Pravda News!
388 readers
1 users here now
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
1
2
In a sign that the US is preparing for yet another evil war, Marco Rubio is now claiming that Cuba poses a “national security threat” to the United States, saying the likelihood of a peaceful agreement is “not high”.
“Cuba not only has weapons that they’ve acquired from Russia and China over the years, but they also host Russian and Chinese intelligence presence in their country — not far from where we’re standing right now,” Rubio told the press on Thursday. “So Cuba has always posed a national security threat to the United States. They, by the way, have been one of the leading sponsors of terrorism in the entire region.”
Rubio’s comments come as a US intelligence report laundered through Axios claims that Cuba may be preparing to launch a drone strike against US military forces. Havana said the Axios report misrepresents Cuba’s defensive measures as a preparation to attack, accusing the US of “fabricating pretexts, creating and spreading falsehoods, and distorting as extraordinary the logical preparation required to face a potential aggression.”
The US has also unsealed an indictment for Raul Castro, the 94 year-old brother of Fidel Castro, in a move that resembles the playbook used for the kidnapping of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro.
The excuses for military action are already being rolled out. This happens as US war machinery relocates to the Caribbean, and as Cuba flounders under a crushing US oil blockade that is already inflicting a severe humanitarian toll.
And everyone knows it’s all based on lies. You know it. I know it. Marco Rubio knows it. The war propagandists know it. The gusanos brigading social media begging for war know it. We all know it’s a sham.
Not one person sincerely believes Cuba poses a threat to the United States.
No one sincerely believes Cuba just coincidentally became an urgent menace to US national security all of a sudden right when the US began scrambling to consolidate geostrategic control in the middle east and the western hemisphere.
Nobody actually thinks that a tiny, impoverished island nation is preparing to launch a war of aggression against the United States.
This is a performance put on by warmongers and bootlickers. It insults our intelligence and robs us of dignity.
If things cool down with Iran, then it’s a safe bet they’re going in for the kill shot on Cuba. The US empire never makes peace, it just moves the crosshairs of its war machinery from nation to nation.
We see this over and over again.
Yay! The troops are leaving Afghanistan — oh, now they’re waging a proxy war in Ukraine.
Excellent, they’re deescalating against Yemen — whoa, now they’re kidnapping the president of Venezuela.
Oh hey, it looks like the mass slaughter in Gaza has slowed down — oh, now they’re going to war with Iran.
Look, they’re pulling thousands of troops out of Germany — oh, it’s so they can move them to Poland.
Hey these Iran negotiations are finally getting somewhere — ah man, now they’re invading Cuba.
Over and over and over and over again. As soon as the human butchery slows down in one place, it picks up somewhere else.
The US empire exists in a constant state of war. War is the glue that holds the empire together. If the wars stop, the empire stops.
That’s why the denizens of the empire are never allowed to vote for an end to wars. You can vote for candidates who will end abortions or trans rights or corporate regulations, but you can’t vote for a candidate who will actually end the wars. Peace is never on the ballot, because war is too critical for the functioning of the empire.
Which is why it’s so important for us all to stand against the war machine. If we can end the wars, we can end the empire. Not until then will we have a shot at building a healthy world.
___________________
Caitlin’s Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
The best way to make sure you see everything I publish is to get on my free mailing list. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Click here for links for my social media, books, merch, and audio/video versions of each article. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.
Bitcoin donations: 1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
Feature image via The White House (public domain).
From Caitlin’s Newsletter via This RSS Feed.
3
In the first hours of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran, up to 175 young children and school staff were blown to pieces at an elementary school. Others were maimed and burned, and will be suffering from their injuries for the rest of their lives. Even any comparatively fortunate ones with minimal injuries will surely experience permanent trauma from having witnessed something so horrific. Witnesses describe scenes of unfathomable horror, with limbs and blood strewn across classrooms. "People were pulling out children's arms and legs. People were pulling out severed heads," said a woman whose child was killed. The Guardian cites verified videos that show "children's bodies lying partly buried under the debris":
In one video, a very small child's severed arm is pulled from the rubble. Colourful backpacks covered with blood and concrete dust sit among the ruins. One girl wears a green dress with gingham patches on her pockets and the collar, her form partly obscured by a black body bag. Screams can be heard in the background.
Drop Site News spoke to the father of a six-year-old girl, Sara Shariatmadar, who was killed in the attack. "I cannot understand how a place where innocent children learn can be bombed like this," he said. "We are talking about small children who knew nothing of politics or wars. And yet they are the ones paying the highest price."
The United States and Israel have not denied responsibility for the attack, although it is still unclear which country fired the missile. The U.S. said that it does not "target" schools, which does not mean that it does not bomb them. ("We take these reports seriously," a spokesman said.) Israel's spokesperson said the government was not "aware" of such an attack, which does not mean its military did not carry one out. Photos supposedly showing that a misfired Iranian missile caused it were debunked, although they spread widely online among Americans and Israelis desperate to believe that only the Bad Guys do things like this.
Domestic coverage of this horrible crime against humanity has been muted. U.S. media has a policy of not showing gruesome images of violence---the Guardian explicitly stated that it was concealing the photos and videos it had "due to their graphic nature." As a result, war is always sanitized, so that Americans can read that 150+ schoolgirls were killed without having to confront the full horror of what it means for their country to drive a missile into a crowded school in the middle of the day. (Saturday is a school day in Iran, a fact that the U.S. government would easily have been able to know when deciding how to time its attacks, but Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has been open about the fact that he regards such niceties as rules of engagement and international law as meddlesome hindrances that can be ignored, lambasting those who "wring their hands and clutch their pearls, hemming and hawing about the use of force.")
I suspect that this attack is also difficult for U.S. media to cover because the basic facts of the situation are so twisted, so depraved, so evil, that they shatter the comforting narrative that the U.S. has the moral high ground over the Ayatollah. In fact, the U.S. government is on the moral level of the Sandy Hook school shooter, a fact that even president Trump's critics may have a hard time fully accepting.
