#evidence of use search in usa | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

embodiedfutures · 1 year ago

Text

introductory excerpts on COINTELPRO

it came to my awareness that some folks don't know what COINTELPRO is still, so imma drop some excerpts from the wikipedia page. ofc there are a billion other resources you can check out, especially firsthand accounts, but this is always a good place to start! link attached below:

[Note that the embedded link above's photo has the following caption: "COINTELPRO memo proposing a plan to expose the pregnancy of actress Jean Seberg, a financial supporter of the Black Panther Party, hoping to "possibly cause her embarrassment or tarnish her image with the general public". Covert campaigns to publicly discredit activists and destroy their interpersonal relationships were a common tactic used by COINTELPRO agents."]

The Introduction:

COINTELPRO (syllabic abbreviation derived from Counter Intelligence Program; 1956–1971) was a series of covert and illegal[1][2] projects actively conducted by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting domestic American political organizations.[3][4] FBI records show COINTELPRO resources targeted groups and individuals the FBI[5] deemed subversive,[6] including feminist organizations,[7][8] the Communist Party USA,[9] anti–Vietnam War organizers, activists of the civil rights and Black power movements (e.g. Martin Luther King Jr., the Nation of Islam, and the Black Panther Party), environmentalist and animal rights organizations, the American Indian Movement (AIM), Chicano and Mexican-American groups like the Brown Berets and the United Farm Workers, independence movements (including Puerto Rican independence groups such as the Young Lords and the Puerto Rican Socialist Party), a variety of organizations that were part of the broader New Left, and white supremacist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan[10][11] and the far-right group National States' Rights Party.[12]

Methods COINTELPRO Utilized

According to attorney Brian Glick in his book War at Home, the FBI used five main methods during COINTELPRO:

Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main purpose was to discredit, disrupt and negatively redirect action. Their very presence served to undermine trust and scare off potential supporters. The FBI and police exploited this fear to smear genuine activists as agents.

Psychological warfare: The FBI and police used a myriad of "dirty tricks" to undermine movements. They planted false media stories and published bogus leaflets and other publications in the name of targeted groups. They forged correspondence, sent anonymous letters, and made anonymous telephone calls. They spread misinformation about meetings and events, set up pseudo movement groups run by government agents, and manipulated or strong-armed parents, employers, landlords, school officials, and others to cause trouble for activists. They used bad-jacketing to create suspicion about targeted activists, sometimes with lethal consequences.[74]

Harassment via the legal system: The FBI and police abused the legal system to harass dissidents and make them appear to be criminals. Officers of the law gave perjured testimony and presented fabricated evidence as a pretext for false arrests and wrongful imprisonment. They discriminatorily enforced tax laws and other government regulations and used conspicuous surveillance, "investigative" interviews, and grand jury subpoenas in an effort to intimidate activists and silence their supporters.[73][75]

Illegal force: The FBI conspired with local police departments to threaten dissidents; to conduct illegal break-ins in order to search dissident homes; and to commit vandalism, assaults, beatings and assassinations.[73] The objective was to frighten or eliminate dissidents and disrupt their movements.

Undermine public opinion: One of the primary ways the FBI targeted organizations was by challenging their reputations in the community and denying them a platform to gain legitimacy. Hoover specifically designed programs to block leaders from "spreading their philosophy publicly or through the communications media". Furthermore, the organization created and controlled negative media meant to undermine black power organizations. For instance, they oversaw the creation of "documentaries" skillfully edited to paint the Black Panther Party as aggressive, and false newspapers that spread misinformation about party members. The ability of the FBI to create distrust within and between revolutionary organizations tainted their public image and weakened chances at unity and public support.[49]

The FBI specifically developed tactics intended to heighten tension and hostility between various factions in the black power movement, for example between the Black Panthers and the US Organization. For instance, the FBI sent a fake letter to the US Organization exposing a supposed Black Panther plot to murder the head of the US Organization, Ron Karenga. They then intensified this by spreading falsely attributed cartoons in the black communities pitting the Black Panther Party against the US Organization.[49] This resulted in numerous deaths, among which were San Diego Black Panther Party members John Huggins, Bunchy Carter and Sylvester Bell.[73] Another example of the FBI's anonymous letter writing campaign is how they turned the Blackstone Rangers head, Jeff Fort, against former ally Fred Hampton, by stating that Hampton had a hit on Fort.[49] They also were instrumental in developing the rift between Black Panther Party leaders Eldridge Cleaver and Huey Newton, as executed through false letters inciting the two leaders of the Black Panther Party.[49]

...

In order to eliminate black militant leaders whom they considered dangerous, the FBI is believed to have worked with local police departments to target specific individuals,[78] accuse them of crimes they did not commit, suppress exculpatory evidence and falsely incarcerate them. Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt, a Black Panther Party leader, was incarcerated for 27 years before a California Superior Court vacated his murder conviction, ultimately freeing him. Appearing before the court, an FBI agent testified that he believed Pratt had been framed, because both the FBI and the Los Angeles Police Department knew he had not been in the area at the time the murder occurred.[79][80]

...

In 1969 the FBI special agent in San Francisco wrote Hoover that his investigation of the Black Panther Party had concluded that in his city, at least, the Panthers were primarily engaged in feeding breakfast to children. Hoover fired back a memo implying the agent's career goals would be directly affected by his supplying evidence to support Hoover's view that the Black Panther Party was "a violence-prone organization seeking to overthrow the Government by revolutionary means".[84]

Hoover supported using false claims to attack his political enemies. In one memo he wrote: "Purpose of counterintelligence action is to disrupt the Black Panther Party and it is immaterial whether facts exist to substantiate the charge."[85]

Intended Effects of COINTELPRO

The intended effect of the FBI's COINTELPRO was to "expose, disrupt, misdirect, or otherwise neutralize" groups that the FBI officials believed were "subversive"[58] by instructing FBI field operatives to:[59] 1. Create a negative public image for target groups (for example through surveilling activists and then releasing negative personal information to the public) 2. Break down internal organization by creating conflicts (for example, by having agents exacerbate racial tensions, or send anonymous letters to try to create conflicts) 3. Create dissension between groups (for example, by spreading rumors that other groups were stealing money) 4. Restrict access to public resources (for example, by pressuring non-profit organizations to cut off funding or material support) 5. Restrict the ability to organize protest (for example, through agents promoting violence against police during planning and at protests) 6. Restrict the ability of individuals to participate in group activities (for example, by character assassinations, false arrests, surveillance)

When did they start?

Centralized operations under COINTELPRO officially began in August 1956 with a program designed to "increase factionalism, cause disruption and win defections" inside the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). Tactics included anonymous phone calls, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audits, and the creation of documents that would divide the American communist organization internally.[9] An October 1956 memo from Hoover reclassified the FBI's ongoing surveillance of black leaders, including it within COINTELPRO, with the justification that the movement was infiltrated by communists.[31] In 1956, Hoover sent an open letter denouncing Dr. T. R. M. Howard, a civil rights leader, surgeon, and wealthy entrepreneur in Mississippi who had criticized FBI inaction in solving recent murders of George W. Lee, Emmett Till, and other African Americans in the South.[32] When the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), an African-American civil rights organization, was founded in 1957, the FBI began to monitor and target the group almost immediately, focusing particularly on Bayard Rustin, Stanley Levison, and eventually Martin Luther King Jr.[33]

How did the news get out about COINTELPRO?

The program was secret until March 8, 1971, when the Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI burgled an FBI field office in Media, Pennsylvania, took several dossiers, and exposed the program by passing this material to news agencies.[1][54] The boxing match known as the Fight of the Century between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier in March 1971 provided cover for the activist group to successfully pull off the burglary. Muhammad Ali was a COINTELPRO target because he had joined the Nation of Islam and the anti-war movement.[55] Many news organizations initially refused to immediately publish the information, with the notable exception of The Washington Post. After affirming the reliability of the documents, it published them on the front page (in defiance of the Attorney General's request), prompting other organizations to follow suit. Within the year, Director J. Edgar Hoover declared that the centralized COINTELPRO was over, and that all future counterintelligence operations would be handled case by case.[56][57]

#reaux speaks #black panther party #fbi corruption #cointelpro #counterinsurgency #revolution #martin luther king jr #black power #intersectional feminism #indigenous #young lords #history #wikipedia #communism #socialism #j edgar hoover #mccarthyism

376 notes · View notes

eretzyisrael · 9 months ago

Text

Two weeks ago I urged the UNC fraternity brothers who stood up to pro-Hamas rioters at their college by protecting Old Glory from desecration to use the half million dollars raised for them for something more worthwhile than a big party.

Why not use these funds instead to create a database that identifies every single one of the Hamas protesters who attempted to take over the UNC campus so that future employees will have a resource when it comes time to hire graduates? Why not then use that UNC database as the starting point for a nationwide database, to identify other Hamas protesters who took over colleges at every other university?

