[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 26 points 5 months ago

Man I hate this dude

The history of the Middle East since 1948 shows Israel constantly striving for peace, only to be rebuffed time and again by the Arabs.

-- Antony J. Blinken, "Lebanon and the Facts", 1982

Israel is not, has never been, nor will ever be the irreproachable, perfectly moral state some of its supporters would like to see. Israelis are, after all, only human. Still, one pedestal the Jewish state can stand on--and stand on alone in the Middle East--is that of a democracy. Yes, there are tragic excesses in the occupied territories. True, the invasion of Lebanon claimed many innocent lives. The fact remains, though, that Israelis question themselves and their government openly and honestly. Eventually, as in other democracies, those responsible for wrongdoing are held accountable.

-- Antony J. Blinken, "Israel's Saving Grace", 1982

The summer of 1982 may be remembered in history as the time Israel passed from adolescence to adulthood. The illusions of a child are left behind. But the Jewish state remains special, an oasis in a desert. Its citizens have built a working democracy from scratch in a region that has no others. Israelis must treasure that democracy, protect it with all their will. For if they don't, the growing pains that are Lebanon, Shatila and Sabra, the repression of Arabs and the feud between Ashkenazim and Sephardim could turn into a plague.

-- Antony J. Blinken, "The Danger Within", 1983

6
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml to c/socialistmusic@lemmygrad.ml

Lyrics

It isn't nice to block the doorway,

It isn't nice to go to jail,

There are nicer ways to do it,

But the nice ways always fail.

It isn't nice, it isn't nice,

You told us once, you told us twice,

But if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind.

It isn't nice to carry banners

Or to sit in on the floor,

Or to shout our cry of Freedom

At the hotel and the store.

It isn't nice, it isn't nice,

You told us once, you told us twice,

But if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind.

We have tried negotiations

And the three-man picket line,

Mr. Charlie didn't see us

And he might as well be blind.

Now our new ways aren't nice

When we deal with men of ice,

But if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind.

How about those years of lynchings

And the shot in Evers' back?

Did you say it wasn't proper,

Did you stand out on the track?

You were quiet just like mice,

Now you say we aren't nice,

So if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind.

It isn't nice to block the doorway,

It isn't nice to go to jail,

There are nicer ways to do it

But the nice ways always fail.

It isn't nice, it isn't nice,

Well thanks for your advice,

But if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind, we don't mind!


21
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml to c/production@lemmygrad.ml

I found this article to be interesting as it talks a bit about methods of mining uranium, as well as talks about a current issue regarding a shortage of a necessary ingredient of that process (sulfuric acid), while also going over issues in how to transport uranium supply to the West in light of sanctions on transport routes through Russia and recent deals with China. In general the article is just stressing how precarious the West's supply of uranium from Central Asia may be, and highlighting that China and Russia are much better positioned to trade with that region. Also a mention of how France has been prompted to rely more on Central Asia for uranium in light of the instability of sourcing uranium from Niger.

  • Kazatomprom, world's largest uranium producer, warns of production shortfall
  • logistical issues, eg transport and shortages in sulfuric acid could take years to fix
  • concerns long-term supply contracts prioritize Russia and China over the West

Kazatomprom is the world's largest and, arguably, most important uranium producer, accounting for 23% of global supply in 2022. To put in context, that's double the next largest producer, Cameco in Canada.

The company has now warned production will be 20% below levels allowed by permits in 2024, with production impacted possibly into 2025. The warning comes just as uranium prices are approaching historic highs with significant fallout across the global energy and nuclear sector.

Critically, as we'll get to shortly, Kazatomprom mines exclusively with in-situ leach (ISL) methods (or, in-situ recovery (ISR)), which involves dissolving the ore while it's still in the ground with acid and soda, and then pumping the solution to the ground where it can be recovered with no tailings, waste or disturbance on the surface. [...] The main problem, ostensibly, is that they don't have enough sulfuric acid, essential for in-situ leaching, to raise output levels. [...] The problem is so acute that Kazatomprom plans to construct a new sulfuric acid plant in the Turkestan region to produce 800,000 tonnes of sulfuric acid per year. However, it's only expected to be ready in 2026.

The deals between Kazatomprom and both Russia and China threaten to squeeze out Western access. [...] China has just signed a long-term contract to procure a significant amount of uranium — for domestic consumption, not for export. The West, we suspect, would also be reluctant to trade vulnerable supply chains through Russia for supply chains through China. [...] In the high-stakes Great Game of resource control in Central Asia, any sudden and severe tightening of global uranium supply threatens to expose the West's precarious position compared to its competitors.

28
21
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml to c/informedtankie@lemmygrad.ml

Some quotes from the video:

The official orders, to anyone who breaks curfew, is shoot to kill.