And this was not the only massacre carried out by the U.S. and Israel in a war that has been going on just a few days. The Human Rights Activists News Agency reports that there have already been over 1,000 civilian deaths in Iran, including 181 children under the age of ten, with thousands more civilians injured. Drop Site reports on the nauseating scene in a middle-class Tehran neighborhood following a "double tap" strike (dropping one bomb first, and then dropping another on the survivors and emergency responders, a favorite war crime of the U.S. and Israel). Warning, the following description is extremely graphic and may undermine any love you may have for your country:
Videos of the immediate aftermath of the attack showed several individuals dead and wounded as well as massive destruction on the street outside. In Cafe Ahla, next to the square, blood and debris soaked the floors. Several patrons who had been sitting there when the attack struck could be seen dead on the floor or with their mutilated bodies still sprawled across their seats. "We were sitting here around 8:00-8:30 p.m. and suddenly there was the noise and explosion. We got up and a few people ran away. We turned around to get our belongings and we saw that blood was spraying everywhere. Someone's hand had fallen on the floor, a head had fallen on the floor," said Shahin, a witness who had been at the cafe and asked to be identified by first name only. "There were scalps torn off, hands severed, a few people were laying here all cut up and two people were martyred."
I will get to the many ways in which the Iran war is illegal, making us less safe, founded on lies, strategically insane, unbelievably costly, etc. But let us dwell for a moment on what we are doing to these people. The right-wing Telegraph newspaper reports that in Tehran, "millions of civilians are trapped under relentless bombardment as food and medical supplies dwindle and the death toll mounts," and the city is an "'apocalypse' of hospitals in flames and children buried beneath rubble." The paper records a total humanitarian disaster, with sick people lacking medicine, children going hungry, diabetics running out of insulin, and the repeated bombing of residential areas. While Americans pat themselves on the back for assassinating Iran's repressive head of state, everyday Iranians (even those with little love for their theocratic government) are facing the prospect of being killed at any moment, or watching their children be ripped to pieces. I realize that in the U.S., the devaluation of Middle Eastern lives means that little Iranian girls will receive a fraction of the compassion and concern that has arisen around, say, Nancy Guthrie. But if we apply our morality consistently, I cannot see how we can be anything other than completely revolted by the carnage our president is choosing to inflict (and will apparently soon be further escalating, according to Marco Rubio, who is promising an increased use of force to come, and Pete Hegseth, who is salivating about delivering "death and destruction all day long").
We are all complicit. If you are an American, you paid your government to murder those little girls and those Tehran cafe-goers. Money was withdrawn from your paycheck in the form of federal income taxes. If the attack was conducted with a Tomahawk missile (of which 400 were fired in 72 hours), that money would have been paid to the RTX Corporation (formerly Raytheon). Each missile fired costs somewhere between $1.3 million and $2.2 million, of which approximately $200,000 would be pure profit. Thus the killing of the Iranian schoolgirls, which left their bloody backpacks and tiny severed limbs scattered across classroom floors, transferred hundreds of thousands of dollars from us (the American taxpayers) into RTX's bank accounts. It also boosted the GDP. And the stock market.
Stock price of RTX (formerly Raytheon)
It is hard for me to write about this war, because I am so sickened every time I contemplate the full dark reality of the country I live in. I realize that not only are there people who will drop a bomb on a school without losing a wink of sleep, but there are people who get rich when we bomb schools, who have a direct financial stake in ensuring we keep dropping as many bombs as possible. (And that's just the weapons companies. Others are getting rich from betting on the atrocities on prediction markets.) The fact that many Congressional Democrats implicitly or explicitly supported this war (whether by outright goading Trump into it, as Chuck Schumer did, dragging their feet on opposing it, or raising meek procedural objections) further adds to my disgust. Many Democrats apparently declined to try to stop the war, reasoning that if it achieved U.S. foreign policy goals it would be embarrassing to have opposed it, but if it went south Trump would own it anyway. When I open the New York Times op-ed page, and I find resident foreign policy guru Thomas Friedman cautioning against adopting any "black and white narrative" about what goes on in "a complicated, kaleidoscopic region," I want to vomit. The moment calls for moral clarity: our country is engaged in a mass murder campaign. It must be stopped. It is depressing to see so many debates around strategic end-goals, congressional authorization, or the consistency of the justifications. They take us away from the basic fact that our president, with the blessing of his party and many members of the so-called opposition, is gruesomely murdering children by the dozen. Every day this continues, we are paying our government to commit some of the worst crimes humans are capable of.
Of course, the war is also based on a pack of lies. The Trump administration can't even get its story straight on why the war is being waged and has produced no justification beyond vague invocations of National Security. (Trump says Iran was a "bad seed.") Some Republicans won't even admit that this is a war. (Perhaps they might want to borrow a phrase from Vladimir Putin: "special military operation.") House Speaker Mike Johnson is trying to have it both ways, saying that while the Iranians "have declared war on us," we're "not at war right now." Others are tying themselves in pretzels trying to explain how this differs from the "regime change" wars that Trump has so vocally opposed. (Pete Hegseth: "This is not a so-called 'regime change war.' But the regime sure did change.") Sometimes there are direct self-contradictions within a single sentence, as with Tom Cotton declaring that "Iran has been an imminent threat to the United States for 47 years." This was too much for right-wing commentator Matt Walsh, who accused Republicans of "gaslighting" for suddenly discovering that Iran has been waging a half-century of war against the U.S. Even leading Iraq war hawk Bill Kristol is confused about the reasoning behind the war, saying there is "no coherent rationale." (Of course, Kristol's own favorite Middle East war was equally illegitimate, but that's an argument for another day.)