It seems that database already exists, called Canary Mission, which was revealed to me first in this somewhat hostile news article on May 12, 2024 from the Times of Israel, which seems more interested in protecting pro-Hamas rioters from the consequences of their actions than defending Jews and Israel from attack.

The goal of Canary Mission is very straight-forward, and utterly legal. From its About webpage:

Canary Mission documents individuals and organizations that promote hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews on North American college campuses and beyond. Canary Mission investigates hatred across the entire political spectrum, including the far right, far left and anti-Israel activists. Canary Mission is motivated by a desire to combat the rise in anti-Semitism on college campuses. We pursue our mission by presenting the words and deeds of individuals and organizations that engage in anti-Semitism, racism and bigotry on the far right, far left and among the array of organizations that comprise the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. Canary Mission gathers content from publicly available sources. We aggregate this information into a concise and easily searchable format, providing free access to the general public. Before publication, all content is verified, meeting our high standards of accuracy and authenticity.

It also provides a method for individuals to dispute its claims, and get removed from the list. As far as I can tell, so far no one has succeeded in getting removed, probably because the evidence of their anti-Semitic behavior is easy to document.

The student list is easy to scan, providing the name and picture of each individual, plus specific informatoin about what they did and where they attend school. There are also similar lists of professors, professionals, and organizations.

Book mark this webpage. It has a search function. Use it when ever someone wants a job with you, or wishes to partner with you in any capacity. You need to know who you are dealing with, at a deeper level then anything they will be willing to tell you.

#canary mission #data base

54 notes · View notes

spacelazarwolf · 1 year ago

Note

Hey Avi hope you're doing well. Good faith question, but as a jewish queer person in USA, What's your opinion on people supporting and sharing doxxing and indirectly incentivating cyber harrasment of actual zionists (with real and objective proof) who regardless of identity have actually supported the harm of the IDF and celebrated the Palestine Genocide?

And to be clear with the context so there isn't a misunderstanding with the meaning of "zionist" here: This is in refference to a very recent god awful moment in a congress? In which a goy (not sure if she's specifically christian but it's likely) republican woman shamelessly states that the I/P conflict will not end until all Palestine people are eliminated after she was asked so. And yes what I mentioned of her full doxxing being spread everywhere online and using that info with *negative* intents because of what she said is real.

i'm gonna unpack this a bit first and give some context.

michelle salzman, a republican representative in florida, interrupted her colleague angie nixon during a speech where nixon asked "we are at 10,000 dead palestinians, how many will be enough?" and salzman interjected "all of them." this is unquestionably a call for genocide, and if this wasn't florida i'd say people should be calling for her resignation.

that being said, there is no indication that salzman is a zionist. her office has not responded for comment, and i could not find any statements from her about if she believes that jews should have a sovereign state in eretz yisrael, so there is no evidence she is an "actual zionist", just that she is a racist piece of shit. in fact, when i went to try to find information about this, a bunch of the suggested searches and articles were about if she is jewish. so that should tell you something about how people are reacting to this, and the biases that are feeding into people calling her a zionist.

now all that being said, i do think it's wrong to dox people. even if they are horrible, horrible people. i think doxing is unethical, and i don't believe in justifying using unethical methods just because the person you're using them against has also done something unethical. i don't have an answer for what people should be doing instead because, unfortunately, this is in desantis territory so it's unlikely anything official will be done. but she absolutely should be removed from office and should face serious consequences for that remark.

#ask avishai #ip

132 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 5 months ago

Text

Matt Keeley at NCRM:

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton threatened to sue two large, Democratic-leaning counties should they proceed with their plan to mail voter registration forms to eligible voters who are currently unregistered. Bexar and Harris counties have proposed using third-party vendors to mail the forms. Though the plan is to only send them to people who are eligible to be registered, Paxton said that the forms could fall in the hands of those who are ineligible to vote, which would “encourage” them to register illegally, according to KSAT-TV. “At worst, it may induce the commission of a crime by encourage individuals who are ineligible to vote to provide false information on the form,” Paxton said, according to KENS-TV. “Either way, it is illegal, and if you move forward with this proposal, I will use all available legal means to stop you.”

Bexar and Harris counties both have high Latino populations, with nearly 20% of all Texan Latinos living in Harris County, according to The Hill. Paxton has faced accusations of specifically trying to suppress the Latino vote. Following raids on the homes of Latino voting activists, the League of United Latin American Citizens called for an inquiry into alleged civil rights violations, according to USA Today. At least six LULAC volunteers had their homes raided by police, and had voter registration materials seized, along with phones, computers and other electronic devices, USA Today reported. Paxton said the search warrants were “part of an ongoing election integrity investigation” into “allegations of election fraud and vote harvesting that occurred during the 2022 elections.” LULAC says one of the people raided was Lidia Martinez, an 87-year-old member of the organization. On August 20, her home was raided, and she was interrogated for hours, according to LULAC. There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2022 elections in Texas or elsewhere in the United States. Paxton’s most recent probe, despite the raids, has led to no charges thus far, according to the Texas Tribune.

Texas AG Ken Paxton (R) is a jackboot fascist disgrace to the Lone Star State and America.

#Ken Paxton #Texas #Voter Intimidation #Voter Suppression #Voter Registration #LULAC #Texas Politics

42 notes · View notes

dancing-wombat · 6 months ago

Text

Tuesday August 14, 1962, a US Mail truck is driving from Cape Cod to Boston. Instead of carrying letters and packages, the truck is carrying money, picked up at banks on Cape Cod after a busy weekend and being transported to the Federal Reserve Bank in Boston. Instead of using a proper armoured car company, the banks opted to save a few bucks and send it in a mail truck. Someone with inside knowledge tipped off one of Boston’s crime kingpins, and planning for a heist began.

On route 3 near Plymouth Mass, the truck slowed down for what looked like a State Police roadblock. Unbeknownst to the postal workers the men in the State Police uniforms were robbers - unbeknownst until they pointed machine guns at them. Meanwhile, other members of the robbery gang were placing detour signs futher back, diverting any other traffic, and ensuring there were no witnesses to the robbery. The postal workers were tied up and blindfolded in the back of the truck and driven around for about 90 minutes, then the robbers unloaded the money bags and left. When the postal workers finally freed themselves, all the money - $1,551,277.00 - was gone. It was the largest cash robbery in USA history.

The case caused a sensation, the amount of money stolen would be over $15 million today. The case made headlines from coast to coast, even making the cover of Life magazine. The investigation was led by the US Postal Inspectors, and although there was lots of rumors there was little evidence.

Eventually suspects were identified, through underworld gossip, and although they were followed constantly, and their homes searched, no evidence could be found to prove they did it. Eventually, just before the 5 year statute of limitations was about expire, 4 men and 1 woman were indicted for the crime, with the rumor being that one of them agreed to turn State's evidence, but he disappeared before the trial, likely murdered, and without him the case fell apart and the other defendants were acquitted.

The money was never recovered.

#robbery #crime #massachusetts #organized crime #Boston #unsolved #perfect crime #heist #larceny

12 notes · View notes

darkmaga-returns · 1 month ago

Text

Aaron Siri, Esq. is a vaccine and civil rights attorney and the Managing Partner of the law firm Siri & Glimstad who have offices across the USA. Aaron earned his law degree at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law where he received four Prosser Prizes and ten High Honors – REF

Following a screening of the movie Vaxxed in 2016, Aaron insisted on meeting personally with Del Bigtree to discuss working together. Del’s non-profit the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) an activist, litigious and fundraising organisation instructs Siri & Glimstad to, amongst other things, submit Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to government health agencies such as the FDA, CDC, HHS & NIH to seek the evidence to prove claims made by these “trusted” government bodies regarding vaccine safety and policy.

As of December 2022 Siri & Glimstad had over 20 individuals in the law firm that exculsively work on vaccine related matters.

In case you are not aware, vaccine manufactures are the only product developer who can’t be sue for damages caused by their products, and there is no trial process to access discovery. All liability and accountability rests with the government, the very entity that promotes the products and ensures they are “safe and effective”!

Suing the government for evidence

Since 2018 Siri & Glimstad, on ICAN’s behalf, have been submitting FOIA requests to US government agencies, they too often do not comply, so Aaron and his team then sues the government in order to obtain the public record documents sort. When ICAN win’s lawsuits, this means the court has ruled that the government agency has to turn over the FOIA documents/data requested. Too often this process reveals that the govenment agency has no evidence to support their public claims, or appear to be hiding evidence of harm.

“A search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request” is too often the reply following court action such as HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE etc.

The FOIA process can take up to 3 years or more – seemingly delay-tactics by the government who clearly knows they don’t have the evidence to back up their bold claims! The public trust that these health agencies are doing their job to protect the public, and have the evidence to back their claims. ICAN via Siri & Glimstad are revealing, time and time again, that public health make claims on “hope” not science based data.