I wasn't sure if I was enjoying the power of controlling all of these people, or if I don't understand why kids look at me frightened, why are they running away when I walk into the street? Before my service, I worked as an educator, I love kids, so I think I was very confused on why a kid would find me scary.

I realized that my job is actually to maintain an apartheid system. Very early on I understood that the rights that the Jewish settlers have are not the rights that the Palestinians have. I understood that I cannot touch a Jewish settler if he is attacking a Palestinian; the best I can do is call a local police department to come handle it, like I would do at home in Jerusalem. So these Jewish settlers are living under the same rights that I live in Jerusalem but the Palestinian next to them next house over next building over sometimes next apartment over lives under my rule, my military rule, and I can do whatever I want with him.

I can take his home as a temporary base for a few hours to a few days to a few weeks, I can decide that I'm arresting the people of the house and tying him up to the fence of my base. If we will get an order to demolish their home or just lock their front door and don't let them out into the street, their house is on a street that only Jewish settlers can walk on, and Palestinians cannot

I felt like I am the terrorist and my job was literally to scare people so they cannot think about acting against the Israeli settlers or the Israeli military, that was actually our defined mission: to make sure that to instill fear in the hearts of Palestinians in Hebron, and that's exactly what we did

Growing up in Israel like I said I believe that I was the good guy, I mean the story that all of us are being told all around the world is that the the very clear difference between good and bad people. You learn about the Holocaust growing up. I saw my grandma screaming in the middle of the nights, memories from Auschwitz in her mind, memories of our family, I knew that I am going to be a good human being, you know. In the age of 15, 16, I began being almost obsessed with trying to understand the Nazi side in the Holocaust, not only to hear the stories of the victims of the Jewish victims and any other victims from the Holocaust, but to try to understand how can a Nazi soldiers get up in the morning, give his kids a kiss his wife a hug and go out to the camps and do his job?

I just couldn't understand that. And when I got into the occupied territories for the first time I understood how can there be a contradicting inside yourself, as a human being you could do your job and be a one person at home, be a loving caring, you know, boyfriend or a son or brother, and in the same time, hold people under a regime so oppressed that people are dying not from only your bullets, but the amount of calories being entered into their territory, like in Gaza, from depression or sickness

Leaving the military and start interviewing soldiers, really, I think, made me understand that there's a systematic oppression that is taking place in the occupied territories

Actually what being an Israeli means, being an Israeli, growing up in the Israeli educational departments, you understand that all the Arabs hates you [...] Going into the military you're already going so full of hate and fear at the same time that you don't need much to be very aggressive, violent, and racist toward Palestinians, they see the Palestinian women and the Palestinian men as subhuman

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 32 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

When reading books written in the imperial core, about the enemies/targets of imperialist nations, I would keep this in mind:

Former CIA case officer John Stockwell: Well for example, in my war, the Angola war, that I helped to manage, one third of my staff was propaganda. [...] We would take stories which we would write and put them in the Zambia Times, and then pulled them out and sent them to a journalist on our payroll in Europe. But his cover story, you see, would be what he had gotten from his stringer in Lusaka, who had gotten them from the Zambia Times. We had the complicity of the government of Zambia, Kenneth Kaunda if you will, to put these false stories into his newspapers. But after that point, the journalists, Reuters and AFP, the management was not witting of it. Now, our contact man in Europe was. And we pumped just dozens of stories about Cuban atrocities, Cuban rapists--in one case we had the Cuban rapists caught and tried by the Ovimbundu maidens who had been their victims, and then we ran photographs that made almost every newspaper in the country of the Cubans being executed by the Ovimbundu women who supposedly had been their victims.

Interviewer: These were fake photos?

Stockwell: Oh, absolutely. We didn't know of one single atrocity committed by the Cubans. It was pure, raw, false propaganda to create an illusion of communists, you know eating babies for breakfast and the sort. Totally false propaganda.

Interviewer: John, was this sort of thing practiced in Vietnam?

Stockwell: Oh, endlessly. A massive propaganda effort in Vietnam in the '50s and in the '60s, including the thousand books that were published--several hundred in English--that were also propaganda books sponsored by the CIA. Give some money to a writer, "Write this book for us, write anything you want, but on these matters, make sure, you know, you have this line."

Interviewer: Writers in this country? Books sold and distributed in this culture?

Stockwell: Sure. Yeah. English language books, meaning an American audience as a target, on the subject of Vietnam and the history of Vietnam, and the history of Marxism, and supporting the domino theory, et cetera.

Interviewer: Without opening us up to a lawsuit, could you name one of them?

