In this war of attrition, historian Isaac Saney uses the example of Cuba to show how any misstep by the revolutionary government or societal deficiency is exaggerated and weaponized. The empire’s siege, he explains, is not merely an attempt to destabilize the economy but is a deliberate strategy of suffocation. The empire aims to instigate internal discontent, distort people’s perception of the government, and ultimately erode social gains.

While Cuba is affected the worst by the hybrid war, both Venezuela and Nicaragua have also been damaged. All three countries have seen the “humanitarian parole” for their migrants in the US come to an end. Temporary Protected Status (TPS) was also withdrawn for Venezuelans and Nicaraguans. The strain of returning migrants, along with cuts in the remittances they had sent (amounting to a quarter of Nicaragua’s GDP), further impacts their respective economies.

Higher-than-average tariffs are threatened on Venezuelan and Nicaraguan exports to the US, together with severe restrictions on Caracas’s oil exports. Meanwhile, the screws have been tightened on the six-decade US blockade of Cuba with disastrous humanitarian consequences.

However, all three countries are fighting back. They are forming new trade alliances with China and elsewhere. Providing relief to Cuba, Mexico has supplied oil, and China is installing solar panel farms to address the now-daily power outages. High levels of food security in Venezuela and Nicaragua have strengthened their ability to resist US sanctions, while Caracas successfully defeated one of Washington’s harshest migration measures by securing the release of 252 of its citizens who had been incarcerated in El Salvador’s torturous CECOT prison.

Venezuela’s US-backed far-right opposition is in disarray. The first Trump administration had recognized the “interim presidency” of Juan Guaidó, followed by the Biden administration declaring Edmundo González the winner of Venezuela’s last presidential election. But the current Trump administration has yet to back González, de facto recognizing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Nicaragua’s right-wing opposition is also reeling from a side-effect of Trump’s harsh treatment of migrants – many are returning voluntarily to a country claimed by the opposition to be “unsafe,” while US Homeland Security has even extolled their home country’s recent achievements. And some of Trump’s prominent Cuban-American supporters are now questioning his “maximum pressure” campaign for going too far.

Troubled waters for the Pink Tide

The current progressive wave, the so-called Pink Tide, was initiated by Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s landslide victory in 2018. His MORENA Party successor, Claudia Sheinbaum, won by an even greater margin in 2024. Mexico’s first woman president has proven to be perhaps the world’s most dignified and capable sparring partner with the buffoon in the White House, who has threatened tariffs, deportations, military interdictions, and more on his southern neighbor.

Left-leaning presidents Gabriel Boric in Chile and Gustavo Petro in Colombia are limited to a single term. Both have faced opposition-aligned legislatures and deep-rooted reactionary power blocs. Chilean Communist Party candidate Jeanette Jara is favored to advance to the second-round presidential election in November 2025, but will face a challenging final round if the right unifies, as is likely, around an extremist candidate.

As the first non-rightist in Colombia’s history, Petro has had a tumultuous presidential tenure. He credibly accuses his former foreign minister of colluding with the US to overthrow him. However, the presidency could well revert to the right in the May 2026 elections.

Boric, Petro, Uruguay’s Yamandú Orsi, and Brazil’s Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva met in July as the region’s center-left presidents, with an agenda of dealing with Trump, promoting multilateralism, and (we can assume) keeping their distance from the region’s more left-wing governments.

With shaky popularity ratings, Lula will likely run for reelection in October 2026. As head of the region’s largest economy, Lula plays a world leadership role, chairing three global summits in a year. Yet, with less than a majority legislative backing, Lula has triangulated between Washington and the Global South, often capitulating to US interests (as in his veto of BRICS membership for Nicaragua and Venezuela). Regardless, Trump is threatening Brazil with a crippling 50% export tariff and is blatantly interfering in the trial of former right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro, accused of insurrection. So far, Trump’s actions have backfired, arousing anger among Brazilians. Lula commented that Trump was “not elected to be emperor of the world.”

In 2021, Honduran President Xiomara Castro took over a narcostate subservient to Washington and has tried to push the envelope to the left. Being constitutionally restricted to one term, Castro hands the Libre party candidacy in November’s election to former defense minister Rixi Moncada, who faces a tough contest with persistent US interference.

Bolivia’s ruling Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) Party is embroiled in a self-destructive internal conflict between former President Evo Morales and his former protégé and current President, Luis Arce. The energized Bolivian right wing is spoiling for the August 17^th presidential election.

Israeli infiltration accompanies US military penetration

Analyst Joe Emersberger notes: “Today, all geopolitics relates back to Gaza where the imperial order has been unmasked like never before.” Defying Washington, the Hague Group met in Colombia for an emergency summit on Gaza to “take collective action grounded in international law.” On July 16, regional states – Bolivia, Cuba, Colombia, Nicaragua, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines – endorsed the pledge to take measures in support of Palestine, with others likely to follow. Brazil will join South Africa’s ICJ complaint against Israel.

At the other end of the political spectrum are self-described “world’s coolest dictator” Nayib Bukele of El Salvador and confederates Javier Milei of Argentina and Daniel Noboa of Ecuador. As well as cozying up to Trump, they devotedly support Israel, which has been instrumental in enabling the most brutal reactionaries in the region. Noboa duly tells Israel’s Netanyahu that they “share the same enemies.”

In February, the US Southern Command warned: “Time is not on our side.” The perceived danger is “methodical incursion” into our “neighborhood” by both Russia and China. Indeed, China has become the region’s second-largest trading partner after the US, and even right-wing governments are reluctant to jeopardize their relations with Beijing. The empire’s solution is to “redouble our efforts to nest military engagement,” using humanitarian assistance as “an essential soft power tool.”

Picking up where Biden left off, Trump has furthered US military penetration, notably in Ecuador, Guyana, Brazil, Panama, and Argentina. The pandemic of narcotics trafficking, itself a product of US-induced demand, has been a Trojan Horse for militarist US intervention in Haiti, Ecuador, Peru, and threatened in Mexico.

In Panama, President José Mulino’s obeisance to Trump’s ambitions to control the Panama Canal and reduce China’s influence provoked massive protests. Trump’s collaboration in the genocide of Palestinians motivated Petro to declare that Colombia must leave the NATO alliance and keep its distance from “militaries that drop bombs on children.” Colombia had been collaborating with NATO since 2013 and became the only Latin American global partner in 2017.

Despite Trump’s bluster – what the Financial Times calls “imperial incontinence” – his administration has produced mixed results. While rightist political movements have basked in Trump’s fitful praise, his escalating coercion provokes resentment against Yankee influence. Resistance is growing, with new alliances bypassing Washington. As the empire’s grip tightens, so too does the resolve of those determined to break free from it.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by John Perry and Roger D. Harris.

Leonardo da Vinci’s extensive studies of human anatomy were hundreds of years ahead of their time. (Image by Wikimedia Commons, Leonardo da Vinci.)

At the third assembly of the World Humanist Forum on July 19, Antonio Carvallo proposed the creation of a new working table on the theme of Personal Development. During his presentation, a spark caught my attention. He remarked that, for over 5,000 years, humanity has devoted nearly all its energy to understanding and developing the external world, while neglecting its own internal development as human beings.

Here we are today, with astonishing technological, scientific, intellectual, and social capacities. We can split atoms, map genomes, and communicate instantly across the planet. Yet, in comparison, our understanding of how we function internally as human beings remains painfully limited. Human beings are still too often treated as tools, valued mainly for their capacity to produce and consume.

Ask a teenager what they plan to do with their life, and the question is typically understood to mean: What job will you have? Life becomes synonymous with work. You study in order to work, you work most of your life, and eventually retire—often exhausted and disillusioned. Fulfillment is closely tied to career success, even in a dysfunctional society or a toxic workplace.
Meanwhile, mental health statistics in Western society point to a deep and growing crisis:

• • In 2022, around 59.3 million U.S. adults (≈23.1%) experienced some form of mental illness.
  • In 2022, 15.4 million adults (6%) experienced serious mental illness.
  • In 2022, the CDC reported 49,449 suicide deaths in the United States—about a 3% increase from 48,183 in 2021, marking a record high.

Is this not a dramatic expression of unresolved internal conflict?

Why has internal development been so undervalued? It almost seems like there’s a global conspiracy against it. Most religions begin with an internal experience, but over time, they become increasingly outward-facing — placing God in the sky, focusing on external rituals, and obsessing over food or rules. Political ideologies like Marxism often fail to explore the role of violence, fear, and meaning in how we organize ourselves. Even in the modern “self-help” industry, personal growth is often framed as a way to “optimize performance” within the same dehumanizing structures that cause suffering.

Ask someone, “How do you deal with fear?” Most will struggle to answer. People have no internal tools or language to face and transform their fear. Fear becomes a tool used by the system to control everyday life: we fear being fired, not having enough money, not being loved, being “too much” or “not enough.”

Why are so many people exhausted? What do we actually know about our internal energy — how to cultivate it, renew it, and direct it? These are fundamental questions central to our survival and evolution, and yet society rarely addresses them.

Let’s be clear: we are not proposing personal development so that people can function better in this dehumanized system. True personal development is about changing the focus of our lives entirely. Nothing meaningful can be transformed in the world until we internalize our knowledge of what it means to be human, recognize that life has meaning beyond labor and consumption, and free ourselves from the illusion of fear.

Peace is not the absence of war. It is an internal state of being.

Imagine what it would mean for 8 billion people to embark on a path of self-understanding, learning to overcome pain and suffering, seeing money not as an end in itself but as a tool to humanize the Earth. Imagine if self-knowledge were approached with the same discipline, care, and passion as a musician practices an instrument.

Education must evolve. It must be rooted in the development of the whole human being. Reconciling with oneself should be the first step. The world we long for must first take root within ourselves—only then can we co-create it with others.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by David Andersson.

“Now by coming in and being part of the cover-up, the Trump administration has become part of it.”—Alex Jones, InfoWars

Once again, the American police state is choosing to protect predators, not victims.

Jeffrey Epstein—the hedge fund billionaire/convicted serial pedophile and sex trafficker—may be dead, but the machinery that empowered and protected him is still very much alive.

You see, the Epstein case was never just about Epstein—it was about the entire edifice of power that shields the ruling class, silences victims, and erases accountability.

Thus, the latest about-face declarations from the Trump administration—that Epstein had no client list, that he did, in fact, kill himself, and that there’s nothing more to discuss or investigate so we should just move on—have only reinforced what many have suspected all along: the system is rigged in order to protect the power elite because the power elite are the system.

In this age of partisan politics and a deeply polarized populace, corruption—especially when it involves sexual debauchery, depravity, and predatory behavior—has become the great equalizer.

With the reemergence of Jeffrey Epstein’s ghost in the public discourse, we are once again reminded of just how deep the rot goes.

Politics, religion, entertainment, business, law enforcement, the military—it doesn’t matter the arena or affiliation: all are riddled with the kind of seedy, depraved behavior that gets a free pass when it involves the powerful.

For years, the Epstein case has stood as a grotesque emblem of the depravity within America’s power elite: billionaires, politicians, and celebrities who allegedly trafficked in sex with young girls while insulated from accountability.

It is believed that Epstein, who died in jail after being arrested on charges of molesting, raping, and sex trafficking dozens of young girls, operated a sex trafficking ring not only for his own personal pleasure but also for that of his friends and business associates.

According to The Washington Post, “several of the young women…say they were offered to the rich and famous as sex partners at Epstein’s parties.”

Despite the government’s insistence that there’s nothing more to see, here’s what the public record already reveals:

• Epstein ferried his friends about on his private plane, nicknamed the “Lolita Express” after the Nabokov novel, due to the presence of what appeared to be underage girls on board.
• Both Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were counted among Epstein’s friends.
• Both Clinton and Trump were at one time passengers on the Lolita Express.
• Both Clinton and Trump are renowned womanizers who have been accused of sexual impropriety by a significant number of women over the years. In fact, The Rutherford Institute represented Paula Jones in her landmark sexual harassment lawsuit against then-President Clinton—a case that helped expose how far the political establishment will go to shield its own.

So you have to wonder… when President Trump, who has used his administration’s war on human trafficking to justify expanding the government’s police state powers, quietly dismantles the very government agencies tasked with investigating and exposing sex trafficking… what exactly is going on?

The message from the top is clear: there will be no accountability.

This isn’t justice. It’s a double standard—one set of rules for the untouchables, and another for everyone else.

If it looks like a cover-up, smells like a cover-up, and appears to benefit all the usual suspects, is it so far-fetched to suspect that the government is once again closing ranks to protect the members of its power elite?

We’ve seen it before: from the CIA’s MK-Ultra experiments and the FBI’s COINTELPRO operations to CIA black sites and NSA mass surveillance.

Each time, secrecy protected the powerful and betrayed the people.

And it will keep happening—again and again—unless we confront the truth hiding in plain sight: that abuse of power is not an aberration of the system—it is the system.

Nowhere is that more apparent than in the shadow economy of sex trafficking, where power, profit, and predation converge.

This is America’s seedy underbelly.

Child sex trafficking—the buying and selling of women, young girls, and boys for sex, some as young as 9 years old—has become big business in America. It is the fastest growing business in organized crime and the second most-lucrative commodity traded illegally after drugs and guns.

This is the darkness at the heart of the American police state: a system built to shield the powerful from justice.

While Epstein’s alleged crimes are heinous enough on their own, he is part of a larger narrative of how a culture of entitlement becomes a cesspool and a breeding ground for despots and predators.

Give any one person—or government agency—too much power and allow them to believe that they are entitled, untouchable, and will not be held accountable for their actions, and those powers will be abused.

We see this dynamic play out every day in communities across the United States.