During the COVID-19 pandemic Aaron and his team have lead many lawsuits pertaining to COVID-19 vaccine mandates, seeking Pfizer documents from the FDA, and following up on all things deemed “misinformation” and more. The work continues today – building an “informed choice” public record.

“Vaccine” depositions

Aaron knew next to nothing about immunology and vaccines when he started out, but through devours text books he gained a basic understanding for when he deposes long-standing vaccine experts like Dr Stanley Plotkin (2018) and Dr Katherine Edwards (2022). Depositions that YouTube deleted!

This page contains interviews and articles that provide little-known insight into the litigious aspects of vaccines in the US (which affects the entire world) – insights that the medical community have not been aware of…but the COVID response is waking people up to the public-private vaccine industry house-of-cards!

Aaron Siri Official links:

Substack – Injecting Freedom – HERE, INTRO

Twitter – HERE

ICAN decide website – HERE

FOIA Filter search – HERE

Pfizer Documents – HERE

V-Safe Dashboard & Data files – HERE

On this website relates to Aaron Siri’s work:

ICAN major lawsuit wins – HERE

Revelations from the Pfizer Document FOIA win – HERE

6 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 1 year ago

Text

Las Vegas police on Tuesday arrested eight teenagers on murder charges in connection with the death of Jonathan Lewis, a 17-year-old who was pummeled by a mob of his classmates in an alley outside their high school, authorities said.

The eight suspects charged with murder are between 13 and 17 years old, said Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department Lt. Jason Johansson in a news conference on Tuesday. Police along with the district attorney's office are beginning the process to charge them as adults. Johansson added that there's no evidence indicating the attack was "a hate crime."

On Nov. 1, students from Rancho High School, including Jonathan, met in an alley just across the street from the campus to fight over "stolen wireless headphones and, possibly, a stolen marijuana vape pen," Johansson said. Police believe the items were stolen from Jonathan's friend but once they were all in the alley, it was Jonathan who fought instead.

Johansson said as soon as the first punch was thrown, 10 people swarmed Jonathan, pulled him to the ground and began kicking, punching and stomping him.

After the fight, a passerby found the teenager unconscious in the alley and carried him to the school, where staff performed CPR. First responders rushed him to the University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, where it was soon determined that he had suffered "non-survivable head trauma," Johansson said. Jonathan died several days later.

Police search for two more suspects, ask public for help

Videos of the incident – called "extremely disturbing" and "void of humanity" by police officials – circulated social media and were used by investigators to identify eight of the 10 suspects. On Tuesday, police and the FBI coordinated arrests of the eight students and executed search warrants at nine homes throughout Las Vegas. Johansson said clothing worn by teenagers in the video and cellphones were recovered.

Las Vegas police will be releasing photos of the remaining suspects and urged the public to assist investigators in identifying them. Johansson asked that people submit footage of the incident to police and called on parents to speak with their children about the videos, which have been shared widely across multiple social media platforms.

"If you're a mentor with youth, if you're a parent, you have to assume that your kids have seen this video ... don't put your head in the sand," Johansson said. "Please talk with your kids about it and explain – people need to know right from wrong and that this act was heinous."

Jonathan's father seeks 'deeper justice'

Jonathan Lewis Sr., an electrician who lives in Austin, Texas, said his son was "a hero" who stuck up for his friend.

"That's just the kind of person he was," Lewis, 38, told USA TODAY. He described his son as an avid hip-hop fan who liked to make digital art.

Lewis said when he got the phone call that Jonathan was attacked and in the hospital, he could "could barely walk."

His family arranged to get him a flight to Las Vegas, where he and Jonathan's mother stayed at their son's bedside for days. During that time, they started planning a foundation that would address youth violence issues through counseling, mentorships and after-school programs.

Lewis created a website for the foundation, Team Jonathan, and is beginning to work on what he hopes becomes a nonprofit that'll prevent incidents like what happened to his son.

"Justice is a much much deeper issue to me than these children go to prison," Lewis said. "This is an all-encompassing issue that involves all of humanity and how we behave and the lack of empathy and compassion that we have. I just feel like my son's legacy deserves a deeper justice."

#nunyas news

35 notes · View notes

killed-by-choice · 14 days ago

Text

Kamala Reddy, 31 (USA 1975)

Kamala Reddy, who had four young children at home, went to Sigma Reproductive Health Center Inc. on November 28, 1975. This abortion facility was owned and operated by Sigma Centers of America Incorporated. The abortionist was Vibhakar J. Mody, who was paid by the number of abortions he carried out.

Both Kamala and her husband G. Pulla signed the consent forms for the surgical abortion. Mr. Reddy stated that his wife had never had any known complications from giving birth to four children, and had never had a severe reaction to any anesthetic to his knowledge. Her only known allergy was to a drug called sulfa, which she indicated on the paperwork.

Before beginning the abortion, Mody gave Kamala a local anesthetic. Kamala suffered what a later lawsuit called a “violent reaction” and had to be hospitalized at Washington Adventist Hospital. She died in the hospital the next day.

Kamala’s family sued for her death. During the court proceedings, both the abortionist and a nurse from the facility claimed that Kamala had known about a reaction to the drugs used and hadn’t disclosed them. Their only basis for this claim was a brief alleged conversation that only they had been witness to. They stated that while under the influence of the drug causing the reaction, Kamala had told them she did not feel well and, when prompted, gave a vague confirmation of a reaction in the past. Neither testimony stated that Kamala specified any specific adverse history to that drug. Despite the Reddy family’s attorney arguing that she was not a component witness, the alleged conversation was accepted as evidence. However, it was later found that accepting the story into evidence was in error, and the judgement was remanded for a new trial.

"United States, Social Security Death Index," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VMY1-G2V : 8 January 2021), Kamala Reddy, Nov 1975; citing U.S. Social Security Administration, Death Master File, database (Alexandria, Virginia: National Technical Information Service, ongoing).

#tw abortion #tw ab*rtion #tw murder #pro life #unsafe yet legal #abortion #abortion debate #death from legal abortion #victims of roe

3 notes · View notes

lololollywrites · 1 year ago

Text

Let's debunk Zionist arguments.

There are some things I'm getting really tired of hearing from Zionists. Not only are they just blatantly wrong, but - even if they were right - their actions would STILL be against international and humanitarian law.

Let's break it down, shall we? (This is incredibly long, but so so important. Please hear me out). Source links are in bold and underlined.

Here are some classic Zionist arguments:

Hamas will never settle for peace nor a two-state solution - all they want is violence. (This is what U.S. reps just argued as they voted against a ceasefire. Again.)

Setting aside the fact that October 7 wasn't the beginning of the conflict as well as the fact that Israeli officials publicly proclaim not to want a two-state solution and instead wish to take over all Palestinian land (I'll get to October 7 soon, because there is SO MUCH there), shoddy rockets built from discarded missiles that had already been fired upon them, rocks being thrown, and car bombs (in the 90s) aren't exactly a match for a military backed by the USA. We're also going to (temporarily) set aside the fact that Palestinians welcomed Jewish refugees post-WWII. I'll get there.

Let's pretend that they're right. Hamas - instead of being a few thousand or so young, traumatized men mostly in their late teens and early 20s who have never known a life outside of Israeli persecution - are vicious killing machines. Let's say that preposterous lie is true. Guess what? COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT IS STILL A WAR CRIME. Bombing civilians, almost half of whom are children, hoping that Hamas will surrender is a war crime. Cutting off food and water and electricity and internet is a WAR CRIME. AND THIS IS THE DEFENSE THEY USE OUT IN THE OPEN. IN FRONT OF THE UN.

You. Can't. Do. That. (But I guess they can, can't they?)

Also? A two-state solution only works if the other side is acknowledged as an independent state, and the West refuses to acknowledge as much (though the overwhelming majority of other countries do). You cannot claim to want a two-state solution if you do not acknowledge two states. Let's start there.

2. Israel has a right to defense.

Generally, I'd agree with this on principle alone. But... guess what? According to international law, an occupying power has NO right to defense from their own occupied territory. Why? They're meant to be its leader. To ensure human rights (not that it's possible under occupation, but whatever). Also? IT'S NOT A WAR IF THE OTHER SIDE IS NOT A COUNTRY. IF THERE IS NO MILITARY TO FIGHT AGAINST. At that point, it becomes a massacre. So no, Israel actually has no right to defense. (Killing in the West Bank and Lebanon is also a bit contrary to that surface-level lie - Hamas aren't there).

Even if they did have a right to defense, the word "disproportionate" comes to mind. We're at at least 17k dead and 46k wounded in TWO MONTHS. An average of 200 children have been killed every day for the past month. Civilians make up at least 61% of deaths from airstrikes, which is a higher proportion than all world conflicts in the 20th century. A minimum of 1000 children are missing limbs (I linked just one story, as those tend to pull more at the heartstrings than statistics, but also check out Bisan on TikTok and Motaz Azaiza on Tiktok - both on Instagram as well- for news from the literal ground in Gaza. They are just two of many; Hind, Saleh, and Plestia are also so important to follow... they come up when searching). Thousands more are orphaned. Premature babies were found decomposing in hospital beds during the temporary ceasefire because armed IOF soldiers forced doctors and nurses to leave but promised they'd send the babies elsewhere for care. They didn't.