Stockwell: No, I could not. The Church Committee, when they found this out, demanded that they be given the titles so that the university libraries could at least go and stamp inside "Central Intelligence Agency's version of history," and the CIA refused because it's been commissioned to protect its sources and methods, and the sources would be the authors who wrote these false propaganda books, some of whom are now distinguished scholars and journalists.

Source (video interview)

Also note:

  • It's a recognized problem in south Korea that "time and time again, conservative outlets and foreign media circulate and reproduce rumors [about DPRK] based on questionable sources ... retractions and apologies are rarely ever provided when the reports are shown to be false" and "Sometimes, the South Korean government itself has been the epicenter of false reports ... The situation has been made worse by defector groups aggressively proliferating claims from unverified 'North Korean sources,' as if attempting to draw attention to themselves."

  • South Korea's national intelligence service (NIS) forges documents to frame people and tortures them into false confessions as well as pays defectors for sensational stories and harasses and silences people who say positive things about DPRK (and takes away their passports so they can't go back, even when they came to south Korea against their will)

  • UN human rights researchers who have worked directly with defectors from DPRK have written about how testimonies are made unreliable by cash incentives paid by the NIS and other organizations: "North Korean refugees are well aware of what the interviewer wants to hear. ... The more terrible their stories are, the more attention they receive. The more international invitations they receive, the more cash comes in. It is how the capitalist system works: competition for more tragic and shocking stories. ... In my 16 years of studying North Korean refugees, I have experienced numerous inconsistent stories, intentional omission and lies. I have also witnessed some involved in fraud and other illicit activities. In one case the breach of trust was so significant that I could not continue research."


Edit: So, to summarize -- Former CIA case officers have discussed how they pay academics and journalists to write thousands of books about foreign communist enemies that contain whatever content the author wants as long as it pushes certain specific lines; the CIA regularly plants false stories into foreign newspapers and gets them circulated around; the NIS (formerly the "KCIA", formed on the US-backed side during the Korean War to combat communists) is known to forge documents, extract false confessions, pay people to lie or embellish to the point that mainstream south Korean liberal media and UN researchers say it's making it too hard to tell what's true; defectors with sensational stories receive payments and get book deals and international speaking tours while people with positive things to say get arrested and surveilled by intelligence agencies...So, keep that info in mind as you consider what's going on with these books.

32
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml to c/us_news@lemmygrad.ml

Video's content begins @56:44

For a quick look of the general vibe see @1:04:32

"We now stand at a moment where many are again making the bet that we’re too divided, we’re too distracted at home to stay the course..." says Blinken in his speech about supporting Israel and Ukraine, as he is repeatedly disrupted by activists demanding a ceasefire in Gaza and an end to funding genocide and are gradually pulled out of the room one-by-one by the Capitol Police.

Remarks on the State Department website: https://www.state.gov/opening-remarks-by-secretary-antony-j-blinken-before-the-senate-appropriations-committee-on-a-review-of-the-national-security-supplemental-request/

The several statements and chants by activists demanding an end to the bombing of Gaza and genocide of Palestinians are listed only as "(Interruption.)" in the transcript.

I just happened to be reading that transcript and was curious what the repeated "interruptions" were, assuming it would be something like this, so I checked the video out. In the vid you can see the tense atmosphere as Blinken attempts to deliver his soulless advertisement-like speech in a firm optimistic or "inspiring" tone, making statements about how the US's adversaries have assessed the US is internally divided but the US is actually a resilient and strong leader, while the chairwoman has to keep hitting the gavel and pausing the hearing as activists shouting "genocide" at Blinken are dragged out one by one by the cops, while Blinken sits in a tense, irritated, and pathetic posture and then keeps trying to continue with his sales pitch tone between interruptions and being called a genocide supporter, with others sitting in the hearing behind him looking variously annoyed, drained, and bleak

9
A diary of distress (electronicintifada.net)
8

More context here: https://electronicintifada.net/content/watch-film-israel-lobby-didnt-want-you-see/25876

The Electronic Intifada has obtained a complete copy of The Lobby – USA, a four-part undercover investigation by Al Jazeera into Israel’s covert influence campaign in the United States.

We are releasing the leaked film simultaneously with France’s Orient XXI and Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar, which have respectively subtitled the episodes in French and Arabic.

The film was made by Al Jazeera during 2016 and was completed in October 2017.

But it was censored after Qatar, the gas-rich Gulf emirate that funds Al Jazeera, came under intense Israel lobby pressure not to air the film.

Now The Electronic Intifada can reveal for the first time that it has obtained all four parts of the film.

To get unprecedented access to the Israel lobby’s inner workings, undercover reporter “Tony” posed as a pro-Israel volunteer in Washington.

The resulting film exposes the efforts of Israel and its lobbyists to spy on, smear and intimidate US citizens who support Palestinian human rights, especially BDS – the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.

