The Palestinians’ inalienable right to resist

In December 1982, following Israel’s devastating invasion of Lebanon six months earlier, the United Nations General Assembly passed resolution A/RES/37/43 concerning the ‘[i]mportance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination’. It endorsed, without qualification, ‘the inalienable right’ of the Palestinian people to ‘self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference’, and reaffirmed the legitimacy of their struggle for those rights ‘by all available means, including armed struggle’. It also strongly condemned Israel’s ‘expansionist activities in the Middle East’ and ‘continual bombing of Palestinian civilians’, both said to ‘constitute a serious obstacle to the realization of the self-determination and independence of the Palestinian people’. In the four decades since then, Israel’s violence against the Palestinian people and its colonisation of their land has not ceased. Up to the present moment, all over historical Palestine, from the Gaza Strip to Sheikh Jarrah, Palestinians are still under that same occupation, subject to suffocating control over virtually every aspect of their lives – and the sadistic, unaccountable violence of the Zionist state.

The Palestinians’ inalienable right to resist

Hype on iPhone ‘ban’ shows US has a guilty conscience

The biggest destroyer of the global economic and trade order is being paranoid. This is perhaps the most incisive and vivid explanation of why the US government and media outlets have seen a rumored ban on iPhones as China’s retaliation against the US.

Hype on iPhone ‘ban’ shows US has a guilty conscience

Related:

US spokesman behind on the news pours gas on seemingly settled China iPhone ban

In what appears to be a statement generated before news of the Chinese government refuting ban rumors, the White House chimed in on the matter, as reported by Bloomberg. The National Security Council shared that it is watching the issue with concern.

Death of Yevgeny Prigozhin + More

BREAKING!!! ASSASSINATION OF TOP RUSSIAN ELITE, WW3 SPIRALLING, AUG 24TH UKRAINE PREDICTED THIS! (originally from Canadian Prepper)*

Related:

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on July 21: “If I were Mr. Prigozhin, I would remain very concerned. NATO has an open-door policy; Russia has an open-windows policy, and he needs to be very focused on that.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Yevgeny Prigozhin, 08-23-2023, via C-SPAN (originally titled, Secretary Blinken Warning Prigozhin Should Be Concerned for His Safety)**

Coincidentally’, C-SPAN chose to upload the clip of Antony Blinken, shortly after the plane crash (it’s from July).

Read More »

Bombing Mexico to stop drug cartels from supplying US with fentanyl is a terrible idea

The early stretch of the 2024 presidential campaign is underway — and with it a boatload of bad ideas and policy initiatives. One of the worst but increasingly popular proposals, uttered by several politicians aspiring for the highest office in the land, is to use the military to combat the drug cartels that have smuggled gargantuan amounts of fentanyl into the United States and turned swaths of neighboring Mexico into a war zone.

Bombing Mexico to stop drug cartels from supplying US with fentanyl is a terrible idea

Maybe they should call the Taliban for help?! /s

Ukraine’s Defense Ministry Admits It Attacked Crimean Bridge to ‘Break’ Russia’s Logistics

Detonation of a truck bomb on the 19-km bridge linking the Crimean Peninsula to the region of Krasnodar on the Russian mainland on October 8, 2022, killed three people, causing part of the road section to collapse into the sea. Kiev refused to take responsibility, yet its officials had gloated over the attack in Twitter posts.

Ukraine’s Defense Ministry Admits It Attacked Crimean Bridge to ‘Break’ Russia’s Logistics

Biden Appeals Judge’s Ban on Government Asking for Social Media Takedowns

Biden Appeals Judge’s Ban on Government Asking for Social Media Takedowns

State Department officials, according to a Facebook employee speaking with The Washington Post, told the company all future monthly meetings to discuss content takedowns were “canceled pending further guidance.” The reported cancellation means government officials and trust and safety representatives at Facebook will no longer meet to discuss brewing political misinformation or foreign influence operations. It’s unclear whether other agencies have taken similar measures following the ruling or if Google or Twitter have canceled meetings. The State Department, Meta, and Google did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment. Twitter sent us a 💩 . …

Judge compares Biden’s admin’s meeting with tech companies to Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth’

The Justice Department appealed Trump-appointed federal Judge Terry A. Doughty’s preliminary injunction hours after it landed, according to court documents filed Wednesday evening. Doughty’s preliminary injunction bars numerous government agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) from contacting or asking social media companies about posts he said are protected by the First Amendment. The ruling does offer some exceptions for government communications with tech firms intended to warn them of national security threats, criminal activity, and voter suppression. Government officials maintain their content recommendations to social networks were merely suggestions, not legal demands. Doughty said numerous uncovered communications show Biden administration officials wielded threats of increased regulations or a stripping of Section 230 immunity protections to get its way.

Related:

State Dept. cancels Facebook meetings after judge’s ‘censorship’ ruling

When tech companies and State Department officials meet, “they talk about foreign influence, they compare notes. It gives them the opportunity to ask questions about foreign influence they are seeing,” this person said. “State will share Russian narratives, things they are seeing in state media in Russia about U.S. topics. They will ask whether Facebook is seeing things from known entities, such as the Chinese Communist Party or the Internet Research Agency,” the Russian entity thought responsible for much of the interference in the 2016 election. …

“The really tough question is when does the government cross the line from responding to speech — which it can and should do — to coercing platforms to censor constitutionally protected speech?” Kosseff said. “The judge here believes that line was crossed, and he certainly cited some persuasive examples,” such as administration officials suggesting antitrust actions against tech firms or changes to their liability protections while criticizing their content moderation efforts.

US Court Victory Against Online Censorship