Three
boys were shot and wounded with live ammunition near Ofer prison
earlier Saturday evening, according to the Palestine Red Crescent
Society.
A
CNN team on the ground near Beitunia crossing, which is about 200
meters away from the Israeli prison, had witnessed many Palestinians
waiting in the area for the expected release of the prisoners. The team
heard three gunshots over the course of an hour and witnessed three boys
being carried away on a stretcher over the same time period.
The Red Crescent said two of the boys were 17, and one was 16.
CNN explains, "The Gaza Strip is 'the most dangerous place' in the world to be a child, according to the executive director of the United Nations Children's Fund." NBC NEWS notes, "Strong majorities of all voters in the U.S. disapprove of President Joe
Biden’s handling of foreign policy and the Israel-Hamas war, according to the latest national NBC News poll.
The erosion is most pronounced among Democrats, a majority of whom
believe Israel has gone too far in its military action in Gaza." The
slaughter continues. It has displaced over 1 million people per the US
Congressional Research Service. Jessica Corbett (COMMON DREAMS) points out, "Academics and legal experts around the world, including Holocaust scholars, have condemned the six-week Israeli assault of Gaza as genocide." ABC NEWS notes, "In the neighboring Gaza Strip, at least 14,854 people have been killed
and 36,000 have been injured, according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health
Ministry." In addition to the dead and the injured, there are the missing. AP notes, "About 4,000 people are reported missing." And the area itself? Isabele Debre (AP) reveals, "Israel’s military offensive
has turned much of northern Gaza into an uninhabitable moonscape. Whole
neighborhoods have been erased. Homes, schools and hospitals have been
blasted by airstrikes and scorched by tank fire. Some buildings are
still standing, but most are battered shells." Kieron Monks (I NEWS) reports, "More than 40 per cent of the buildings in northern Gaza have been damaged or destroyed, according to a new study of satellite imagery by US researchers Jamon Van Den Hoek from Oregon State University and Corey Scher at the City University of New York. The UN gave a figure of 45 per cent of housing destroyed or damaged across the strip in less than six weeks. The rate of destruction is among the highest of any conflict since the Second World War."
It's about destroying Gaza and that includes the living and that includes the living that provide care. CNN notes, "The Israeli military said it is still detaining the director of northern Gaza's Al-Shifa hospital, Dr. Mohammed Abu Salmiya. Earlier Saturday, the World Health Organization called for the legal and human rights of detained health workers to be respected. Israel has repeatedly accused Hamas of using the hospital for combat and command purposes, which Hamas and hospital officials deny. So far, Israel has provided limited evidence of such use, with an alleged Hamas underground network having been viewed by only some Israeli reporters." ALJAZEERA reports:
The UN office for humanitarian affairs (UNOCHA) has said that Israeli
forces are reportedly arresting people moving from north and central
Gaza towards the south through a checkpoint that Israel is describing as
a “corridor”.
According to UNOCHA, people are being made to pass through an “unstaffed checkpoint” where they are asked to:
Show IDs
“Undergo what appears to be a facial recognition scan”
In one case in the last week, the UN says a child was left to pass
through the checkpoint alone after his father was arrested at the
checkpoint.
The UN is also raising concerns about the need for more child protection services to assist unaccompanied children.
Humanitarian workers in Gaza on Thursday said their daily experiences
struggling to take care of pregnant people and babies demonstrate why a
four-day pause
in fighting is far from sufficient to save the lives of the blockaded
enclave's most vulnerable residents, including newborns who have begun
to die from preventable causes.
As Israel's blockade continues to
keep Gaza authorities from providing clean water, food, sanitation, and
heat to homes and hospitals, babies aged three months and younger "are
dying of diarrhea, hypothermia, dehydration, and infection," said Oxfam International.
Juzoor,
an organization partnering with Oxfam in northern Gaza, said premature
births have increased by 25-30% since October 7 when Israel began its
bombardment of Gaza in retaliation for an attack by Hamas.
Let's turn to Iraq. Climate change is harming Iraq already. At some point, the discoveries will become less 'fascinating' as the horrors of climate change become more clear. For now? EKATHIMERINI notes:
An inscription written in Aramaic and Greek that means “giver of the
two brothers,” and a coin, a silver drachma, suggest to archaeologists
at the British Museum in London the discovery of a temple in Iraq that
was built at the request of Alexander the Great and was dedicated to
Greek deities and to the warrior king himself.
Archaeologists at the museum who are excavating the ancient
Sumerian city of Girsu, in the modern-day town of Tello, last year
unearthed the remains of a 4,000-year-old ancient temple. They believe
that within the site there was a Greek temple dedicated to Alexander and
his “brother,” the demigod Hercules.
One of the last acts by Alexander the Great before dying at the
tender age of 32 might have been dedicating a Greek temple to honor
ancient gods and confirm his own divine status. This is according to
archaeologists from the British Museum working in the ancient city of
Girsu in southern Iraq who have unearthed a 4,000-year-old Sumerian
temple. The later Greek inscriptions, extremely cryptic and tough to
gauge, had made no sense to the archaeology team, until now.
Girsu, also known as Tiris, was an ancient Sumerian city located in southern Mesopotamia, in what is now modern-day Iraq. The city flourished during the Early Dynastic and Ur III periods of Sumerian history,
roughly between the 26th and 21st centuries BC. Girsu was a significant
city of the Sumerian civilization, the first in the world, and played a
crucial role in the development of early Mesopotamian culture.
Jassim Al-Asadi
was born in a boat in the marshes of southern Iraq. Sixty-six years
later, his life still revolves around the marshes, now as an
environmental activist and a water-resources engineer fighting to save
them from extinction.
“This used to be green pastures and reeds, but the place has dried
up,” said Al-Asadi as he walked in blistering heat in a landscape of
barren, cracked earth. “Over there is a house where a buffalo rancher
used to live, but he abandoned it and moved near the Euphrates River.
There are no more buffalo pastures.”
