#I would advocate them sure

[ganondoodle]

actively fighting a full blown panic attack born out of sadness and anger after having to drive by yet another victim on the side of the road

it makes me livid how accepted it is to just let cats suffer and die disgustingly horrid deaths and live awful short lives just so what, for what?? so you dont have to play with them for an hour a day??? when i was little it was just kinda normal that they disappeared at some point, i didnt understand what it actually meant until our outdoor cat i loved dearly was found in the bushes near our house in a condition so horrible my dad has never told me and i have never dared to ask, she only made it to 6 and had horrible scars and infections before that i allowed my family to convince me to let my first own cat outside, we only had her for a year, she died at only 2 years old, i am still suffering from the guilt, it has never let me go, she went missing for a week and i walked the entire vilage up and down every day, yelling her name, wandering into the forest alone, talking to every stranger i met until one morning my mom told me that our neighbour who works for the city asked if we had a white cat with a very specific collar she had- he found her on a busy road crossing in the next bigger city, i never even got to bury her, its haunting me, the thought of her wandering lost and scared in the city for a week until meeting an awful end gives me headaches, the fact that i was the last one to see her alive, that i put her outside bc we were late for school and had to leave quickly, that she had come home with oil in her fur from crawling through maschines and cars before, that i was worried but still didnt act, that it is my fault, any time i am up to late its coming back, it will never let me go, if i had stood my ground and not allow her outside unless on a leash or similar shed still be alive today, any time i read a description at our local shelter it comes back, they still advocate for outside cats, all of them, even if they have only been an indoor one before, its madness my older sister had a cat, i dont even know how old he got but it wasnt long either, he got hit by a car in front of their house, she has two now again and the only reason she hasnt let them outside is because they havent shown much interest in it, i tried to warn her before and she didnt listen and shes still resistent, even after losing one too

i have seen so many on the side of the road, anywhere i drive i see them, i cannot forget a single one, we are surrounded by farm land and all its giant maschinery, its still common to poison rodents, why do people value them so little, you wouldnt let your dog just live outside in the woods and streets for half the day or more, you wouldnt just throw your guniea pigs on the road and tell them have fun, you wouldnt just let your bird roam outside, there probably assholes that do that too but you cannot tell me its as common as outside cats

i dont understand it, i dont, i wont, i never will, i will never forgive myself this poor little animal that was my responsibility having to pay the price of my ignorance, or my own weakness letting my family convince me despite the awful way we lost one before, it makes me want to explode it hurts my brain in grief and anger i can barely contain

cats deserve to live a safe and long life, i get only having them inside may feel like you are locking them up, but do you think that not doing so is worth having them die a painful death? being poisonend? on purpose even by disgusting people that hate them? abused and chased by other animals and dogs? hurt and lost? cutting their lifespan in half? if they even make it that far? the amount of wildlife that they kill unnecessarily so when all of that is already in a steep decline everywhere? and if they eat what they hunt get infected with diseases or again, poison? die somewhere in agony? if cared for they dont care about going outside, plenty can be leash trained or given a secure way to roam like those cat proof aviary like things, if you dont want to put effort into caring for a cat DONT GET ONE, ALL pets require adequate care, and if you think cats are the easiest bc you only have to feed them every now and then IF they come home? you suck, you are an asshole, i hate you and you do not care about them, if you just want to occasionalyl feed and pet an animal go to the petting zoo

(this is about pet cats of people who can absolutely afford to keep them healthily inside, i know feral cats and those in poor neighbourhoods are a thing, even if not here where i live, and thats a whole other but still similar problem and not the point of this post)

[witches-come]

I don't like genital preference discourse because 99 percent of the time it's a cis person who made up a hypothetical pro trans argument and got mad at it.

[listen-to-the-inner-walrus]

Personally, I think if you describe yourself as a socialist and also have a bust of Vladimir Lenin's head in your house, I should be allowed to smash that bust over your head with no consequences.

[things-methinks]

Talking to [leftist/socialist/progressive/whatever] white people as a brown girl is always an experience

[wildflowercryptid]

last night i started thinking about working as a seminar teacher at blueberry academy and filling a mentor role for kieran... i need to play with this idea, i NEED to.