10

On episode 63, we speak to Refaat Alareer, a professor, writer and father in Gaza, about the latest Israeli military assault on Gaza that killed nearly 50 Palestinians, including 17 children, in early August [2022].

"But for Palestinians who’ve been suffering for decades under this military, brutal military regime, military rule, whether there are elections or not, we’re exposed to Israeli killing machines, we’re killed day and night, we’re being suffocated. Even if Israel is not killing us, shedding our blood or being suffocated. When you can’t travel, when somebody – I know people in Gaza who, people who died because they can’t go to the West Bank or to Jerusalem because they will get arrested at Erez because 30 years ago, they threw stones at Israeli military jeeps, or because a family member was a freedom fighter. So the reality on the ground that sadly not many people see is that the 24/7 Israelis are killing us, suffocating us, shedding our blood. And for many people, this slow death that happens is even worse in so many ways. At least, when Israel starts a war, many people start paying attention. And even when we talk about truce, or a lull or a ceasefire, it never stops"

Video, audio, and transcript available on the linked page.

8
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml to c/informedtankie@lemmygrad.ml

On episode 68, we speak with activist and blogger Tony Greenstein, a veteran of the Palestine solidarity movement in the UK, about his new book Zionism During the Holocaust: The Weaponization of Memory in the Service of State and Nation.

Video, audio, and transcript available on the linked page.

20

The Ukraine crisis has laid bare the deep divisions between great powers and cast doubt on the "rule-based order" built by the West. What should a multipolar world look like? What can be done to make sure that the world is not divided between "first-class" and "second-class" countries and peoples?

For this edition of Leaders Talk, CMG's Wang Guan traveled to Moscow and sat down with Russian President Vladimir Putin ahead of his visit to China to attend the 3rd Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation. President Putin spoke about Russia-China relations and how they have nurtured and developed in the last two decades, not only on the energy front but also in other areas of mutual interest. He told Wang how the Russian vision of an Eurasian Economic Union aligns with China's Belt and Road Initiative and why President Xi's concept of "building a global community of shared future" is realistic and coherent. President Putin also expressed at length his position on the conflict in Ukraine and drew another parallel with Iran, saying that "the West keeps adding fuel to the fire."

11

Note: This video is from January (uploaded 01/13/23).

BT’s Rania Khalek sat down with Sheikh Naim Qassem, deputy secretary-general of Hezbollah, in Beirut, Lebanon. Hezbollah began as a resistance movement against Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon and has since grown to become a regional player across the Middle East.

They discussed Hezbollah’s role in Lebanon and the region as well as the group’s view on global developments. This is Qassem’s first interview with an English-language outlet based in the West since the BBC sat down with him in 2019.

19

DPRK, along with Iraq and Iran, was declared part of the "Axis of Evil" in 2002 by the US's George W. Bush administration. This 2008 book recounts and analyzes the "war on terror" and the U.S. bid for unipolar hegemony up to the time of its writing. It provides details about that time period, as well as other historical background information, delivered with DPRK's anti-imperialist perspective. Overall, I think it's an interesting and relatively quick read (81 pages) covering mainly the 1990s-mid 2000s and tracing the emergence of multipolarity and the US's attempt to stop that emergence around the world, with attention given specifically to its attempts to gain control over countries in which oil and natural gas pipelines run through in order to circumvent Russia and "seize the lifeline of the European economy."

Beginning with the fall of the Soviet Union and thus the ending of NATO's reason for existence, it follows the US's unpopular attempts during the 1990's to manufacture a new world enemy, until the 9/11 attack created its perfect excuse to permanently wage war on any region unfavorable to US interests, with the main conclusion of the book being that although this project by the US is intended to drag on indefinitely, it will eventually end in failure due to its unilateralism and infringement upon sovereignty of nation-states, "illogicality combined with a childish attempt at division of the international political forces, and anachronism."

Below I will share some excerpts from the book.

several excerpts

[With the collapse of the Soviet Union] NATO forfeited its raison d’etre, and the United States was deprived of any justification for its pursuit of world supremacy. The stick which the US had been wielding on the excuse of “protecting the free world” from the “threat” of the Soviet Union and communism, lost its authority, and the focal point that had supported the pyramid of the US-led alliance diminished considerably. The Iron Curtain was lifted, widely opening the sphere of influence under the former Soviet Union, a much coveted region. The United States, however, lacked a specific justification to fill the “power vacuum” until September 11, 2001.

In order to reverse the world trend towards multipolarization and allay the spiraling anti-Americanism across the world, the United States needed an event by which it could mislead opinion at home and abroad as in the days of the Cold War and bring about a radical change in the world political sphere.