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. attacked because it knew Israel was going to attack, and needed to defend itself against the inevitable Iranian retaliation for Israel's attack---perhaps the most tortured and unpersuasive case for self-defense ever made. Perhaps because this seemed like an admission that Israeli choices dictate U.S. policy, Trump subsequently denied that Israeli decision-making had anything to do with the attack, although it's clear that Benjamin Netanyahu lobbied heavily for this, as he has been salivating at the prospect of a major war with Iran for decades, and has been scheming for a way to get the U.S. involved.
The idea that Iran was a threat to the United States was always laughable. U.S. intelligence has consistently assessed that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon. The Trump administration itself declared that it had destroyed Iran's nuclear program with last year's bombings. Iran has in fact consistently shown itself very reluctant to engage in military confrontation with the U.S., often carefully limiting its retaliation after U.S. provocations. To the extent that Iran did want to become a nuclear threshold state, with at least the capacity to pursue a weapons program if it wanted to, credible analysts believe that Iran mainly wanted an insurance policy against potential U.S. and Israeli attacks. North Korea has shown that the possession of nuclear weapons is enough to make the U.S. think twice about forcible regime change, and there is a good argument that it would have been rational for Iran to pursue nuclear weapons for the sake of its own self-protection. As Israeli military historian Martin Van Creveld observed, the world "witnessed how the United States attacked Iraq for, as it turned out, no reason at all. Had the Iranians not tried to build nuclear weapons, they would be crazy." (Van Creveld is wrong that Iraq was attacked for "no reason," however. It was attacked for the same reason Iran is being attacked: the establishment of U.S.-Israeli dominance over the Middle East.) While U.S. commentators often talk as if Iran would pursue nuclear weapons mainly in order to destroy the U.S. or Israel (which would, of course, be suicidal given both countries' superior nuclear forces), there's no evidence that Iran would want nuclear weapons for any reason beyond deterring potential external attacks. (A fear that recent events have proven to be well-founded.)
In fact, the entire prevailing narrative about Iran is completely backwards. It's the U.S. that has been a threat to Iran, not the other way around. It was the United States and Britain that overthrew Iran's legitimately elected leader, Mohammad Mosaddegh, in 1953. (The New York Times was elated by the coup, commenting that "underdeveloped countries with rich resources now have an object lesson in the heavy cost that must be paid by one of their number which goes berserk with fanatical nationalism.") Since 1979, when the Iranians ousted the dictator (the Shah) that the U.S. had helped install and maintain in power, the U.S. has had a virtually unremittingly hostile attitude toward Iran. This is not because of the government's (very real) human rights abuses, since the U.S. is happy to support human rights abusing states that are pliant and servile (see, e.g., Saudi Arabia and Egypt). But Iran is viewed as a threat to U.S. dominance in the Middle East. Thus, in the 1980s, the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein as he waged a ruthless war of aggression against Iran, killing hundreds of thousands of Iranians including with chemical weapons. (The U.S. concealed evidence of Hussein's chemical weapon use from the UN, because it wanted him to go on killing Iranians.) More recently, the U.S. and Israel have tried to destabilize the country through devastating cyberattacks, economy-wrecking sanctions, and assassinations. The sanctions have been explicitly aimed at harming civilians, with Mike Pompeo boasting in 2019 that "things are much worse for the Iranian people" thanks to sanctions and hoping that their suffering would lead them to overthrow their government.
Importantly, while U.S. policymakers in both the Republican and Democratic parties constantly affirm that "Iran must not be allowed to have nuclear weapons," they rarely state their implicit corollary to this proposition, which is that Israel must be allowed to have nuclear weapons. As it happens, Iran actually agrees that it shouldn't be allowed to have nukes, and has long supported turning the entire Middle East into an official nuclear weapons free zone, much as Africa and Latin America have done. The problem is that the U.S. and Israel demand a double standard, with Israel refusing to contemplate giving up its nuclear weapons. The entire nuclear disagreement, then, is not about whether Iran should have nuclear weapons, but about whether Iran should hold itself to a different standard to Israel. (Amusingly, Chuck Schumer recently accidentally declared that "no one wants a nuclear Israel," and had to correct himself, because he does want a nuclear Israel.)
Anyone who values human life should treat war as an absolute last resort, to be engaged in only once every diplomatic option has been exhausted. In this case, it was the Trump administration that sabotaged diplomacy. First, even though asking Iran not to pursue nuclear weapons means imposing an unfair double standard that imperils Iran's national security, Iran had agreed under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action to severely constrain its development of nuclear technology, and agreed to a detailed monitoring and compliance regime. It was confirmed to be adhering to that agreement until Donald Trump ripped it up in 2018, subsequently criticizing Iran for failing to adhere to the agreement that he himself had destroyed. Joe Biden declined to pursue the revival of that agreement, even though Iran signaled that it was open to it. But to this day, Iran has shown that it is willing to consider even highly unfavorable agreements in order to avoid war---it has never shown any sign of launching an unprovoked strike, only deploying military action in response to violence by others, such as an Israeli attack on its embassy or the assassination of its allies' leaders.
Iran has long wanted to keep a war with the U.S. from breaking out, which is why its responses to U.S. and Israeli attacks have previously been notably measured and cautious. (This time around, Iran reasons that unless it inflicts major damage, it will be perceived as weak and attacked further, since previous restraint only encouraged the U.S. and Israel to press their advantage.) Diplomatic talks between the U.S. and Iran were ongoing, and Oman, mediating talks, saw "the most promising diplomatic opening in years" and thought "diplomacy was producing tangible results and that a negotiated settlement was imminent." The U.S. and Israel decided to sabotage diplomacy and assassinate the Iranian head of state, possibly because they felt they just couldn't forgo the opportunity to kill as many high-ranking Iranians as possible in one fell swoop. (They killed so many Iranian government officials that Donald Trump admitted the U.S. had killed all of the people who had been considered likely candidates to take Khamenei's place.) Iran professed itself baffled as to why the U.S. attacked. "I do not know why the U.S. administration insists on beginning a negotiation with Iran and then attacking Iran in the middle of talks," said the country's foreign minister. He told NBC: "We were able to address serious questions related to Iran's nuclear program. We obviously have differences, but we resolved some of those differences, and we decided to continue in order to resolve the rest of [the] questions."