A cop shoots an unarmed citizen for no credible reason and gets away with it. A president employs executive orders to sidestep the Constitution and gets away with it. A government agency spies on its citizens’ communications and gets away with it. An entertainment mogul sexually harasses aspiring actresses and gets away with it. The U.S. military bombs a civilian hospital and gets away with it.

It’s no coincidence that the same administration dismantling offices tasked with fighting human trafficking is also defunding the few agencies left to hold law enforcement accountable.

This is how the system works, protecting the untouchables—not because they’re innocent, but because the system has made them immune.

Abuse of power—and the ambition-fueled hypocrisy and deliberate disregard for misconduct that make those abuses possible—works the same whether you’re talking about sex crimes, government corruption, or the rule of law.

Unless something changes in the way we deal with these ongoing, egregious abuses of power, the predators of the police state will continue to wreak havoc on our freedoms, our communities, and our lives.

For too long now, Americans have tolerated an oligarchy in which a powerful, elite group of wealthy donors is calling the shots.

We need to restore the rule of law for all people, no exceptions.

The rule of law means no one gets a free pass—no matter their wealth, status, or political connections.

As I make clear in my book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People, and in its fictional counterpart, The Erik Blair Diaries, the empowerment of petty tyrants and political gods must come to an end.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead.

“Now by coming in and being part of the cover-up, the Trump administration has become part of it.”—Alex Jones, InfoWars

Once again, the American police state is choosing to protect predators, not victims.

Jeffrey Epstein—the hedge fund billionaire/convicted serial pedophile and sex trafficker—may be dead, but the machinery that empowered and protected him is still very much alive.

You see, the Epstein case was never just about Epstein—it was about the entire edifice of power that shields the ruling class, silences victims, and erases accountability.

Thus, the latest about-face declarations from the Trump administration—that Epstein had no client list, that he did, in fact, kill himself, and that there’s nothing more to discuss or investigate so we should just move on—have only reinforced what many have suspected all along: the system is rigged in order to protect the power elite because the power elite are the system.

In this age of partisan politics and a deeply polarized populace, corruption—especially when it involves sexual debauchery, depravity, and predatory behavior—has become the great equalizer.

With the reemergence of Jeffrey Epstein’s ghost in the public discourse, we are once again reminded of just how deep the rot goes.

Politics, religion, entertainment, business, law enforcement, the military—it doesn’t matter the arena or affiliation: all are riddled with the kind of seedy, depraved behavior that gets a free pass when it involves the powerful.

For years, the Epstein case has stood as a grotesque emblem of the depravity within America’s power elite: billionaires, politicians, and celebrities who allegedly trafficked in sex with young girls while insulated from accountability.

It is believed that Epstein, who died in jail after being arrested on charges of molesting, raping, and sex trafficking dozens of young girls, operated a sex trafficking ring not only for his own personal pleasure but also for that of his friends and business associates.

According to The Washington Post, “several of the young women…say they were offered to the rich and famous as sex partners at Epstein’s parties.”

Despite the government’s insistence that there’s nothing more to see, here’s what the public record already reveals:

• Epstein ferried his friends about on his private plane, nicknamed the “Lolita Express” after the Nabokov novel, due to the presence of what appeared to be underage girls on board.
• Both Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were counted among Epstein’s friends.
• Both Clinton and Trump were at one time passengers on the Lolita Express.
• Both Clinton and Trump are renowned womanizers who have been accused of sexual impropriety by a significant number of women over the years. In fact, The Rutherford Institute represented Paula Jones in her landmark sexual harassment lawsuit against then-President Clinton—a case that helped expose how far the political establishment will go to shield its own.

So you have to wonder… when President Trump, who has used his administration’s war on human trafficking to justify expanding the government’s police state powers, quietly dismantles the very government agencies tasked with investigating and exposing sex trafficking… what exactly is going on?

The message from the top is clear: there will be no accountability.

This isn’t justice. It’s a double standard—one set of rules for the untouchables, and another for everyone else.

If it looks like a cover-up, smells like a cover-up, and appears to benefit all the usual suspects, is it so far-fetched to suspect that the government is once again closing ranks to protect the members of its power elite?

We’ve seen it before: from the CIA’s MK-Ultra experiments and the FBI’s COINTELPRO operations to CIA black sites and NSA mass surveillance.

Each time, secrecy protected the powerful and betrayed the people.

And it will keep happening—again and again—unless we confront the truth hiding in plain sight: that abuse of power is not an aberration of the system—it is the system.

Nowhere is that more apparent than in the shadow economy of sex trafficking, where power, profit, and predation converge.

This is America’s seedy underbelly.

Child sex trafficking—the buying and selling of women, young girls, and boys for sex, some as young as 9 years old—has become big business in America. It is the fastest growing business in organized crime and the second most-lucrative commodity traded illegally after drugs and guns.

This is the darkness at the heart of the American police state: a system built to shield the powerful from justice.

While Epstein’s alleged crimes are heinous enough on their own, he is part of a larger narrative of how a culture of entitlement becomes a cesspool and a breeding ground for despots and predators.

Give any one person—or government agency—too much power and allow them to believe that they are entitled, untouchable, and will not be held accountable for their actions, and those powers will be abused.

We see this dynamic play out every day in communities across the United States.

A cop shoots an unarmed citizen for no credible reason and gets away with it. A president employs executive orders to sidestep the Constitution and gets away with it. A government agency spies on its citizens’ communications and gets away with it. An entertainment mogul sexually harasses aspiring actresses and gets away with it. The U.S. military bombs a civilian hospital and gets away with it.

It’s no coincidence that the same administration dismantling offices tasked with fighting human trafficking is also defunding the few agencies left to hold law enforcement accountable.

This is how the system works, protecting the untouchables—not because they’re innocent, but because the system has made them immune.

Abuse of power—and the ambition-fueled hypocrisy and deliberate disregard for misconduct that make those abuses possible—works the same whether you’re talking about sex crimes, government corruption, or the rule of law.

Unless something changes in the way we deal with these ongoing, egregious abuses of power, the predators of the police state will continue to wreak havoc on our freedoms, our communities, and our lives.

For too long now, Americans have tolerated an oligarchy in which a powerful, elite group of wealthy donors is calling the shots.

We need to restore the rule of law for all people, no exceptions.

The rule of law means no one gets a free pass—no matter their wealth, status, or political connections.

As I make clear in my book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People, and in its fictional counterpart, The Erik Blair Diaries, the empowerment of petty tyrants and political gods must come to an end.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead.

That the United States of America is controlled by a criminally perverse, two party ruling class should be obvious to any reasonable (not rational, for the above-named people are very rational) person not living in what Jean-Paul Sartre, the French existential writer, called bad faith (mauvaise foi).

Bad faith is based on Sartre’s premise that people are radically free despite social and biological constraints; in each person’s consciousness they sense this but choose to play games, to perform for themselves and others, and to act as if they have no choices when they do. They deny their freedom. This is not lying but a form of self-deception since one cannot lie to oneself for “the one to whom the lie is told and the one who lies are one and the same person, which means that I must know in my capacity as a deceiver the truth which is hidden from me in my capacity as the one deceived,” writes Sartre. This should be so obvious but it escapes most people who imbibe psychobabble.

Lying is different since it involves other people. “The essence of the lie implies in fact that the liar actually is in complete possession of the truth which he is hiding,” added Sartre. This cynical consciousness that knows the truth but denies it to others is a perfect description of  politicians, propagandists, intelligence services, and their media mouthpieces. They know they are lying and are proud of it, but of course they will never admit it. Regular people also lie regularly but with not the same tremendous social consequences.

People often say that certain people really believes their own lies, that they are deluded, but this is impossible.

I begin with this brief excursion into philosophy (and psychology) because I recently read a fine journalist, Patrick Lawrence, in an otherwise excellent article – “Trump, Bibi, and Ayn Rand’s ghost” – write the following about war criminals Trump and Netanyahu’s recent dinner meeting in which  Netanyahu shows Trump a letter he wrote nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, that Medea Benjamin of Code Pink rightly called “surreal:

We must reason through the matter such that we are able to recognize that these two appalling men were serious in their self-congratulation. The idea of themselves they presented before the media cameras is to them genuine: They sincerely understand themselves in this way—virtuous, courageous, standing heroically alone, bearing the world’s banner forward. (my emphasis)

Of what are such people made? This is our question. Attempting our answer leads us beyond politics and policy and into the spheres of psychology and pathology. I have long contended that any true understanding of global affairs cannot leave out consideration of the mental and emotional makeup of those who, for better or worse, are in positions of leadership. The Israeli PM, a case in point, exhibits clear symptoms of clinical psychosis if by this we mean a frayed relationship with reality.

Now Patrick Lawrence most forcefully and eloquently often condemns Trump and Netanyahu and their ilk as the genocidal war criminals that they are. Because I admire his work so much, I hesitate to pick up on his point about their sincerity, but I think it is essential to do so because of its wider implications.

Sartre claimed “sincerity,” purportedly the anti-thesis of self-deception, takes one deeper into self-deception. It goes to Patrick’s  question of what are such people made, of what are we all made; it goes behind psychology to its philosophical presuppositions and beyond the issue of pathology to a theological analysis of evil. While Lawrence’s analysis is focused not on these matters but on Ayn Rand’s influence on Trump, Netanyahu, and the wider individualistic culture – an astute analysis – it respectfully needs an a priori corrective.

I maintain that not for a second do Trump and Netanyahu believe they are genuine or virtuous or believe their own lies. They are the perfect examples of hypocrites, as in the word’s etymological sense of stage actor; pretender, dissembler, from the Greek hypokritēs. To repeat: it is impossible to believe one’s own lies since one knows they are not the truth one withholds.

Since it is obvious from their own words and actions and can be followed in real time video by any concerned person that they enthusiastically support the genocide of the Palestinians without an iota of compunction, can we say they are mentally ill?  I think not. That would suggest that if in some alternative universe they were tried for their crimes and convicted, they should be sent to a mental institution, not a prison, because they are sick. They are far beyond sick and are the current examples of their nations’ predecessors’ support for massive war crimes for a very long time. Both the U.S.A. and Zionist Israel were founded on similar claims of being  God-ordained countries that hid the satanic violence they used against native peoples and anyone who dared to suggest God was not on their sides.

Are they, as Lawrence says of Netanyahu, out of touch with reality? I think not. In any case, whose reality? Those in power, with the corporate mass media and tech companies as accomplices, create their own reality, as in the famous quote attributed to a George W. Bush aid by Ron Suskind: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.” This is even truer today with the use of artificial Intelligence. Their reality is not yours, mine, or Patrick Lawrence’s. Their facts are not ours. In any case, to suggest Netanyahu is out of touch with “reality” would suggest mental illness, not evil intent. Sartre would say that to do so is to excuse him, which is clearly not Patrick’s intention. The result, however, of saying that Netanyahu and Trump sincerely think of themselves as genuine does exactly that.

One can, of course, reject Sartre’s philosophical premise about freedom, bad faith, and lying in favor of psychological and biological explanations. This is the modern approach, which is commonplace. It assumes much. It needs to be understood within the historical context of the decline of religion and the rise of science, modernism, and post-modernism. It is not scientific, however, but pseudo-scientific, and delusional on its own claims to being scientific. I maintain that it fails to comprehend the nature of evil.

But like Sartre and Dostoevsky, I too believe we are fundamentally free. Which is not to say we are not confronted with biological and social limitations on that freedom. We are. But fundamentally we have free will.

In the ancient tragedy Oedipus Rex, known in its Greek original as Oedipus Tyrannus, Oedipus commits two heinous acts: he kills his father and marries his mother. He commits crimes against society and sins against the gods. But he does so unknowingly, unconsciously, as the play makes clear. Throughout the Western world in morality and law it has become accepted, as Aristotle argues in his Ethics, that consciousness and will are necessary for acts to be ethically bad or good.

If Netanyahu, Trump, and their ilk (to be clear, by ilk I mean Biden and former U.S. presidents and Israeli prime ministers before Netanyahu) are not conscious but believe they are being virtuous by mass murdering Palestinians and so many others, then they, like Oedipus, deserve sympathy. For they know not what they do. But they clearly know, so they deserve no sympathy. They deserve condemnation.

What could possess them, and all the other political leaders, to commit mass murder over and over again while reveling in their “accomplishments,” and to speak casually about using nuclear weapons? For that is what they do. I should emphasize that I am not referring to individuals who commit murder and other horrible crimes but to political leaders backed by millions of supporters. Institutional leaders who quite rationally sit in offices discussing the best methods for slaughtering millions.

Why do they act this way? Why did Hitler? Harry Truman with Hiroshima and Nagasaki? George W. Bush with Iraq? You know all the names, or should. They are legion, as are the statistics. The demonic nature of U.S. history from the start is there for all to contemplate, as the late theologian David Ray Griffin has documented in a number of books. No amount of feigned amnesia will erase the bloody truth of American history, the cheap grace we bestow upon ourselves. It is demonic, as is the history of Zionism in Palestine.

So we are left with the question that has engaged people for millennia: What is the nature of evil? The demonic? While not here entering into a long analysis of this question, I will cast my vote with those, such as Soren Kierkegaard, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Herman Melville, et al., who have claimed it goes much deeper than psychological sickness to a spiritual level and that the Enlightenment’s error was that it lacked a devil.

Satan is hard character to fathom, but when he is strutting his stuff, the consequences of his evil are blatantly real in the actions of those who have sold their souls for his favors.

In Melville’s Moby Dick the possessed Ahab says to Starbuck and to us:

Ahab is forever Ahab, man. This whole act is immutably decreed. ‘T’was rehearsed by thee and me a billion years before this ocean rolled. Fool! I am the Fates’ lieutenant, I act under orders.