The objective of the war [in Afghanistan] was not the capture of bin Laden or retaliation for terrorist attacks, but to exert a long-term influence on Afghanistan to secure a foothold in Central Asia, a region with abundant strategic resources: First, to secure a strategic foothold for containing Russia and China and encircling Iran; second, to secure military means for winning firm control over the two major oil regions in the world-the Caspian Sea area and the Middle East; and third, to secure a centre of operations and advanced base needed for expanding and prolonging the “war against terrorism.”

The ulterior motives [of the Iraq war] were, first, to overthrow the Saddam regime, which had openly held up the anti-US banner in the Arab world for over ten years, thus realigning the political force in the Middle East in its favour, second, to win exclusive control over the strategic region with energy resources and the world oil market, and third, to create an environment favourable for Bush’s second term of office and the Republicans’ prolonged stay in power.

Military blockades, a link in the whole chain of the “war against terrorism,” are effected through the Proliferation Security Initiative, which Bush proposed in Krakow, Poland, in late May 2003 and explained in detail at the G-8 summit held in Evian-les-Baines, France. It aims at enforcing economic blockades on the countries that possess, develop and export weapons of mass destruction and searches of their vessels at sea, and further building an international cooperation system for preemptive strike. The targets are Korea and Iran, two of the three countries Bush claimed to be constituting an “Axis of Evil.”

The countries and regions where the flames of the “war against terrorism” are raging are, without exception, those that have oil resources or where oil pipelines pass through. The Afghan war was directly related to oil and its transport in the Caspian, the third-biggest oil region in the world. Samuel R. Berger, national security adviser to former President Bill Clinton, confessed that America’s vital interests in Central Asia, including Afghanistan, are to safely transport oil and natural gas at any cost.

The existing pipelines in Central Asia, from which the United States imports oil, pass through Russia. So the United States had to find another transport channel for Caspian oil to avoid Russia’s monopoly of the pipelines. The southward channel passing through Iran was ideal, but America’s relations with the country were a stumbling block.

Iraq has oil deposits of 112 billion barrels, the next-biggest oilfield after that of Saudi Arabia, and the cost of drilling one barrel was 50 cents before the war, the cheapest in the world. If the United States brought this oil country under its control, it would prove favourable for it to relieve its burden of oil imports, which was estimated to spiral 90 percent till 2020. Moreover, this would deal a telling blow to OPEC, restrict the influence of Russia and other oil suppliers, and seize the lifeline of the European economy.

Entering 2002, the United States took the lead in inducing early membership for Romania and Bulgaria, countries that have ports on the Black Sea, of NATO, and intensified its military advance into Georgia and other Transcaucasian countries. These actions promoted a plan for laying an oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea through Turkey, by-passing Russia.

Availing themselves of the “war against terrorism,” the US military-industry complexes, which had been eclipsed after the Gulf War, bounced back. US munitions enterprises, including the four major corporations-Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon and TRW-are enjoying a wartime boom.

After 9/11 the United States did its best to involve as many countries as possible in its own “war against terrorism.” [...] On September 18, 2001, Secretary of Commerce Don Evans warned that such sanctions as blocking access to the American market and reconsidering food assistance would be imposed against those countries that were unwilling to cooperate with the United States in the campaign. This led many countries to donate troops and help with logistics in the “war against terrorism,” and to allow US-led forces to pass over their territorial airspace or use bases in their territories during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, or promise cooperation or express understanding-overt or covert cooperation with the United States.

Bush divided the world into those on the US side and those on the “terrorist” side, through childish logic. Labelling the countries that pursue anti-US independence, that are not obedient to it and that are situated in regions of strategic importance as siding with the “enemy,” he resorted to unprecedented pressure and military blackmail. If the United States could find a “reasonable excuse,” it immediately and unhesitatingly committed military aggression.

The Taliban regime in Afghanistan and the Saddam Hussein government of Iraq became miserable victims of the “war against terrorism.” The next targets of the “war,” which is continuing in line with Bush’s “ripples” strategy, are the DPRK, Iran and Cuba. These countries, though small, stick to the principle of independence, and reject the American view on values. [...] The US attempt to crush the DPRK and realize domination over the whole Korean peninsula constitutes the core of its policy towards the DPRK and the key to its building of a foundation on which to achieve world hegemony.

The Songun politics the DPRK now pursues acts as a deterrent to the “war against terrorism” and safeguards peace in Northeast Asia as well as on the Korean peninsula.

To cope with a possible military strike by the United States, Cuba put all its people under arms and fortified the whole country. In December 2004, four million civilians joined the soldiers and reserve forces in the last stage of Bastion 2004, a military exercise aimed at perfecting the principles of “all-people war” against possible US aggression. Cuba’s firm anti-US stand and strong countermeasures will inevitably foil any US attempt to stifle it.