Because mass civilian casualties are a predictable consequence of intense airstrikes, to choose to unnecessarily end diplomatic engagement and start bombing is unconscionable depravity. But it's clear that the Trump administration didn't really care whether Iran was genuinely willing to engage in diplomacy, because Trump's position is that Iran should simply do what we say, period. There is nothing to negotiate, because for Trump, the only choice is whether a country is willing to comply with U.S. demands, or whether we will have to use force to ensure their compliance.
I haven't even gotten to the illegality of the war. Leaving aside the ridiculous Republican denials that this is a war (if a country assassinated our head of state and bombed our cities, would anyone doubt that they were waging war?), it's plain that all of this is unconstitutional. The Constitution vests the power to declare war in Congress, not the president. Congress didn't declare war, therefore the war is illegal. Case closed. I know presidents have stretched their powers as far as possible (Obama's drone strikes, etc.) but if a president has the power to wage a relentless bombing and assassination campaign without Congressional approval, the Constitution simply ceases to mean anything. Congress has plainly failed in its responsibility to ensure that Trump complies with the Constitution, but the failure of our politicians to enforce the law doesn't change what it says.
Of course, it virtually goes without saying that the war violates international law. The UN Charter prohibits the use of force (or even the threat of force) except in response to an armed attack. Iran had not attacked the U.S., nor was there any evidence Iran was going to attack the U.S. Propagandists assert that Iran (and its "proxies") have killed "hundreds" of Americans over the years, but they decline to specify who these Americans are or discuss the Iranians killed by the U.S. and our own "proxies." There's no real point discussing international law, because Trump has made it clear he simply doesn't care about it, saying he doesn't need it and is unconstrained by it. Unfortunately, other countries have been just as pathetically weak as members of the U.S. Congress, with countries like Britain and France issuing statements that were de facto supportive of the assassination of a foreign head of state. (Canada issued a supportive statement and then appeared to regret it after noticing that letting the U.S. and Israel tear up the last vestiges of international law might be unwise.) Germany's chancellor has even made the stunning statement that Iran shouldn't be protected by international law, waving away the obvious illegality of the attacks by saying that "now is not the time to lecture our partners and allies." The killing of a head of state is a major crime, the normalization of which would open a horrible Pandora's box of lawless state action, and the world should be unified in condemning U.S.-Israeli lawlessness, but even among the Arab states there is a reluctance to antagonize the U.S.
None of the long-term consequences of this war will be good. The Trump administration does not appear to have any kind of strategic plan for what will happen next in Iran. (Lindsey Graham says it's "not [Trump's] job" to have a plan for what happens to the country's government next.) We could see the country's collapse into civil war, Libya-style. (Obama adviser Ben Rhodes recently admitted that Obama's decision to topple Libya's dictator without a plan for the country was a major error.) We could simply see the hard-line theocrats be replaced by more hard-line theocrats who are more convinced than ever that there can be no negotiating with the U.S., that the only language this country understands is force, and that the best thing for Iran's safety would be for it to obtain a nuclear weapon as quickly as possible. What we are unlikely to see is a pro-American government emerging, and this war puts Americans everywhere in considerable danger. (Ask yourself: if what happened to Sara Shariatmadar happened to someone you love, would you see the country that carried out the bombing as a liberator? Or would you want revenge?) Although plenty of Iranians are justly celebrating the end of the Ayatollah's rule, like the Iraqis who celebrated in 2003, they will soon find out that the U.S. has no interest in their well-being, and will happily watch their country slide into civil war if this serves America's perceived "national security" interest.
Six Americans have already died in addition to the 1,000 Iranians. Because this is a war of choice, totally unnecessary and unjustifiable, their blood is on Donald Trump's hands, and he (as well as Congress) should be treated no differently than we would treat someone who murdered these Americans with their bare hands. But the costs to this country are only just beginning. Of course, if you're an RTX shareholder this may be a bonanza, but the rest of us are likely to see major economic disruption, in addition to all the resources that are put into the production of weapons. Eisenhower famously tried to warn Americans that war spending is an act of "theft" from the public, because it's money not spent on schools and hospitals, and the "opportunity cost" is therefore enormous. But Eisenhower's warning has largely been ignored.
Worse, as Abby Martin notes in the terrifying and important new film Earth's Greatest Enemy, military action has catastrophic climate consequences, since the U.S. war machine is the world's biggest polluter and the carbon emissions of our vast, brutal empire are driving us toward ever-worsening climate catastrophe. Unfortunately, that's just fine with some in the administration and the military---terrifying recent reporting suggests that some evangelical Christian officers are celebrating the war as hastening the apocalypse, claiming Trump was "anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth." These people would sacrifice the rest of us to the inferno to fulfill their delusional prophecies.
Of course, the war reveals that Trump and his coterie were complete frauds when they pledged to keep the U.S. out of senseless Middle East wars. Trump fooled a lot of people with this stuff, although hopefully their illusions will now be hard to maintain. (Former hardcore MAGA types like Alex Jones and Nick Fuentes are now admitting they were duped.) If there is one silver lining here, amid all of the horror, it is that because this war is deeply unpopular and Trump has no idea how to deal with its consequences, perhaps we will finally see the MAGA movement collapse politically. Trump's approval rating was already in the toilet, and while I sadly have no illusions that public opinion will be especially moved by the bombing of a school, when the fallout in cost, lives, and global chaos begins to come home, perhaps Americans will turn once and for good against their warmongering president.
But it is hard for me to think hopefully right now, as I see pictures of the remnants of former schoolchildren, schoolchildren whose lives were brutally extinguished with the help of my tax dollars. All I can feel is horror and rage at the sociopaths willing to do such things, who claim to want peace while ensuring that humanity will be consigned to a future of endless, senseless conflict.
PHOTO: Graves being dug for the elementary school girls killed in the bombing of the Minab school. Iran Foreign Ministry.