And what do they have to show for it? Failure and death. The loss of hundreds of millions of dollars. Worldwide hatred - how does that benefit Israeli citizens? How does it help the Jewish cause? Where is the evidence that Hamas has been stopped? Evidence that hasn't been fabricated, I mean. We've all seen the fake "list" - the calendar on the wall. The small pile of guns that changed in number from one video to the next (and why the hell would Hamas leave behind weapons they could use to defend themselves?) The arrested, stripped-naked men and boys as young as 15 blindfolded, brought to their knees at gunpoint. Claims they were members of Hamas were quickly disproven by those on social media who could identify doctors and journalists and shopkeepers. Another lie. And another war crime. I've seen claims that 13 members of Hamas have been killed. 13, hm? Sure, sure. That's completely proportionate.

Worse than that, against a **belligerent** and illegal occupying force who has violated territorial agreements by violently occupying land granted to Palestine, imposing sanctions, killing civilians, arresting civilians (including minors and the elderly, who are often beaten and raped in captivity) without charge or trial, etc. - AN APARTHEID STATE WHEREIN PALESTINIANS ARE LITERALLY TRIED BY A DIFFERENT COURT AND MUST ADHERE TO DIFFERENT LAWS than Israelis and have no freedom of movement - Palestine actually has a legal right to RESIST. Imagine that. Why do people never say "Palestine has a right to defend itself"? Why is it just Israel?

Israel is so afraid of Palestinians appearing human that they forbade families welcoming back their freed children and family members (falsely incarcerated by the IOF) from showing emotion - THIS WAS DURING THE HOSTAGE EXCHANGE. October 7 didn't happen in a vacuum. Israel has long held thousands of hostages of their own. Children's bones are broken as they're beaten in jail. They're sexually assaulted. Denied food. Never presented with charges nor granted trial. How easily the demands of Hamas for them to be released were swept under the rug. How blatantly the crimes were covered up by saying "Palestinian teenagers 18 years old and younger" were returned in contrast to the Israeli "children" that were also released. They were afraid to use the word children in reference to Palestinian captives.

3. Nothing ends until all of the Israeli hostages are freed.

I am not undermining the fact that the Israeli hostages were traumatized and terrified (though videos of recent hostage releases wherein they're hugging and shaking hands and smiling as they say goodbye to Hamas - and one girl was even allowed to keep her dog - say that at least some of them escaped such anguish)... Because sure. Yes. It's not okay. But they were fed. Medications were administered. Connections were forged as their plight was explained.

And guess what? I've seen interviews with more than one released hostage who said that their biggest fear was Israeli forces. Who witnessed IOF soldiers raiding where they were held and shooting and killing their own hostages. Who were just as vulnerable to the bombings as any Palestinian. AT LEAST 60 OF ISRAEL'S OWN HOSTAGES HAVE BEEN KILLED BY THE IOF. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THEIR HOSTAGES. Israel was so terrified by these testimonies that they have edited the interview footage and cut interviews short. The hostages are a convenient excuse for genocide. It's why it took so long for them to agree to any exchange at all; what would be their reason for indiscriminately killing Gazans?

IF YOU STILL DON'T SEE IT: If Hamas were hiding in Israel, do you think Israel would bomb their own hospitals? Carpet bomb their civilians? They should, after all, after spouting the necessity of their actions for so long - what would the difference be? Ah. Yes. They only see one set of civilians as human. They've said as much. Openly.

When you're trying to capture an armed militia, you send specialized teams. Reconnaissance. You do not just try to destroy everything in sight (and destroying places where hostages may be held goes extremely contrary to their claim of caring about said hostages).

If you don't agree with the following statement, then you should not support Israel: "The school shooters might still be inside. Let's bomb the whole school to make sure we get them. The kids and teachers are collateral damage."

4. Supporting Palestine is anti-Semitic.

There's so much wrong with this. 13% of citizens across Palestinian territories (Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem) are Jewish. Orthodox Jews have held and attended multiple protests. Jewish Voices for Peace occupied Grand Central Station to call for a ceasefire. Thousands, perhaps millions, of members of the Jewish diaspora have shouted "NOT IN MY NAME" to the rooftops. Through the streets. "Never again," they say, "means never again for ANYONE." Are you calling thousands of rabbis at protests anti-Semitic? Bold of you. I dare you to say so to their faces.

Do you know what puts Israeli lives - Jewish lives - in legitimate danger? Creating enemies of neighboring Middle Eastern countries and starting an international war. Weak Hamas rockets could NEVER lead to a genocide of Israelis. Lebanese missiles, however (because right - Israel has also been bombing Lebanon, despite it being solidly free of Hamas) - have a lot more ability to cause damange. Good thing that Israelis have freedom of movement - over 370k of them have already fled, many of whom to awaiting homes back where they came from in Western countries.

Zionism was not founded with Jewish rights in mind. Balfour was wildly anti-Semitic. Many Christian Zionists supported the creation of an Israeli state so the Jewish people could just... go away. Somewhere else. The largest motivator of an Israeli state was a Western presence in Middle Eastern oil fields; Argentina was considered prior to Palestine, so the "ancient claim" is nothing more than a farce. They would have settled anywhere that made financial sense. Zionism itself is a profoundly anti-Semitic concept, goes against the Torah/divine will (there should be no ethnostate, it states), and does nothing more than CREATE MORE ANTI-SEMITISM.

Israel has perverted the very real issue of global anti-Semitism and generational trauma post-WWII to make Jewish people worldwide feel unsafe (doing so recruits citizens, after all). They've claimed birthright to the land - appealed to spirituality - and claimed that those who deny this hate them and want them dead (forgetting that the land is ancestral and significant for Muslims and Christians as well). They made their citizens feel attacked and persecuted so they could massacre Palestinians with impunity and call them barbaric terrorists and extremists. Many Israelis are brainwashed. Terrified of Arabs. That suits the Israeli government. They call everyone who hates the notion of the Israeli state around the world anti-Semitic. In the process, of course, they create actual anti-Semites who fail to distinguish between a beautiful religion and a settler-colonial, white supremacist political ideology. Conflating the two terms is an injustice to Jewish people.

Doing so is also horrifically disrespectful to Holocaust victims and survivors. Plenty of them have protested Zionism, in fact. Using perhaps the worst atrocity in modern human history to justify very similar dehumanizing, indiscriminately violent practices against another chosen "other" of human beings is so twisted and evil that it makes me sick.

Additionally, Netanyahu is far from popular in Israel. There were protests of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS just prior to October 7. Are they anti-Semitic for not supporting his rule and judicial takeover?

5. Israel is the only safe place for Jews.

Really? It doesn't seem very safe. Requiring youth to join the IOF - having a continuously armed and trained militia - doesn't reek of peace and prosperity. Imprisoning Israeli teenagers who refuse to partake in the atrocities (and subjecting them to potential abuses in prison) does not seem very safe. Building walls around Israeli territories guarded by soldiers and cameras doesn't seem safe. Was the music festival safe? No. And we'll get to how that's even more insidious than it seems. This "war" isn't safe. Won't it just create more resistance? More members of Hamas? More enemies of Israel? Doing so feeds into their victimhood.

People often laugh at wealthy white western Jews who make TikTok videos from their homes far away from the conflict who claim to feel unsafe now due to Hamas and the resulting world response against Israel. But it's not funny; this is all part of the plan. Propaganda is MEANT to make all supporters, especially Jewish people, feel unsafe. It's also actively leading to a lack of safety as it riles up and inflames those against Israel. All the easier to justify their cause.

(ALSO, this doesn't need stated, but it's Palestinians and pro-Palestinians who are unsafe. Palestinians who are being killed even in the West - even children - for wearing keffiyeh and speaking Arabic. Those who speak against Israel who are losing their jobs). It's Jewish people who are being protected by the West, but not out of respect for their religion. It's about money. Oil. The paying off of politicians.)

6. Palestine never existed. Israel is a land without a people for a people without a land.

This is perhaps the dumbest argument of them all, because it just doesn't matter. Zionists are wrong - completely - but even if they were right... PEOPLE. STILL. LIVE. THERE. If you care more about legal technicalities (the intricacies of which are decided upon by Western powers) than you do about the notion of literally kicking entire families out of their generational homes and giving the house keys to a newly-minted Israeli from Southern California, then something is broken within you.