The Marsh Arabs, the wetlands' indigenous population of Iraq, have
fished and cultivated crops here for 5,000 years, raising water
buffaloes and building houses from reedbeds on floating reed islands at
the place where the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers meet before flowing
into the Gulf.
But climate change, water pollution, oil exploration and the
construction of upstream dams are threatening the survival of this
delicate ecosystem and its ancient Mesopotamian culture, which some
trace back to the Sumerians.
Al-Asadi, head of the leading conservation group Nature Iraq, said a
drought now in its fourth year is turning vast areas of once flourishing
wetlands and agricultural land into desert. Salinity is rising in the
shrinking channels and waterways, killing fish and making buffaloes
sick.
“There is a change operating in the environment,” said Al-Asadi, who
worked for more than 30 years as an engineer in Iraq’s Ministry of Water
Resources. “One of the reasons is climate change and the effect of
climate change on water levels in the Euphrates and Tigris in Iraq.”
Baldwin Pushes to Crack Down on Big Oil Mergers and Prevent Price Hikes at Pump for Wisconsinites
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Ahead of Thanksgiving and
increased travel, U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) joined her
colleagues in pushing the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate
and crack down on Big Oil mergers that greatly reduce competition and
drive up gas prices at the pump for Wisconsin families.
The letter to FTC Chair Lina Khan urges the FTC to closely review two
newly-proposed mergers by the two largest oil companies in the United
States. ExxonMobil’s proposed $60 billion acquisition of Pioneer Natural
Resources and Chevron’s proposed $53 billion acquisition of Hess
Corporation are two of the largest petroleum deals in American history.
“Exxon’s and Chevron’s operations downstream would enable them to
redirect Pioneer’s and Hess’s crude supply to themselves, away from (and
possibly to the detriment of) their midstream competitors,” wrote the Senators.
“These new market dynamics could result in price hikes for midstream
customers, and such added costs are often passed downstream to retail
customers, including drivers at gas stations.”
Americans have felt the negative effects of unchecked Big Oil mergers
for decades. A wave of nearly 3,000 mergers in the 1990s caused the
number of major American energy companies to plummet, creating a Big Oil
oligopoly in which oil companies have continued to see increasing
profits, and consumers are left with higher gas prices.
“By 2005, due to the wave of mergers, the top five controlled 55
percent of the market, and the largest ten had 81.4 percent. This
increase in concentration enabled the largest players to manipulate the
industry by withholding supply in order to drive up prices, and since
most of the firms were also vertically integrated, they benefited from
higher prices at the retail level, as well,” the senators continued.
Senator Baldwin has pushed to hold Big Oil accountable and keep
prices at the pump down for Wisconsin families. Earlier this year, she
introduced legislation
to crack down on Big Oil price gouging by clawing back windfall profits
from the five biggest producers to deliver relief for consumers in the
form of rebates.
Full text of the letter can be found here and below.
Dear Chair Khan:
We write regarding our concerns about two blockbuster oil-and-gas
deals announced in October: ExxonMobil’s (Exxon) proposed $60 billion
acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources (Pioneer) and Chevron’s
proposed $53 billion acquisition of Hess Corporation (Hess) – two of the
largest oil-and-gas deals of the 21st century. By allowing Exxon and
Chevron to further integrate their extensive operations into important
oil-and-gas fields, these deals are likely to harm competition, risking
increased consumer prices and reduced output throughout the United
States. At the regional level, the deals threaten to harm small
operators and suppress wages. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) must
carefully consider all of the possible anticompetitive harms that these
acquisitions present. Should the FTC determine that these mergers would
violate antitrust law, we urge you to oppose them.
This Industry Is Already Too Concentrated, and Americans Are Already Paying the Price.
In the 1990s, over 2,600 mergers occurred throughout all segments of
the U.S. petroleum industry. Between 1990 and 2001, the number of major
U.S. energy companies plunged by more than half, dropping from 19 to 9,
due to merger activity. Most notably, Exxon merged with Mobil in 1999;
Chevron merged with Texaco in 2001 (after Chevron had already acquired
Gulf Oil and Texaco had already bought Getty Oil in the 1980s). Such
consolidation enabled anticompetitive coordination in the industry, and
the remaining firms were well aware that they were members of an
oligopoly with a “small number of companies involved, all of whom
share[d] a motivation to recoup costs and not undermine the market.” For
example, according to internal Mobil and BP documents, the majors
understood that “[f]looding the market and depressing margins on the
base volume” they marketed was unprofitable. Likewise, they knew that
directing their individual supplies into, or away from, particular
regions of the country enabled them to achieve “price uplift scenarios”
and to “leverage up” prices. The Government Accountability Office found
that five specific mergers from that time period – Marathon-Ashland,
Shell-Texaco I (Equilon), BP-Amoco, MAP-UDS, and Exxon-Mobil – led to
wholesale gasoline price increases ranging from 0.39 to 5.00 cents per
gallon. Of those five, the price increase due to the Exxon-Mobil merger
was the greatest.
After these huge mergers took place, the majors’ upstream operations
were skewed to the detriment of consumers. Studies at the time
demonstrated that spending on drilling for new oil supplies by the
merged giants fell significantly compared to the drilling budgets before
their mergers. Strangely enough, the majors cut back on upstream
production at a time when crude prices were sky high and exploration
costs had fallen by more than half, “one of the biggest potential
disconnects between supply and demand in the 150-year history of the oil
business.” These anticompetitive tactics resulted in a fragile supply
for the nation where isolated mishaps at refineries or broken pipelines
caused enormous price spikes for consumers (as took place in 2000, 2001,
2002, and 2005) – all of which financially benefited the oligopolists,
providing them no incentive to stabilize national supply.
Consolidation in midstream operations hurt Americans consumers, as
well. In 1993, the largest five oil refiners had a collective share of
about one-third of the American market, and the largest ten controlled
55.6 percent. By 2005, due to the wave of mergers, the top five
controlled 55 percent of the market, and the largest ten had 81.4
percent. This increase in concentration enabled the largest players to
manipulate the industry by withholding supply in order to drive up
prices, and since most of the firms were also vertically integrated,
they benefited from higher prices at the retail level, as well.
