Keeponstalin

“He had been arrested while performing his humanitarian duty during the massacre of medical teams in the Tel Al-Sultan area of Rafah Governorate,” the PRCS said.

The PRCS reported last month that Israeli forces opened fire on the medics, who were driving in ambulances to assist wounded Palestinians at the site of an earlier Israeli attack.

When United Nations and Palestinian officials were able to reach the area a week later, they found a mass grave where bulldozed ambulances and bodies were buried.

Eight PRCS workers were killed along with six Palestinian Civil Defence team members and one UN employee, the PRCS said.

Al-Nassasra, 47, is one of two people who survived the attack.

The other survivor, Munther Abed, said at the time that he had seen al-Nassasra being captured, bound and taken away.

Israel has carried out an intensified campaign of arrests during the war. According to the Palestinian prisoner support network Addameer, at least 9,900 Palestinians are currently being held in Israeli detention facilities, including 400 children

Reporting from the city, Al Jazeera’s Tareq Abu Azzoum said the released detainees reported being tortured in “horrific ways” and were in a bad physical and psychological state

UNICEF spokesperson Kazem Abu Khalaf yesterday announced the closure of approximately 21 malnutrition treatment centres in Gaza due to the resumption of Israeli military aggression and the issuance of evacuation orders in operational areas.

He further emphasised that Israel continues to impose a blockade on Gaza, preventing the entry of humanitarian aid, medical supplies, nutritional supplements, and other essential materials for the 35th consecutive day.

UNICEF reported on Saturday that more than one million children in the Gaza Strip have been deprived of life-saving assistance for more than a month, warning that “the continued denial of aid entry into Gaza constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law and has dire consequences for children.”

UNICEF spokesperson Kazem Abu Khalaf yesterday announced the closure of approximately 21 malnutrition treatment centres in Gaza due to the resumption of Israeli military aggression and the issuance of evacuation orders in operational areas.

He further emphasised that Israel continues to impose a blockade on Gaza, preventing the entry of humanitarian aid, medical supplies, nutritional supplements, and other essential materials for the 35th consecutive day.

UNICEF reported on Saturday that more than one million children in the Gaza Strip have been deprived of life-saving assistance for more than a month, warning that “the continued denial of aid entry into Gaza constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law and has dire consequences for children.”

As President Trump finally unveils his global tariff plan — setting a baseline 10% tariff on all imported goods, with additional hikes apparently based on individual countries’ trade balances with the United States — economists like our guest Richard Wolff warn it will have grave economic effects on American consumers and lead to a recession.

Wolff says the Trump administration’s tariff strategy is borne out of an ahistorical “notion of the United States as a victim” despite the fact that “we have been one of the greatest beneficiaries in the last 50 years of economic wealth, particularly for people at the top.”

In response to the growing economic fortunes of the rest of the world and the associated decline in U.S. hegemony, Trump and his allies are “striking out at other people” in desperation and denial of an end to U.S. imperial dominance. “[It’s] not going to work,” says Wolff.

Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?

@PugJesus

What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?

Community ban, comments wiped from modlog

Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).

Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).

Unable to find comments in modlog

Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.

I was community banned after the mod falsely smeared me as doing genocide apologia. Not just me but also the hosts of the Blowback podcast Brendan James and Noah Kulwin, as well as Noam Chomsky. According to PugJesus, we are all actually pro genocide.

Context:

In this post about the victims of the Iraq War, I shared Season 1 of the Blowback podcast as it does a phenomenal job covering the war and aftermath while humanizing the victims. PugJesus falsely smeared them as "campist cretins" to discredit the entire podcast. I pushed back.

PugJesus brought up a previous discussion where they also tried to discredit the Journalists and Podcast based on tweets. Here, as with the more recent post, pushed back.

The tweets in question:

According to PugJesus, this is evidence that Brendan James and Noah Kulwin are pro Russia and pro Ukrainian genocide. I completely disagree.

To clarify my position. I have always maintained the position that Ukraine is fighting a war of self defense and fighting for their sovereignty. I have always maintained that Putin's war is illegal and unjustifiable; and that what Russia should do to pull out completely and enact reparations. I have always maintained that I am in complete support of supplying arms to Ukraine, same as any other people fighting against Imperialism and/or Colonialism. I also consider Putin's invasion justifies the need of a European security pact, although I'd prefer it to be one without the US. And yes, Putin's war is a genocide, as multiple genocide scholars have expressed.

I do not consider the US to be a benevolent and altruistic actor. Instead I consider the US to not have the best interests of Ukraine at heart; using the opportunity to expand NATO for the benefit of US Hegemony and to extract capital out of Ukraine. I believe those are worth criticizing and not remotely "genocide apologia"

The two contentious points are as follows

Has the US escalated the conflict to further its own foreign policy goals? Or is saying so genocide apologia?

From the evidence I have seen, yes the US has escalated the conflict. That does not mean Ukraine is to blame, which they aren't. Nor does it mean Russia hasn't escalated the situation more than the US has, which is an easy argument to make and has merit. All it means is that there are actions by the US worth criticizing as they at the expense of Ukraine.