The same clarity of mind and will can be said of Trump, Netanyahu, and their ilk. They know from whence their orders come; they echo Ahab’s words that “from hell’s heart” and “for hate’s sake” they will kill the innocent and exult in the slaughter.

God and Satan battle on.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Edward Curtin.

Anas Shallal’s family moved to Washington D.C. from Iraq in 1966, when he was 11 years old. His father had accepted a position with the U.S. office of the Arab League. Like any 11-year-old would be, Anas was overwhelmed by his new life in a new place, where he did not know the habits and customs, and where he did not speak the language. He had to deal with teasing and name calling, nasty cracks about his lack of English, the “weirdness” of his name – kids called him “Anus” — his whole first year.

But like just about any 11-year-old in the same circumstances, he figured out how to stay quiet, out of the way, and reasonably safe while he learned the ropes. When somebody called him Andy one day, the name stuck.

After less than 2 years at the Arab League, Andy’s dad left his job and bought a pizza restaurant near where the family lived. Dad had no wish to be a restaurateur, but he had to support his family, and when the popular neighborhood dining spot became available, he purchased it. That was a fateful move for Andy, because working in a pizza joint launched him on a lifelong trajectory that took him into the restaurant business, political protest, support of the arts, involvement with all manner of brilliant, talented, cranky and committed people.

Andy was a smart kid and graduated from high school at age 15. He did what his parents expected by entering college to pursue a career in medicine. But he had no interest in doctoring and dropped out of school after a short time. On the loose, he had to make a living, and working at the Pizza Kaezano was a natural. And he found out pretty quickly that he loved it, putting in long hours perfecting his kitchen skills and the fine points of providing first-class service. He loved the art of satisfying customers’ needs, memorized the favorite dishes of the regulars, and chatted with them about their families. The skills he developed on that first job, he continued to cultivate as he went on to work in several first-class restaurants in and around Washington D.C., where he encountered people of position and power while serving them plates of escargot and exquisite lemon souffles.

Then Andy was ready for the next step, a restaurant of his own – or in this case, a restaurant in financial partnership with his father and brother. Skewers, serving Middle Eastern food, was in a townhouse in the heart of D.C., where bureaucrats and politicians and journalists and art collectors and non-profiteers could stop in for lunch. The Sallals added another restaurant on the floor above Skewers — Café Luna, serving the evening crowd.

At the same time that Shallal was running the restaurants, he was also becoming increasingly involved in citizen politics. He was more interested in the left shoulder of the road than the white line down the middle. He opposed the first Iraq war, got involved in Jerry Brown’s campaign for president, and at the request of a regular restaurant patron, Ralph Nader, hosted a hugely successful evening with Howard Zinn in a space on the top floor that he filled with books, dubbed Luna Books and Democracy Center. Andy began to envision how a restaurant could be something so much more than just a place to eat. Following that first event with Zinn, he produced a couple more — a production of Zinn’s play, Marx in Soho, and the launch of his autobiography, You Can’t be Neutral on a Moving Train.

Andy finally ended the business arrangement with his father and brother so he could operate on his own terms. His brain was bubbling over with new ideas for restaurants and theaters and gathering spaces for activists. When you read the book you’ll be amazed at his fecund mind, his ease in making friends of the famous as well as ordinary folks, his commitment to peace and justice and excellent comestibles. And you will surely appreciate the energy and experience and vision that brought Busboys and Poets into existence. And today there are several Busboys and Poets in the D.C. area.

A short review cannot do justice to the wealth of stories contained in this highly entertaining book nor to the spirit of the man who wrote it. At the end of the book, Andy writes:

I knew now that I had created something more than a restaurant. Busboys and

Poets would be a sanctuary for those that believe that a better world is possible.

not Black, not white, just human beings looking to connect with other like-minded

folk…

To be continued …

Andy Shallal is a guy you’d like to have a meal with.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Buff Whitman-Bradley.

Anas Shallal’s family moved to Washington D.C. from Iraq in 1966, when he was 11 years old. His father had accepted a position with the U.S. office of the Arab League. Like any 11-year-old would be, Anas was overwhelmed by his new life in a new place, where he did not know the habits and customs, and where he did not speak the language. He had to deal with teasing and name calling, nasty cracks about his lack of English, the “weirdness” of his name – kids called him “Anus” — his whole first year.

But like just about any 11-year-old in the same circumstances, he figured out how to stay quiet, out of the way, and reasonably safe while he learned the ropes. When somebody called him Andy one day, the name stuck.

After less than 2 years at the Arab League, Andy’s dad left his job and bought a pizza restaurant near where the family lived. Dad had no wish to be a restaurateur, but he had to support his family, and when the popular neighborhood dining spot became available, he purchased it. That was a fateful move for Andy, because working in a pizza joint launched him on a lifelong trajectory that took him into the restaurant business, political protest, support of the arts, involvement with all manner of brilliant, talented, cranky and committed people.

Andy was a smart kid and graduated from high school at age 15. He did what his parents expected by entering college to pursue a career in medicine. But he had no interest in doctoring and dropped out of school after a short time. On the loose, he had to make a living, and working at the Pizza Kaezano was a natural. And he found out pretty quickly that he loved it, putting in long hours perfecting his kitchen skills and the fine points of providing first-class service. He loved the art of satisfying customers’ needs, memorized the favorite dishes of the regulars, and chatted with them about their families. The skills he developed on that first job, he continued to cultivate as he went on to work in several first-class restaurants in and around Washington D.C., where he encountered people of position and power while serving them plates of escargot and exquisite lemon souffles.

Then Andy was ready for the next step, a restaurant of his own – or in this case, a restaurant in financial partnership with his father and brother. Skewers, serving Middle Eastern food, was in a townhouse in the heart of D.C., where bureaucrats and politicians and journalists and art collectors and non-profiteers could stop in for lunch. The Sallals added another restaurant on the floor above Skewers — Café Luna, serving the evening crowd.

At the same time that Shallal was running the restaurants, he was also becoming increasingly involved in citizen politics. He was more interested in the left shoulder of the road than the white line down the middle. He opposed the first Iraq war, got involved in Jerry Brown’s campaign for president, and at the request of a regular restaurant patron, Ralph Nader, hosted a hugely successful evening with Howard Zinn in a space on the top floor that he filled with books, dubbed Luna Books and Democracy Center. Andy began to envision how a restaurant could be something so much more than just a place to eat. Following that first event with Zinn, he produced a couple more — a production of Zinn’s play, Marx in Soho, and the launch of his autobiography, You Can’t be Neutral on a Moving Train.

Andy finally ended the business arrangement with his father and brother so he could operate on his own terms. His brain was bubbling over with new ideas for restaurants and theaters and gathering spaces for activists. When you read the book you’ll be amazed at his fecund mind, his ease in making friends of the famous as well as ordinary folks, his commitment to peace and justice and excellent comestibles. And you will surely appreciate the energy and experience and vision that brought Busboys and Poets into existence. And today there are several Busboys and Poets in the D.C. area.

A short review cannot do justice to the wealth of stories contained in this highly entertaining book nor to the spirit of the man who wrote it. At the end of the book, Andy writes:

I knew now that I had created something more than a restaurant. Busboys and

Poets would be a sanctuary for those that believe that a better world is possible.

not Black, not white, just human beings looking to connect with other like-minded

folk…

To be continued …

Andy Shallal is a guy you’d like to have a meal with.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Buff Whitman-Bradley.

One such statement, released on July 21, proved to be yet another one of those flossy effusions made by, as Macbeth might have said, idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The idiots numbered many: 28 international partners, including the foreign ministers of 27 states and, obviously not wanting to miss out, the EU Commissioner for Equality, Preparedness and Crisis Management. All, bar Australia, were from Europe. “We, the signatories listed below, come together with a simple, urgent message: the war in Gaza must end now.”

The statement goes on to mention the drearily obvious. “The Israeli government’s aid delivery model is dangerous, fuels instability and deprives Gazans of human dignity.” The “drip feeding of aid and inhumane killing of civilians, including children, seeking to meet their most basic needs of food and water” deserved condemnation. The deaths of over 800 Palestinians (the numbers are most certainly higher) while seeking aid was “horrifying”. Even here, the language lacked rage. Israel’s “denial of essential humanitarian assistance to the civilian population is unacceptable.” The government “must comply with its obligations under international humanitarian law.”

To that end, Israel was called upon to restore the flow of aid and enable the work of the United Nations and humanitarian NGOs to resume in the Strip. This is obviously something that the Netanyahu government is conscious of avoiding, given the systematic program of controlled starvation and deprivation being inflicted.

To add balance, the statement also notes the plight of the Israeli hostages still held by Hamas, their continued detention also something to be condemned. They were to be immediately and unconditionally released with a negotiated ceasefire being the best way of doing so.

The signatories do go so far as to acknowledge the dangers and intentions of Israel’s administrative measures that seek “territorial or demographic change in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The E1 settlement plan announced by Israel’s Civil Administration, if implemented, would divide a Palestinian state in two, marking a flagrant breach of international law and critically undermine the two-state solution.” The West Bank is also recognised in similar light, with the signatories urging a cessation to the violence taking place against Palestinians and a halt to the building of settlements across the territory “including East Jerusalem”.

These statements are always interesting for what they omit. No toothy measures to address the maltreatment of Palestinian civilians are stipulated, other than an encouragement of “a common effort to bring this terrible conflict to an end”. A benign, most unthreatening promise is made: the prospect of taking “further action to support an immediate ceasefire and a political pathway to security and peace for Israelis, Palestinians and the entire region.” This may be code for recognition of a Palestinian state, fanciful given the systematic pulverisation of the people who would inhabit it. The signatory list also omits Germany and, most importantly of all, the United States, Israel’s arch guardian and evangelical sponsor.

The US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, gave us a flavour of feelings in Washington about the signatories in a post on X. “How embarrassing for a nation to side [with] a terror group like Hamas & blame a nation whose civilians were massacred for fighting to get hostages released.” In another post that made a vague shot at justifying the unjustifiable, the ambassador absolved Israel in its conduct; only the militant group Hamas deserved exclusive blame. The nations in question had “put pressure on @Israel instead of savages of Hamas! Gaza suffers for 1 reason: Hamas rejects EVERY proposal. Blaming Israel is irrational.”

The Israeli foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar, ever lurking in the twilight of alternative reality, reasoned the statement away, much as relatives would the views of a demented, unloved aunt. “If Hamas embraces you – you are in the wrong place.” Praise from the group was itself “proof of the mistake they [the signatory countries] made – part of them out of good intentions and part of them out of an obsession against Israel.”

While the various foreign ministers were flashing their plumage of principles and international humanitarian law, the Israeli Defense Forces had busily commenced an operation on a part of Gaza they have yet to level: Deir al-Balah. Given its importance as a humanitarian hub that still houses UN staff and guesthouses, more slaughter is imminent.

Till Israel assumes the status of a pariah state it seemingly craves to become, its rogue army confined and depleted, its economy humbled and isolated, the industrial appetite for slaughter and dispossession will only continue. The Palestinians will be left to be relics of moral anguish, banished to the footnotes of bloodied history along with many more statements of concern and sheer impotence.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

Humaira Asghar Ali Chaudhry (1992 – 2025) was a Pakistani social media influencer, actress, model, reality TV star, and theatre artist who was linked with socially conscious theater groups. She was also into sculpting and painting. She was a graduate of the prestigious National College of Arts (NCA) in Lahore with degrees in Fine Arts, TV, and Film. She earned her Masters in Philosophy from Punjab University.

Humaira last accessed her Facebook account on September 11, 2024  and her Instagram account on September 30. The last time she used her phone was on October 7 when she called 14 people but, none of them picked up her call. She left messages. One of them was an Islamabad-based famous director.

That was the last time she used her phone.

Humaira had been living alone in an apartment in Karachi’s Ittehad Commercial area of DHA Phase VI since 2018. According to Humaira’s landlord, the last rent she paid was in May 2024. The landlord complained to the courts of not receiving rent since then, a court-appointed bailiff with police joined him to visit the flat on July 8, 2025. When no one opened the door, it was broken into, and they found Humaira’s decomposed body lying on the floor. Electricity to her apartment had been cut-off since October 2024, for non-payment of bill. Humaira’s greatly decayed unrecognizable body was transported to Lahore to her family. She was buried on July 11. Her funeral was attended by only a few people.

Without being judgemental, actress Durefishan Saleem had a simple heartfelt message:

“Been thinking about life a lot lately. Not in terms of big dreams or loud success, but in the small, quiet moments.”

“I pray, with all my heart, that whenever [death] comes, for me or anyone, it doesn’t come in silence. Not in loneliness. Not in an empty room. But with love in the air. With familiar hands nearby. With someone who truly knew your heart.”

The police report was released on July 18, said chemical examination of her remains found no psychotropic drugs, intoxicants, tranquilizers, or any poisonous substances in her system.

She had three cellphones with over 2,000 saved contacts. With at least 75 people, she was in frequent contact and had had long conversations.

Stylist Danish Maqsood worked with Humaira on two photo-shoots, one in 2023 and the other on October 2, 2024. Maqsood’s request to Humaira for releasing images on social media didn’t receive an approval from her:

“When the request wasn’t approved, we tried calling her several times. After receiving no response, we messaged her on WhatsApp, but there was still no reply.”

He informed some digital publications about Humaira’s disappearance. After great efforts, he succeeded in a couple of them reporting her missing but, Maqsood regrets: it failed to garner attention of most people in the industry.

Humaira had not been in touch with her family for a long time. We don’t know if there were any family problems; speculation would probably be out of line.