Palestine was on the maps. There were Palestinian passports. Sports teams. Early Zionists acknowledged the existence of Palestine in their very rhetoric. Don't believe me? Look it up. Click on my links so far. I'm tired of citing every source for easily verifiable facts. For once, challenge yourself to obtain your information from somewhere other than the news. Millions of people live in Palestine and have for thousands of years. THE WEST DOES NOT GET TO DECIDE THE LEGITIMACY OF EVERY STATE AND COUNTRY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD. Who the hell are they to do so? Who put any legal weight into the Balfour Declaration or to the UN's proposed land distribution for the two-state proposal? Why do these foreign white men get to carve apart land they've never stepped foot upon? Nationalism is fairly new as well; empires reined for centuries. Italian peasants in 1850 may have had no idea they were in Italy. Empires rose and fell and borders changed so often that they'd be altered within someone's own lifetime; look at the Eastern Bloc. No one says that Ukranians don't have a right to freedom from Russia despite Russia's historical claim over the land as the Soviet Union.

I have just one question for you, if you're reading this and still a Zionist: Do you believe European settlers had a blanket right to land in the New World (pre-United States) because the Native American tribes did not receive nationhood approval by some Western governing body? Because there was no unifying flag or established Native country? Do you believe that American colonists had no right to fight for independence against Great Britain despite the lack of parliamentary representation, exorbitant taxes, and continued occupation that limited their sovereignty? They weren't a country yet, after all. Just a colony.

I'll bet you ANYTHING you argued the opposite in your American history classes. That you saw the barbarism against and genocide of Native Americans for what it was. That you teared up yourself upon learning about the Trail of Tears - the ethnic cleansing of 60k+ people who were forced out of their homes and land and into reservations despite being promised safety just prior. Who died on the long and arduous journeys on foot. I'll bet you that you understood the Native American attacks on colonists and violent enslaved people's rebellions against their white masters, even if you also understood the horror of the resulting violence... that you could see reason behind the uprisings. Do you condemn Nat Turner? Do you condemn colonists inciting a war against their occupying power in order to form the United States?

Hypocrisy. Western Zionists are hypocrites. Acts of uprising acts are only righteous in their minds if a) they are done by white people or b) are far enough back in history that it suits their current narrative and allows them to seem like a champion for justice. Nelson Mandela was also called a terrorist for protesting against apartheid. Do you see him as wrong, or have you checked out a book on him from the library to read to your children? Don't hurt yourself doing those mental gymnastics.

Bombing Gaza with thousands of tons of bombs - including incredibly damaging bunker-buster bombs - at a rate more than the carpet bombing of Germany in WWII and with more bombs dropped during in six days than any one month of the U.S. fighting ISIS - is akin to building a wall around Native American reservations in the US and Canada and deciding to just... drop bombs on them. When they can't escape. Who in their right minds would justify that?

GAZA IS AN OPEN-AIR PRISON, but even worse because they've committed no crimes. Gaza is a CONCENTRATION CAMP.

7. This is war. Civilians die in war. This is called collateral damage.

Let's briefly forget the facts mentioned above that 1) this isn't war, as wars require an opposing military, and 2) collective punishment is a war crime. Do civilians die in war? Yes. They do. But more men, women, and children were killed in the first month than in any other conflict ANNUALLY since 2019. As the New York Times reports, almost 1 in every 150 Palestinian children has been killed; this is the equivalent to half a million American children.

Read THIS ALJAZEERA ARTICLE and look at the pictures. Tell me this is justified with a straight face. Look a member of the Palestinian diaspora in their eyes as you tell them so. Stand before someone who has lost their entire family. Look AlJazeera journalist Wael Al-Dahdouh in the eyes as you say that the killing of his wife, daughter, son, and grandson were justified, and that him learning about it on-air (REPORTED BY CNN, if your loyalty lies with Western media) is just "what happens during war". Look at the faces of children crying and missing limbs on hospital beds and tell yourself it was for the greater good. Of patients who were unable to flee Al Shifa hospital for the South on cots outside of the building, languishing with their injuries and unable to move. Of orphans, shaking and in shock, desperately searching for their dead parents. Of kids covered in dust and blood and pulled from the rubble. Or children whose intestines are spilling out of their bodies as doctors without supplies seek to save their lives. These things are all on video, by the way. Don't believe me? Look it up.

This is not the normal consequence of war (though we shouldn't normalize civilian deaths at all in any conflict, this goes far beyond the expected harsh reality). Wars should allow civilians to flee. Permit humanitarian aid (at more than just trickling rates for either). All Israel has to do, it seems, is say "We're not targeting civilians" while clearly targeting civilians. "There's safe space in the South" while bombing the South and evacuation routes to get there. All they have to do is say "Muwasi is a no-fire zone! It's safe!" despite it being a "narrow patch of barren coastline" with no buildings, water, facilities, etc. that is much too small to house thousands, let alone millions.

Since the end of the temporary ceasefire, deaths have increased by 40%. Due to bombardment, yes, but also due to starvation and disease.

But still, Israel can say (at least upon the first bombing of Al Shifa) "We're not targeting hospitals - that was Hamas!" (despite having bombed hospitals for decades and video clearly disproving their claims; another shows sound bites cut together to try and reveal a plot - those clains have since been removed from Israel's official X account). "Gazans have rights!" despite bombing them every few years or so and calling it "mowing the grass". "Journalists are safe!" despite literally mowing down American journalist Rachel Corrie, who was protesting the demolition of Palestinian homes, with a bulldozer and annually celebrating her death by eating pancakes. Their propaganda campaign is failing globally, but upheld by Western governments.

They have also stolen dead Gazan bodies from various places, including Al-Shifa, raising concerns that these bodies were falsely claimed to be Israeli corpses for propaganda videos as well as that they might be being used to harvest organs.

7. Why haven't Hamas and Palestinians tried peaceful protest?

They have. Look it up. Hundreds have been shot and killed doing so. I have nothing else to say about it. TAKE MEASURES TO ELIMINATE YOUR OWN IGNORANCE PLEASE. We are TIRED of explaining things to you. Do I condone killing and hostage taking? No. Do I condemn Hamas for their desperation? Also no. No more than I would condemn the rebellion of enslaved peoples in colonial America. THIS IS A RESULT OF OPPRESSION. HAMAS IS A SYMPTOM, NOT A DISEASE.

Additionally...

8. October 7 was an unjustifiable atrocity. 40 babies were beheaded! Gazans elected Hamas, so they deserve to die.

First of all, no. Hamas did not behead any Israeli babies. Biden and the western media had to walk back those claims when Israel refused to provide evidence or verify these claims. Do you really think there were just... 40 babies at a music festival? The only babies who have been beheaded (by bombs) are Gazan. I saw a photo of a father holding a headless child up in front of a crowd, and that was far from the only incident. Israeli propagandists tore apart a photo of another father carring a dead infant with the claim it was just a doll, not a dead baby. They had to retract the article when it was proven that the baby was, in fact, real. And deceased.

Was October 7 horrific? Yes. Did innocent people die? Also yes. My heart hurts for Israeli people too; for families who lost loved ones. Whose grief was utilized to support a genocide. But here's another HUGE guess what: Israel has admitted to killing MANY of their own in the "chaos" of the event from Apache helicopters. Egypt has claimed that Israel knew about the planned Hamas attack days before the festival, and the festival was even extended a day later than planned. So the attack could happen? How were armed members of Hamas able to overcome the most secure border in the world and take so many hostages? How did Israel fail to prevent this (and, in fact, add to the death toll - initially blamed on Hamas?) Listen, there's no solid evidence that Israel planned everything as a neat justification for their assault on Gaza, but it's the simplest explanation, isn't it?

It's important ot note that ISRAEL CREATED AND PROPPED UP HAMAS as a convenient enemy. Every fascist group needs an enemy, after all.

FURTHER: Though Israel has denied this, there are reports of suspicious trading on the Israeli stock exchange in the days leading up to October 7. *Note that this is still unconfirmed, but:

"The preliminary research, which hasn’t been peer reviewed, found in the days before the Hamas attacks that bets against the value of the MSCI Israel Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) “far exceeded” the short selling activity that took place during the Covid-19 pandemic, the 2014 Israel-Gaza war or even the 2008 financial crisis.

“Our findings suggest that traders informed about the coming attacks profited from these tragic events,” the authors wrote." (CNN).

Did Gazans elect Hamas? Sure, in 2006. With no measure of foresight, of course, and despite them being controversial even then (though, remember, they were supported by Israel - don't you think the election was already set into motion?) MOST GAZANS WERE NOT YET BORN AT THIS TIME OR WERE CHILDREN. Even if they had been, have we ever justified killing civilians based upon who they elected into office? America has had its fair share of corrupt politicians who commit overseas atrocities. Do we deserve to be carpet bombed? That's the justification of the 9/11 attacks; that there are no innocent civilians. That's also called TERRORISM.

9. Jewish people have a birthright and claim to the land.

First of all, nothing has ever stopped any Jewish people from moving to Palestine. They were initially welcomed after WWII, too, as there were already (and are still) Jewish Palestinians. (Christians, too - this is not a religious war. Churches have also been bombed). Though really, Zionist settlers should have considered (and I'm sure they did) that being granted unfamiliar land after surviving an atrocity at the hands of their own governments rather than being encouraged to go home should have warned them that no small measure of anti-Semitism was behind the Zionist project.