Sources:

• Chomsky and Barsamian, In Ukraine, Diplomacy Has Been Ruled Out
• Noam Chomsky & Vijay Prashad: U.S. Must Stop Undermining Negotiations with Russia to End Ukraine War
• Senators say Israel blocking transfer of US-owned Iron Dome batteries to Ukraine
• The Russia-Ukraine Crisis: A Scorecard on Biden’s Response

Has the US used the conflict to exploit Ukraine financially? Or is saying so genocide apologia?

I think the US has certainly exploited Ukraine, in particular with the usual neoliberal model of loans and privatization via the IMF and World Bank. This is a criticism of the US and of Neoliberal economics, not of Ukraine who's facing an existential threat.

Sources:

• Ukraine’s Debt: an Instrument of Pressure and Spoliation in the Hands of Creditors
• US corporations cash in on Ukraine’s oil and gas
• Ukraine moves closer to large-scale privatization breakthrough

Of course both these criticisms are peanuts when it comes to Trump's complete alignment with Putin's foreign policy aims.

I'm no expert on Russia/Ukraine, if anyone has sources I've overlooked please share. My main concern is the discrediting of Blowback and the Journalists who host it, who have done phenomenally detailed and sourced work on the Iraq War, Cuba, Korea, Afghanistan, and Cambodia. Likening them to "pro-genocide" is disingenuous at best and discrediting their work on that is an injustice.

World reaction to Israel’s wave of deadly attacks on Gaza> Israel has launched a massive wave of air strikes on Gaza, killing hundreds of people and shattering the fragile two-month ceasefire with Hamas.

Tuesday’s attack, which took place across Gaza, was its most intense since the ceasefire came into effect on January 19, with the Palestinian Health Ministry reporting at least 326 people killed.

Here is how the world is reacting to the deadly attacks:

Israel has launched a massive wave of air strikes on Gaza, killing hundreds of people and shattering the fragile two-month ceasefire with Hamas.

Tuesday’s attack, which took place across Gaza, was its most intense since the ceasefire came into effect on January 19, with the Palestinian Health Ministry reporting at least 326 people killed.

Here is how the world is reacting to the deadly attacks:

Reporting from Jordan’s Amman, Al Jazeera’s Hamdah Salhut said that while Israel has accused Hamas of rejecting various proposals made by negotiators, talks had been stalled after Netanyahu refused to begin negotiations on phase two of the ceasefire deal on February 6.

“Several Israeli analysts, several within the political opposition and several within Netanyahu’s own government said that this was the plan all along – a resumption of the fighting, to go back to full-scale war,” Salhut said.

“And in fact, there’s a new army chief of staff, one who said that 2025 is going to be a year of war – noting that Israel still has a lot of goals to accomplish when it comes to the Gaza Strip, meaning that they are in no way finished with their military action.”

Israel’s 18-month war on Gaza has levelled much of the enclave, reducing homes, hospitals and schools to rubble.

Israeli forces have so far killed more than 48,000 people in the territory, according to Palestinian health authorities.

Almost immediately after the Hamas attack on October 7, Weiss and the rest of the settler movement set their sights on Gaza. Against the backdrop of Israel’s massive bombardment and ethnic cleansing of the territory’s north, they ramped up their efforts to re-establish Jewish settlements there, broadcasting their intentions loudly and bluntly — and with the knowledge that they could count on significant support within the governing coalition.

This past December, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who leads the Religious Zionism party and functions as the overlord of the West Bank, declared (not for the first time) on Israeli public radio, “We must occupy Gaza, maintain a military presence there, and establish settlements.” Many in Smotrich’s camp wanted to prolong the war, reasoning that the longer Israel continued to brutalize Gaza, the greater the likelihood that settlers would succeed in installing an outpost — the germ of a settlement — in the Strip.

The announcement of a ceasefire agreement, which went into effect on Jan. 19, has slowed the Gaza resettlement movement’s momentum, but it has not stalled it.

The ceasefire is fragile, dangerously so: there is no guarantee that it will last beyond the initial six-week phase, which involves only a partial Israeli withdrawal from the territory. And there have already been reports that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to keep his hard-right government together, has conceded to Smotrich’s demand that Israel restart the war after the first phase ends and gradually assert full Israeli control over the Gaza Strip. Whether that happens will depend largely on the Trump administration’s willingness to exert continuous pressure on Netanyahu to carry out the subsequent stages of the ceasefire agreement — which would very likely jeopardize the survival of Netanyahu’s governing coalition.

Amid this uncertainty, the settler movement has continued to press its eliminationist vision of resettling Gaza. The night before the ceasefire went into effect, Nachala led several dozen activists back to the Black Arrow memorial to stage a protest against the agreement. The settlers are openly praying for its failure, while a handful of the more militant among them remain camped within sprinting distance of the separation barrier.

If and when the ceasefire collapses and Israeli ground troops return to the Strip in full force, the settlers will be prepared to renew their push, even more determined to establish new settlements there. In that scenario, there will be frighteningly little standing in their way.