But there remain several questions:

• In the nine months of her absence, why did none of the 75 people she often talked to become worried about her whereabouts?
• Did any of the last 14 people she contacted try to call her back? If they did, why didn’t they follow-up?
• In the world of celebrities, parties are as common as regular people going to the dollar store, why did no one notice her disappearance?
• In one of her last calls, she called a director which may have been work related, did that director think about what state she was in, and did he follow up on her missed call?

Entertainment industries worldwide do not have good reputation. Many people attracted to the glamor get exploited. The phrase rising Sun gets worshiped is very applicable to this industry. Once your star is down, you’re not allowed within the vicinity of the movie moguls’ sight; and you’re out of their mind. Then there are those who never find work which could lead to frustration, depression, and rejection that can lead to suicidal tendencies.

On 19 June, the dead body of another actress Ayesha Khan (1941 – 2025) was found as result of the neighbors complaint of a strong odor emanating from her place. She had been dead for a week! It’s tragic that people are lying dead for days and months without anyone knowing about it.

Most people working in the industry, including directors, actors, spot boys, lighting technicians, etc. don’t get paid on time.

Film and TV serial director Mehreen Jabbar:

“In the US, even with all their issues, there’s a fixed schedule for payments. People know when they’ll get paid. Here, you have to chase payments like beggars. Ask anyone and they’ll have horror stories. This is across every channel and production house. They [the crew members] do the hardest labour. But with no union, no rights, and no fair pay, they remain trapped. Working in Pakistan has become more disheartening. Compared to other places, the difference in professionalism and organization is stark.”

Many artists have the same complain including, senior artists who have now started voicing their grievances in the media.

(Renowned Indian singers Sunidhi Chauhan and Sonu Nigam said there are instances where they don’t get paid because Bollywood mafia controls things.)

There is no doubt Humaira was desperately looking for work. One of her two bank accounts had only Rs390,000 or about $1,375. The call to her close friend Dureshehwar revealed she was looking for work:

“I’m so sorry, I was traveling, caught up here and there. I’m so happy you’re in Makkah [on a pilgrimage]. Please pray a lot for me… Pray a lot from your heart for your cute friend/sister. For my career, please remember me in your prayers. You have to pray a lot for me.”

Pakistani society is very conservative and is rough on women, particularly on single women. The Global Gender Gap Index 2025 lists 148 countries of which Pakistan is ranked 148. Only 24% women are part of the labor force.

Sociologist Nida Kirmani gives an example of a woman named Saima who lived in a poor conservative neighborhood but found work in a very posh locality with a multinational department store where she made four times more money than most women, and even many men. She would put on an abaya (a loose overgarment) to cover her uniform but remove it once she reached her work because at work she would have seemed out of place in an abaya. Fortunately, her work company provided pick-and-drop service for their employees, otherwise, she would have faced verbal and or sexual harassment during her commute to work. Nevertheless, she still faced contempt from her neighbors and extended family members.

Coming back to Humaira, the cultural critic Aimun Faisal points out:

“It appears, at least to our moral gatekeepers, that there are no good women left in Pakistan.

“And so, perhaps understandably, people celebrate their deaths, leave their decaying bodies unclaimed, and repurpose their broken corpses as stark reminders — cautionary examples used to sermonize virtue. They preach goodness from behind their monetized YouTube accounts, from behind verified Twitter accounts, from the benches of the superior courts, from their pulpits, and from their news channels, and drawing rooms. And for their guidance, we are eternally grateful.”

Actor Osman Khalid Butt went after morality brigade and money makers:

“Stop turning people’s real trauma into content. Stop projecting your morality onto someone who’s not here to defend herself. Stop the speculation and the judgment, and the deflection. For God’s sake, just stop.”

Actress Mawra Hocane extended a helping hand:

“If you’re in trouble or caught in spiraling thoughts, if I have known you briefly or extensively, if you’re a friend or an acquaintance, if you’re from my fraternity and you feel I will understand your pressures, please reach out!”

Suggestion

What Mawra should do is get some of her fraternity on board to form a hotline service that artists in crisis, depression, and other problems are able to access. Also the service should try to reach artists who have been active but have suddenly vanished, like Humaira.

Humaira in the womb of death

for nine months,
life grows in the womb of a living being
it grows into a fetus
then turns into a human being
where as lifeless Humaira resided
nine months in the womb of death
when she was found,
one could say she was reborn but in a dead state
she was dead …
but became live fodder for news & social medias
many …
gossip-mongers, influencers, reporters, & others, cashed in
voyeuristic vloggers and commercial cameras not far behind
commercialism neither respects life, nor has regard for death
and custodians of morality too …
especially for a single woman from showbiz
why did it happen –
how can we stop more Humairas from happening?
for such questions,
the state has no interest,
nor any intention to pursue
the state resources are for
the ruling class’ families, friends, and donors …

VIDEO: Ahmad Ali Butt/ Youtube

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by B.R. Gowani.

And this brings me to what I referred to earlier as a reaffirmation of my views on the basic problem confronting the underdeveloped countries. The principal insights, which must not be obscured by matters of secondary or tertiary importance, are two. The first is that, if what is sought is rapid economic development, comprehensive economic planning is indispensable… if the increase in a country’s aggregate output is to attain the magnitude, of, say, 8 to 10 per cent per annum; if in order to achieve it, the mode of utilization of a nation’s human and material resources is to be radically changed, with certain less productive lines of economic activity abandoned and other more rewarding ones taken up; then only a deliberate, long range planning effort can assure the attainment of the goal…

The second insight of crucial importance is that no planning worth the name is possible in a society in which the means of production remain under the control of private interests which administer them with a view to their owners’ maximum profits (or security or other private advantage). For it is of the very essence of comprehensive planning for economic development – what renders it, indeed, indispensable – that the pattern of allocation and utilization of resources which it must impose if it is to accomplish its purpose, is necessarily different from-the pattern prevailing under the status quo…
— xxviii-xxix, Foreword to 1962 printing, The Political Economy of Growth, Paul A. Baran [emphasis added]

It is surely of some interest that the late Professor Baran — reassessing his important, insightful, and extremely influential 1957 book, The Political Economy of Growth — grounds his contribution to the liberation of the post-colonial world in two “insights”: 1. The necessity of “comprehensive” economic planning over the irrational decision-making of the market, and 2. The impossibility of having effective planning with the major productive forces in the hands of private entities operating for profits.

Put simply, Baran is arguing that the most promising humane and rational escape from the legacy of colonialism is for the developing countries to choose the socialist path going forward and adopt planning as a necessary, rational condition for achieving that goal.

It is of equal interest that many who consider Baran to be one of the fathers of dependency theory — the theory that development is most significantly hindered by the state-to-state structural barriers imposed by the “core” on the “periphery” or the “North” on the “South” — have abandoned Baran’s key “insights” for an approach that argues for open, unhindered “fair” exchange and the rationality of markets.

For many of today’s Western left, the locus of international inequalities is found in the economic relations between states. Exploitation — in the form of taking advantage of uneven development or resource differences — undoubtedly occurs in the relations between states, systematically in the colonial era, more indirectly today. That is just to say that competition between capitalist states within a global imperialist system will produce and reproduce various inequalities. It is popular to capture this as conflict between an advantaged North and a disadvantaged South — while the geographical reference is most inexact, it is widely understood. From Wallerstein, Arrighi, and Gunder Frank, through Amin, and an important consensus today, the central feature of imperialism is thought to be the vast differences in wealth between the rich and poor countries. Moreover, they share the belief that existing structures maintain those differences, structures established and protected by the richest countries.

Of course, they are right to object to these inequalities and the practices and institutions that preserve them. And Paul Baran was acutely aware of these structures, but also attendant to the specific historical conditions influencing the individual countries — their differences and similarities. He understands the trajectory of the post-colonial states:

Thus, the peoples who came into the orbit of Western capitalist expansion found themselves in the twilight of feudalism and capitalism enduring the worst features of both worlds, and the entire impact of imperialist subjugation to boot. To oppression by their feudal lords, ruthless but tempered by tradition, was added domination by foreign and domestic capitalists, callous and limited only by what the traffic would bear. The obscurantism and arbitrary violence inherited from their feudal past was combined with the rationality and sharply calculating rapacity of their capitalist present. Their exploitation was multiplied, yet its fruits were not to increase their productive wealth; these went abroad or served to support a parasitic bourgeoisie at home. They lived in abysmal misery, yet they had no prospect of a better tomorrow. They existed under capitalism, yet there was no accumulation of capital. They lost their time-honored means of livelihood, their arts and crafts, yet there was no modern industry to provide new ones in their place. They were thrust into extensive contact with the advanced science of the West, yet remained in a state of the darkest backwardness (p. 144).

At the same time, Baran is fully aware of the predatory nature of foreign capital, denying its “usefulness” and affirming its sole domestic benefit to the merchant class.

Perhaps his clearest statement of the logic of imperialism appears on pages 196-197:

To be sure, neither imperialism itself nor its modus operandi and ideological trimmings are today what they were fifty or a hundred years ago. Just as outright looting of the outside world has yielded to organized trade with the underdeveloped countries, in which plunder has been rationalized and routinized by a mechanism of impeccably ‘correct’ contractual relations, so has the rationality of smoothly functioning commerce grown into the modern, still more advanced, still more rational system of imperialist exploitation. Like all other historically changing phenomena, the contemporary form of imperialism contains and preserves all its earlier modalities, but raises them to a new level. Its central feature is that it is now directed not solely towards the rapid extraction of large sporadic gains from the objects of its domination, it is no longer content with merely assuring a more or less steady flow of these gains over a somewhat extended period. Propelled by well-organized, rationally conducted monopolistic enterprise, it seeks today to rationalize the flow of these receipts so as to be able to count on it in perpetuity. And this points to the main task of imperialism in our time: to prevent, or, if that is impossible, to slow down and to control the economic development of underdeveloped countries.

Notice that Baran acknowledges, along with today’s fashionable dependency theory, that imperialism’s “main task” is to impose underdevelopment. But imperialism’s agent is identified as the “monopolistic enterprise” and not specifically an antagonistic state or its government. Of course, the state hosting monopoly corporations does all it can to promote and protect their interests, but it should not be confused with either the exploiter or the beneficiary of exploitation: it is “the well-organized, rationally conducted monopolistic enterprise” that bleeds the workers of the developing countries. With monopoly capitalism dominating the state, the state plays a critical, essential role as an enabler for the most powerful monopolies in the global economy.

For Baran, the key to liberating the former colonies from the stranglehold of rapacious monopolies is not a reordering of international relations, not a campaign for a level international playing field, not alternative market institutions, nor a coalition of dissenters from the status quo, but a radical change in the social and economic structure of the oppressed country.

In this regard, Baran differs from many contemporary dependency theorists who pose multipolarity as an answer to the North-South inequalities and welcome the BRICS development as constituting an anti-imperialist stage. They believe that breaking the stranglehold of the dominant great power — the US — will somehow eliminate the logic of contemporary imperialism, that it will disable the “mechanism of impeccably ‘correct’ contractual relations” at the heart of “core” / “periphery” relations.

But this is not Baran’s thinking. He opts instead for an active engagement of the workers, peasants, and intellectuals on the periphery. His is a class approach. For Baran, working people are not dried leaves, blown this way and that by the powerful winds of great powers. Rather, they are the agents of their own liberation.

Baran draws out the potential of the post-colonial masses through his innovative concept of “surplus.”¹ Baran asks revolutionaries in the emerging countries to realize the potential surplus that they may access for development provided that they engage in a “reorganization of the production and distribution of social output” and accept “far reaching changes to the structure of society.” (p. 24). Baran emphasizes four available sources for the surplus:

One is society’s excess consumption (predominantly on the part of the upper income groups…), the second is the output lost to society through the existence of unproductive workers, the third is the output lost because of the irrational and wasteful organization of the existing productive apparatus, and the fourth is the output foregone owing to the existence of unemployment caused primarily by the anarchy of capitalist production and the deficiency of effective demand. (p. 24)

By recovering this surplus, Baran contends that the post-colonial world can begin “the steep ascent” — the escape from the legacy of colonialism and the stranglehold of capitalism. At the same time, Baran concedes that a resource-poor country, an economy violently distorted by a close neighbor — a country like Cuba — will need assistance from the socialist community, an assistance that has been less forthcoming since the demise of the Soviet Union.

The Multipolaristas and the BRICS advocates do not share Baran’s confidence in working people. They cannot conceive a revolutionary answer to the problem of development. They relegate socialism to the far, far-off future, and argue for a more humane capitalism. Their vision ends with establishing a new regime of “structural adjustments” that will blunt the economic power of the US to make way for a plurality of powers competing for global markets, but in a “friendly” way. This is the social-democratic vision taken to the global level. But this is not Baran’s vision.

Like their national counterparts, these global social democrats envision a world in which reforming capitalist social relations — taming the worst monopoly scoundrels — will result in the proverbial arc bending toward justice. BRICS, they believe, will give us a level playing field for the monopoly corporations to roam more fairly.

A recent Oxfam report on inequality in Africa suggests that there is plenty of potential surplus available for building a developmental program based on a class-based approach of appropriation and surplus recovery:

● Africa’s four most affluent billionaires have $57.4 billion in wealth, which is greater than ~50% of the continent’s 1.5 billion people.

● While Africa had no billionaires in 2000, today, there are 23 with a combined wealth of $112.6 billion. The wealth of these 23 ultra-rich Africans has grown by 56% in the last 5 years.

● The richest 5% on the continent have accumulated almost $4 trillion in wealth, more than twice the wealth of the rest of the people in Africa (by comparison, the richest 10% of US households hold two-thirds of US wealth).