From blog via This RSS Feed.
4
Despite being the world's most trafficked animal, the European eel receives surprisingly little sympathy. It lacks the mammalian charisma of the creatures whose plights dominate conservation campaigns; among them the shy, helpless pangolin and the stoically intelligent elephant. By contrast, the eel is viewed by many as a source of revulsion: a slimy, writhing reason to stay out of the water. Yet behind inscrutable eyes, it harbors many secrets. This is the story of how an elusive and often misunderstood fish found itself at the center of an international smuggling network.
From blog via This RSS Feed.
5
0
Calls grow for FIFA VAR official Shaun Evans to be removed after white supremacist sign
(www.thecanary.co)
FIFA’s discrimination monitoring team has called for World Cup VAR official Shaun Evans to be removed from duty after he appeared to make a hand gesture resembling a white supremacist sign during Germany’s 7-1 win over Curacao.
The moment was captured on the official broadcast when cameras cut to the VAR booth. Evans, an Australian official assigned to the match, briefly formed an “OK” gesture with his right hand near his leg, a symbol that has been co‑opted by white extremist groups.
The gesture was quick, but it was enough to trigger immediate concern from FIFA’s anti‑discrimination unit, which monitors all matches for offensive behaviour. The monitor formally requested that Evans be stood down from further involvement in the tournament pending review.
FIFA response
FIFA has not yet announced disciplinary action, but the governing body confirmed that the incident is under assessment. The organisation’s discrimination monitoring system, expanded for the 2026 tournament.
This is what it was designed to flag, any behaviour that could undermine the sport’s commitment to inclusivity. The call for Evans’ removal came directly from this unit, which has the authority to recommend sanctions or suspensions.
The match in question, Germany’s emphatic opening win over debutants Curacao, had already drawn attention for its lopsided scoreline. But the focus quickly shifted from the pitch to the VAR booth once the footage circulated.
The broadcast clip showed Evans standing alongside fellow officials as the camera panned across the VAR team. His right hand formed the “OK” sign this is the thumb and forefinger touching, three fingers raised.
The discrimination monitor’s concern centred on the potential interpretation of the gesture rather than any confirmed intent. There has been no public comment from Evans as yet, and FIFA has not indicated whether he has been interviewed as part of the review.
Wider context at the World Cup
The 2026 World Cup has already seen several officiating‑related talking points, including the use of advanced VAR technologies such as connected ball data and waveform detection, systems that played a role in other matches across the opening days.
But this incident has added a different layer of scrutiny. FIFA’s anti‑discrimination protocols were strengthened ahead of the tournament, with monitors assigned to every match and empowered to escalate concerns immediately. Their recommendation to remove Evans underscores the seriousness with which the organisation treats any gesture that could be interpreted as discriminatory or extremist.
The footage spread quickly among fans and analysts, prompting debate about intent, context and the responsibilities of match officials on the world stage.
While some argued the gesture may have been innocuous, others stressed that officials must avoid any action that could be misinterpreted, especially during a global event watched by billions.
Sky Sports’ reporting emphasised that the discrimination monitor acted swiftly, reflecting FIFA’s zero‑tolerance stance. The request for Evans’ removal is not a final ruling but a procedural step designed to protect the integrity of the tournament while the matter is reviewed.
Will FIFA do the right thing?
FIFA’s next move will determine whether Evans continues in his role. The organisation typically reviews broadcast footage, interviews involved parties, and consults its anti‑discrimination experts before issuing a decision. If the monitor’s recommendation is upheld, Evans could be replaced for the remainder of the tournament.
The incident also raises broader questions about training and awareness for officials. With global audiences and heightened sensitivity around discriminatory symbols, governing bodies face increasing pressure to ensure that all match personnel understand the implications of gestures, language and behaviour.
The World Cup is built on the idea of global unity, and FIFA has repeatedly emphasised its commitment to combating discrimination in all forms. Any incident that threatens that image, especially one based on a gesture openly declares ‘white power’ becomes a real risk.
By moving quickly, the discrimination monitor has signalled that vigilance is non‑negotiable. The coming days will reveal whether FIFA agrees that Evans’ continued involvement poses a risk to the tournament’s integrity.
The call to remove Shaun Evans marks one of many major off‑field controversies of the 2026 World Cup. While the investigation continues, the incident highlights the intense scrutiny placed on officials and the importance of maintaining clear, unambiguous standards of conduct.
FIFA now faces a decision that will set the tone for how it handles similar issues throughout the tournament, a reminder that, in the modern game, you won’t be accepted for being racist.
Featured image via Ian Walton/Getty Images
By Faz Ali
From Canary via This RSS Feed.
6
Israel has abducted the sister of Irish president Catherine Connolly during its criminal assault on the Gaza-bound humanitarian Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF). Margaret Connolly, a physician, is among eight Irish citizens kidnapped in international waters by the genocidal occupation.
President Connolly promptly condemned the abduction, describing it as “upsetting”, adding that:
I’m very worried about her, and I’m also very concerned about her colleagues on board.
Fifty GSF vessels were attempting to break Israel’s war crime, a brutal starvation blockade of Gaza. At least a dozen of the ships were attacked yesterday and their crews abducted. The Irish government condemned Israel’s actions as “wrong” and “unacceptable”.
UK citizens are also among the victims, but UK PM Keir Starmer has still kept silent about Israel’s crimes. Abductees in previous flotillas have been beaten and tortured, and at least one has been raped. The occupation regime regards rape as a weapon of war. Its routine and brutal rape of Palestinian prisoners has begun even to catch the attention of US ‘mainstream’ media, but is still mostly ignored by UK ‘msm’ – though a few have noted Israel’s threat to sue the New York Times for covering it.
Featured image via the Canary
By Skwawkbox
From Canary via This RSS Feed.