[rearranging-deck-chairs]

once again thinking about a version of the story where 13 lands in sheffield three years earlier when ryan and yaz are still sixteen and a whole lot angrier

13 turning out a bit more immature bc she spends her first twenty-four hours after regenerating with these reactive and kinda fucked up kids. ryan dealing with grace and graham recently getting married or getting ready to get married. probably feeling abandoned by his grandmother after his mother and father. feeling alone with his grief. maybe kinda just has tibo to confide in. yaz meanwhile is in hell getting bullied and either recently got driven home from a running away attempt and is now dealing with the familial aftermath of that, or is planning the running away. maybe kiiiiiiinda just has sonya to confide in but probably not really. probably doesnt confide in anyone

13, still malleable and fluid, running into these messed up teenagers who reflect all her own lonely angry betrayed abandoned feelings back to her, shaping herself in response to them. they dont trust her at all to start with, but i think she'd win yaz over in a similar way she does in canon, presenting herself as an authority who listens and understands. perhaps slightly more the understanding than authority part at this point in yaz's life. maybe she lands in front of yaz actually in the hills before anita can get there. yaz is like "where the fuck did you come from" and shes like "um the troposphere i think" and yaz is like "how are you not dead" and shes like "oh i was! but then i decided maybe i shouldnt be. so. now im here :) with you!" and that kinda strikes a chord with yaz. and then the doctor's like "do you happen to have a sandwich in that backpack im starving"

then aliens happen and once they run into ryan, yaz is already won over and she and ryan recognise each other and she convinces him that, like, no shes not nuts, theres definitely aliens shes seen them

11x1 would go entirely differently obviously. maybe grace wouldnt die and graham wouldnt travel. ryan maybe decides to travel a little bit out of spite and home doesnt really feel like home, and yaz isnt having fun at home or at school either and she was running away anyway so this is not a hard decision

the emotional instability and bad decision counter of a team tardis thats just 16-year-old yaz and ryan and 13 is kind of amazing to imagine. it'd be so volatile but they'd love each other so much i think they'd be the best friends bc instead of starting off closing herself off from grief, 13 would start off having her justified and irrational anger sort of validated and coaxed out i think by yaz's and ryan's. in the tardis between the three of them there would be a place to express "nobody cares about me" whether thats true isnt the point, i think theyre all feeling it a little bit. "everyone just moved on like mum didnt matter/'tell an adult' like what are they gonna do?/okay it wasnt all their faults but all my friends are dead" you know? i think they'd be heard with each other and i think there'd be space for the injustice of it all and especially as the doctor is like a children's advocate most of all, she would take ryan and yaz seriously in a way i think they wouldnt have been by any other adult in their lives at that point. and in return they, just by being there as they are, would make room for the hurt child that 13 is and will turn out to be

and i dont have details for this but i think it would be really nice if the way 13 listens and takes seriously yaz and ryan in the first season (not like consciously or deliberately or anything, shes not trying to Do anything, this is just who the doctor is) would be mirrored in the second and/or the third when they have calmed down a bit, dealt with some of their issues at home, talked to some family members, become a little less depressed and angry etc, and they return the way she treated them when she finds out abt the timeless child and tecteun. she took their anger seriously and she took them seriously when they said "this isnt fair" and in return they can take her anger seriously, probably are angry on her behalf, and they can stop her from overcorrecting from like being 10 by pointing out to her that this isnt fair and shes allowed to be angry abt it

and when yaz inevitably gets a crush i think it shows up as a kind of out of character/seemingly regressive prickliness and snappiness toward the doctor getting more intense over the course of s12 that ryan and the doctor first are puzzled by bc like sure in the first half of s11 maybe they were all a bit snappish with each other but theyve been friends for like a year now whats this about all of a sudden? and yaz is like Nothing!!!! it's nothing!!! piss of!!! bc shes having feelings she doesnt know what to do with or how to interpret so theyre just manifesting as Angery. that same need to prove herself + probably worry abt the doctor as in canon except a lot more combative and a lot less inhibited. shes probably picking fights abt everything the doctor tells her to do. trying to provoke the doctor into actually getting mad and yelling at her or, god forbid, grabbing her, shoving her, using her hands bc yaz wont listen to words. sometimes youre 17 and horny and you dont understand you want one of your two friends in the world to kiss you bc it hasnt occurred to you that girls kissing girls is a thing that can happen. ryan figures it out first

in this version ryan probably stays until the end too - or the same as in revolution happens and yaz feels betrayed that he'd give up on the doctor so easily and feels alone in the entire world again - graham and dan wouldnt come into the picture. ryan's and yaz's family would come into the picture a little more actively. theres a lot of plot to figure out that i cant and it would be a very different era in many ways but i think it would be nice

[neproxrezi]

KIIIIILL

...oni is fun

[dnalt-d2]

Guys don't be a writer

Don't do it

One day you're gonna use a figure from mythology/religion as a secondary character in your story thinking he's nothing but a basic bitch practically nameless guy and then one day when you try to make a ranking system you'll find out that actually that character represents your zodiac sign in some circles, then in an effort to clarify what the hell happened there you'll find out he has another name that denotes that he's a SUPER big deal and also has another-nother name that's EXACTLY the same as your online pen-name and then that their power somehow perfectly fits the power system you've made for this story and then randomly you'll also find out that someone else used this character as the base for a DC character (Yes the comics) and you'll basically find some of that information in one night and then the rest over the next three years after the initial discovery and then one night three years later you'll find out something new about it that says that the original name you picked is actually this other big-name guy who's the entire leader of a rank that you ignored initially when making said ranking system and

I'm fucking spiraling guys

*EDIT

I HAVE POSTED THIS TO THE WRONG ACCOUNT AGAIN

I DO NOT CARE ANYMORE I AM NOT REWRITING THESE NOTES

[tj-crochets]

Inexplicably just got two letters from Aetna asking for additional information for prescription drug prior authorization in the state of Florida. Couple of things wrong with that: - the prior authorizations have already been approved - I don’t live in the state of Florida and never have - the information it asks for is information I cannot provide, only my doctor can, and she’s named on the paperwork so they definitely know how to send her the letters - I’m not in Florida???? Why Florida?????

[renjunniez]

I WAS AB TO SAY (re your tags on my set btw) that i’d cry if i ever represented them OR if they were the jury on a case i had 😭

THATS SO VALID CAUSE SAME 😭😭😭

[boneless-mika]

The for you tab once again reminding me that not only do abled people despise me but disabled people do too

[ceilidhtransing]

The discussions around whether or not to vote for Kamala keep being dominated by very loud voices shouting that anyone who advocates for her “just doesn't care about Palestine!” and “is willing to overlook genocide!” and “has no moral backbone at all!” And while some of these voices will be bots, trolls, psyops - we know that this happens; we know that trying to persuade progressives to split the vote or not vote at all is a strategy employed by hostile actors - of course many of them won't be. But what this rhetoric does is continually force the “you should vote for her” crowd onto the back foot of having to go to great lengths writing entire essays justifying their choice, while the “don't vote/vote third party” crowd is basically never asked to justify their choice. It frames voting for Kamala as a deeply morally compromised position that requires extensive justification while framing not voting or voting third party as the neutral and morally clean stance.

So here's another way of looking at it. How much are you willing to accept in order to feel like you're not compromising your morals on one issue?

Are you willing to accept the 24% rise in maternal deaths - and 39% increase for Black women - that is expected under a federal abortion ban, according to the Centre for American Progress? Those percentages represent real people who are alive now who would die if the folks behind Project 2025 get their way with reproductive healthcare.

Are you willing to accept the massive acceleration of climate change that would result from the scrapping of all climate legislation? We don't have time to fuck around with the environment. A gutting of climate policy and a prioritisation of fossil fuel profits, which is explicitly promised by Trump, would set the entire world back years - years that we don't have.

Are you willing to accept the classification of transgender visibility as inherently “pornographic” and thus the removal of trans people from public life? Are you willing to accept the total elimination of legal routes for gender-affirming care? The people behind the Trump campaign want to drive queer and trans people back underground, back into the closet, back into “criminality”. This will kill people. And it's maddening that caring about this gets called “prioritising white gays over brown people abroad” as if it's not BIPOC queer and trans Americans who will suffer the most from legislative queer- and transphobia, as they always do.

Are you willing to accept the domestic deployment of the military to crack down on protests and enforce racist immigration policy? I'm sure it's going to be very easy to convince huge numbers of normal people to turn up to protests and get involved in political organising when doing so may well involve facing down an army deployed by a hardcore authoritarian operating under the precedent that nothing he does as president can ever be illegal.

Are you willing to accept a president who openly talks about wanting to be a dictator, plans on massively expanding presidential powers, dehumanises his political enemies and wants the DOJ to “go after them”, and assures his supporters they won't have to vote again? If you can't see the danger of this staring you right in the face, I don't know what to tell you. Allowing a wannabe dictator to take control of the most powerful country on earth would be absolutely disastrous for the entire world.

Are you willing to accept an enormous uptick in fascism and far-right authoritarianism worldwide? The far right in America has huge influence over an entire international network of “anti-globalists”, hardcore anti-immigrant xenophobes, transphobic extremists, and straight-up fascists. Success in America aids and emboldens these people everywhere.

Are you willing to accept an enormous number of preventable deaths if America faces a crisis in the next four years: a public health emergency, a natural disaster, an ecological catastrophe? We all saw how Trump handled Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico. We all saw how Trump handled Covid-19. He fanned the flames of disaster with a constant flow of medical misinformation and an unspeakably dangerous undermining of public health experts. It's estimated that 40% of US pandemic deaths could have been avoided if the death rates had corresponded to those in other high-income countries. That amounts to nearly half a million people. One study from January 2021 estimated between around 4,200 and 12,200 preventable deaths attributable purely to Trump's statements about masks. We're highly unlikely to face another global pandemic in the next few years but who knows what crises are coming down the pipeline?

Are you willing to accept the attempted deportation of millions - millions - of undocumented people? This is “rounding people up and throwing them into camps where no one ever hears from them again” territory. That's a blueprint for genocide right there and it's a core tenet of both Trump's personal policy and Project 2025. And of course they wouldn't be going after white people. They most likely wouldn't even restrict their tyranny to people who are actually undocumented. Anyone racially othered as an “immigrant” would be at risk from this.

Are you willing to accept not just the continuation of the current situation in Palestine, but the absolute annihilation of Gaza and the obliteration of any hope for imminent peace? There is no way that Trump and the people behind him would not be catastrophically worse for Gaza than Kamala or even Biden. Only recently he was telling donors behind closed doors that he wanted to “set the [Palestinian] movement back 25 or 30 years” and that “any student that protests, I throw them out of the country”. This is not a man who can be pushed in a direction more conducive to peace and justice. This is a man who listens to his wealthy donors, his Christian nationalist Republican allies, and himself.

Are you willing to accept a much heightened risk of nuclear war? Obviously this is hardly a Trump policy promise. But I can't think of a single president since the Cold War who is more likely to deploy nuclear weapons, given how casually he talks about wanting to use them and how erratic and unstable he can be in his dealings with foreign leaders. To quote Foreign Policy only this year, “Trump told a crowd in January that one of the reasons he needed immunity was so that he couldn’t be indicted for using nuclear weapons on a city.” That's reassuring. I'm not even in the US and I remember four years of constant background low-level terror that Trump would take offence at something some foreign leader said or think that he needs to personally intervene in some military situation to “sort it out” and decide to launch the entire world into nuclear war. No one sane on earth wants the most powerful person on the planet to be as trigger-happy and careless with human life as he is, especially if he's running the White House like a dictator with no one ever telling him no. But depending on what Americans do in November, he may well be inflicted again on all of us, and I guess we'll all just have to hope that he doesn't do the worst thing imaginable.

“But I don't want those things! Stop accusing me of supporting things I don't support!” Yes, of course you don't want those things. None of us does. No one's saying that you actively support them. No one's accusing you of wanting Black women to die from ectopic pregnancies or of wanting to throw Hispanic people in immigrant detention centres or of wanting trans people to be outlawed (unlike, I must point out, the extremely emotive and personal accusations that get thrown around about “wanting Palestinian children to die” if you encourage people to vote for Kamala).

But if you're advocating against voting for Kamala, you are clearly willing to accept them as possible consequences of your actions. That is the deal you're making. If a terrible thing happening is the clear and easily foreseeable outcome of your action (or in the case of not voting, inaction), in a way that could have been prevented by taking a different and just as easy action, you are partly responsible for that consequence. (And no, it's not “a fear campaign” to warn people about things he's said, things he wants to do, and plans drawn up by his close allies. This is not “oooh the Democrats are trying to bully you into voting for them by making him out to be really bad so you'll feel scared and vote for Kamala!” He is really bad, in obvious and documented and irrefutable ways.)

And if you believe that “both parties are the same on Gaza” (which, you know, they really aren't, but let's just pretend that they are) then presumably you accept that the horrors being committed there will continue, in the immediate term anyway, regardless of who wins the presidency. Because there really isn't some third option that will appear and do everything we want. It's going to be one of those two. And we can talk all day about wanting a better system or how unfair it is that every presidential election only ever has two viable candidates and how small the Overton window is and all that but hell, we are less than eighty days out from the election; none of that is going to get fixed between now and November. Electoral reform is a long-term (but important!) goal, not something that can be effected in the span of a couple of months by telling people online to vote third party. There is no “instant ceasefire and peace negotiation” button that we're callously overlooking by encouraging people to vote for Kamala. (My god, if there was, we would all be pressing it.)

If we're suggesting people vote for her, it's not that we “are willing to overlook genocide” or “don't care about sacrificing brown people abroad” or whatever. Nothing is being “overlooked” here. It's that we're simply not willing to accept everything else in this post and more on top of continued atrocities in Gaza. We're not willing to take Trump and his godawful far-right authoritarian agenda as an acceptable consequence of feeling like we have the moral high ground on Palestine. I cannot stress enough that if Kamala doesn't win, we - we all, in the whole world - get Trump. Are you willing to accept that?

And one more point to address: I've seen too many people act frighteningly flippant and naïve about terrible things Trump or his campaign want to do, with the idea that people will simply be able to prevent all these bad things by “organising” and “protesting” and “collective action”. “I'm not willing to accept these things; that's why I'll fight them tooth and nail every day of their administration” - OK but if you're not even willing to cast a vote then I have doubts about your ability to form “the Resistance”, which by the way would have to involve cooperation with people of lots of progressive political stripes in order to have the manpower to be effective, and if you're so committed to political purity that you view temporarily lending your support to Kamala at the ballot box as an untenable betrayal of everything you stand for then forgive me for also doubting your ability to productively cooperate with allies on the ground with whom you don't 100% agree. Plus, if the Trump campaign gets its way, American progressives would be kept so busy trying to put out about twenty different fires at once that you'd be able to accomplish very little. Maybe you get them to soften their stance on trans healthcare but oh shit, the climate policies are still in place. But more importantly, how many people do you think will protest for abortion rights if doing so means staring down a gun? Or organise to protect their neighbours from deportation if doing so means being thrown in prison yourself? And OK, maybe you're sure that you will, but history has shown us time and time again that most people won't. Most people aren't willing to face that kind of personal risk. And a tiny number of lefties willing to risk incarceration or death to protect undocumented people or trans people or whatever other groups are targeted is sadly not enough to prevent the horrors from happening. That is small fry compared to the full might of a determined state. Of course if the worst happens and Trump wins then you should do what you can to mitigate the harm; I'm not saying you shouldn't. But really the time to act is now. You have an opportunity right here to mitigate the harm and it's called “not letting him get elected”. Act now to prevent that kind of horrific authoritarian situation from developing in the first place; don't sit this one out under the naïve belief that “we'll be able to stop it if it happens”. You won't.

[chemicalarospec]

.

[emptymanuscript]

That’s a pretty good one.

Though I think the first three panels are actually the more important ones.

Yes, hypocrisy is totally the norm. And that’s the main point, “we” do whatever benefits “us.” The gotcha is real.

AND

Note that you can actually rearrange these panels in any order and get a disturbing relationship between them. All these tactics are connected. The hypocrisy is simply another tactic in the same overall goal of control and purification.

Go in reverse.

I don’t like this government action, leave it to the states voters. Let me intimidate the voters so only the ones I like will feel safe to vote. Let me pick how the votes are counted so that the voters I prefer will count more than other voters. Let me enshrine all these tactics into the basic structures of our system. And you’ve just painted the picture of systemic racism as a political organizing principle.

Vertically.

Make the law to control who can vote and how. Enforce the law with extreme force and/or with vigilante “justice” and you suddenly have the right to intimidate, control, and kill those who aren’t on the “good” list without repercussions. This lets you move and reorganize the systems and structures so the “good” ones like “us” get what they need while the “bad” ones get less and are pushed toward bad action by simple need, clearly showing to the majority that more drastic action is necessary to stop the “bad” ones, so they vote you even more draconian power and extralegal new latitude in law enforcement to stem the tide of reactions to the problem the “good” ones actually caused in the first place.

Or read them at random. It doesn’t matter. They’re all connected. They all lead to the same place. It’s holistic.

[libraford]

The word 'rural' is in the public consciousness again and every time people start going in about the 'rural values' 'rural way of life' I remember just how subjective that word is.

I have a friend that lives in LA. He considers Columbus, OH to be 'rural.' A population of over 900k. Thriving arts community, tons of culture festivals, every kind of restaurant you can think of, one of the most annoying college campuses ever, several smaller colleges, lots of queer spaces, comic book conventions, huge concerts... rural.

The town I live in considers itself 'rural.' 38k population. Arts festival every year, a small pride celebration, monthly gallery hop, big Halloween festival. Five ice cream shops, three coffee shops, a couple fancy bars, so many grocery stores. Huge library, conservation and sustainability advocates, queer spaces, a hospital, one private college. Rural.

The town we nearly annexed, but lost the deal considers us 'urban' compared to them. Less than 5k. They have a limited hospital, often send their surgeries here. Downtown has hardware store, bars, craft supply store, a couple grocery stores, pizza places. There's some farmland, but much of the square acreage is golf. Mega churches. The houses here are 500k. Most people drive ATVs. They have a handful of festivals in the summer.

A town I would often get sent to to cover their high school sports- a little over 2k. There's a Subway, a Domino's, Family Dollar. Some bars, some corner stores. Some local crafts. All the students grow up knowing each other, most of them stay there. But they have craft fairs and art galleries, still.

Less rural still than the town I go through to get there, population of around 600. Houses, farmland, post office, general store.

Who would still look down upon the town of about 400 that I would go to sometimes- post office. Gas station. Bar. The school is the only big thing there.

And yet still, I have seen towns with population in the double digits that have a church and a post office.

Even just looking at the numbers doesn't lend accuracy to what 'rural' actually looks like. Because this is what it looks like in ohio, but it's different in West Virginia- where your closest neighbor might be a mile down a hill. Or in Montana, where your town might be planned very tightly and your neighbors are very close, but the nearest grocery store is an hour and a half away. These are places I've been, friends that I've talked to. I've never been to Missouri or Alabama or Louisiana- I'm sure they have a unique experience of being 'rural.'

So my point is that when people talk about 'the rural experience' or 'rural values,' they are talking about millions of people across the entire country who all have lived unique lives- and who may not even agree on what 'rural' is.

Think about who is talking, and who is being talked over, and who isn't even being asked to join the conversation.

[fairuzfan]

What's new(ish) in the settler-colonial state of the US is that a series of bills have been passed in the House (the Baby Senate as I like to say) and are on their way to the Senate that make it harder to voice support for Palestinians while also making sure your direct taxes aid the genocide in Gaza.

These bills affirm the US's stance on the settler-colonial Zionist Entity and the implicit ties that the government has with Israel and really — just goes to show you how Israel is just one big base for American Imperialism.

Anyways, there's still time to call your senate and tell them that you don't want these bills that only further spiral the US into fascism so even if you think it might not do much — it's important that we document our dissent in official sources. And while you're at it — call your congressperson and tell them that if they voted for this you're not voting for them next election. If they voted against the bills, still call your congresspeople and tell them you support their decision to vote against these bills.

Here are the bills:

📍Resolution: HR 6126

Resolution Name: Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act Description: Gives $14.3 Billion To Israel From The IRS (Taxes You Pay). Like straight up. Just takes it from an IRS project, which used our tax dollars to begin with, to give to Israel "defense." Link to check summary: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/118/hr6126

📍Resolution: HR 798

Resolution Name: "Condemning the support of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist organizations at institutions of higher education, which may lead to the creation of a hostile environment for Jewish students, faculty, and staff." Description: Will Penalize Students On American College Campuses For Supporting Palestine. This includes "Free Palestine" Protests as according to Rep Owens who introduced the bill (Click). Link to check who voted: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/118-2023/h578

📍Resolution: HR 3266

Resolution Name: "Tolerance in Palestinian Education Act" Description: They will be examining Palestinian education materials to see if it promotes "hate" or "violence" (aka are they teaching their children to become murderers??). Will inevitably require Revision Of Text Books In Palestinian Schools To Portray The Occupation In A Positive Light. Link to summary: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/118/hr3266

📍Resolution: HR 340

Resolution Name: "The Hamas International Financing Prevent Action" Description: Claims to stop financial support for "terrorist" organizations but considering that Gaza's government is run by Hamas, then this would mean Gaza will receive absolutely no aid and donating to people in Gaza could get you in legal trouble. Link to summary: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/118/hr340

There's a button for most of these bills that allows you to contact your representative directly. Please do take the time to contact them — while many of this isn't especially new to Palestinians, the difference is now that we have a larger power in numbers than we did in the past. Please make sure to advocate for you Palestinian comrades in the US whenever possible! Help us Free Palestine one step at a time!