Almost immediately after the Hamas attack on October 7, Weiss and the rest of the settler movement set their sights on Gaza. Against the backdrop of Israel’s massive bombardment and ethnic cleansing of the territory’s north, they ramped up their efforts to re-establish Jewish settlements there, broadcasting their intentions loudly and bluntly — and with the knowledge that they could count on significant support within the governing coalition.

This past December, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who leads the Religious Zionism party and functions as the overlord of the West Bank, declared (not for the first time) on Israeli public radio, “We must occupy Gaza, maintain a military presence there, and establish settlements.” Many in Smotrich’s camp wanted to prolong the war, reasoning that the longer Israel continued to brutalize Gaza, the greater the likelihood that settlers would succeed in installing an outpost — the germ of a settlement — in the Strip.

The announcement of a ceasefire agreement, which went into effect on Jan. 19, has slowed the Gaza resettlement movement’s momentum, but it has not stalled it.

The ceasefire is fragile, dangerously so: there is no guarantee that it will last beyond the initial six-week phase, which involves only a partial Israeli withdrawal from the territory. And there have already been reports that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to keep his hard-right government together, has conceded to Smotrich’s demand that Israel restart the war after the first phase ends and gradually assert full Israeli control over the Gaza Strip. Whether that happens will depend largely on the Trump administration’s willingness to exert continuous pressure on Netanyahu to carry out the subsequent stages of the ceasefire agreement — which would very likely jeopardize the survival of Netanyahu’s governing coalition.

Amid this uncertainty, the settler movement has continued to press its eliminationist vision of resettling Gaza. The night before the ceasefire went into effect, Nachala led several dozen activists back to the Black Arrow memorial to stage a protest against the agreement. The settlers are openly praying for its failure, while a handful of the more militant among them remain camped within sprinting distance of the separation barrier.

If and when the ceasefire collapses and Israeli ground troops return to the Strip in full force, the settlers will be prepared to renew their push, even more determined to establish new settlements there. In that scenario, there will be frighteningly little standing in their way.

US President Donald Trump has doubled down on comments about displacing Palestinians in Gaza to Jordan and Egypt, escalating tensions with the Hashemite Kingdom and possibly leaving King Abdullah II “vulnerable to geopolitical blackmail”, experts warned.

Analysts believe that if Trump leverages aid, Jordan could be forced to rethink its alliances and look to Arab Gulf states, Russia, China, or the European Union to fill funding gaps.

It could also “[force] them to … implement deeply unpopular austerity measures that predictably lead to protests”, said Geoffrey Hughes, author of the book Kinship, Islam and the Politics of Marriage in Jordan: Affection and Mercy.

Much of Jordan’s population, which includes many Palestinians with Jordanian nationality and more than two million Palestinian refugees, was frustrated with the government’s unwillingness to cut ties.

“What might help Jordan is the old-school, and bipartisan, consensus wing in Washington that sees the Hashemites as indispensable to US foreign policy in the region, remembers the help that Jordan has given for decades to various US wars and interventions, and regards this ‘oasis of moderation’ as not worth destabilising in the long run,” Yom said.

“Trump will need to walk back this completely unrealistic proposition,” Toukan said. “If this was to become official American policy, it would undermine not only Jordan’s stability but that of the entire region, including Egypt’s.”

the Democratic National Committee will begin a multi-round election to choose its new chair. Former President Joe Biden’s appointee, Jamie Harrison, is on his way out, and an array of party insiders and outsiders are competing to replace him.

The DNC’s 448 voting members include hundreds of Democrats elected and selected through state parties, along with smaller numbers of appointees, elected officials, and representatives from party groups like the Young Democrats of America. They will cast ballots for a new chair at a time when the Democratic Party itself is adrift, with no clear leader and no strategy for fighting the Trump agenda or regaining power. As one DNC member told me, “The DNC is not really talking about what went wrong and what we did wrong.”

In writing this piece, I reached out to 427 of the DNC’s 448 voting members and interviewed 19 of them. Those who spoke with me came from ideologically, geographically, and racially diverse backgrounds. They included Democrats from rural and urban communities, grassroots party members, elected officials, and party insiders and critics alike. Most agreed to speak on the condition their names wouldn’t be used.

What emerged from these conversations is a picture of a DNC that is built to be an undemocratic, top-down institution, unable to truly leverage the wisdom and guidance of the DNC members who hail from local and state networks across the country. This is especially true when those local and state members disagree with the DNC’s posture or strategic choices

Members said their meetings don’t feel like a place for participation or governance. They described these gatherings as a combination of party presentations and social time, as opposed to real debates or discussions. During Covid, for instance, one member said that meetings were held via web conference, with the chat function turned off. And while the potential for real decision-making can occur at the DNC committee level, “committees are completely rigged, with the chair appointing whoever they want,” one DNC member told me.

In some ways, the race for DNC chair has itself become a microcosm of this tension between money, transparency, and winning elections. Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party Chair Ken Martin and Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler are considered the front-runners based on their declared, though likely inflated, DNC vote counts. But neither has disclosed how much money they have raised for their campaigns, who their donors are, or how much they have spent.