If the United States continues the “war against terrorism” with the logic that any country that is not on its side is on the enemy’s side, it will inevitably meet self-destruction.

Bush submitted the Nuclear Posture Review to Congress in January 2002. Outlining the orientation of the nuclear policy the United States should pursue in the forthcoming five to ten years in the report. Bush insisted on changing the strategy of nuclear deterrence. In the part not made public, the report pinpointed the DPRK, along with China, Russia, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria, as targets of nuclear attack, and further expanded the scope and methods of the use of nuclear weapons. [...] The document also advocated nuclear preemptive strike against nonnuclear states by defining five nonnuclear states as targets of nuclear attack.

In the United States some advocate a theory of “cultural conflict,” which alleges that Islamic culture is fundamentally contradictory to Christian culture. Neocons view that 9/11 proved this conflict and the only way to eliminate it is to reform the entire Islamic world and lead it to Western-style democracy.

Since 9/11 the United States has claimed that, as the “failed states,” serving as a source of or shelter for terrorism, pose a great threat to global security, the countries that sponsor international terrorism or allow the free activities of terrorists in their territories should also be viewed as “failed states.” Alleging that these countries are deprived of their raison d’etre, it insists that the international community, or some countries, or one country, has a right to take action with regard to such countries, and further to change their regimes to root out terrorism, which threatens the international community. The concept of “bankrupt states” (“rogue states” and “Axis of Evil” included) much touted by the Bush administration serves, in practice, US military intervention in other countries.

The “war against terrorism” pursued by the Bush administration will eventually end in failure due to its unilateralism that infringes upon the sovereignty of nation-states, illogicality combined with a childish attempt at division of the international political forces, and anachronism.

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 29 points 11 months ago

Apparently the attacker was also their landlord:

According to the Will County sheriff’s office, the woman had called 911 to report that her landlord had attacked her with a knife, adding she then ran into a bathroom and continued to fight him off.

The Muslim civil liberties organization called the crime “our worst nightmare” and part of a disturbing spike in hate calls and emails since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war. The group cited text messages exchanged among family members that showed the attacker had made disparaging remarks about Muslims.

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 11 months ago

I'm taking a look through the link that @GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml stickied on c/GenZhou. I'm also trying to learn more about the early history of the region, as I also mostly only know about the more recent history. So, take my post as someone else also learning about this too and sharing my notes, not as someone well-versed on the topic.

Here's a page from there: Myth: My people were here before your people.

Key points from the page:

The ethnic cleansing, massacres and colonialism needed to establish Israel can never be justified, regardless of who was there first. It’s a moot point. Even if we follow the argument that Palestinians have only been there for 1300 years, does this suddenly legitimize the expulsion of hundreds of thousands? Of course not. There is no possible scenario where it is excusable to ethnically cleanse a people and colonize their lands. Human rights apply to people universally, regardless of whether they have lived in an area for a year or ten thousand years.

A point regarding the historical issue of the population (read the whole page for more info about that):

[T]he Palestinian Arabs of today did not suddenly appear from the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century to settle in Palestine, but are the same indigenous peoples living there who changed how they identified over time. This includes the descendants of every group that has ever called Palestine their home. When regions change rulers, they don’t normally change populations. Throughout history, peoples have often changed how they identified politically. The Sardinians eventually became Italians, Prussians became Germans. It would be laughable to suggest that the Sardinians were kicked out and replaced by a distinct foreign Italian people. We must separate the political nationalist identity of people from their personhood as human beings, as nationalism is a relatively modern concept, especially in the Middle East.

"Jewish history ... forms a part of the Palestinian past and heritage, just like every other group, kingdom or empire that settled there does ... These positions can be maintained while simultaneously rejecting Zionism and its colonialism"

If we reject the “we were there first” argument, and not treat it as a legitimizing factor for Israel’s creation, then we can focus on the real history, without any ideological agendas. We could trace how our pasts intersected throughout the centuries. After all, there is indeed Jewish history in Palestine. This history forms a part of the Palestinian past and heritage, just like every other group, kingdom or empire that settled there does. We must stop viewing Palestinian and Jewish histories as competing, mutually exclusive entities, because for most of history they have not been. These positions can be maintained while simultaneously rejecting Zionism and its colonialism. After all, this ideologically driven impulse to imagine our ancestors as some closed, well defined, unchanging homogenous group having exclusive ownership over lands corresponding to modern day borders has nothing to do with the actual history of the area, and everything to do with modern notions of ethnic nationalism and colonialism.

Another page: Myth: The "conflict" is ancient

This shallow analysis of the question of Palestine serves multiple functions; First, it is an attractive and easy way to comment on the situation without actually saying anything or taking a side. It is convenient because it spares you the need to do any research or take a stance while simultaneously morally elevating yourself over the “backwards” people in the region. This is done in an attempt to project a false image of understanding or nuance.