7
I took my first ride in a Chinese car recently. Not in the U.S., of course, since sky-high tariffs have made them almost impossible to import. I was visiting family in the U.K., and we rented a BYD Sealion SUV. And let me tell you: I saw immediately why American car companies are desperate to have these things kept out of this country. It was elegantly designed, incredibly comfortable, and a smooth ride.
From blog via This RSS Feed.
8
0
Flotilla Organisers Subjected to ‘Extreme Brutality’ in Extended Israeli Detention
(novaramedia.com)
Israeli soldiers beat and tortured flotilla organisers Saif Abukeshek and Thiago Ávila after abducting them in international waters near Greece in the early hours of Thursday morning, lawyers and diplomats have said.
After illegally intercepting 22 boats and kidnapping around 200 activists hundreds of miles from Gaza, Israel transferred the majority to Greek authorities, but refused to release Abukeshek and Avila. Instead, it transported them back to an Israeli desert prison, where Palestinians are routinely tortured.
Brazilian activist Ávila was dragged face down across the floor and beaten so badly he passed out twice, lawyers said, after they were finally able to visit him on Saturday. His wife, Lara Souza, said in a video that a Brazilian embassy official told her he had been temporarily blinded by his injuries, with his left eye remaining swollen shut, but he was being denied medical treatment. In a brief visit, where he was separated from the consul by a glass screen and not able to speak freely, he reported pain all over his body, especially in his hand and shoulder, and said that soldiers had threatened to throw him overboard and target his wife and two-year-old daughter.
Abukeshek, who had been sailing on an observer boat and did not intend to go to Gaza, was “in shock”, his wife Sally Issa said. He was forced to lie face-down on the floor of an Israeli warship for two days, lawyers said, blindfolded and with his hands bound behind his back.
Spain has demanded Israel release Abukeshek, who is Palestinian but has Spanish and Swedish citizenship. On Friday, prime minister Pedro Sánchez said he had been “illegally abducted by the Netanyahu government”.
Foreign minister José Manuel Albares later told a radio station the arrest was made “outside the jurisdiction of Israel”. “Of course, it is a kidnapping,” he said.
Hannah Smith, who runs the Global Sumud Flotilla’s media operation, said in a video that Abukeshek had Palestinian identity documents, “putting him in a legal context that we’ve never seen with participants before”.
“We do not know how the Israeli regime will handle his case,” she said, “they can try him just as they would any Palestinian.”
Adalah, the law firm supporting the two men, said they had reported being interrogated by Israel’s Shin Bet security service. Ávila said he had been told he would also be interrogated by Mossad, on suspicion of “affiliation with a terrorist organisation”.
On Sunday, both activists appeared in Ashkelon magistrates’ court, where a judge extended their detention by a further two days.
Adalah said the Israeli state attorney presented a list of suspected offences, including “assisting the enemy during wartime, contact with a foreign agent, membership in and providing services to a terrorist organisation, and the transfer of property for a terrorist organisation”.
No formal charges have yet been filed against either Ávila or Abukeshek, and Adalah said Israeli authorities had refused to provide details of any of the offences they are being interrogated over.
Lawyers demanded both men be immediately and unconditionally released, telling the court the entire process was “fundamentally flawed and illegal”, and describing Israel’s actions as a “retaliatory measure against humanitarian activist leaders”.
They challenged the state’s jurisdiction, arguing that there is “no legal basis for the extraterritorial application of offences to the actions of foreign nationals in international waters”.
In a statement, Adalah said: “The treatment of the two activists, including the use of isolation, prolonged blindfolding, and physical beatings, constitutes a grave violation of international law.”
Meanwhile, Smith, who was on one of the boats that was intercepted on Wednesday night, urged people to “mobilise” for Ávila and Abukeshek. “As someone who was thrown around, who was threatened to be killed, as someone who has seen two of my best friends taken, I ask the world: what kind of world do you want to live in?” she said. “And if you want to live in a better one than this one, you need to act, you need to mobilise.”
Ávila and Abukeshek have now been transferred back to solitary confinement in Shikma prison, where they are being held in windowless cells.
Both are on hunger strike, with Avila saying he will not accept release without Abukeshek.
From Novara Media via This RSS Feed.
9
0
Trump Cancels Kushner-Witkoff Trip as Iran Suggests US Not 'Truly Serious About Diplomacy'
(www.commondreams.org)
US President Donald Trump on Saturday abruptly canceled a planned visit by two of his administration's negotiators to the Pakistani capital for diplomatic talks to end his illegal war on Iran, complaining that the trip would be "too much work."
The president announced his decision after Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left Islamabad on Saturday, writing in a social media post that he relayed to Pakistani officials "Iran's position concerning a workable framework to permanently end the war on Iran." Araghchi added that he has "yet to see if the US is truly serious about diplomacy."
Iranian officials said repeatedly in recent days that they had no intention of engaging in direct talks with the Trump administration this weekend as long as the US naval blockade remained in effect. Despite clear statements from Iran's leadership, the Trump White House insisted that special envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff would be holding another round of direct negotiations with Iranian officials in Islamabad after earlier talks ended without a deal.
"This has happened repeatedly: Trump claims the Iranians are begging for talks, Iran says it is false," observed Drop Site's Jeremy Scahill. "The US says Iran is lying, and then it becomes clear Iran meant what it said."
In an assessment published before Trump canceled his envoys' trip, Scahill wrote that "there is no question it is the US that is seeking direct talks right now, not Iran."
"Iran still believes it is likely the US and Israel will resume the war and has indicated it has prepared new forms of retaliatory strikes and other actions, including in the Strait of Hormuz," Scahill added. "Its military commanders have said that while the US has moved more military assets into the region during the 'ceasefire,' Tehran has also taken this period to prepare its own weapons systems for more fighting."
Trump insisted Saturday that his administration—whose deeply unpopular and deadly war of choice has sparked a global economic disaster—holds "all the cards" and that Iranian leadership is in turmoil. But Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, wrote that "Trump can’t hide exuding desperation for a deal."