● Almost half of the world’s most unequal countries are in Africa.

● The bottom 50% of Africans own less than 1% of the wealth of the continent (by comparison, the bottom 50% of US households own 3% of US wealth).

Presumably, the report does not include the billionaires like Elon Musk, Patrick Soon-Shiong, Rodney Sacks, and many others who relocated and invested outside of Africa. Eight of the top foreign-born US billionaires are from Africa.

Clearly, class, and not state-to-state relations, is at the center of Africa’s human development problem. The “potential surplus” accumulated in the hands of so few would well serve a peoples’ development program that could reverse the concentration of wealth now starving the continent’s poor. Appropriated wealth could well serve an industrial drive and the rationalization of agriculture. More than enough wealth is available in Africa to implement Paul Baran’s twin insights that open this article.

The BRICS movement — a coalition of partners aligning to create a different international exchange network that would be less one-sided, less privileging wealthy nations– is not itself a bad thing. The proverbial level playing field — the fair and free marketplace — is a proper goal for capitalist participants competing internationally. But it is not a Left project. It moves the goal no closer in the struggle for justice for working people. It is not class-partisan, and thus ultimately will likely benefit those who gain from the proper functioning of capitalist economic relations in the various countries disadvantaged by existing relations. And we know from the Oxfam report who they are.

One can see the limitations of multipolarity from the recent Rio de Janeiro meeting of BRICS leaders. There is much talk of a “more equitable global order,” of state-to-state “cooperation,” of broader “participation,” even a pledge to fight disease and extreme poverty. The foreign ministers and heads of state dutifully denounce war and aggression. The current President, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva “called BRICS a successor of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).” What he didn’t say was that NAM broke up when Cuba transcended toothless resolutions and declarations and actually defended Angola against apartheid South African aggression in a bloody war that brought the criminal regime to its knees. The BRICS response to the attack on Iran brings “toothlessness” back to mind.

Baran’s revolutionary path is not an easy one. Others have tried and failed. From Nkrumah and Lumumba to Thomas Sankara, revolutionaries in Africa have taken steps in this direction, only to be thwarted by powerful forces determined to snuff out even a beginning. That alone should tell the EuroAmerican left that it is the path worth following.

We should not pretend that reforming global market relations—any more than reforming national market relations– will secure justice for working people. That will come when the workers, peasants, and intellectuals of the global South decide that justice is impossible while “the means of production remain under the control of private interests which administer them with a view to their owners’ maximum profits.”

ENDNOTE:

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Greg Godels.

The ocean was flat as a pond and paddling our sea kayaks at a good clip we reached the mysterious island in less than an hour.

“No human, and probably no other mammalian, has ever set foot here,” announced the guide. “The island is made up of irregular columns of lava rocks, so tall and steep they make the place uninhabitable. Except for birds, of course. Tens of thousands of them nest here, all kinds.”

“What’s this bitter stench?” a woman asked.

“Guano, bird droppings. Some scientific types have estimated there’s a fifteen to twenty foot layer of guano covering the rocks. That’s the reason the island is nicknamed NPK.”

“That’s a strange moniker if ever there was one.”

“Apparently guano is the best fertilizer there is, definitely the most natural. Until the synthetic ones,were developed in early 20th century, guano was used in agriculture worldwide. N stands for nitrogen, P is phosphorus and K is potassium. The last one doesn’t make sense, at least not in English. It’s probably the Latin or Greek word for potassium. Anyway, that’s the story.”

It took us four hours kayaking around the beautiful but stinky place. Then we paddled back to our hotel standing on a real beach where the air smelled fresh and the sand felt smooth, caressing the feet.

Proposal

Background: During my recent vacation in the Pacific I found out about a large uninhibited island, nicknamed NPK. It is made up of volcanic rock and guano, the latter a highly valuable fertilizer. I asked the statistics department to roughly calculate the amount of guano. They estimate it could be over one hundred thousand metric tons. Organic-vegetable farmers are willing to pay up to ten dollars a kilogram (2.2 lbs) for good quality guano.

Plan A: We flatten NPK by bombing until it becomes manageable, i.e., flat, so workers can enter and surfacemine the guano. Finding manpower will present little to no difficulty; all the islands near NPK have large numbers of unemployed, healthy young men. The current average wage over there is below a dollar an hour; if we pay them two fifty, we’re going to be able to pick the crème de la crème. While the functional illiteracy rate is also relatively high, it may not matter, and in a way advantageous, since the work involves only shoveling and heavy lifting. Health services are provided by the islands’ medicine men and elderly female quacks, two-three members of Doctors Without Borders and a dozen or so young volunteers (mainly nurses) from the western world. In short, no health coverage need be provided. Icing on the cake, the natives are self-involved individualistic types and as a result their labor unions are rather primitive and fragile.

Plan B: If members of the ruling elite become greedy and demand excessively high cuts for themselves, we foment an uprising among the destitute masses, overthrow the regime, and install loyal, less greedy leadership. Next step, go to Plan A.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by J.S. O’Keefe.

We can only speculate why the Constitution’s Framers omitted a national recall in their lengthy deliberations in drafting the rules governing this young nation. They seem to have counted on a provision that a House impeachment and a Senate trial could oust a president. Somehow, they could not conceive of an autocratic or impaired president failing to uphold the Constitution, ruling a cowardly Congress, ignoring the courts, and crowning himself as the nation’s first lifetime dictator.

For starters, they obviously did not want a parliament or royalty to rule, nor voting by women, the property-less, and Native Americans. After all, how could the uneducated read or understand such ballot issues as budgets, taxes, war, corruption, property lines, gerrymandering, and the like? Besides, political leaders and officeholders recognized that voters might oust Senate and House members, Supreme Court judges.

Also, logistics of conducting a nationwide referendum or initiative was a factor, much less paying millions for it. Interestingly, it certainly hasn’t been a problem in electing a president in our 250-year history.

It also took a century before people recognized that state legislators failed to pass laws desperately needed. As an election expert on Ballotpedia’s website explained the origin of such oversight:

By the late 19th century, many citizens wanted to increase their check on representative government. Members of the populist and progressive movements were dissatisfied with the government; they felt that wealthy special interest groups controlled the government and that citizens had no power to break this control. A comprehensive platform of political reforms was proposed that included women’s suffrage, secret ballots, direct election of [legislative] senators, recall elections and primary elections.

The theory of the referendum process was that the individual was capable of enhancing the representative government. The populists—who believed citizens should rule the elected and not allow the elected to rule the people—and the progressives took advantage of methods that were already in place for amending state constitutions, and they began pushing state legislators to add an amendment that would allow for an initiative and popular referendum process.

Thus, the recall referendum/initiative system was born in those 19 states—but not for a president and other federal officials.

Soon, recalls took out mayors, judges, and two governors (North Dakota in 1921, California in 2003) and nearly California’s Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021. He won by 69.1 percent of the vote, having raised $70 million for media promotion. And he also campaigned around the state to “meet-and-greet” voters. The estimated cost to California taxpayers: $215 million. Last year, Newsom faced yet another recall by opponents who then failed to get the required 1,311,963 petition signatures in time to make the state ballot.

A presidential recall referendum would require a Constitutional Amendment by passage from Congress and state legislators—and approval by 38 states with a seven-year deadline to gather signatures. So prospects for expelling Trump do seem bleak. But all the 27 Amendments once had the same challenges and met them despite geographic distances and lacking today’s electronic communication systems.

But the majority of states passed the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) within the first year. Trump has three and a half years left to continue wreaking havoc on the American public and exchanging democracy for a dictatorship. If his first six months is any indication of peoples’ reaction to his rule, it brought at least five million angry protesters to the streets in a “No Kings” demonstrations against him a day before his 79th birthday. So consider what his continuing violations of the Constitution and democracy will do to destroy both during this term.

However, a new factor about election numbers can now foretell favorable outcomes if a recall movement gets started:

If the political marker of 3.5 percent of a nation’s voters opposes a dictator, the regime will fold, according to extensive long-term quantitative research noted recently by Harvard University professor Erica Chenoweth . America’s electorate was 154,000,000 in 2024, so 3.5 percent means it would take only 5.4 million voters to win a Constitutional Amendment referendum for recalling Trump.

Another factor is that far more millions would be voting in a Trump recall election than in 2024. For example, those five million No Kings protesters have family and friends who vote. So do those who couldn’t or wouldn’t participate. Then, add Trump’s social and healthcare victims affected by his “Big, Beautiful” budget-cutting bill he just signed into law. Like the 71, 258, 215 currently enrolled in Medicaid who will lose its benefits. Not to mention recipients’ families and friends. The 41 million on Trump’s chopping block for SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) certainly would vote for a recall Amendment. So would the 73.9 million receiving Social Security benefits he is threatening. Include, too, the tens of thousands of federal employees (plus family/friends) who have just been fired/laid off by Trump’s hatchet man Elon Musk.

Multiply the total by 3.5 percent.

Republicans in Congress who voted for that bill because of Trumpian and donor threats can count that percentage. If they can’t or won’t, furious and outspoken constituents in town halls or at campaign rallies will awaken them in the months before the 2026 mid-term elections. So will public confrontations of state legislators.

In such a hostile constituent climate, it would seem to be fairly easy for them to ignore heavy pressure by Trump and donors to pass a recall Amendment. He will, of course, veto it, but Congress can override the veto with a two-thirds affirmative vote in both houses (House: 290; Senate: 67). Apply that 3.5 percent to those totals.

Another supportive factor for a recall Amendment is the historical precedent of success by people finally ridding their countries from years of repressive and rapacious rulers. The French did it with revolution and guillotine, beginning in 1789. Our revolution began brewing in 1775 and took eight years of war to free us from Britain’s mad King George III. Both bloody uprisings were inspired and patterned by the achievement of democracy and people’s rights, first won 800 years ago in England. That’s when its barons forced King John to apply the royal seal approving Magna Carta (the Great Charter) June 15, 1215 on Runnymede meadows.

That monumentally important document ended immunity for imperious, narcissistic kings under the centuries-old “Divine Right” policy, starting with the feckless King John’s tyrannical reign (1166-1216). Most of its 63 clauses set out the rights of subjects and kings, established British law, and influenced the authors of both the U.S. Constitution and France’s 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

John was a pampered, favored youngest son of Henry II and one of four brothers. He inherited a fortune, vast taxable properties in England and whole sections of France. With a lascivious nature, he married twice and had numerous mistresses despite often being away with the army to fight the French from stealing his holdings. His early struggle to seize the throne revealed deviousness, murderous ambition, insecurity, paranoia, physical cowardice—and greed. As a king, he jailed opponents, bullied absolute loyalty from his officials and the army, stole lands from the nobility. Worst of all, he never ceased extorting excessive taxes from the elite, commoners, and the English church.

Sound like a president we know?

The bad years began for King John in 1209. He was briefly excommunicated for opposing Pope Innocent III’s choice of England’s Archbishop of Canterbury. He suspected the candidate’s involvement with the growing unrest of barons and the people. After an attempted assassination in 1212 in the 14th year of his reign of terror, John went after the barons he suspected of the deed. But they had banded together, began drafting Magna Carta (chiefly protecting themselves from future kings), and raised an army against him for a civil war.

Only fear of certain defeat by the barons and a near-empty treasury could have brought a humbled King John to use negotiation to escape Magna Carta’s clauses. He had no intention of obeying them—especially the security clause (61) permitting 25 barons to seize his property and “distrain” him if he disobeyed the charter. He even got the Pope to annul the document a month later. The war ended with John’s death from dysentery the following year. By 1225, Magna Carta was in force.

This extraordinary historical event could now be repeated almost exactly 810 years later, lacking only the same solution: a final uprising of the high and low classes to strip Trump of his office and fortunes by a recall Amendment. It’s not so wild a dream at all.

We don’t have the vast organizational obstacles of the 13th century that took 17 years to put Magna Carta in place. But we do have the same furious energy and zeal of King John’s outraged public to oust a dictator and save the Constitution and democracy.

Consider that some 500 national organizations exist—MoveOn, Indivisable, and SEIU to Win Without War, Greenpeace, Patriotic Millionaires, and ACLU—to set up a nationwide alliance for such a cause.

The speed, efficiency, and effectiveness of the recent No Kings protest against Trump’s dictatorial regime shows what’s possible when a coalition is galvanized for a great historical cause. Its organizers in the 50-50-1 group (“50 states, 50 protests, one movement”), American Opposition, and Indivisible linked 193 powerful progressive “partners” driven by a singleness of purpose: to depose Trump and his regime.

So why not a repeat of this astonishing logistical success for a national recall referendum? Millions of volunteers would be more than willing to knock on doors, do teach-ins and phone-banking, lead rallies and marches, design signs and flyers, write articles, stuff envelopes, send emails and other electronic “reach-outs,”—and contribute funds large and small for expenses.

Trump’s high crimes and misdemeanors against the American people will only get worse if we do nothing in the next few weeks. Let’s get to it!

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Barbara G. Ellis.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

The motivations for attacking VOA were hardly budgetary. The White House cited a number of sources to back the claim that the organisation had become an outlet of “radical propaganda.” VOA veteran Dan Robinson features, calling it “a hubris-filled rogue operation often reflecting leftist bias aligned with partisan national media.” The Daily Caller moaningly remarks that VOA reporters had “repeatedly posted anti-Trump comments on their professional Twitter accounts, despite a social media policy requiring employee impartiality on social media platforms.” The Voice, not aligned with MAGA, had to be silenced.

The measure by Trump drew its inevitable disapproval. VOA director, Michael Abramowitz, stuck to the customary line that his organisation “promotes freedom and democracy around the world by telling America’s story and by providing objective and balanced news and information, especially for those living under tyranny.” Reporters Without Borders condemned the order “as a departure from the US’s historic role as a defender of free information and calls on the US government to restore VOA and urges Congress and the international community to take action against his unprecedented move.”