Shockingly enough, however, religious claims and historic occupation (3,000 years ago, a civilization known as Israel - comprised by an ethnically different population than most modern-day Israelis, of course - lasted a brief 150 years) ARE NOT LEGALLY BINDING. Were the lands open for immigrants? Open to those who wanted to visit religiously significant land? YES. Were they fair game to be taken and colonized? NO. Did the UN have any power to designate the land? NO.

This would be like saying Muslim people as a diaspora have a claim to Spain due to their long historical stronghold over the Iberian Peninsula. It would be like Italians trying to take back the modern countries formerly a part of the Roman Empire. It would be like Catholics creating an ethnostate in Germany and massacring Protestants due to their historical control of the land. IT WOULD BE RIDICULOUS.

Look up the 1948 Nakba. Tell me that it doesn't make you think of the Trail of Tears. That forcing people out of their homes is okay because of some ancient claim or suggestion from white politicians that "Hey, you can move there as part of your divine right." I thought the notion of divine right ended with the rise of democracy and resistance to tyrannical historical monarchs such as "Sun King Louis XVI." That Manifest Destiny was just something we learned about in World History.

Nope.

Could you live in a Palestinian home still decorated and furnished with familial artifacts, knowing that the former family was forced to leave and forbidden from returning? No? Then don't support Israel.

10. Palestinians are barbaric! They'd kill you for being gay.

This is another silly argument due to its complete irrelevance. If you find yourself struggling to justify genocide and coming up with these sorts of answers - answers that imply that ALL PALESTINIANS are the same - check yourself and where that notion might be coming from. Stereotyping is bad, isn't it? Should we bomb the American South for being homophobic, as much as we may hate that fact? Um. No.

This perspective is fuelled by Israel's long-standing pinkwashing campaign against Palestine, which both ignores the presence of LGTBQ+ Palestinians but also claims Israel to be a safe, modern haven in comparison to barbarism. (AND ONE MORE REMINDER: NOTHING JUSTIFIES GENOCIDE).

Have you been to Gaza? Have you spoken to someone who has? Have you watched Anthony Bourdain's episode of No Reservations that highlights the humanity and kindness of Gazans? Have you watched the countless videos of Westerners, including women, who claimed they felt safer in Gaza than back home?

Could it be dangerous? Of course. Any place can be for women. Are there extremist Muslims? Of course. Would you want the Westboro Baptist Church to represent all of Chirstianity, however? Avoid sweeping generalizations whose only goal is to make you see millions of people (complex individuals with rich lives) as inhuman. As worth killing. See it for what it is.

Who tortures their prisoners? Israel. Who kills journalists, doctors, and bombs UNRWA schools? Israel. Who forces teenagers to join the military and jails them for protesting? Israel. Who routinely shoots civilians to keep them living in fear? Israel. Who sets up chairs on a hilltop so they can watch bombings with popcorn and snacks? Israel. Who calls for the extermination of all Palestinians? Israel. Have you ever seen a Palestinian person call for the extinction and massacre of all Jews? No? Yep. Think about that.

OVERALL: THE SIDE WITH THE PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN IS IN THE WRONG. THE SIDE LOSING THE CULTURE WAR DESPITE POURING MILLIONS INTO THEIR PUBLIC IMAGE IS IN THE WRONG. THE SIDE FREQUENTLY CAUGHT IN LIES SO EMBARRASSING THAT THEY ARE MEMED AND RIDICULED ON THE INTERNET IS IN THE WRONG. THE SIDE WHO ACCEPTS BILLIONS YEARLY FROM THE UNITED STATES THAT GOES TOWARD WEAPONS AND FREE HEALTHCARE FOR ISRAELIS (That Americans without this pay for with their own tax money) IS IN THE WRONG.

If you don't see this now, I can't help you. In ten years or so, however - when Israel's atrocities have finally been recognized and its leaders have been prosecuted for war crimes - have fun hiding evidence that you were on the wrong side of history. It's inevitable.

Free Palestine.

#palestine #gaza #free palestine #long post but please share with everyone you know #zionism #imperialism #settler colonialism

22 notes · View notes

wonderfullwonderfull · 8 months ago

Text

Science and society: what is the usefulness of knowledge?

(I note that this essay is primarily focused on my experience in the USA)

I've been thinking a lot lately about what impact I will be making in the world with my life. For a long time I had the view that all science is by nature "good" and that any pursuit of new knowledge is worthwhile. While this is a simple and straightforward view of morality and knowledge, it is something that is extremely prevalent among people I work with.

Now I completely understand the inherent desire to feel like you are doing good in the world. Anyone with empathy or even common sense hopes that they do more good in the world than bad. This is an intense desire in me, and due to my sample size of 1 (me) I have to assume that this is true for most others. People want to feel like they are benefiting society and those around them. I want to feel like I am benefiting society and those around me. This desire is strong and will allow people to pursue intense cognitive dissonance in how their career and life choices affect those around them.

In the course of my physics PhD so far, I have encountered many who intend to work for military contractors. There are several motivations given for this, however I believe the primary factor that actually drives so many physicists to military is the wide availability of jobs and the high pay. While I despise class reductionism and the ignorance of intersectionality, I do think class and economics is the driving factor in most of these colleagues decisions. Why spend 18 months searching around the country for a job that will offer 80k when you can go work for the military contractor down the street for 200k tomorrow. These jobs are extremely easy to get with an advanced physics degree, and their availability draws those who can not afford a long job search. The reasoning is straightforward and clear for many: it is the only high paying job available for them.

For many, I can accept this reasoning. I personally will never work for a military contractor (which I will elaborate on), but I can understand the desire for economic stability and the difficulty to reject an offer so prevalent and advertised. However, most, if not all, physicists I met who work with military companies will not use this economic argument as justification. There are instead a few other justifications that I hear. All of them I believe are symptoms of phantasm and cognitive dissonance. I will address them in the order of ascending danger and insidiousness.

First, is the classic neoliberal argument of national security and "the ability to defend ourselves". I will not address this argument. Many more qualified than me have written amazing essays on how the neoliberal idea of defense only perpetuates colonialism and capitalistic exploitation. While this argument is easily discredited by evidence, it is at least straightforward, if not honest.

Second, is the social credibility granted to those who work within the military defence industry. While only the poor proletariat is send to fight directly on the ground risking themselves, all involved in the military benefit by its deification in America. While veterans are ignored economically, the social credibility given to those who assimilate into the American imperialist project gives mobility to those who might otherwise be exploited. While it may be unexpected, a very large number of those working in the military industry are queer, neurodivergent, or otherwise ostracized by society. For many, the false-egalitarianism of the united states military industry gives those with the technical ability, but not the social ability, to climb the ladder of society. Lockheed martin doesn't care if you are a faggot, they just want someone to engineer their bombs. This is an extremely dangerous justification. Clearly, lifting yourself up by endangering others is no true liberation. It is the "liberation" promised by caplitalist society. "Put your boot on whom we tell you to, and we will have you live comfortably" says the Boeing executive, says the capitalist, says the imperialist, says the statist. This dissonance and rejection of empathy, creating a life of comfort at the cost of pain of others. Again, those more read and more impacted have said this in much more well written ways. However the message is clear: there is no queer liberation in America until there is queer liberation in Palestine. There is no acceptance of neurodivergence in America while we use our military to turn away asylum seekers at the border. There is no racial mobility while we use the fruits of our labor to kill the wretched of the earth. This justification is in reality entirely about economics and class. The classic method of elevation in capitalist societies: step hard on those beneath you and you may one day climb just an inch higher.

The final, and I believe most insidious justification I often see and hear is that of the universal good of science and knowledge. I myself used this philosophy for most of my life. While I have never personally done any work for the military industry directly, my justification for going into physics is that basic research helps all. Why worry about imperialism when you publish your research for any to read? Why worry about what your bosses are doing as long as you are advancing humanity's knowledge.

This is easily discredited by many. So much harm has been done to people in the name of "science" and "knowledge". Tuskegee, Nazi "science", eugenics, early anthropology, war chemistry, nuclear bombs. The list goes on and nearly anyone can easily list five failures of science as a guiding philosophy. All knowledge is not equally good, not all knowledge is good. Is the creation of the covid vaccine equivalently useful to humanity as a bioweapon made in a lab? Is the Haber-Bosch process equivalently useful as mustard gas? Is nuclear power equivalently useful as atomic bombs? Are solar panels equivalently useful as crytpocurrency farms? Clearly not. Each of these examples are intimately linked to each other. In all of these cases you can argue that the science discovered in the former will naturally lead to the latter. It is all just knowledge, neither good nor bad.