"So he invents 'fractures' in Tehran to explain being repeatedly stood up," Toossi added. "Iran’s line is unchanged: demanding the blockade be lifted and holding on to its core red lines. They’re playing hardball. He’s spinning."
Trump's cancellation of the Kushner-Witkoff trip came hours after NBC News reported that "American military bases and other equipment in the Persian Gulf region suffered extensive damage from Iranian strikes that is far worse than publicly acknowledged and is expected to cost billions of dollars to repair."
"The Iran war was a tactical and strategic disaster," said Toossi. "Despite heavy efforts to control the narrative, it’s becoming clear just how much US bases and equipment in the region were damaged or destroyed. The war backfired and inflicted far more damage than its proponents want to admit."
From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.
10
In an unprecedented action, more than 130 leading scholars and public figures are risking arrest on terror charges after writing an open letter to the Court of Appeal concerning Palestine Action.
The letter, dated 24 April 2026, simply reads:
We oppose genocide, we support Palestine Action.
The words that have become synonymous with the campaign to Lift the Ban.
Sally Rooney, Greta Thunberg, and Judith Butler were among the first to put their names to this defiant declaration. Joining them are prominent artists and musicians such as Nadine Shah, Brian Eno, Massive Attack’s Robert Del Naja, the actor Billy Howle, writers China Miéville, Lina Meruane and Tariq Ali, and political activists like Lindsey German of Stop the War and Vijay Prashad of the Tricontinental Institute.
The letter is on the Defend our Juries website. And there’s also a sign-on form that allows anyone who supports the scholars’ action to add their name.
Professors and researchers from University of Oxford, University of Cambridge, London School of Economics, Durham University, University of Warwick, University of Exeter and many other UK universities pledge their support for Palestine Action.
The list of signatories includes several senior professors of law: Yvette Russell from University of Bristol, Maria Aristodemou from Birkbeck, and Neve Gordon FacSS, Penny Green FacSS, and Hans Lindahl all from Queen Mary University of London.
Other prominent UK-based professors on the list are Nicola Pratt the president of the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies and Eyal Weizman the founding director of Forensic Architecture.
The letter exposes the paradox of terror charges
If the police proceed to arrest these scholars on terror charges, it’ll further expose the authoritarian nature of the ban. But if they don’t, the more than 3,000 previous arrests of people for saying precisely the same thing will appear not just unlawful but arbitrary and discriminatory.
Today’s action by the scholars is organised by a number of academic critics of the ongoing genocide in Palestine. Many of them are signatories to previous open letters hosted by the group Protest is not Terrorism.
Over the last couple of years Israel has destroyed all of Gaza’s universities and killed scores of Palestinian scholars. Given the UK’s increasingly authoritarian response to anti-genocide protest, the organisers of this letter did not circulate it among colleagues in the West Bank.
Nevertheless, Palestinian academic voices are still represented by Abdaljawad Omar (Birzeit University), Karma Nabulsi (University of Oxford) and Rashid Khalidi (Columbia University), author of perhaps the most widely read recent history of the century-long war against Palestine.
Many well known international figures and political thinkers have signed the letter in solidarity. These include Verónica Gago (Professor of Social Sciences at University of Buenos Aires), Michael Hardt (Professor of Literature, Duke University) and Jacques Rancière (Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, University of Paris 8).
The letter arrives just days before the government’s appeal to uphold its unlawful proscription of Palestine Action comes before the Royal Courts of Justice on 28-29 April.
With more expected to sign the letter over the weekend, the scholars’ defiance is further evidence that the public does not support the government’s attempts to ban legitimate and necessary action to prevent a genocide.
Signatories comment
Penny Green, Professor of Law and Globalisation at Queen Mary University of London, said:
It is both indefensible and revealing that peaceful protesters opposing genocide are being branded as terrorists while the Labour government, itself complicit in Israel’s state terror, avoids all accountability.
Neve Gordon, Professor of International Law at Queen Mary University of London, said:
Instead of meeting its legal obligations as set by the Genocide Convention and international humanitarian law, Keir Starmer’s government has been providing military and diplomatic support to Israel as it perpetrates atrocity crimes while simultaneously silencing the messenger by proscribing Palestine Action as a terrorist group.
The decision to appeal the ruling rendering the proscription unlawful is yet another sign of the government’s moral bankruptcy.
Catherine Rottenberg, Professor of Media and Cultural Studies at Goldsmiths University of London, said:
With the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing in Palestine and an illegal and horrific war raging in the Middle East, the insistence on proscribing a direct action group is not merely absurd, it is absolutely unconscionable.
In the name of defending freedom and democracy, our government is undermining both democracy and freedom. We the people must stand up and defend our freedoms, with Palestine Action as our most urgent test case.
Peter Hallward, Professor of Philosophy at London’s Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy, said:
For anyone familiar with even a few strands of post-war European thought, it’s almost incomprehensible to think that we have so quickly forgotten a principle that once commanded universal and uncontroversial assent – that ‘never again’ really means what it says. Never, ever, anywhere. Especially not with our collusion!
The 1948 Convention remains categorically binding on us all, and it obliges us to ‘prevent and punish’ genocide by all the necessary means at our disposal.
If our government refuses to honour this obligation it is up to us to insist on it.
Başak Ertür, a Reader at Goldsmiths’ Centre for Research Architecture, said:
The use of the sharpest end of criminal law against people who inconvenience political power by acting with conscience is a textbook feature of authoritarianism. I’ve been wary of signing collective letters since I was put on trial in Turkey some years ago, along with hundreds of others, for adding my name to the Academics for Peace petition in 2016.
But the proscription of Palestine Action by executive fiat seems to me no less preposterous than what I have experienced, and therefore it feels exactly right that I now sign this letter, because indeed, I do oppose genocide and therefore support Palestine Action.
A spokesperson for Defend our Juries said:
The scholars who have signed this letter have spent their lives analysing complex political situations and moral problems and today have decided to put their liberty and reputations on the line because saving lives is not terrorism.