Similar market dynamics exist today. The oil-and-gas industry is
still dominated by a handful of corporate giants, led by the top-two
players Exxon and Chevron. Any further consolidation could harm American
consumers. This is especially true given the inelastic demand for gas
products; those who drive to work rarely have substitutes for gas, so as
prices rise, people do not purchase less gas. In April 2020, as the
COVID-19 pandemic began, retail gasoline prices averaged $1.84. Prices
steadily rose for two years, hitting a historic height of $4.93 in June
2022, and remain relatively high today at $3.84. Meanwhile, Exxon and
Chevron posted their own historic heights in 2022: $56 billion in
profits for Exxon and $36.5 billion for Chevron. They were not alone;
Big Oil corporations collectively earned an industry high of nearly $200
billion last year. President Biden rightfully called for the FTC to
investigate the oil industry for price gouging since such surges cannot
be explained away by increased production costs from the pandemic or
inflation, especially in light of these firms’ astronomical profits.
The Deals Could Harm Competition and Lead to Even Higher Prices for Americans.
Exxon is the largest oil-and-gas corporation in the United States,
operating up and down the supply chain and across the entire industry.
Its acquisition target, Pioneer, is an upstream petroleum operator
drilling in Texas’s Permian Basin. Pioneer owns more drilling acreage
than any other producer in the Permian where Exxon is also a top
producer. A merged Exxon-Pioneer could produce a staggering 1.2 million
barrels per day – more than twice the amount of the next competitor.
Accordingly, this deal would enable the new Exxon to dominate the
Permian – the most prolific oil-and-gas field in the world and America’s
most important.
Chevron is America’s 2nd largest oil-and-gas firm with integrated
operations rivaling Exxon’s. Hess is one of the largest producers in
North Dakota’s Bakken Shale, the deepwater Gulf of Mexico, and offshore
Guyana.
Supporters of the deals have argued that the global market for oil
and gas is so enormous that dominant firms in the relevant basins would
not have enough supply to restrict capacity or raise prices in any
meaningful way. Focusing only on the global market is improper. Even if
these energy firms represent a small fraction of the global petroleum
market, the question before the FTC is whether these proposed
transactions may substantially lessen competition in any line of
commerce. Thus, the FTC must consider how Exxon’s or Chevron’s
vertically integrated operations may harm American competition in any
national or regional market. For example, Exxon owns extensive midstream
operations in the Permian Basin, meaning Exxon controls storage,
refining, and transportation for a significant amount of capacity in the
region where it will acquire Pioneer’s drilling operations. Exxon has
an extensive pipeline system that transfers crude supply from the
Permian to the Texas Gulf Coast. Recently, Exxon expanded its refinery
operations on the Texas Gulf Coast by an additional capacity of 250,000
barrels per day and announced plans to ramp up its exporting operations
on the Texas Gulf Coast, suggesting that Exxon-Pioneer intends to move
significantly more oil and gas out of the United States than the two
companies exported separately. Exxon’s CEO Darren Woods put it more
bluntly in 2020: “These projects are export machines, generating
products that high-growth nations need to support larger populations
with higher standards of living. Those overseas markets are the
motivation behind our investments. The supply is here; the demand is
there. We want to keep connecting those dots.” This export strategy – in
the nation’s most important oil-and-gas field, no less – could reduce
the amount of their capacity ultimately available to American consumers
and thereby increase prices throughout the energy supply chain,
including at the gas pump. Furthermore, as we described above, the major
energy firms already have a history of artificially reducing supply and
increasing prices following rounds of consolidation.
If this “consolidation trend in the US” continues accelerating,
competing exploration-and-production companies will find it increasingly
difficult to operate without Exxon’s and Chevron’s networks, which
creates new abilities and incentives for Exxon and Chevron to engage in
anticompetitive tactics. Exxon’s and Chevron’s operations downstream
would enable them to redirect Pioneer’s and Hess’s crude supply to
themselves, away from (and possibly to the detriment of) their midstream
competitors. These new market dynamics could result in price hikes for
midstream customers, and such added costs are often passed downstream to
retail customers, including drivers at gas stations.
We also urge you to investigate how an Exxon-Pioneer merger might
impact local operators in the Permian as well as oilfield employees such
as geologists and engineers. Potential anticompetitive harms at any
level of the supply chain and in any market merit consideration by the
FTC.
The FTC Must Protect Americans from Big Oil. These deals also
demonstrate how corporate consolidation can frustrate self-governing
democracy. At a time when Americans overwhelmingly support governmental
efforts to clean up the environment and protect our nation from climate
disasters, Exxon and Chevron are doubling down on fossil-fuel
production. The proposed transactions would augment these corporations’
outsized political power, further enabling them to spend millions on
lobbyists to thwart climate legislation, litigation to slash
environmental rules, and a coordinated campaign to mislead consumers and
discredit climate science – all to protect their billions in profits.
By taking actions to promote competition, the FTC would also prevent the
fossil-fuel industry from further subverting our democratic processes.
Under President Biden, the FTC has been willing to stand up to Big
Oil. Just last year, the FTC required an energy private-equity fund to
divest its entire crude-oil business in Utah before allowing a similar
transaction to close, expressing concerns that the deal would lead to
higher prices for refiners and consumers at the pump.
The fight against Big Oil is not new. When the Justice Department
took on Standard Oil in the early twentieth century, the Supreme Court
protected competition by breaking up Standard Oil into 43 different
firms. Eventually, the global industry reorganized into seven dominant
global players, including five prominent American companies – three of
which (Standard Oil of California, Gulf Oil, and Texaco) combined into
today’s Chevron, and two of which were Standard Oil of New Jersey (now
known as Exxon) and Standard Oil of New York (now known as Mobil). In
our view, the FTC should not have approved the ExxonMobil merger in
1999, which created the largest corporate successor of Standard Oil’s
original illegal monopoly, or the merger between Chevron and Texaco in
2001. Lax enforcement during that period resulted in market
manipulation, unstable supply, and price hikes for Americans. We must
avoid similar mistakes going forward. It is incumbent upon the FTC to
closely review the Exxon-Pioneer and Chevron-Hess acquisitions and take
appropriate action should such reviews uncover any possible
anticompetitive effects enabled by the acquisitions.
If anything, the FTC should be investigating the past anticompetitive
mergers of Big Oil conglomerates like ExxonMobil and Chevron to
determine whether these energy giants should be broken up once again.
We appreciate your attention to these serious matters.
Tlaib Statement on Temporary Pause in Violence in Gaza
Nov 22, 2023
Press
DETROIT — Today, Representative Rashida Tlaib (MI-12) released the following statement:
“A temporary pause in the violence is not enough. We must move with
urgency to save as many lives as possible and achieve a permanent
ceasefire agreement. Over 14,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza
since this violence began, including thousands of children, and 1.7
million Palestinians have been displaced from their homes.
“Further displacement of Palestinians and forced annexation of their
land will only perpetuate this conflict. Expanding the illegal
occupation will never lead to a just and lasting peace. We must address
the root causes of this conflict.
“When this short-term agreement expires, the bombing of innocent
civilians will continue. We need a permanent ceasefire that saves lives,
brings all the hostages and those arbitrarily detained home, and puts
an end to this horrific violence.”
Congresswoman Bush Statement on Hostage Release, Temporary Pause in Violence in Gaza
Washington, D.C. (Nov. 22, 2023)— Congresswoman Cori Bush (MO-01)
released the following statement upon the announcement of a
U.S.-brokered agreement between Israel and Hamas:
“Tonight’s announcement of a temporary pause in violence and
the release of women and children who are being held hostage and
arbitrarily detained is a welcome and necessary start. It further proves
the effectiveness of de-escalation and diplomacy—not military force—as a
means of saving lives and affirms why we must keep up our push for a
permanent ceasefire. Already over 14,000 Palestinians have been killed,
including nearly 6,000 children, more than 30,000 have been wounded and
thousands more are at risk of death due to the lack of medicine, food,
and water brought on by the ongoing siege of Gaza. When this agreement
expires, the bombing will continue, thousands more will die, and
millions of people will continue to be displaced. We must continue to
vigorously push for a permanent ceasefire that ends this violence,
protects and saves lives, and ensures the safe return of all hostages,
including those who are being arbitrarily detained.”
On October 16th, Congresswoman Bush, alongside Representatives
Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), André Carson (IN-07), Summer Lee (PA-12), and
Delia C. Ramirez (IL-03) led their colleagues in introducing the Ceasefire Now Resolution which
urges the Biden Administration to call for an immediate de-escalation
and ceasefire in Israel and occupied Palestine, and to send humanitarian
assistance to Gaza.
Senator Murray Announces Nearly $2 Million to Clean Up Hazardous Sites, Research Impact of Environmental Stressors on Children
Senator Murray: “Cleaning up hazardous brownfield
sites and understanding the effects that agricultural pesticides have
on children’s health are important steps towards protecting our
environment and families in Washington state.”
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray
(D-WA), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, announced $1.9
million in combined funding for the cleanup and development of
brownfield sites in western Washington state, and for a University of
Washington study into the impact of environmental stressors on early
childhood development in agricultural communities. The brownfield
cleanup grants are administered by the Environmental Protection Agency’s
(EPA) Brownfields and Land Revitalization Program and funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which Senator Murray helped pass as Assistant Majority Leader.
A brownfield
is a property polluted by a hazardous substance or contaminant that
prevents the redevelopment or reuse of the land for homes and
businesses. The EPA Brownfield Grants Program
funding awarded to Tumwater and Kelso provides resources to
characterize, assess, and carry out cleanup activities at brownfield
sites.
“Cleaning up hazardous brownfield sites and
understanding the effects that agricultural pesticides have on
children’s health are important steps towards protecting our environment
and families in Washington state,” said Senator Murray. “Living
up to our promise of environmental justice for all communities is
something I take very seriously, and these federal dollars for
brownfield cleanup and critically important environmental health
research at UW will help us fulfill this commitment.”
The three projects awarded EPA funding are:
$500,000 for the City of Tumwater for brownfield cleanup and development.
$500,000 for the City of Kelso for brownfield cleanup and development.
$910,00 for the University of Washington to support
a research project characterizing environmental stressors on early
childhood development in agricultural communities. The project will
study impacts to children in who are exposed to chemical and
non-chemical stressors in the early stages of their life from nearby
farms.
Designation of Former Colombian General Jésus Armando Arias
Cabrales Due to Involvement in a Gross Violation of Human Rights
Press Statement
Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson
November 24, 2023
The United States is designating former Colombian General Jésus
Armando Arias Cabrales due to his involvement in a gross violation of
human rights during the retaking of the Palace of Justice of Bogotá in
November 1985. As a result of today’s action, Arias Cabrales, his wife
Martha Paulina Isaza de Arias, and his children Francisco Armando Arias
Isaza and Martha Lucia Arias Isaza, are ineligible for entry into the
United States.
The United States steadfastly supports Colombia’s 2016 Peace Accord
and joins the Colombian people in commemorating its seventh
anniversary. The United States congratulates Colombia on this
anniversary, and we value its continuing achievements thus far. We also
commend the Special Jurisdiction for Peace’s (JEP) work to end impunity
for conflict-related crimes. The JEP integrates reparative justice and
acknowledgment with criminal prosecutions to ensure victims play a
central role in all stages of the peace process.
Friday, November 24, 2023. The pause passed off as a 'cease-fire' has already seen Israeli forces kill two Palestinians as the assault on Gaza continues, US President Joe Biden is upsetting the government of Iraq with his ordered assault on their military forces, and much more.
Scott Newman, Daniel Estrin and Brian Mann (NPR) report, "A four-day [pause] between Israel and Hamas in Gaza went into effect
early Friday. The temporary truce sets the stage for the first exchange
of Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners in the nearly seven-week
conflict." The pause has not stopped the violence. CBS NEWS reports, "CBS News producer Marwan al-Ghoul saw Israeli forces open fire Friday on
Palestinians who decided to risk heading back to their homes in
northern Gaza despite leaflets dropped by the IDF warning them against
it. Al-Ghoul said thousands of displaced civilians left the southern
Gaza city of Khan Younis to head back north, but when they reached a
crossover point in central Gaza, they encountered a line of Israeli
tanks and were fired on by Israeli forces." And, no, these weren't 'warning' shots. AFP adds, "Israeli troops fatally shot two Palestinians and wounded 11 others
as they headed toward the main combat zone in northern Gaza despite
warnings by the Israeli army to stay put. An Associated
Press journalist saw the two bodies and the wounded as they arrived at a
hospital in the town of Deir al-Balah in the southern half of Gaza." CNN notes, " A journalist told CNN that Israeli tanks were seen and gunfire could be heard on Salah Al-Din street."
Cease-fire? It was never a cease-fire, it is a pause. And if that's not clear, the two Palestinians shot dead by Israeli forces this morning prove there has been no cease-fire.
Yes, the assault on Gaza continues.
CNN explains, "The Gaza Strip is 'the most dangerous place' in the world to be a child, according to the executive director of the United Nations Children's Fund." NBC NEWS notes, "Strong majorities of all voters in the U.S. disapprove of President Joe
Biden’s handling of foreign policy and the Israel-Hamas war, according to the latest national NBC News poll.
The erosion is most pronounced among Democrats, a majority of whom
believe Israel has gone too far in its military action in Gaza." The
slaughter continues. It has displaced over 1 million people per the US
Congressional Research Service. Jessica Corbett (COMMON DREAMS) points out, "Academics and legal experts around the world, including Holocaust scholars, have condemned the six-week Israeli assault of Gaza as genocide." ABC NEWS notes, "In the neighboring Gaza Strip, at least 14,854 people have been killed
and 36,000 have been injured, according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health
Ministry." In addition to the dead and the injured, there are the missing. AP notes, "About 4,000 people are reported missing." And the area itself? Isabele Debre (AP) reveals, "Israel’s military offensive
has turned much of northern Gaza into an uninhabitable moonscape. Whole
neighborhoods have been erased. Homes, schools and hospitals have been
blasted by airstrikes and scorched by tank fire. Some buildings are
still standing, but most are battered shells."
The rhetoric of ‘humanitarian pause’ is
illustrative of a media disinformation campaign designed to affirm
certain attitudes and stigmatize others. For instance, the Israeli
pledge to resume the war after this brief interlude of relative calm
rarely includes critical comments on the sinister nature of this
commitment to reengage Hamas by recourse to genocidal warfare. In
contrast, when released hostages report humane treatment by their
captors this is either belittled or altogether ignored, whereas if
released Palestinian prisoners were to make analogous comments about how
they enjoyed Israeli prisons their words would be highlighted. We can
only imagine the harsh response of Western media outlets to Russia’s
participation in a comparable pause in the Ukraine War, dismissing any
humanitarian pretensions by Moscow as cynical state propaganda.
Unless properly addressed the whole
provenance of ‘humanitarian pause’ is misunderstood. Remember that
Israel’s political leaders went ahead with such an alternative only when
it was made clear that Israel had no intention of converting the pause
into a longer-range ceasefire, to be followed by ‘day after’
negotiations as to the viability of continuing occupation and a new
agreement as to governance arrangements for Hamas. Rather than
sustaining their nationalist cult by dismissing Hamas as ‘terrorists’
the security of Israel might be enhanced by treating Hamas as a
legitimate political entity, which although guilty of violations of
international law, is far less guilty than Israel if a fair evaluation
is made, and some account is taken of Hamas’ long-term ceasefire
diplomacy is considered as a preferable security alternative.
In retrospect, I understand better the
rationale behind this apparently genuine Hamas efforts, which I received
first-hand evidence of due to extended conversations with Hamas leaders
living in Doha and Cairo while I was UN Special Rapporteur for the
Occupied Palestinian Territories a decade ago. Israel could not take
seriously what appeared to be beneficial from its security perspective
of such Hamas initiatives or the 2002 Arab Peace Proposal issued in
Mecca. Both Hamas and the Arab proposal conditioned peace on withdrawal
from the Occupied Territory of the West Bank, which has long been in the
gun sights of the settler wing of the Zionist Project, and consistently
given priority over Israeli security by its leaders, long before
Netanyahu’s Coalition made this unmistakably clear when it took over in
January of 2023. Israel never accepted the internationally presumed
notion that a Palestinian state would include the West Bank and have its
capital in East Jerusalem.
It is this unwillingness to take account of
the master/slave structure of prolonged occupation that gives a
specious plausibility to both sides’ narratives embodying the delusion
that Israel and Occupied Palestine are formally and existentially equal.
Such narratives equate, or invert, the Hamas attack with the Israeli
genocidal onslaught that followed, regarding the former as ‘barbaric’
while the latter is generally sympathetically described as Israel’s
reasonable and necessary entitlement to defend itself. Variations of
such themes are integral to the apologetics of former US mediating
officials such as Dennis Roth or liberal Zionist casuists such as Thomas
Friedman.
The efforts to control the narrative have failed. In the US, for example, those under 50 tend to grasp the realities and the younger in adulthood you go, the greater the percentage. Yet people continue to attempt to censor and practice thought control. Jessica Corbett (COMMON DREAMS) reports on one such attempt:
The Nation this week published a piece about Israel's genocidal war on the Gaza Strip that the Harvard Law Review
commissioned from a Palestinian scholar but then refused to run after
several days of internal debate, a nearly six-hour meeting, and a board
vote.
The essay—"The Ongoing Nakba: Towards a Legal Framework for Palestine,"
by Rabea Eghbariah, a human rights attorney and doctoral candidate at
Harvard Law School—begins: "Genocide is a crime. It is a legal
framework. It is unfolding in Gaza. And yet, the inertia of legal
academia, especially in the United States, has been chilling."
The controversy over Eghbariah's own piece helps prove his point. In an email to Eghbariah and
Harvard Law Review president Apsara Iyer, online chair Tascha
Shahriari-Parsa, one of the editors who commissioned the blog article,
called the bid to kill it an "unprecedented decision" by the academic
journal's leadership.
The Interceptreported on that email and others from those involved:
"As online chairs, we have always had full discretion to solicit pieces
for publication," Shahriari-Parsa wrote, informing Eghbariah that his
piece would not be published despite following the agreed-upon procedure
for blog essays. Shahriari-Parsa wrote that concerns had arisen about
staffers being offended or harassed, but "a deliberate decision to
censor your voice out of fear of backlash would be contrary to the
values of academic freedom and uplifting marginalized voices in legal
academia that our institution stands for."
Both Shahriari-Parsa and the other top online editor, Sabrina Ochoa, told
The Intercept that they had never seen a piece face this level of scrutiny at the Law Review.
Shahriari-Parsa could find no previous examples of other pieces pulled
from publication after going through the standard editorial process.
In a statement, the
Harvard Law Review said
that it "has rigorous editorial processes governing how it solicits,
evaluates, and determines when and whether to publish a piece. An
intrinsic feature of these internal processes is the confidentiality of
our 104 editors' perspectives and deliberations. Last week, the full
body met and deliberated over whether to publish a particular blog piece
that had been solicited by two editors. A substantial majority voted
not to proceed with publication."
According to
The Nation, 63% of editors who participated in the anonymous vote opposed publication.
"At a time when the Law Review was facing a public
intimidation and harassment campaign, the journal's leadership
intervened to stop publication," 25 editors said in a statement shared
with The Nation and The Intercept. "The body of editors—none of whom are Palestinian—voted to sustain that decision."
"We are unaware of any other solicited piece that has been revoked by the
Law Review in this way," they added. "This unprecedented
decision threatens academic freedom and perpetuates the suppression of
Palestinian voices. We dissent."
Eghbariah wrote in an email to an editor: "This is discrimination. Let's
not dance around it—this is also outright censorship. It is dangerous
and alarming."
It is also part of a broader trend identified
by more than 1,700 lawyers and law students. In a letter to the
American Bar Association last week, they noted "increasing instances of
discrimination and censorship faced by Palestinian, Muslim, Arab, South
Asian, Black, Indigenous, immigrant, and other communities within law
schools, universities, law firms, and other corporate entities,
particularly due to their expression of support for the Palestinian
people."
In a post on X, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus welcomed the start of the
humanitarian pause and the entry of aid into Gaza, calling it a “step in
the right direction”.
“But much more is needed,” he warned.
“We continue to call for a sustainable ceasefire to end further civilian suffering.”
Around the world, protests have taken place with people demanding a cease-fire -- not a pause, a cease-fire. The world has said "enough." The world has said a cease-fire is a must. AP notes, "Thousands of people led by Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel marched
along Havana’s iconic boardwalk Thursday in a show of solidarity with
the Palestinian people and demanding an end to the war between Israel
and Hamas." WSWS adds, "In Germany, too, many thousands are defying the pro-Israel stance of the
Social Democrat-led Federal Government and Bundestag (parliament), to
participate in pro-Palestine demonstrations. In Berlin, a demonstration of more than 5,000, including whole families
with children, moved from the main train station to the Großer Stern on
Saturday afternoon." And they note, "High school students across the city of Melbourne went on strike
Thursday against Israel’s genocide in Gaza. A crowd of students,
estimated at over 1,000, gathered outside Flinders Street Station in the
city centre. This marked the first of other planned school strikes
around Australia this week, including today in Sydney, Adelaide and
Wollongong." Australia's ABC NEWS notes:
Pro-Palestinian rallies have been going on for weeks across the country. The protests are dominated by young people.
That's
not a surprise for Associate Professor Tanya Notley, who leads the
Advancing Media Literacy research program at Western Sydney University.
"Young
people who are really highly engaged with news are also more likely to
be taking a range of civic actions in their communities, and on the
issues that matter to them," the media academic said.
Once again, it is our western governments that have endorsed and
supported Israel’s war of annihilation. And like the invasion of Iraq 20 years before, millions have taken to the streets to protest against a war launched in their name.
Gaza is also a war of narratives, of governments against their
people, with western corporate media attempting to hold a line in favour
of Israel’s legitimacy while millions in western countries are
increasingly seeing the scales fall from their eyes.
Last week, a group of 50 people drove onto the San Francisco-Oakland
Bay Bridge during the morning rush hour and stopped their cars, throwing
their car keys into the bay and blocking traffic for hours.
“Fifteen protesters covered themselves in shrouds and laid down in
front of vehicles to represent dead bodies in Gaza,” the New York Times
reported.
Meanwhile, in Washington State on 7 November, hundreds of
pro-Palestinian demonstrators rallied at the Port of Tacoma to block a
military supply vessel they believe was carrying weapons from the United
States to Israel.
“We want a ceasefire now. We want people to stop getting murdered
now. We want a real examination and action on US foreign policy and US
funding to Israel,” said Wassim Hage, community outreach coordinator
with the Arab Resource and Organizing Center, an organiser of the Tacoma
rally.
Other groups have blocked ports to prevent weapons shipments being
loaded onto ships for Israel, in California, Belgium, Australia, and at
a BAE arms factory in Kent, UK. This kind of direct action protest to block weapons shipments is spreading.
As our political elites give carte blanche support to Israel’s total
war on the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinians, global protests,
including direct actions and sit-ins at major rail terminals from New
York to London, are sweeping European and American cities.
Again, the world is demanding a true cease-fire; not a four day "pause" passed off as a cease-fire. Jordan Shilton (WSWS) writes:
The brief lull in Israel’s savage onslaught on the defenceless
civilian population of Gaza scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m. local time
Thursday is widely being presented as a “ceasefire,” or at least a
“humanitarian pause.”
Assuming the agreement is fulfilled, which
is by no means assured, it will amount to little more than an
operational pause in Israel’s military offensive to ethnically cleanse
Gaza by carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people.
The
terms of the agreement, mediated by Qatar and the United States,
include the release by Hamas of 50 women and children among the
approximately 240 Israelis captured by Hamas fighters during the October
7 incursion into Israel. In return, Israel will release 150 Palestinian
detainees, halt fighting in the Gaza Strip for four days, and permit
200 trucks carrying aid to enter the enclave each day. The number of
Palestinian detainees being released is minuscule compared to the over
10,000 Palestinians held in detention by Israel under the most brutal
conditions, including routine torture.
The agreement remains
highly unstable, illustrated by the announcement late Wednesday by
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s national security adviser
that the release of the first hostages would be delayed by up to 24
hours and only take place Friday. During the four-day pause, Israel will
refrain from operating aircraft and drones over southern Gaza, but in
the north they will only do so during a short window between 10:00 a.m.
and 4:00 p.m. each day.
All Israeli ground forces will remain in
place, ready to resume battle at a moment’s notice. As Netanyahu put it
at a press conference Wednesday evening, “When the pause is done, we
resume the war. It may be that we are forced to do so much earlier.” He
also rejected any suggestion that the pause applied to Israel’s northern
border, where the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) have been striking
Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon. Underlining the point, War
Cabinet Minister Benny Gantz told the same press conference, “What’s
happening now in northern Gaza can also happen in southern Lebanon and
Beirut.”
The US government is not listening to its citizens. And it appears to be offended by protests in other countries. Iraq, especially in Baghdad, has seen one protest after another against the assault on Gaza. They have rightly tied in the occupation of Gaza to the occupation they experience from the US -- the US government recently gave 'independent' Iraq the permission to do a gas deal with Iran.
US President Joe Biden has put all US forces in the Middle East at risk, painted a target on their backs, by refusing to support the Palestinian people. We've noted that repeatedly. We've noted that the attacks in Syria and Iraq on US forces, over fifty such since the assault on Gaza began, are not by "Iranian-backed militias." We've explained repeatedly that these attacks are carried by Iraqi forces.
Now let's move over to AP and their distortion of reality, "The U.S. on Friday imposed sanctions on six people affiliated with the Iranian-backed Iraqi militia Kataeb Hezbollah, which is accused of being behind a spate of recent attacks
against U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria following the October 7 attacks
by Hamas against Israel." Oh, look, they name a group! They don't
identify it correctly, but they name it.
For
years, we opposed the notion of folding militias into the Iraqi forces
because of their history of abuses. But the Iraqi leaders decided to go
for it. Kateb Hezbollah is a part of the government force, the
official military. Opening sentence of their WIKIPEDIA entry, "Kata'ib Hezbollah (Arabic: كتائب حزب الله, lit. 'Battalions of the Party of God')[36] -- or the Hezbollah Brigades -- is a radical Iraqi Shiite paramilitary group which is part of the Popular Mobilization Forces, staffing the 45th, 46th, and 47th Brigades.[37]"
Again,
we spent years here calling out the notion of merging the militias with
the Iraqi military. And for years, it didn't happen. But the CIA's
long choice for prime minister, Hayder al-Abadi, became prime minister
in 2014 and, at the end of 2016, he did what Nouri al-Maliki had been
unable to, made the militias part of the Iraqi army.
Stop pretending this is a renegade. It's a part of the Iraqi military.
And
though the US is condemning its actions (as a radical renegade) there's
no outcry in the Iraqi press over the attacks. They have the blessing
on the Iraqi government, of the Iraqi people. Like most people around
the world, the Iraqis are appalled by the slaughter taking place in
Gaza.
On Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, the US government attacked Iraqi forces. Not "militias linked to Iran." They are Iraqi forces and that didn't start yesterday.
Guess what? The US government did not scare off Iraqi forces. No, they've attacked the US military sites multiple times since Wednesday.
Now I've said Joe painted the target on the backs of US service members. And he has but, let's be clear, the US media has assisted him. They continue to lie and pretend that these attacks come from Iran. No. Stop lying.
The United States has conducted two retaliatoryairstrikes
against Iraqi militias this week after ballistic missile attacks
against America’s Al Asad Air Base, the latest in a troubling
tit-for-tat between the U.S. and Iran-backed militias in the region that
was triggered by the Israel-Hamas conflict.
CENTCOM appears to
believe that the status quo of attack and reprisal with Iraqi militias
is sustainable. There’s an assumption that Washington, Iran, and Iraq’s
militias understand each other’s red lines. However, this assumption
comes with a lot of risks.
The potential for one-upmanship between various Shi’a militias,
each trying to prove they’re more hostile toward Americans than the
others, is a concerning possibility. A deadly attack on U.S. troops
could prompt the Biden administration to respond more forcefully,
especially in an election year. What is the administration’s plan to
manage escalation and prevent a larger regional war (with heavy U.S.
involvement) if this were to occur?
While the timing and scale of
the war in Gaza may have been unpredictable, it was always evident that
the presence of scattered U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria posed a risk of
escalating the U.S. into greater conflict in such an unpredictable
region. That’s why I’ve long argued for rethinking America’s military posture in Iraq, including in new research this year exploring how Washington could conduct a phased withdrawal of troops and successfully recalibrate our approach to the country and region.
It
is true that the presence of U.S. military advisors in Iraq helps
maintain cohesion and a working relationship between competing factions
of Iraq’s military. U.S. troops also offer critical capabilities in the
fight to contain ISIS. But it is time for Washington to consider whether
these benefits are outweighed by the risk of malign actors using U.S.
troops to provoke a wider conflict – either intentionally or
inadvertently.