I find this argument disingenuous. While no physicist went out to discover the strong nuclear force, certainly it was a conscious decision to harness it as a weapon. Science is not a random selection of facts that you pick out of a hat. All science is pursued actively. Every day I go to my lab I make a decision that I am going to try to use magnetic materials as platforms for quantum information. I don't go into some random room with lasers and magnetic resonance machines and magically come out with a computational qubit. Those working for BAE systems do not walk into work and just randomly come out with a design for a missile system. Anyone who works in science knows: pursuing knowledge is an active process. You must envision what you want, and pursue it with vigor. Justification for knowledge is always either given before the science starts, or not given at all. No one accidentally creates a weapons delivery system, then has to decide whether they will publish it. No, this decision was made well before funding was granted.

This is a fact I have had to deal with in my PhD program. I will state, while accepting I myself may have some cognitive dissonance in this, that graduate students should not be held accountable for the science they do in the lab. Anyone in academia knows that 90% of PhD students do not pick specifically who their funding comes from or what the goals of their research are. These are decided between their primary investigator and the funding agency. I must tell myself this every day, knowing that my funding comes from the department of defence, knowing that my results will be used for technology I vehemently hate. Should I be held accountable that the science I do may be used for illegal spying and surveillance when all I want is to characterize a material? Should the blame that rests with the department of defense be passed onto me? I hope not, but I honestly do not know.

I sit here thinking about this as my close friends from undergrad go off to work in public defence, legal aid, and community-driven nonprofits. For a long time I thought that the pursuit of science was equal in worth to these careers. However it has been made clear to me that science can easily be one of the most harmful careers. So what is to be done? Personally, I am too far along my education to make a meaningful change. I have too much debt and have invested too much time to switch to a more directly impactful career. And I truly love physics. Discovering the nature of reality is a magical feeling that is addicting. Nothing measures with the experience to be the first person ever to learn something. Should I just accept that my own happiness is worth the career? Should I lay down and use my knowledge of semiconductors to build a weapons guidance computer? I still think not, but the way forward is uncertain.

I myself will attempt to, if not do good, at least not perpetuate the bad. While I sincerely thing quantum computing can do massive good for the world, it can clearly do harm as well. I hope I can find a position where I can do good, but at the very least I can avoid doing bad by working for Lockheed.

Science is grey. Much good and happiness has come from the pursuit of knowledge. Much harm has come from it as well. At best we can do what we think is right in the moment and attempt harm reduction in our work. I may not be able to choose who used quantum information science, but I can at least choose not to be the one building a quantum computer for the air force. I can choose to not do the harm that is clear to me. Does this make me a good person? A bad person? No. In addition to me not believing in "good" or "bad" people, science is just science. It is as good as what is done with it. While I can not be able to tell what will be done with my discoveries in 200 years, I can see what will happen in the next five. And I can choose to not work for those who will clearly abuse science for the sake of profit and power.

In closing, I am reminded of Darwin and his theory of natural selection and evolution. While a clearly complex person who has held both despicable racial views, he also created the most widely accepted theory of science in the modern day. The knowledge of evolution has been used to create medicine, and abused to justify eugenics. Can we blame or credit Darwin for this? I say no, the knowledge gained is only as good as it is used, and those who use it must be those who carry the responsibility of their actions. Can Darwin be blamed for the capitalist justification of "Social Darwinism?" Even without Kropotkin's takedown of it in "Mutual Aid", even if social Darwinism became a mainstream view, the responsibility remains only with the fascists who use it. Those who discovered the knowledge nessesary to formulate this argument had nothing to do with how it is used. We can not blame scientists for their discoveries when it is not them who abused them. We can not credit scientists with praise for their discoveries when it wasn't them who used them for good. Darwin did not invent modern eugenics, he did not invent modern medicine. Darwin is not good because of his discoveries, he is not bad because of them either. He is just Darwin.

I hope that, even if my discoveries are abused, that I will still just be me. I have given up on the idea of scientists as a universally good career, as people selfless and honorable. We are just people. Knowledge is just knowledge. It is how we use it that must be judged, and how we justify it that must be analyzed.

I hope this did not come off too verbose and long. In many ways this is me trying to come to terms with the fact my career is not the noble pursuit that I envisioned as a bright-eyed undergrad. I still think science is a worthwhile pursuit and worthy of public support and funding. However, I will no longer excuse the actions of those who ignore their responsibilities in their creations.

#philosophy #ethics #epistemology #science #physics

12 notes · View notes

shipcestuous · 8 months ago

Note

Introduction

58M; USA

Wow. And here I thought doing an intelligent search on IMDB gave me all of the shipcest I wanted. Then I discovered shipcestuous about a year ago and your curated lists across all mediums is, hands down, fantastic. Thank you, shipcestuous, for having the courage to put this blog into action and maintain it for all of us. I hope everyone appreciates you as much as I do.

I've been a lurker for about a year but finally decided to sign up and post in order to support the blog. I feel like shipcestuous is my brother from a different mother.

My story began in college, when I dated a 21yo woman who was in a consensual, thriving (but secret) relationship with her still very healthy and virile grandfather. Looking back, I realize now he had become her Sugar Daddy, but they really cared for her. She and I are still friends and she is a very successful attorney, so proof that not every shipcest is doomed to disaster or evidence of mentally unstable people. With her, I realized that real, emotionally involving shipcests among consenting adults can exist... maybe even thrive.

That experience set me on a path of seeking out shipcests - whether IRL or in the arts - that still continues after 4 decades. It's impacted every aspect of my life, and maintaining its secrecy has become a bit of a burden. I am an emotionally healthy adult with 2 amazing and successfully grown children. I have been divorced for nearly 2 decades, but my divorce was not related to my obsession/hobby/fantasy (my ex-wife did know about it but chose not to partake in it). Now, nearing 60 years of age, I have no interest in meeting anyone if I can't share my love of the fantasy/hobby with her. And THAT is easier said than done as I'm sure many of you have discovered. I spend most of my days watching films with shipcest themes and logging them so that I can return to my favorites. And I'm perfectly okay with that.

Moving forward, I hope to contribute by adding to your lists, but honestly, it seems like you have captured already every shipcest in the film and arts that I'm encountering. Nevertheless, if I run into something new, I'll post and you can add it to the list.

Keep on, keep on, shipcestuous. And thanks again.

This was such a wonderful message to receive. I'm so pleased that you de-lurked to say something!

That's really fascinating about your friend and her relationship with her grandfather. So glad everything ended fine for everyone! Like you said, there it is, proof.

I understand so much how the secrecy can be a burden. I really hope you find someone who can enjoy it as much as you do. That's the dream for all of us!

If you've been chasing tags on IMDB then I'm sure you'll come across something that isn't on my lists. As long as some of the lists are, they're far from complete. Happy hunting!

Thanks, again!

#asks #shipcestfan #discussion #t: incest shipping #noiv #nr #tw: incest

7 notes · View notes

nothing0fnothing · 8 months ago

Note

People with NPD are frustrated by the term "narcissistic abuse" because it's closely linked to NPD itself. When they seek resources for recovery or coping strategies, they're bombarded with information on "recovering from a narcissist" rather than guidance tailored to individuals with NPD.

It's not harmful to label abuse as emotional, physical, sexual, or even using a new term like "egotistical abuse." But when it's labeled as "narcissistic abuse," it can create problems for people with NPD, regardless of intention. I understand you'll likely dismiss this, but I hope you'll take a moment to think about it.

Thank you for being patient for all the time I took to craft this reply, I really wanted to give your ask the time it deserves.

I looked into resources connecting NPD with narcissistic abuse and I did find a few. Most of them were articles written by therapists in single practises, blogspot articles or other uncritiqued works, or dissertations written by students in counselling and psychiatry. Obviously any misinformation is bad, especially when it's coming from places that should be reputable like therapists and universities. I wouldn't say in my research what I found was evidence that narcissism is "closely linked" with NPD in any reputable circles though. In todays day and age anyone can have an opinion and make it available for free on the publicly available Internet. It's our own responsibility to educate ourselves and make sure we are leaning on credible sources to form our opinions.

Speaking of the modern age of the Internet, the last part of your ask interested me and I decided to test your theory and run a little experiment.

When people with NPD seek online resources to for support with their disorder, are they are instead met with information for narcissistic abuse survivors?

I created 5 phrases a person suffering narcissistic abuse might search and 5 a person with NPD might search and put each of them into Google.

I used a VPN to manually change my my browsing location to 5 English speaking countries (Ireland, Canada, The USA, Australia and England) and, clearing the cache between every search to reduce uncontrolled variables, searched each phrase to simulate what a person may find in each of those locations when looking for support online.

I decided to see what results came up when searching "narcissist help" "narcissist support" "narcissism recovery" "narcissism signs" and "narcissistic abuse" to emulate what a person suffering from narcissistic abuse might search when seeking support. What came up on the first page of google were mostly resources tailored to support a person experiencing narcissistic abuse in all 5 locations.