If the police start arresting these scholars on terrorism charges for peaceful expressions of political speech the state’s authoritarianism will be fully exposed. But if they don’t, the arrests of more than 3,000 people for saying precisely the same thing will be shown to be not just unlawful but also discriminatory.
We applaud the signatories of today’s letter in joining thousands of people who have publicly declared their support for Palestine Action.
Featured image via the Canary
By The Canary
From Canary via This RSS Feed.
11
military contractor Palantir is helping the IRS analyze dozens of different data sets on Americans to investigate a broad range of financial crimes, according to records shared with The Intercept.
Since 2018, the Internal Revenue Service’s Criminal Investigation division has used Palantir’s Lead and Case Analytics platform to aggregate and analyze a sprawling list of sensitive federal databases and data sets.
Public records detailing Palantir’s IRS contract, obtained by the nonprofit watchdog group American Oversight and shared exclusively with The Intercept, reveal the immense volume of data plugged into the military contractor’s software. The LCA uses both Palantir’s Gotham and Foundry applications to facilitate “analysis of massive-scale data to find the needle in the hay stack,” the contract paperwork says.
Documents indicate the IRS has paid Palantir over $130 million for these services to date.
Palantir’s LCA is ostensibly directed toward cracking down on fraud, money laundering, and other financial crimes. According to a 2024 agency privacy impact assessment, IRS “Special agents and investigative analysts … utilize the platform to find, analyze, and visualize connections between disparate sets of data to generate leads, identify schemes, uncover tax fraud, and conduct money laundering and forfeiture investigative activities.”
[
Related
Trump Wants to Put You in a Massive, Secret Government Database](https://theintercept.com/2026/03/17/government-surveillance-centralized-database-privacy/)
The IRS use of the software, launched under Trump’s first term and expanded under Biden, is now in the hands of an IRS Criminal Investigations office that has drastically scaled back its pursuit of tax cheats and pivoted, under Trump’s direction, toward investigating “left-leaning groups,” the Wall Street Journal reported in October.
“The real concern is the consolidation of vast amounts of sensitive personal data into a single system with minimal transparency — especially one built and operated by a contractor like Palantir, whose business model is premised on integrating data and expanding surveillance capabilities,” American Oversight director Chioma Chukwu said in a statement to The Intercept. “Its platforms have been used in deeply troubling contexts, from immigration enforcement to predictive policing, with persistent concerns about overreach, bias, and weak oversight.”
Palantir did not respond to a request for comment, nor did the IRS.
“The real concern is the consolidation of vast amounts of sensitive personal data into a single system with minimal transparency — especially one built and operated by a contractor like Palantir.”
The contract documents reviewed by The Intercept reveal that these “disparate sets of data” are vast. Palantir’s LCA allows the IRS to quickly search and visualize “connections from millions of records with thousands of links” between databases maintained by the IRS and other federal agencies. According to the contract documents, this data includes individual tax form and tax returns as well as Affordable Care Act data, bank statements, and transactions, and “all available” data compiled by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
Its view apparently extends to cryptocurrencies including bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, and Ripple. “The application would sit on top of a singular repository of identified wallets from seized servers utilizing dark web data obtained from exchangers such as Coinbase,” the documents note.
The program places an emphasis on mapping social relationships between the targets of an investigation. That includes analyzing a “network of people and the relationships and communications between them,” such as “calls, texts, [and] emails events.” The use of “IP address analysis” within LCA allows the IRS to “Identify suspects more easily” and “Establish (new) relationships among actors.”
These investigative functions are continuously updated, the materials say, through ongoing close work between Palantir engineers and IRS personnel.
[
Related
Palantir Will No Longer Profit Off of New Yorkers’ Health Data](https://theintercept.com/2026/03/24/palantir-new-york-city-hospitals-contract/)
The intermingling of sensitive data on millions of Americans comes at a time of increased global skepticism and opposition toward Palantir, which, despite its military-intelligence origins, has a thriving business with civilian agencies like the IRS. The use of Palantir software at the U.K.’s National Health Service, for example, has created an ongoing political controversy across Britain, while a similar contract with the New York City public hospital network was recently canceled following public protest.
The contract is also active at a time when IRS Criminal Investigations has been coopted to aid in the broader Trump administration’s aggressive agenda. In July, ProPublica reported that the agency was working with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to provide “on demand” data to accelerate deportations. Last year, the New York Times reported that Palantir, founded by Trump ally Peter Thiel, was central to an administration effort to increase data-sharing across federal agencies.
“The question isn’t just what it can do — it’s who it will be used against.”
The company’s right-wing politics and eagerness to facilitate U.S. and Israeli military aggression abroad, NSA global surveillance, and ICE deportations has also made many weary of its access to incredibly sensitive personal data. A recent post on the company’s Palantir’s X account summarizing a book by CEO Alex Karp triggered an immediate backlash from those unnerved by the manifesto’s fascistic bent. The bullet points extolled the virtue of arms manufacturing, argued the Axis powers were unfairly punished after World War II, called for a reinstatement of the draft, condemned cultural pluralism, and claimed that wealthy elites are unfairly persecuted.
“When the government can map relationships, track behavior, and generate investigative leads across data sets at this scale, the question isn’t just what it can do — it’s who it will be used against,” Chukwu said. “Entrusting that infrastructure to a company known for opaque, security-state deployments only heightens those risks.”
The post Palantir Is Helping Trump’s IRS Conduct “Massive-Scale” Data Mining appeared first on The Intercept.
From The Intercept via This RSS Feed.
12
13
0
Iran declares ‘historic victory’ over the U.S., says enemy forced to accept its proposal
(www.workers.org)
The following statement issued by Iran’s Supreme National Security Council in response to the MAGA president’s two-week “ceasefire” was published by Press TV on April 7. “Good news to the dear nation of Iran! Nearly all the objectives of the war have been achieved. * “The noble people of Iran . . .
From Workers World via This RSS Feed.
14