While the risks of keeping U.S. troops in Iraq are
apparent, the overall utility of their presence is unclear (particularly
in deterring attacks on themselves). With each new day comes a fresh
opportunity for crisis. It’s past time Washington grappled with the true
costs and benefits of our military presence.
I've reposted that in full to be fair because that think tank is far to the right of me. That's their opinion and in their words. Again, It's not a 'militia.' It is part of the Iraqi military forces. But grasp that even the people at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft grasp what the US press keeps ignoring.
The Iraqi Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fuad Hussein, confirmed on
Wednesday that the recent US escalation is dangerous and violates the
sovereignty of Iraq.
Hussein’s statements took place during his meeting with the US
Ambassador to Iraq, Alina Romanowski, according to a statement cited by
the Iraqi News Agency (INA).
The Iraqi Foreign Minister conveyed the government’s disapproval of
the recent US strikes against sites belonging to the Popular
Mobilization Forces in the Babylon governorate’s Jurf Al-Nasr, without
the Iraqi government’s knowledge.
Earlier on Wednesday, the spokesperson of the Iraqi government, Basem
Al-Awadi, mentioned in a statement that the Iraqi government considers
the recent escalation a dangerous step involving an unacceptable
violation of Iraqi sovereignty.
At least five people were killed in the early hours of Wednesday
after PMF sites southwest of Baghdad were targeted by air strikes
carried out by US forces.
The US press -- and US think tanks -- can lie all they want but the reality is that on Wednesday, the US government physically attacked the Iraqi military. And that's not just how the Iraqis see it -- which would be bad enough -- that's how it actually is. Tom O'Connor (NEWSWEEK) notes, "Iraq, considered by the United States to be a regional security partner, has strongly condemned President Joe Biden's
decision to conduct airstrikes against militias accused of attacking
U.S. forces in the country, warning that a cycle of unrest threatens to
destabilize the nation." Julian Benocha (RUDAW) reports:
The Iraqi government said it “vehemently condemns” the US airstrikes on
Iran-backed Iraqi militia positions in Jurf al-Nasr on Wednesday as a
“blatant violation of sovereignty” as the strikes took place without
government knowledge.
“We vehemently condemn the attack on Jurf al-Nasr, executed without the
knowledge of Iraqi government agencies. This action is a blatant
violation of sovereignty and an attempt to destabilize the security
situation,” Basem al-Awadi, spokesperson for the Iraqi government, said
in a statement.
The statement came hours after US warplanes struck pro-Iran fighters in
Jurf al-Nasr (formerly Jurf al-Sakhar) in northern Babil province,
around 60 kilometers southwest of Baghdad. Popular Mobilization Forces
(PMF, or Hashd al-Shaabi) confirmed to AFP that the strikes left eight
fighters dead.
Wednesday’s strike came hours after the US Central Command (CENTCOM)
announced its first retaliatory strike targeting Iran-backed groups in
Iraq since the start of the attacks on American personnel in Iraq and
Syria over Washington’s support for Israel in its war against Gaza. The
first retaliatory strike resulted in “several enemy casualties,”
according to CENTCOM.
“The Iraqi government is solely dedicated to enforcing the law and
holding violators accountable, a prerogative exclusively within its
purview. No party or foreign agency has the right to assume this role,
as it contradicts Iraqi constitutional sovereignty and international
law,” the government statement said, labeling the recent escalations as
“a dangerous development.”
He further criticized the US-led global coalition against the Islamic
State (ISIS) for steering away from its intended mission of supporting
Iraqi armed forces in the fight against the jihadist group.
“The recent incident represents a clear violation of the coalition’s
mission to combat [Arabic acronym for ISIS] on Iraqi soil,” the
statement added.
It would be bad enough if the American government was falling blindly into these actions but that's not the case. Multiple people at the US State Dept have lodged complaints about the US government's position on Gaza and warned that it harming the opinion of the US in the Middle East. Joe has ignored those warnings when they've reached him.
His blind-support of the Israeli government is bad enough for what's happening to the Palestinians but he's now also threatening whatever stability the US had imposed on Iraq with its continued occupation. He's putting US service members at risk and he's risking destabilizing Iraq.
This is the time when people need to get real and tell him reality not just agree with him. That's for the good of the Palestinians and for the good of human rights but also good for the United States.
In case we're not getting how fragile things are starting to get in Iraq, let me pull this from last night's entry:
Iraq? As we focus on the assault on Gaza, we mention
Iraq, we do not focus on it. Cilia e-mailed asking if there was
anything I felt we missed re: Iraq?
Yeah, Speaker of
the House Mohammed al-Halbousi was removed from his post. By the
country's Supreme Court. He was removed from office over an accusation
that he forged the signature of MP Laith al-Dulaimi. The court removed
al-Dulaimi from office as well.
The story we didn't
have time for. I read over the Iraqi Constitution and there's nothing
in there that gives the Federal Court the power to remove any MP from
office. The Council of Representatives has the power to remove one of
its members. But the Court has no say in that at all. They can't even
arrest for a felony (in Iraq, forgery is a felony) without the
permission of the Council of Representatives.
They've created a power for themselves that does not exist.
By
removing both the accuser and the accused (al-Dulaimi and al-Halbousi),
they've also made clear that they didn't determine guilt in the
matter. Now they would have had to have had permission to do that from
the Council. That's in the Constitution. So removing both the accuser
and the accused? That makes no sense. One was telling the truth, one
wasn't. I have no idea which.
But the Supreme Court
has no power to remove a member from the Council -- Speaker or
otherwise. This should could cause an outcry in Iraq for that reason.
It should also alarm legal observers around the world.
The
Supreme Court in Iraq now believes it can remove any member of
Parliament. And no one got convicted, by the way. Grasp that as well.
So anytime the Court doesn't like a member of Parliament or that
members politics, it's now claiming it can remove the member. That is
not how the government and its checks and balances are structured in the
country's Constitution.