[T]he question of Palestine is not some ancient blood feud between eternally warring peoples, it is a recent struggle resulting from settler colonialism infused with reactionary ethnonationalism, both relatively new concepts originating in the last couple of centuries. The analysis of the question of Palestine through any other lens will produce a flawed and misleading understanding of the facts on the ground and will result in shallow and ahistorical interpretations of the region as the one discussed above.

Since iirc the video you linked mentioned this: Myth: The name "Palestine" was a Roman invention

As I said, I am also learning more about the more distant past history of this region, and at the moment I am in the phase of just gathering information and reading up, not yet at a phase of fact-checking certain details (though, as the pages above importantly point out, certain facts are moot points in regard to justifying settler colonization--nonetheless it's good to be aware of factual historical information).

I'm going to be taking the information on the above pages as a jumping off point as I learn more about it. I noticed that each page in their myths section contains a list of sources, so maybe you (and I) could start looking into those. I know you said you know about the more recent history but I thought this Empire Files video was informative due to containing several quotations from Zionists before and throughout the history of their colonization of Palestine and context about European colonial projects: How Palestine Became Colonized.

Again, this video, like the above website, and also like the video you linked, are all media intended to quickly introduce information to a mass audience, so we should always be taking them as a starting point for more detailed research. As someone else in this thread mentioned, keep learning about the history, keep expanding your knowledge of the context. Read widely with a critical mind and with a materialist analysis and keep wary of the imperialist point of view being the default in many sources. Explicitly Marxist histories of events can help very much in orienting your research but you can also do your best to make that kind of analysis yourself as you become more informed using sources of all kinds as long as you remain critical.

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 24 points 11 months ago

Transcript contains some errors, typos, and spots where I was unsure of what exactly was said, which I marked by a question mark, but should be mostly readable. Feel free to correct any problems you see.

https://paste.lcomrade.su/XVquKDWC

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 25 points 11 months ago

All this week I keep thinking about/looking up Haitian revolution images too...

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

In America there are signs posted all over residential zones reminding citizens that they are being spied on by their neighbors who will immediately report all "suspicious persons and activities" to the authorities 😱 Some signs even mention the people have been "trained" to report/spy on each other's family members 😢

neighborhood watch sign that says "we are watching you" neighborhood watch sign with pictures of eyeballs on houses neighborhood watch sign that says the neighbors are trained to watch each other and report suspicious activities

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 20 points 1 year ago

“We have many interesting projects,” Putin promised, naming as one example the plan to develop Russian railroad connectivity through North Korea. (Source)

Really interested to see if this is pursued.

This is an old article (2018) but it outlines the kinds of projects that have been discussed before concerning Russia-DPRK-ROK:

One such project could be a railway that will be able deliver goods from Russia to South Korea through North Korea. "Once the Trans-Korean Main Line is built, it may be connected to the Trans-Siberian Railway. In this case, it will be possible to deliver goods from South Korea to Europe, which would be economically beneficial not only to South and North Korea but to Russia as well," Moon Jae-in said in an interview with Russian media ahead of his state visit to Moscow.

A gas pipeline coming from Russia to North Korea to be extended to the South is another possibility, he said. "We can also build a gas pipeline via North Korea, so that not only South Korea will receive Russian gas but we will also be able to deliver it to Japan," the South Korean president said.

The project to unite the Korean Peninsula with a gas pipeline has been discussed for a long time, but official talks started in 2011. The negotiations were frozen after relations between Seoul and Pyongyang deteriorated. Last week, Russian energy major Gazprom announced it resumed talks with Seoul over the construction of a gas pipeline connecting Russia with North and South Korea.

The countries could also connect their electricity grids, Moon Jae-in said. "We can also establish a powerline that would allow us to receive electricity from Russia. It could also be delivered not only to South and North Korea but also to Japan.”

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 42 points 1 year ago

I don't recall the exact details as I believe it was the usual UN demands about DPRK's missile launches, but basically China went along with a round of security council sanctions adopted in 2017, which meant that petroleum exports become more restricted and thousands of people from DPRK who were working in China had to go home and a bunch of joint ventures were forced to shut down as well. However, in 2022, China and Russia vetoed a new round of US-sponsored UN sanctions on DPRK, and recommended lifting some of the earlier sanctions, as they felt the US had failed to engage in its end of diplomacy with DPRK, and therefore the earlier sanctions should be reduced and no further ones should be imposed.

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 1 year ago

Watch the 2016 film "Donbass" by Anne-Laure Bonnel, to see the things people are referring to about the violence there over the past several years. Warning that if you look into what was going on in Donbass during those years, you are going to see a lot of footage of people dead/dying in the street with their limbs blown off. This film shows a bit less of that than others do.