Then I searched "NPD help" "NPD support" "NPD signs" "NPD recovery" and "Narcissistic Personality Disorder" to emulate what a person suffering with NPD might search while seeking support. What came up on the first page of Google were only resources tailored to support a person seeking treatment, information or diagnosis for NPD in all 5 locations.

It seems to me that when using the correct vocabulary for their disorder, people with NPD can find support, resources and information relevant to them fairly easily online. Even though they may share a common keyword that victims of narcissistic abuse may also be searching.

From the small test I did to see if your hypothesis held true, it doesn't look like narcissistic abuse awareness harms people with NPD by altering the type of information they may find online at all. My results suggest that the only reason a person with NPD may struggle to find resources when searching for them online is if they've been led to believe that narcissism is the correct term for their disorder.

If people with NPD are led to believe that "narcissist" and "narcissism" are synonyms for their disorder, they may be using these keywords when seeking online resources for diagnosis, treatment or support online. This could explain why people with NPD are reporting that when looking for resources for their disorder online, they're repeatedly finding resources better suited for people looking for information on narcissistic abuse.

The evidence suggests that actually, it's people like you, who are arguing that narcissistic abuse awareness harms people with NPD because narcissism and NPD are synonyms, might actually be the ones harming people with NPD in this way.

I'd love to know if these stats are repeatable, so if you'd like to do the same test and let me know your findings, get back to me any time.

#narcissistic abuse #narcissism is not npd #misinformation #narcissism #narcissistic personality disorder #narcissism recovery

11 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 1 month ago

Text

By: Wilfred Reilly

Published: Jan 1, 2025

It’s always worth remembering that the person responsible for probably 95 percent of what you do is you.

Now that we Westerners know we mostly do have free will, no one seems to like using it. A few days before New Year’s Eve, writing for a — nay, the — conservative magazine, this strikes me as a point worth discussing.

We saw what I’ll call agency-rejectionism first — in very recent discourse — from the feminists. A few weeks back, British pornographic actress Lily Phillips opted to have sex with 101 men in a “gang-bang” scene which she orchestrated and choreographed. The almost universal reaction from women’s advocates was that the fit but slender, blonde Phillips was being abused.

Self-described lesbian radical feminist Julie Bindel penned a raging column for the U.K. Guardian, bold-headlined “Shame on the Men Exploiting Lily Phillips.” Tens of thousands of angry women supported this take across social and digital media, with one typical take being Polly Clark’s: “Lots of men congratulating other men . . . in the face of televised abuse of a woman. Evil is always legalistic and careful with its terms. The Lily Phillips case is not about ‘sex.’ This isn’t about sex. It’s bestial abuse of another human being.” A full list of these responses, including Bindel (again), calling for prison for “any man involved in the torture of this woman,” and the more gender-neutral Hot & Freddy demanding “death penalty for all the dudes,” can be found here.

Unfortunately for Phillips’s unrequested “defenders,” however, there exists basically no evidence of (actual, legal) abuse in her case. Phillips is a 23-year-old adult from a fairly wealthy family, who cleared five British GCSE (“G-level”) exams and went on to college. She has never been sexually abused and describes herself — in one of the articles just linked — as not being a victim of any kind. Her financial manager is her own, feminist, mother. The young woman currently runs a for-profit OnlyFans business, managed by an all-female staff of eight, has made more than $2,500,000 (£2,000,000) to date, and stands to make hundreds of thousands more from her most recent stunt.

As it happens, she not only choreographed that event but booked the setting for it — a nice little Airbnb, now very worried about cleaning and fumigation costs — invited all of the male participants, and contracted with the professional film crew. She now, apparently, plans on a larger-scale repeat. The actress’s new goal is to break the “world sex record” by engaging with 1,000 men in a day (the current mark is 919). Those interested in a casting call may apply here. Perhaps women simply have personal agency, just as men do.

Moving on, a similar wailing cry of, “How could society fail (X amoral person)?” was heard an ocean away at about the same time, when U.S. Marine veteran Daniel Penny was acquitted on the charge of the choking death of vagrant Jordan Neely during a subway fight. A simple Google search for “We all failed Jordan Neely” turns up hundreds of thousands of hits, including predictable drivel from the New Yorker (“The System That Failed Jordan Neely”), USA Today’s main opinion editorial (“Daniel Penny’s Acquittal Isn’t Cause for Celebration”), the Washington Post (“Penny Verdict Reveals How New York City Failed Jordan Neely”), and a major piece from the National Coalition for the Homeless (“Justice Denied: Honoring Jordan Neely and Demanding Change”).

A consistent theme throughout this national coverage is that “America” failed to provide Neely with housing or clean clothing or medical treatment — and that Penny went too hard on him in that train car, perhaps for this reason. But is this empirically true? Not really.

As it happens, Jordan Neely had pretty high-quality housing available to him at the time of his death. He simply opted not to live in it. As the New York-focused website Vital City points out, “in lieu of prison” in a recently decided criminal matter, “Neely was offered 15 months of (free) supportive housing and intensive outpatient psychiatric treatment.” However, he “absconded” from his bungalow after less than two weeks. He was given psychiatric medications while in treatment, but also opted to stop taking these pills: obviously, by default while still under their influence and aware that he could not safely do so.

Not only was Neely’s overall situation largely his fault, so was the very specific situation that led to his death. What is often misleadingly described as Neely “using colorful language” with other passengers on his train car, or “asking them for food and water,” was actually — per my best-possible compilation from several articles and police reports — the phrase: “I’ll hurt everyone here! I will KILL you! I don’t care if I go back to prison!” This obviously insane behavior prompted not merely Daniel Penny but several other random male citizens to confront and restrain Neely.

One glance at Neely’s arrest record would only have strengthened the unsurprising, absolutely correct conclusion that Daniel Penny and his fellow subway heroes drew from their opponent’s crazed ranting and filthy appearance. As it happens, Neely had been locked up some 42 previous times, for crimes including an unprovoked subway attack on a 67-year-old woman (which shattered her orbital bone), breaking the nose of a different subway rider, “pulling down his pants and exposing himself” to an unsuspecting young woman on a train, and attempting to snatch a pre-teen girl away from her guardians . . . in a train station. Neely’s encounter with Penny was only the latest — and, as it turned out, the last — time he fought with strangers on the NYC public rails.

On X and Facebook, we are currently seeing a broader example of the same trend of personal responsibility denial — and one which may hit closer to home for tax-paying readers of this article. Monorail salesman, likely genius, and of-late GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy just began a major conversation and attracted an apple-throwing mob by — while defending most recipients of H-1B foreign “talent” visas — pointing out that white and black American youth may not be the hardest working imaginable occupants of the classroom.

Quoth he: “The reason top tech companies often hire foreign-born & first-generation engineers over ‘native’ Americans isn’t because of an innate American IQ deficit (a lazy & wrong explanation). A key part of it comes down to the c-word: culture. Tough questions demand tough answers & if we’re really serious about fixing the problem, we have to confront the TRUTH: Our American culture has venerated mediocrity over excellence for way too long That doesn’t start in college, it starts YOUNG.”

Ramaswamy was greeted with, alongside some support, an immediate wave of anger and excuses. Elijah Schafer of The Blaze argued: “Vivek — white people built marvelous nations and were almost completely white until 1965. We didn’t have H1B visas replacing jobs and were fine. (H1B support) is only about cheap labor!” Other debaters agreed, with some suggesting that the U.S. should immediately end upper-end foreign migration totally. Our kids? Best in the world!

An honorable and tempting idea. However, as I once noted at book length, a ton of objective statistics indicate that Ramaswamy is largely correct. The average American SAT score was 1024 in the most recent year on record. It’s well below that for Latinos, and below 950 for blacks. Despite this, as writer Adam Grant noted in a sourced response to Ramaswamy, one-third of native-born American college students expect a “B” grade for showing up in class. In contrast, Asian-American students, many foreign born, study roughly three times as much as black kids and twice as much as white kids — and post a 1250 on the annual aptitude test. They tend not to expect a B+ for — forgive me — “being” present.

Delano Squires, a black conservative writer whom I personally know and like, pointed out during the whole Vivek-induced controversy that no one objects to the invocation of personal responsibility or responsibility culture when this is made in the direction of failures or poor people, or even working-class blacks as a whole, or Appalachians. However, we all tend to get a bit testy when similar reminders are made to us or our beautiful children.

Let’s make them to everyone. I intentionally opened this essay with extreme cases, but, as New Year’s Day approaches, it’s always worth remembering that the person responsible for probably 95 percent of what you do is you. Let us all work on ourselves, each other, and the country.

[ Via: https://archive.today/YE3uZ ]

This is part of the larger victimhood industry. We have to stop rewarding self-professed "victims" - while not ignoring actual victims - who just refuse to take responsibility for their own actions and choices and feel compelled to blame others.

#Wilfred Reilly #personal responsibility #internal locus #internal locus of control #responsibility denial #denial of reponsibility #accountability #personal accountability #victimhood culture #victimhood #religion is a mental illness

2 notes · View notes