As with much criticism of Trump’s seemingly impulsive actions, these sentimental views proved misguided and disingenuous. Trump is on uncontentious ground to see the Voice as one dedicated to propaganda. However, he misunderstands most nuttily that the propaganda in question overwhelmingly favours US policies and programs. His quibble is that they are not favourable enough.

Prohibited from broadcasting in the United States, VOA’s propaganda role was always a full-fledged one, promoting the US as a spanking, virtuous brand of democratic good living in the face of garden variety tyrants, usually of the political left. Blemishes were left unmentioned, the role of the US imperium in intervening in the affairs of other countries considered cautiously. Loath to adequately fund domestic public service providers like National Public Radio (NPR), the US Congress was content to fork out for what was effectively an information arm of government sloganeering for Freedom’s Land.

The VOA Charter, drafted in 1960 and signed into law as Public Law 94-350 by President Gerald Ford on July 12, 1976, expressed the view that “The long-range interests of the United States are served by communicating directly with the peoples of the world by radio. To be effective, the Voice of America must win the attention and respect of listeners.” It stipulated various aspirational and at times unattainable aims: be reliable on the news, have authoritative standing, pursue accuracy, objectivity and be comprehensive. America was to be represented in whole and not as any single segment of society, with the VOA representing “a balanced and comprehensive projection of significant American thought and institutions.” US policies would be presented “clearly and effectively” as would “responsible discussions and opinion on these policies.”

The aims of the charter were always subordinate to the original purpose of the radio outlet. The Voice was born in the propaganda maelstrom of World War II, keen to win over audiences in Nazi Germany and its occupied territories. Authorised to continue operating by the Smith-Mundt Act of 1946, it continued its work during the Cold War, its primary task that of fending off any appeal communism might have. Till October 1948, program content was governed under contract with the NBC and CBS radio networks. This troubled some members of Congress, notably regarding broadcasts to Latin America. The US State Department then assumed control, authority of which passed on to the newly created United States Information Agency (USIA).

In such arrangements, the objective of fair dissemination of information was always subject to the dictates of US foreign policy. What mattered most, according to R. Peter Straus, who assumed the directorship of VOA in 1977, was to gather “a highly professional group of people and trying to excite them about making the freest democracy in the world understandable to the rest of the world – not necessarily loved by, nor even necessarily liked by but understood by the rest of the world.” The State Department left an enduring legacy in that regard, with the amalgamation of its Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs with the USIA in 1978 during the Carter administration. Furthermore, prominent positions at the Voice tended to be filled by career members of the diplomatic corps.

Given that role, it was rather rich to have the likes of Republican Congresswoman Young Kim of California question Trump’s executive order, worried that closing the Voice would effectively silence a body dedicated to the selfless distribution of accurate information. Accuracy in that sense, alloyed by US interests, would always walk to the dictates of power. Kim errs in assuming that reporting via such outlets, emanating from a “free” society, must therefore be more truthful than authoritarian rivals. “For a long time now, our reporting has not been blocked by adversaries like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea,” she claimed in March. “Now, we are ourselves shutting off the ability to get the information into those oppressed regimes to the people that are dying for the real truth and information.” As such truth and information is curated by an adjunct of the State Department, such people would be advised to be a tad sceptical.

The falling out of favour with Trump, not just of the Voice, but such anti-communist creations of the Cold War like Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty and Radio Free Asia, is a loss for the propagandists. Arguments that stress the value of their continued existence as organs of veracity in news and accuracy, correctives to the disinformation and misinformation of adversaries, are deludedly slanted. All forms of disinformation and misinformation should be battled and neither the Voice’s critics, nor its fans, seem to understand what they are. VOA and its sister stations could never be relied upon to subject US foreign and domestic policy to rigorous critique. Empires are not in the business of truth but power and effect. Radio stations created in their name must always be viewed with that in mind.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Jonathan Cook.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Jonathan Cook.

In the 1970s, during the height of the farmworker movement, United Farm Workers leader César Chávez often rallied supporters with the phrase “Sí se puede” (“Yes we can”)—a slogan coined by UFW co-founder Dolores Huerta in 1972 during Chávez’s 25-day fast in Phoenix, Arizona. Today, as undocumented farmworkers face aggressive immigration enforcement in California’s fields, a darker refrain might be more fitting: “Cuidado con ICE”—watch out for ICE.

Farmworkers say they feel like they are being “hunted like animals,” as they desperately try to avoid getting swept up by Donald Trump’s “crackdown on immigration,” the Guardian’s Michael Sainato recently reported.

During interviews with farm workers and farmworker organizers, Sainato pointed out that “Raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have caused workers to lose hours and income, and forced them into hiding at home.”

Trump has been all over the map in defining his policy toward undocumented farm workers. In April, according to Fruit Growers News, “Trump suggested that farmers could help retain key workers by submitting letters of recommendation to delay deportations and support legal re-entry.

“‘A farmer will come in with a letter concerning certain people saying, they’re great, they’re working hard, we’re going to slow it down a little bit for them and then we’re going to ultimately bring them back. They’ll go out, they’re going to come back as legal workers,’ Trump said during the Cabinet meeting.”

In late-June, CNBC reported that Trump told Fox News that “We’re working on [a plan] right now. We’re going to work it so that some kind of a temporary pass where people pay taxes, where the farmer can have a little control, as opposed to you walk in and take everybody away.”

Trump added: “What we’re going to do is we’re going to do something for farmers, where we can let the farmer sort of be in charge. The farmer knows. He’s not going to hire a murderer. When you go into a farm and he’s had somebody working with him for nine years doing this kind of work, which is hard work to do, and a lot of people aren’t going to do it, and you end up destroying a farmer because you took all the people away. It’s a problem.”

That plan, which would put farmers in charge of immigration enforcement, “alarmed workers’ rights advocates, who suggested they were being asked to surrender ‘their freedom to their employer’ just to stay in the country,” the Guardian noted.

“You can’t go out peacefully to do things, or go to work with any peace of mind anymore. We’re stressed out and our kids are stressed out. No one is the same since these raids started,” one farm worker told the Guardian. “We are stressed and worrying if it continues like this, what are we going to do because the rent here is very expensive and it has affected us a lot. How are we going to make ends meet if this continues?”

Of the more than 2.6 million farm workers in the US, most are Hispanic, non-citizen immigrants. According to the Department of Agriculture, around 40% of crop workers — roughly 500,000 individuals – are undocumented.

In a recent Iowa rally, Trump “claimed the administration is looking into legislation to defer immigration enforcement on farms to farmers. ‘Farmers, look, they know better. They work with them for years.’”

“They have really demonized us with the word ‘criminals’,” Lázaro Álvarez, a member of the Workers’ Center of Central New York and Alianza Agrícola, said. “Despite the fact we are undocumented, we pay taxes. We are invisible to the government until we pay taxes, and we don’t receive any benefits.”

Teresa Romero, president of United Farm Workers, said: “Everything that he’s doing to detain these workers is unconstitutional. They don’t have a document signed by a judge. They don’t have a court order. They want to just eliminate protections of farm workers who are currently here and have been working in the field for 20 to 30 years.

“These workers who have not committed any crime are being taken by people who are masked, are not wearing a uniform and don’t have a marked vehicle, so they are essentially being kidnapped.”

One undocumented farm worker told Sainato:  “We worked through Covid. We worked through the wildfires in Los Angeles. We get up at 4am every day. No one else is willing to work the eight-, 10-hour days the way we do. We’re not criminals. We’re hardworking people trying to give our kids a better life. And we contribute a lot to this country.”

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Bill Berkowitz.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

God told me he has a message for you. It is this.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by David Swanson.

“Those people … ” Donald said, trailing off. “The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.” — Donald TRUMP

Trump’s buddy:

This figure corresponds to the number of inmate deaths since the “State of Emergency” was implemented in March 2022. “These were people awaiting trial who had not been convicted,” said the Salvadoran NGO, which provides legal assistance to the families of detainees.

According to SJH, 94% of those who died “had no gang affiliation,” and the organization warned that the total number of deaths in state custody “could surpass 1,000,” noting that “there is information being concealed in mass trials.”

A criminal justice reform passed in 2023 by the Legislative Assembly—controlled by President Nayib Bukele’s party—eliminated individual criminal proceedings and authorized the implementation of mass and collective trials based on gang affiliation. To date, no verdicts have been issued under this procedure, which human rights defenders have repeatedly denounced as violating the right to due process.

[El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, sitting next to President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, said on Monday he will not return Kilmar Abrego García, a migrant from Maryland who was wrongfully deported.

“I don’t have the power to return him to the United States,” Bukele said when a reporter asked.

“How could I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?” he added, repeating the Trump administration’s claim that Abrego García is a “terrorist” gang member of MS-13 — which it has not claimed in the court battle over his fate.

Bukele, the self-described “world’s coolest dictator” who has become a key partner in Trump’s controversial deportations, called it a “preposterous question,” saying “of course, I’m not going to do it,” as Trump nodded in agreement.]

Tax all these fucking continuing criminal enterprises? Check it out: UN Special Rapporteur Issues Report Detailing Corporate Machinery that Profits Off Immiseration of Palestinians

Italians Call for Nobel Peace Prize for Francisca Albanese

The Italian attorney, who has served as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, has directly and explicitly accused Israel of committing war crimes and genocide in the Gaza Strip.

During his weekly television show Con Maduro +, the Bolivarian leader said that Albanese “produced a report with conclusive and reliable evidence of the genocide being committed against the Palestinian people.”

“The criminals and the accomplices of the genocide will pay,” Maduro said, emphasizing that human rights defenders like Albanese “will be remembered in the future for their bravery.”

[Caterpillar bulldozer destroying Palestinian home in West Bank. ]

[I.G. Farben executives on trial at 1947 Nuremberg trials. I.G. Farben was a chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas used at Auschwitz and other concentration camps.]

[IDF helicopter at Tel Nof air base that is being upgraded by the U.S.]

[Glastonbury is far from perfect. Tickets are increasingly unaffordable making it largely inaccessible for many working class people. Its demographics remain overwhelmingly white. Its insurer—Allianz—invests in Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer. The contradictions are real.]

Shit dawg, the outsized number of Chosen People at this Utah fun fun fun felony camp:

[Summer camp for billionaires’ begins in Sun Valley with the arrival of 165 private jets]

Look at the degradation in AmeriKKKa, the headlines for this Mafia Meet-Up:

• Sun Valley 2025: Billionaire brawls and AI powerplays set to take centre stage –
• Sun Valley moguls compete for ‘best dressed’ with odd outfits
• Photos show Altman, Iger and Cook arrive at ‘summer camp for billionaires’ in Sun Valley

• Inside The Annual Summer Camp For Billionaires In Sun Valley, Idaho
• Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez show up hand-in-hand for ‘summer camp for billionaires’
• Oprah Winfrey stuns in monochromatic ensemble at billionaires summer camp

• Oprah dazzles in all-white outfit as she joins close friend Gayle King and billionaire masters of the universe at Sun Valley summit

I will belabor the point — AmeriKKKa, AKA LaLaLandia, AKA, UnUnited Snake$ of Israel First, that fucking parasitic country, that ONE, is a tale of five bloody cities:

• Top earners across the United States earn at least six figures, with an average income of over $160,000 for those in the top 10% in 2021.
• Earners in the top 1% need to make $1 million annually in states like California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington.
• In West Virginia, the top 1% earners need only $435,302.
• Historically, the wealthiest Americans have grown richer much faster than the rest of the population.
• Trends in income and wealth disparities are most pronounced among the top and lowest earners.

Annual Incomes of Top Earners

Data from tax year 2021 (as reported on Americans’ 2022 tax returns) shows that taxpayers in the top 1% had adjusted gross income (AGIs) of at least $682,577, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation. Those in the top 5% had AGIs of at least $252,840, while breaking into the top 10% required an income of at least $169,800.1

Those numbers are averages and can vary widely across the country. According to GoBankingRates, also using 2021 data but adjusting it for inflation, qualifying for the top 1% now requires an AGI of over $1 million in five states (California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington), with Connecticut having the highest threshold, of $1,192,947.

Meanwhile, residents of Mississippi, New Mexico, and West Virginia could qualify with less than $500,000 in AGI, with West Virginia setting the lowest bar at $435,302.

Oh, those house negroes: Malcolm describes the difference between the “house Negro” and the “field Negro.”

Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 23 January 1963.

So you have two types of Negro. The old type and the new type. Most of you know the old type. When you read about him in history during slavery he was called “Uncle Tom.” He was the house Negro. And during slavery you had two Negroes. You had the house Negro and the field Negro.

The house Negro usually lived close to his master. He dressed like his master. He wore his master’s second-hand clothes. He ate food that his master left on the table. And he lived in his master’s house–probably in the basement or the attic–but he still lived in the master’s house.

So whenever that house Negro identified himself, he always identified himself in the same sense that his master identified himself. When his master said, “We have good food,” the house Negro would say, “Yes, we have plenty of good food.” “We” have plenty of good food. When the master said that “we have a fine home here,” the house Negro said, “Yes, we have a fine home here.” When the master would be sick, the house Negro identified himself so much with his master he’d say, “What’s the matter boss, we sick?” His master’s pain was his pain. And it hurt him more for his master to be sick than for him to be sick himself. When the house started burning down, that type of Negro would fight harder to put the master’s house out than the master himself would.

But then you had another Negro out in the field. The house Negro was in the minority. The masses–the field Negroes were the masses. They were in the majority. When the master got sick, they prayed that he’d die. [Laughter] If his house caught on fire, they’d pray for a wind to come along and fan the breeze.

If someone came to the house Negro and said, “Let’s go, let’s separate,” naturally that Uncle Tom would say, “Go where? What could I do without boss? Where would I live? How would I dress? Who would look out for me?” That’s the house Negro. But if you went to the field Negro and said, “Let’s go, let’s separate,” he wouldn’t even ask you where or how. He’d say, “Yes, let’s go.” And that one ended right there.

So now you have a twentieth-century-type of house Negro. A twentieth-century Uncle Tom. He’s just as much an Uncle Tom today as Uncle Tom was 100 and 200 years ago. Only he’s a modern Uncle Tom. That Uncle Tom wore a handkerchief around his head. This Uncle Tom wears a top hat. He’s sharp. He dresses just like you do. He speaks the same phraseology, the same language. He tries to speak it better than you do. He speaks with the same accents, same diction. And when you say, “your army,” he says, “our army.” He hasn’t got anybody to defend him, but anytime you say “we” he says “we.” “Our president,” “our government,” “our Senate,” “our congressmen,” “our this and our that.” And he hasn’t even got a seat in that “our” even at the end of the line. So this is the twentieth-century Negro. Whenever you say “you,” the personal pronoun in the singular or in the plural, he uses it right along with you. When you say you’re in trouble, he says, “Yes, we’re in trouble.”

But there’s another kind of Black man on the scene. If you say you’re in trouble, he says, “Yes, you’re in trouble.” [Laughter] He doesn’t identify himself with your plight whatsoever. — SOURCE: X, Malcolm. “The Race Problem.” African Students Association and NAACP Campus Chapter. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 23 January 1963.

Look, I am taking adults with low income lives, adults with Medicaid lives, adults living with intellectual and developmental disabilities lives, adults who need to take in those 10 cents a pop beer and soda cans just to make ends meet lives, adults on food (SNAP) stamps lives, adults with no transportation options lives … taking them on road trips so they can have some sort of activities of daily living that go beyond watching the TV and playing on Smart/Dumb phones.

Intellectual disability¹ starts any time before a child turns 18 and is characterized by differences with both:

• Intellectual functioning or intelligence, which include the ability to learn, reason, problem solve, and other skills; and
• Adaptive behavior, which includes everyday social and life skills.

The term “developmental disabilities” is a broader category of often lifelong challenges that can be intellectual, physical, or both.²

“IDD” is the term often used to describe situations in which intellectual disability and other disabilities are present.³

It might be helpful to think about IDDs in terms of the body parts or systems they affect or how they occur. For example⁴:

• Nervous system
  These disorders affect how the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system function, which can affect intelligence and learning. These conditions can also cause other issues, such as behavioral disorders, speech or language difficulties, seizures, and trouble with movement. Cerebral palsy,⁵ Down syndrome, Fragile X syndrome, and autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are examples of IDDs related to problems with the nervous system.
• Sensory system
  These disorders affect the senses (sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell) or how the brain processes or interprets information from the senses. Preterm infants and infants exposed to infections, such as cytomegalovirus, may have reduced function with their eyesight and/or hearing. In addition, being touched or held can be difficult for people with ASDs.
• Metabolism
  These disorders affect how the body uses food and other materials for energy and growth. For example, how the body breaks down food during digestion is a metabolic process. Problems with these processes can upset the balance of materials available for the body to function properly. Too much of one thing, or too little of another can disrupt overall body and brain functions. Phenylketonuria (PKU) and congenital hypothyroidism are examples of metabolic conditions that can lead to IDDs.
• Degenerative
  Individuals with degenerative disorders may seem or be typical at birth and may meet usual developmental milestones for a time, but then they experience disruptions in skills, abilities, and functions because of the condition. In some cases, the disorder may not be detected until the child is an adolescent or adult and starts to show symptoms or lose abilities. Some degenerative disorders result from other conditions, such as untreated problems of metabolism.

The exact definition of IDD, as well as the different types or categories of IDD, may vary depending on the source of the information.

For example, within the context of education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a law that aims to ensure educational services to children with disabilities throughout the nation, the definition of IDD and the types of conditions that are considered IDD might be different from the definitions and categories used by the Social Security Administration (SSA) to provide services and support for those with disabilities. These definitions and categories might also be different from those used by healthcare providers and researchers.

Jewish elite values. More room temperature IQ’s:

Oz began by saying that programs like Medicare and Medicaid “were a promise to the American people to take care of you if you’re having problems financially or you’re having an issue because you’re older and need health care.”

But he also told Fox host Stuart Varney that Americans should also do the most they can to stay healthy.

“We’ll be there for you, the American people, when you need help with Medicare and Medicaid, but you’ve got to stay healthy as well,” Oz said. “Be vital. Do the most that you can do to really live up to the potential, the God-given potential, to live a full and healthy life.”

It was his next piece of advice, however, that inspired waves of social media mockery.

“You know, don’t eat carrot cake. Eat real food,” he said.

And, yes, Oz had brought a whole carrot cake for Varney.

“I couldn’t find a healthy cake, so I brought the closest thing, a carrot cake,” Oz said.

These people DO NOT care about you, me, my clients, those I write about, none of us.

Forget about FDR’s legacy: November 12, 2013/ How Franklin D. Roosevelt Botched Social Security/ Alan Nasser

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul Haeder.

“Those people … ” Donald said, trailing off. “The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.” — Donald TRUMP

Trump’s buddy:

This figure corresponds to the number of inmate deaths since the “State of Emergency” was implemented in March 2022. “These were people awaiting trial who had not been convicted,” said the Salvadoran NGO, which provides legal assistance to the families of detainees.

According to SJH, 94% of those who died “had no gang affiliation,” and the organization warned that the total number of deaths in state custody “could surpass 1,000,” noting that “there is information being concealed in mass trials.”

A criminal justice reform passed in 2023 by the Legislative Assembly—controlled by President Nayib Bukele’s party—eliminated individual criminal proceedings and authorized the implementation of mass and collective trials based on gang affiliation. To date, no verdicts have been issued under this procedure, which human rights defenders have repeatedly denounced as violating the right to due process.

[El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, sitting next to President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, said on Monday he will not return Kilmar Abrego García, a migrant from Maryland who was wrongfully deported.

“I don’t have the power to return him to the United States,” Bukele said when a reporter asked.

“How could I smuggle a terrorist into the United States?” he added, repeating the Trump administration’s claim that Abrego García is a “terrorist” gang member of MS-13 — which it has not claimed in the court battle over his fate.

Bukele, the self-described “world’s coolest dictator” who has become a key partner in Trump’s controversial deportations, called it a “preposterous question,” saying “of course, I’m not going to do it,” as Trump nodded in agreement.]

Tax all these fucking continuing criminal enterprises? Check it out: UN Special Rapporteur Issues Report Detailing Corporate Machinery that Profits Off Immiseration of Palestinians

Italians Call for Nobel Peace Prize for Francisca Albanese

The Italian attorney, who has served as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, has directly and explicitly accused Israel of committing war crimes and genocide in the Gaza Strip.

During his weekly television show Con Maduro +, the Bolivarian leader said that Albanese “produced a report with conclusive and reliable evidence of the genocide being committed against the Palestinian people.”

“The criminals and the accomplices of the genocide will pay,” Maduro said, emphasizing that human rights defenders like Albanese “will be remembered in the future for their bravery.”

[Caterpillar bulldozer destroying Palestinian home in West Bank. ]

[I.G. Farben executives on trial at 1947 Nuremberg trials. I.G. Farben was a chemical company that manufactured the Zyklon B gas used at Auschwitz and other concentration camps.]

[IDF helicopter at Tel Nof air base that is being upgraded by the U.S.]

[Glastonbury is far from perfect. Tickets are increasingly unaffordable making it largely inaccessible for many working class people. Its demographics remain overwhelmingly white. Its insurer—Allianz—invests in Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer. The contradictions are real.]

Shit dawg, the outsized number of Chosen People at this Utah fun fun fun felony camp:

[Summer camp for billionaires’ begins in Sun Valley with the arrival of 165 private jets]

Look at the degradation in AmeriKKKa, the headlines for this Mafia Meet-Up:

• Sun Valley 2025: Billionaire brawls and AI powerplays set to take centre stage –
• Sun Valley moguls compete for ‘best dressed’ with odd outfits
• Photos show Altman, Iger and Cook arrive at ‘summer camp for billionaires’ in Sun Valley

• Inside The Annual Summer Camp For Billionaires In Sun Valley, Idaho
• Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez show up hand-in-hand for ‘summer camp for billionaires’
• Oprah Winfrey stuns in monochromatic ensemble at billionaires summer camp

• Oprah dazzles in all-white outfit as she joins close friend Gayle King and billionaire masters of the universe at Sun Valley summit

I will belabor the point — AmeriKKKa, AKA LaLaLandia, AKA, UnUnited Snake$ of Israel First, that fucking parasitic country, that ONE, is a tale of five bloody cities:

• Top earners across the United States earn at least six figures, with an average income of over $160,000 for those in the top 10% in 2021.
• Earners in the top 1% need to make $1 million annually in states like California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington.
• In West Virginia, the top 1% earners need only $435,302.
• Historically, the wealthiest Americans have grown richer much faster than the rest of the population.
• Trends in income and wealth disparities are most pronounced among the top and lowest earners.

Annual Incomes of Top Earners

Data from tax year 2021 (as reported on Americans’ 2022 tax returns) shows that taxpayers in the top 1% had adjusted gross income (AGIs) of at least $682,577, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation. Those in the top 5% had AGIs of at least $252,840, while breaking into the top 10% required an income of at least $169,800.1

Those numbers are averages and can vary widely across the country. According to GoBankingRates, also using 2021 data but adjusting it for inflation, qualifying for the top 1% now requires an AGI of over $1 million in five states (California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Washington), with Connecticut having the highest threshold, of $1,192,947.

Meanwhile, residents of Mississippi, New Mexico, and West Virginia could qualify with less than $500,000 in AGI, with West Virginia setting the lowest bar at $435,302.

Oh, those house negroes: Malcolm describes the difference between the “house Negro” and the “field Negro.”

Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 23 January 1963.

So you have two types of Negro. The old type and the new type. Most of you know the old type. When you read about him in history during slavery he was called “Uncle Tom.” He was the house Negro. And during slavery you had two Negroes. You had the house Negro and the field Negro.

The house Negro usually lived close to his master. He dressed like his master. He wore his master’s second-hand clothes. He ate food that his master left on the table. And he lived in his master’s house–probably in the basement or the attic–but he still lived in the master’s house.

So whenever that house Negro identified himself, he always identified himself in the same sense that his master identified himself. When his master said, “We have good food,” the house Negro would say, “Yes, we have plenty of good food.” “We” have plenty of good food. When the master said that “we have a fine home here,” the house Negro said, “Yes, we have a fine home here.” When the master would be sick, the house Negro identified himself so much with his master he’d say, “What’s the matter boss, we sick?” His master’s pain was his pain. And it hurt him more for his master to be sick than for him to be sick himself. When the house started burning down, that type of Negro would fight harder to put the master’s house out than the master himself would.

But then you had another Negro out in the field. The house Negro was in the minority. The masses–the field Negroes were the masses. They were in the majority. When the master got sick, they prayed that he’d die. [Laughter] If his house caught on fire, they’d pray for a wind to come along and fan the breeze.

If someone came to the house Negro and said, “Let’s go, let’s separate,” naturally that Uncle Tom would say, “Go where? What could I do without boss? Where would I live? How would I dress? Who would look out for me?” That’s the house Negro. But if you went to the field Negro and said, “Let’s go, let’s separate,” he wouldn’t even ask you where or how. He’d say, “Yes, let’s go.” And that one ended right there.

So now you have a twentieth-century-type of house Negro. A twentieth-century Uncle Tom. He’s just as much an Uncle Tom today as Uncle Tom was 100 and 200 years ago. Only he’s a modern Uncle Tom. That Uncle Tom wore a handkerchief around his head. This Uncle Tom wears a top hat. He’s sharp. He dresses just like you do. He speaks the same phraseology, the same language. He tries to speak it better than you do. He speaks with the same accents, same diction. And when you say, “your army,” he says, “our army.” He hasn’t got anybody to defend him, but anytime you say “we” he says “we.” “Our president,” “our government,” “our Senate,” “our congressmen,” “our this and our that.” And he hasn’t even got a seat in that “our” even at the end of the line. So this is the twentieth-century Negro. Whenever you say “you,” the personal pronoun in the singular or in the plural, he uses it right along with you. When you say you’re in trouble, he says, “Yes, we’re in trouble.”

But there’s another kind of Black man on the scene. If you say you’re in trouble, he says, “Yes, you’re in trouble.” [Laughter] He doesn’t identify himself with your plight whatsoever. — SOURCE: X, Malcolm. “The Race Problem.” African Students Association and NAACP Campus Chapter. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 23 January 1963.

Look, I am taking adults with low income lives, adults with Medicaid lives, adults living with intellectual and developmental disabilities lives, adults who need to take in those 10 cents a pop beer and soda cans just to make ends meet lives, adults on food (SNAP) stamps lives, adults with no transportation options lives … taking them on road trips so they can have some sort of activities of daily living that go beyond watching the TV and playing on Smart/Dumb phones.

Intellectual disability¹ starts any time before a child turns 18 and is characterized by differences with both:

• Intellectual functioning or intelligence, which include the ability to learn, reason, problem solve, and other skills; and
• Adaptive behavior, which includes everyday social and life skills.

The term “developmental disabilities” is a broader category of often lifelong challenges that can be intellectual, physical, or both.²

“IDD” is the term often used to describe situations in which intellectual disability and other disabilities are present.³

It might be helpful to think about IDDs in terms of the body parts or systems they affect or how they occur. For example⁴:

• Nervous system
  These disorders affect how the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system function, which can affect intelligence and learning. These conditions can also cause other issues, such as behavioral disorders, speech or language difficulties, seizures, and trouble with movement. Cerebral palsy,⁵ Down syndrome, Fragile X syndrome, and autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are examples of IDDs related to problems with the nervous system.
• Sensory system
  These disorders affect the senses (sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell) or how the brain processes or interprets information from the senses. Preterm infants and infants exposed to infections, such as cytomegalovirus, may have reduced function with their eyesight and/or hearing. In addition, being touched or held can be difficult for people with ASDs.
• Metabolism
  These disorders affect how the body uses food and other materials for energy and growth. For example, how the body breaks down food during digestion is a metabolic process. Problems with these processes can upset the balance of materials available for the body to function properly. Too much of one thing, or too little of another can disrupt overall body and brain functions. Phenylketonuria (PKU) and congenital hypothyroidism are examples of metabolic conditions that can lead to IDDs.
• Degenerative
  Individuals with degenerative disorders may seem or be typical at birth and may meet usual developmental milestones for a time, but then they experience disruptions in skills, abilities, and functions because of the condition. In some cases, the disorder may not be detected until the child is an adolescent or adult and starts to show symptoms or lose abilities. Some degenerative disorders result from other conditions, such as untreated problems of metabolism.

The exact definition of IDD, as well as the different types or categories of IDD, may vary depending on the source of the information.

For example, within the context of education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a law that aims to ensure educational services to children with disabilities throughout the nation, the definition of IDD and the types of conditions that are considered IDD might be different from the definitions and categories used by the Social Security Administration (SSA) to provide services and support for those with disabilities. These definitions and categories might also be different from those used by healthcare providers and researchers.

Jewish elite values. More room temperature IQ’s:

Oz began by saying that programs like Medicare and Medicaid “were a promise to the American people to take care of you if you’re having problems financially or you’re having an issue because you’re older and need health care.”

But he also told Fox host Stuart Varney that Americans should also do the most they can to stay healthy.

“We’ll be there for you, the American people, when you need help with Medicare and Medicaid, but you’ve got to stay healthy as well,” Oz said. “Be vital. Do the most that you can do to really live up to the potential, the God-given potential, to live a full and healthy life.”

It was his next piece of advice, however, that inspired waves of social media mockery.

“You know, don’t eat carrot cake. Eat real food,” he said.

And, yes, Oz had brought a whole carrot cake for Varney.

“I couldn’t find a healthy cake, so I brought the closest thing, a carrot cake,” Oz said.

These people DO NOT care about you, me, my clients, those I write about, none of us.

Forget about FDR’s legacy: November 12, 2013/ How Franklin D. Roosevelt Botched Social Security/ Alan Nasser

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Paul Haeder.

Quds News Network

In Gaza’s emergency rooms, doctors now face a wave of patients suffering not from injury, but from hunger. The Ministry of Health confirmed that unprecedented numbers of people, from infants to the elderly, are arriving at hospitals in extreme exhaustion due to starvation.

The cause is not a drought or a natural disaster. It is the direct result of Israel’s full blockade, now in its 139th consecutive day. And the death toll is rising.

So far, 69 children have died from malnutrition. Another 620 patients have died due to the lack of food and medicine. Behind every number is a slow, painful process that strips the human body of life one stage at a time.

The Body’s Breakdown: A Four-Stage Collapse

Stage One: The Hunger Takes Over
In the first 48 hours without food, your body uses up its stored sugar (glycogen) from the liver and muscles. Hunger pangs hit hard. You feel anxious, irritable, and dizzy. Your stomach cramps. You may struggle to focus. Energy vanishes quickly, and even walking becomes a task. Children scream in discomfort or go silent from exhaustion.

Stage Two: Muscle Melts, Immunity Crumbles
After a few days, your body switches to survival mode. It starts breaking down fat into ketones for fuel. But when fat runs low, your muscles become the next target. You begin to lose strength. Your immune system weakens. Small infections grow dangerous. You feel cold, even when it’s hot. Simple tasks like standing or thinking become harder.

Stage Three: Your Organs Struggle to Keep Up
Now weeks in, your body is wasting away. You look skeletal. Your skin turns dry and brittle. Some parts of your body, like your belly or feet, may swell due to protein loss. Your heart rate drops. Your liver and kidneys slow down. Your mind becomes foggy. You may forget where you are. Some start hallucinating. You no longer recognize your own voice or the people around you.

Stage Four: The Final Shutdown
Eventually, your body gives up. You no longer feel hunger. Swallowing becomes impossible. You might fall unconscious or slip into a coma. Your organs (heart, lungs, liver) begin to fail. Death often comes quietly, not from hunger itself, but from a final, irreversible shutdown.

The Gaza Numbers That Should Alarm the World

In addition to the rising death toll, the Government Media Office in Gaza released staggering figures today:

• 650,000 children are now at risk of dying from hunger and malnutrition.

• 76,450 aid and fuel trucks have been blocked from entering Gaza in the past 139 days.

• 42 charity kitchens and 57 aid centers have been directly targeted by Israeli forces.

• 877 people have been killed near American-Israeli “aid centers.”

• 12,500 cancer patients and 60,000 pregnant women are also facing starvation without access to treatment or food.

A Man-Made Famine, a Global Failure

Starvation is not just physical. It destroys dignity, memory, and hope. In Gaza, it comes with the added trauma of displacement, bombardment, and abandonment by the international community.

“This is not just a humanitarian crisis,” the Government Media Office stated. “It is a deliberate policy. And the governments who support Israel or remain silent are complicit.”

The office called for immediate global action: opening the crossings, lifting the siege, and allowing unrestricted humanitarian aid into Gaza before more lives are lost.

But as of today, the siege remains. And every passing hour brings Gaza closer to a famine that the world could stop, but hasn’t.

This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Dissident Voice Communications.

 Despite opposing imperialism, a tendency in the Western left is to recycle Western anti-China narratives that liken Chinese trade relations to Western imperial conduct, as in Sri Lanka and the Congo. Others have written of Chinese investments in the Occupied West Bank, and even criticize China for lack of aid to Cuba – clearly not issues the Western powers have problems with. 

 The US empire has at least 750 military bases in 80 countries. China has just one, in Djibouti – part of a UN mission against piracy. The US has continued wars against other countries on a non-stop basis, while China has invaded no country nor started any wars in close to half a century. The US instigated over 25 coups and coup attempts in Latin America just between 2000 and 2020. China has sponsored no coup attempts on any government. The US imposes blockades and “sanctions” warfare on at least 39 nations. China imposes no sanctions on anyone. The US regularly launches drone attacks on the people of other countries. China has launched no drone attacks on anyone. China is no imperial superpower, but a peaceful one. 

China is the outstanding example of a Third World country developing into a superpower despite the West’s centuries-long efforts to torpedo its progress. China engages in “win-win” economic relations with other nations. Its loans and investment are carried out based on equality, consensus and joint benefit, unlike the predatory behavior of the IMF and Western lending institutions. China is helping other countries of the Global South break out of the underdevelopment that colonialism and imperialism have imposed on their countries for 500 years.

Third World Leaders Praise China’s World Role

 At present, over 150 countries have chosen to participate in China’s economic program called the Belt and Road Initiative. Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega explained why:

The People’s Republic of China has brought progress, benefits, development to peoples who were colonized, and later became independent, but who were then subjugated under the boot of the interests of the powers that had colonized them, leaving those peoples in poverty, with people in misery, people going hungry, people in illiteracy, with infant mortality, in Africa, in Asia. And the People’s Republic of China has been developing a policy bringing benefits to developing countries, without setting any conditions… The powers that have been colonialists and neocolonialists, like the US, like Europe… have not stopped being colonialists. They still are neocolonialists. They have not stopped being criminals. They still are criminals. They still are killers. 

China’s role in helping other countries to develop has been noted by several anti-imperialist leaders. Fidel Castro rejected the notion that China was an imperial power. “China has objectively become the most promising hope and the best example for all Third World countries. I do not hesitate to say that it is already the main engine of the world economy… The role that China has been playing in the United Nations, including the Security Council, is an important element of balance, progress and safeguard of world peace and stability.” Of the Chinese leader he said, “Xi Jinping is one of the strongest and most capable revolutionary leaders I have met in my life.”

Present Cuban President Diaz-Canel also had high praise for Xi Jinping.

Former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez likewise said, “one of the greatest events of the 20th century was the Chinese Revolution.” Chavez considered that an alliance with China constituted a bulwark against imperialism — a “Great Wall against American hegemonism… China is large but it’s not an empire. China doesn’t trample on anyone, it hasn’t invaded anyone, it doesn’t go around dropping bombs on anyone.” 

 Bolivian President Arce said: “We have built bridges of trust between the two countries and maintain a very positive bilateral relationship.” Evo Morales, the former president, said Bolivia and China “maintain a relationship characterized by wide-ranging and diverse cooperation and reciprocity.” China “works in a joined-up way with other countries and benefits the peoples of the world; the opposite to what was imposed on us for decades by the US, where predatory, individualistic and competitive capitalism looted our people’s resources for the benefit of transnational corporations.” “China develops, and helps, invests, without any conditions, just to support our development. China is always ready to cooperate unconditionally.”

 Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro declared, “Between China and Venezuela there is a model relationship, a model of what should be the relationship between a superpower like China, the great superpower of the 21st century, and an emerging, heroic, revolutionary and socialist country like Venezuela… China has inaugurated a new era of the emergence of non-colonialist, non-imperialist, non-hegemonic superpowers.”

 Former Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa spoke highly of Chinese aid to the Citizens Revolution. China’s assistance is “an example for Latin America and for the rest of the world.”

 Burkina Faso revolutionary President Ibrahim Traoré said Chinese aid was a “testament to a mutually beneficial partnership.”

 Even President Prabowo Subianto of Indonesia recently said at the ASEAN summit, “China has consistently defended the interests of developing countries. They consistently oppose oppression, oppose imperialism, oppose colonialism, oppose apartheid, The People’s Republic of China defends liberation struggles in countries that are still oppressed by imperialism and colonialism.” 

 Recent Western Left anti-China Stories

Yet, despite the testimonies of these anti-imperialist Third World leaders, some progressives still highlight West’s anti-China narratives, such as in Sri Lanka and in the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

Sri Lanka

The China debt-trap myth arose from Sri Lanka’s port Hambantota, that China lent money to the country to build the port, knowing Sri Lanka could not make it viable. This led Sri Lanka to default on the loans, and Beijing demanded the port as collateral. Chatham House and The Atlantic, both organs of the ruling elite, debunked this. First, the Hambantota Port project was not proposed by China, but by Sri Lanka. Second, Sri Lanka’s debt crisis resulted not from Chinese lending, but from Western loans. Third, there was no debt-for-asset swap. Rather, China leased the port for $1.1 billion, money Sri Lanka then used to pay down debts to the West. Chatham House concludes, “Sri Lanka’s debt trap was thus primarily created as a result of domestic policy decisions and was facilitated by Western lending and monetary policy, and not by the policies of the Chinese government.”

 China in Africa

Liberia’s former minister of public works, W Gyude Moore noted that under European colonialism “there has never been a continental-scale infrastructure building program for Africa’s railways, roads, ports, water filtration plants and power stations…China has built more infrastructure in Africa in two decades than the West has in centuries.”

 At the most recent Forum on China–Africa Cooperation in 2024, 53 of the 54 African countries chose to attend. China pledged $50 billion over the next three years on top of the $40 billion already invested.

 Dee Knight took up the issue of China’s exploitation in the Democratic Republic of Congo propagandized in the book Cobalt Red. He drew on Isabelle Minnon’s report, “Industrial Turn-Around in Congo?” She wrote, “China has responded to the DRC’s need to have partners who invest in industrialization.” The West had bled Congo dry through debts that prevented its development. China brought large-scale investment on a new basis, combining financing for industrial mining and public infrastructure – roads, railroads, dams, health and education facilities.

 Minion stated the result: “After decades of almost non-existent industrial production, the country became and remains the world’s leading producer of cobalt and, by 2023, became the world’s third largest producer of copper.” This “puts an end to the monopoly of certain Western countries and their large companies,” which just plundered the Congo. Furthermore, China cancelled $28 million in interest-free loans, and gave $17 million in support to the DRC.

 During the Covid pandemic, China announced that it also forgave 23 interest-free loans for 17 African nations.  This is in addition to China’s cancellation of more than $3.4 billion in debt and restructured $15 billion of debt in Africa between 2000 and 2019.

 Chinese investments in Israel

Chinese trades with Israel, as with all other countries, to establish mutually beneficial economic relations, to counter the US goal of turning countries against China. China’s trade with Israel is qualitatively different from that of the US, Britain, France, Germany and others since China does not export weaponry to Israel used to slaughter Palestinians and peoples in surrounding countries. 

Some have written of Chinese business involvement in the occupied West Bank. The report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories Francesca Albanese (which brought US sanctions on her) substantiates one such instance. China’s role contradicts its vote in favor of the 2024 UN General Assembly resolution calling for no trade or investments with Israeli operations in the occupied territories. 

 Yet China worked hard to unite the divided Palestinian resistance with the recent Beijing Declaration. China has continually denounced the US and Israel in Gaza, upholds the Palestinian right to resist occupation, and has never condemned the October 7, 2023 Hamas breakout attack. China is also a participant in the present The Hague Group calling for “concrete measures” against Israel.