Also here is a clip from the documentary, with footage of the 2014 burning of the trade union building in Odessa, where Ukranian nationalists burned the building down and beat and shot the people who jumped out of the windows to avoid burning. The people in the building were Russian speakers who were protesting a ban on Russian language, and took refuge in the trade union building when the right-wing nationalists showed up. The person being interviewed is a former Ukranian soldier from Donestk, who left the military because he didn't want to join in the violence enacted on the region. Warning that you will briefly see bodies of people who burned to death.

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 107 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, the US is purposely starving the world.

Yep. I doubt you'll care to read the following but I'm putting it here for others to see.

The United States is the world leader in imposing economic sanctions and supports sanctions regimes affecting nearly 200 million people. ... Targeted countries experience economic contractions and, in many cases, are unable to import sufficient essential goods, including essential medicines, medical equipment, infrastructure necessary for clean water and for health care, and food. ... While on paper most sanctions have some humanitarian exemptions for food, necessary medicines and medical supplies, in practice these exemptions are not sufficient to ensure access to these goods within the targeted country. (Center for Economic and Policy Research)

It's well known that sanctions are ineffective for pressuring governments, but very effective at waging siege warfare by starving and killing ordinary citizens by disease and infrastructural failures. Continuing to use sanctions in this way and to this extent, when this is well known, is definitely "purposely starving the world". An independent expert appointed by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights said in 2019 that US sanctions violate human rights and international code of conduct and can lead to starvation. Why does the US continue to be the world leader in imposing sanctions, increasing its use of sanctions by 933% over the last 20 years, when this is well known? It's because they know the effect, and they're doing it on purpose.

We can also look at some US internal memorandums from before it was more politically incorrect to talk about starving people in other countries. In 1960, U.S. officials wrote that creating "disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship" through denying money and supplies to Cuba would be a method they should pursue in order to "bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government" in Cuba.

In other countries, we see a pattern of US officials and US-backed institutions purposely denying aid and loans to governments they don't approve of, and then suddenly approving aid and opening up loans when a coup brings a leader they're happy with into power. When Ghana was requesting aid under an administration that the West's bourgeoisie didn't like, U.S. officials said this: "We and other Western countries (including France) have been helping to set up the situation by ignoring Nkrumah’s pleas for economic aid. The new OCAM (Francophone) group’s refusal to attend any OAU meeting in Accra (because of Nkrumah’s plotting) will further isolate him. All in all, looks good." The "situation" they were helping to set up was a coup they knew was going to happen. After a US-friendly coup took place, suddenly it was time to give the "almost pathetically pro-Western" government a gift of "few thousand tons of surplus wheat or rice", knowing that giving little gifts like this "whets their appetites" for further collaboration with the US. You will find the same song and dance in numerous other countries, Chile being a well-documented example, if you simply look for it.

The US imposes starvation and depravation of other countries on purpose, using it as an economic wrecking ball, then pats itself on the back for giving "aid" to the countries which have been hollowed out by such tactics.

The loans which magically become available to countries that meet the US approval standards are not so pretty either, as a former IMF senior economist said, he may only hope "to wash my hands of what in my mind's eye is the blood of millions of poor and starving peoples", there not being "enough soap in the world" to wash away what has been done to the global south through the calculated fraud of the IMF, whose tactics are designed to accomplish the same kind of goals as the sanctions are--to prevent the economic rise of any country but the US by wrecking its competitors economically, tearing apart their local manufacturing capacity and transforming them into mere resource extraction projects, redirecting their agricultural industries into exports to make sure they reach a level where they are more reliant on imports to feed themselves, and reliant on foreign aid which is ripped away whenever they do not do what the US approves of or make friends with who the US wants them to.

I refer to #3, why don’t they just do it then?

This is what secondary sanctions and the US's various protection rackets have always been designed to prevent, which has definitely been a powerful tool for them, but it seems with the rise of the new non-aligned movement and de-dollarization its becoming a less successful one and we can see countries "just doing" what they want more and more while the US leadership waves around, as usual, more sanctions and military threats in response.

[-] afellowkid@lemmygrad.ml 32 points 1 year ago

If you have not seen it already, you may be interested in this short 2021 documentary, "A Day of Trans 跨越性别的一天", made by a Chinese director who is transgender, which interviews four trans people in China. There is a woman in her 60s who tells some of her life story, a man in his 30s who talks about a gender identity discrimination lawsuit that he won in 2016 and about general issues trans people face in society, and two younger people (one identifies as genderqueer/nonbinary and the other is agender) who talk about their trans rights advocacy work. Each interviewee also talks about the attitudes in society about trans people over time, their own journey, etc.

view more: next ›

afellowkid

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF