#extortion by government officials

[royallawx]

Disqualified bribed criminal Stephen Lowney on 02/07/2024 was using threats of unlawful imprisonment to extort passport, green card and all documents of my abducted and unlawfully detained son Max Mars.

After I disqualified and reported bribed criminal Stephen Lowney to Commission on Judicial Performance (50 complaints to CJP), presiding judge Beth McGowen, FBI, Attorney General office, Governor Newsom, and President of the United States,

bribed criminal Stephen Lowney (being in process of disqualification since 02/20/2024 and by the law not having judicial power to act on the case 22FL003144), issued:

unlawful Vexatious Litigant prefiling order against me 03/11/2024 -completely denying me all access to all California courts;

arrest warrant with the help of his criminal associates Thomas Kuhnle, Benjamin Williams and Michael Clark;

TWO bench warrants (from both family and criminal courts): personally signed bench warrant against me on 06/17/2024, and his criminal associate Benjamin Williams signed criminal bench warrant 08/21/2024 in my presence and presence of my attorney - insisting on unlawful imprisonment against me;

Criminals Colin Haselbach (Sheriff's Office) and Martin (Sunnyvale Police) were sending me repetitive threats of unlawful imprisonment, and committed theft of my sensitive personal information from my Google account, and from my mobile carrier - threatening that they located me and are preparing to unlawfully arrest me

permanent restraining order blocking all contact with my abducted and unlawfully detained son Max Mars under threats of unlawful imprisonment enforced by unlawful arrest warrant

denied request for Change of Venue - denying removal of case 22FL003144 from extremely corrupt Santa Clara County Court

denied request to nullify all orders obtained by fraud on court committed by THREE disqualified bribed criminals Stephen Lowney (disqualified after his first month in court, February 2024), Andrea Flint (disqualified in November 2023), and James Towery (removed from court with loud media scandal in 2022)

Bribed criminal Stephen Lowney was using threats of unlawful imprisonment for extortion of passport, green card and all documents of my abducted and unlawfully detained without access to phone and internet son Max Mars,

committing the same racketeering activity as TWO his disqualified bribed predecessors - Andrea Flint and James Towery,

the same extortion of passport, green card and all documents of my abducted son, while denying child abduction prevention orders and custody review, therefore facilitating international child abduction of my abducted son Max Mars,

exactly as Hanna's father, known Ukrainian criminal Gondon Nahornyy requested right before abduction, stating that he "bribed almost every judge in Ukraine, and will bribe whoever he needs to ensure that you will never see your son again"

While Joe Biden was sending American money to Ukraine in times of war, Ukrainian criminal Gondon Nahornyy was bringing dirty money from Ukraine to bribe THREE criminals on positions of Santa Clara County judges to facilitate international child trafficking - international abduction of my unlawfully detained son Max Mars. More files and evidence in following posts. View more and subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/@SaveMaxFromAbduction View more and subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/@royallawx

[nando161mando]

25 years of labour for this is crazy work

[literaryvein-reblogs]

hello! may i ask for some advice on writing women involved in the mafia? i'm having difficulty finding realistic ways women involved can be inducted (aside from being a wife), work, and climb up the ranks when the italian mafia was quite patriarchal, conservative, and catholic. thank you very much!

Writing Notes: Women in the Mafia

Mafia - hierarchically structured society of criminals of primarily Italian or Sicilian birth or extraction. The term applies to the traditional criminal organization in Sicily and also to a criminal organization in the United States.

Investigations conducted by U.S. government agencies in the 1950s and ’60s revealed that the structure of the American Mafia was similar to that of its Sicilian prototype.

In the United States, the organization had adopted the name Cosa Nostra [Italian: “Our Affair”].

From the 1950s, Mafia operations were conducted by some 24 groups, or “families,” throughout the country.

In most cities where syndicated crime operated, there was one family, but in New York City there were 5: Gambino, Genovese, Lucchese, Colombo, and Bonanno.

The heads of the most powerful families made up a commission whose main function was judicial.

At the head of each family was a “boss,” or “don,” whose authority could be challenged only by the commission.

Each don had an underboss, who functioned as a vice president or deputy director, and a consigliere, or counselor, who had considerable power and influence.

Below the underboss were the caporegime, or lieutenants, who, acting as buffers between the lower echelon workers and the don himself, protected him from a too-direct association with the organization’s illicit operations.

The lieutenants supervised squads of “soldiers,” who often had charge of one of the family’s legal operations (e.g., vending machines, food-products companies, or restaurants) or illegal operations involving prostitution, gambling, or narcotics.

By the late 20th century the Mafia’s role in U.S. organized crime seemed to be diminishing.

Convictions of top officials, defections by members who became government witnesses, and murderous internal disputes thinned the ranks.

In addition, the gradual breakup of insulated Italian-Sicilian communities and their assimilation into the larger American society effectively reduced the traditional breeding ground for prospective mafiosi.

Sicilian Mafia

Hierarchically structured organization of criminals in Sicily, Italy.

Made up of a coalition of criminal organizations—called “families” or “clans” in English and cosche (singular, cosca) in Italian—which engage in extortion, smuggling, gambling, and the mediation of disagreements between other criminals.

The term Mafia has become synonymous in English with organized crime, but technically Mafia refers only to the Sicilian organization and its Sicilian American counterpart in the United States.

Women in the Mafia

Men have dominated the history of organized crime as bosses, capos, soldiers and associates.

They traditionally relegated women to servile roles as prostitutes, shills, dancers and servers.

America’s La Cosa Nostra and Sicily’s Mafia are old-style patriarchies.

In Mob movies, females typically portray mothers, wives, siblings, girlfriends, “molls” and, at best, crime-wise, low-level smugglers.

The Mafia is a criminal organization renowned for being "full male chauvinists" (Pizzini-Gambetta 1999, 257) where no woman has ever been admitted into in.

However, despite their exclusion, women have featured in norms upheld by this criminal group.

The Mafia is usually depicted, especially by the media, as a conservative, male-dominated organization, but it is probably less backward and more flexible than the rest of society would like to think and believe.

A "good" woman of the Mafia is expected to dedicate her life to her family and especially to her husband.

Women who participate in Mafia's illicit activities are usually unemployed and live in the most deprived areas of Sicilian cities.

These types of women are quite easy targets for Cosa Nostra.

Usually they are contacted "through an intermediary (so that, if captured will no be in the position to tell anything about the organization) and to offer them a relatively easy way to make money, selling drugs in the areas where they live, usually from their own homes and frequently using their children as couriers" (De Pretis 1996, 5).

These are the types of activities that women tend to be selected for.

Different from men, women can move freely in their environment without arousing suspicions in the police.

In addition, with the growth of the international drug trade (particularly towards the United States), which enabled the Mafia to expand, the organization was forced to "employ" more workers, including women.

Women took advantage of prejudice: they passed unsuspected across international borders, where the presence of female customs officers to search them was exceptional.

It is also important to note that "although these women are recruited primarily as a criminal force, they often have to accept sexual intercourse with their referents, who regard this practice as their own right" (De Pretis 1996, 6).

It can be said that for long time, the Italian law favoured female criminals and indeed their partners, albeit indirectly.

For example, Mafiosi used women's names to register companies, properties and bank accounts.

It can be claimed that the system worked perfectly for the honoured organization because "women, even wives of high-ranking Mafiosi, were considered beyond suspicion. Since there was not legal definition of the Mafia, there was no way of connecting a bank account in a woman's name with a drug smuggling ring" (Longrigg 1997, 18).

Anti-Mafia crackdowns by Italian police started in the 1980s with stringent new laws.

According to the investigative news website TransCrime, while Italian courts indicted only one female boss in 1989, they indicted 89 of them in 1995.

Male bosses headed for prison commonly hand their assets over to their wives or sisters. Even though women made up only 2.5 percent of those sent to prison for Mafia-linked crimes, they controlled a third of Mafia financial resources.

Women have served as acting bosses in Italy’s major crime families, including the ’Ndrangheta and Camorra.

“There is a growing number of women who hold executive roles,” Gaetano Maruccia, an Italian police commander in greater Naples, told The Daily Telegraph newspaper in 2009. “They are either widows or wives of husbands who have been put in prison. They hold the reins. They’re very good at mapping out strategy, even sharper (than the men).”

Example: Maria Licciardi

Naples, Italy, is the home of the Camorra, a group of savvy, ruthless organized criminal clans that try to work together but have a history of deadly internal clashes.

By the late 1990s, during a murderous feud among Camorra cliques, a Neapolitan woman in her late 40s, Maria Licciardi, materialized as the boss of one of the largest Camorra families, the Secondigliano clan.

In 2001, while a fugitive from the law for two years, Licciardi made it onto a list compiled by Italian police of the nation’s thirty most wanted criminals.

Licciardi was born in 1951 in the Secondigliano section of northern Naples.

Some came to regard her as a boss within the Camorra organized crime group from 1993 to 2001.

Her ascendancy to the apex of a Camorra crime group occurred as women were stepping into leadership roles in the syndicate left open by men arrested, imprisoned or killed in the 1990s and 2000s.

That trend continued alongside battles won by Italy’s criminal justice system.

Some wives of Mafia bosses will cut and package cocaine and heroin for their husbands at home while also performing traditional family duties such as cooking, cleaning and raising children.

While men mostly handle the violent side of things, some of these women are as capable of making threats and extorting money from victims, and running drug sales operations, as their male spouses. Licciardi was one such person.

She grew up with a close-knit family deeply involved in the Camorra syndicate. Her father served as a clan boss.

She seized power as a “madrina” (godmother) in the Secondigliano clan after police arrested her two brothers, Pietro and Vincenzo, and her husband, Antonio Teghemi.

She took over the mantle to manage the clan’s prostitution, drug trafficking, cigarette smuggling, extortion and other rackets.

Smart and practical, steeped in Camorra business, she conversed with various male Camorra bosses, listening, debating and taking action as their equal.

During the late 1990s, Licciardi gained the confidence of the “guappos” (bosses) of twenty warring criminal gangs within the Camorra in Naples.

She used her skills as a negotiator to convince them that fighting was bad for business and unity would bring more money for everyone and avoid bloodshed.

Her view held sway in Naples. For several months, there were no Mob-related slayings in the city.

Then, a gang war erupted over a substantial shipment of heroin from Istanbul:

The cache was not refined, too strong and posed a deadly risk for users. Licciardi rejected the drugs and ordered the load returned.

A rival clan, the Lo Russo, disobeyed, snatched the drug supply and sold the powder in small bags.

As it turned out, the heroin was indeed too pure to use, and nearly a dozen addicts died on city streets.

Publicity about the deaths led police to arrest various known local hoodlums. The fragile union Licciardi created fell apart.

Rival Camorra clans began to rebel.

Over 8 days, they shot several of her clan’s people to death.

One of her nephews died in the clashes.

Licciardi fought back with her gunmen.

Within a few days, in revenge, she allegedly had 14 people murdered.

Police believe Licciardi commanded the deaths of about 30 people in all.

Her petite stature emboldened some to assign her the nickname “la piccolina,” or the little one.

Others named her the “Camorra Princess.”

Still, she proved herself as unabashed as her male counterparts in ordering people killed.

Neapolitan police came after her with an arrest warrant in 1999.

Police raided the meeting of 13 Mafia bosses and arrested them, but Licciardi eluded the cops.

She went into hiding until officers pulled a car over outside Naples, and recognized her in it, in 2001.

Since then, Licciardi has been in prison, living under the harsh conditions of isolation from the outside world as dictated by Italian law for convicted Mafiosi.

She has dropped out of the limelight, but not from her clan’s rackets.

In 2009, Anna Maria Zaccaria, a sociologist at Naples Federico II University, told the Associated Press: “She’s in prison, but she still commands.”

Sources: 1 2 3 ⚜ More: References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

Thanks for this request, I found this quite interesting. You could use stories like Maria Licciardi's as inspiration. And additional stories I found [1, 2] that you could do further research on, since this is a really long post already. Hope this helps with your writing!

[sweet-evie]

Soooo... About Sylus

I'm new to this game, but I NEED TO KNOW MORE... 😭

Game info says that he is the leader of Onychinus and is the "ruler" of the N109 Zone, but they don't really flesh it out enough.

He has two visible henchmen, an Onychinus base in N109 (and several properties/armories around the world based on Memories, Secret Times, and Tender Moments info), a notorious reputation, and it's implied that Onychinus has eyes and ears almost everywhere.

And that's it??? 🤔😫

I want more worldbuilding goddamnit

(Unless I'm missing other information shared through exclusive 5-star Memories that I didn't get because I just started playing).

Aside from the obvious money-laundering, Protocore-trafficking (???), selling of illegal Evol weapons, and buying and selling of classified Intel, there has to be other stuff. 😖

Bribery has to be in there somewhere. Extortion too…

Corrupted connections with government officials and law enforcement, tax evasion, stock manipulation, loan sharking, counterfeiting, syndicate-run casinos -- the list goes on.

I say all that because istg, this man has to have money coming from hundreds of sources to be able to say that a 1M offer for a protocore will "make people think he's broke." 🤦‍♀️💀

Also, does the man have an army of defense lawyers? How does he keep his hands squeaky clean?

Shouldn't the kingpin conduct his business via proxy? Like through his Underboss or a Capo or something? Where is his Consigliere???

And why does he attend business deals himself??? (from Tender Moments) That's like asking to get caught!

It also sounds like the other characters just know the name 'Sylus' (hence MC calling him 'Skye' in front of her colleagues) and don't have a face to attach that name to, and even then, that's one piece of his identity that's already in jeopardy.

More importantly, how is MC okay with this? 😆 Dating the man sounds troublesome.

Never mind how much he probably makes her feel like a sugarbaby with these private jets, high-end hotels, yachts, etc. 😂

(But I played this game for Sylus, so I'm turning a blind eye).

[justinspoliticalcorner]

David Badash at NCRM:

President Donald Trump intensified his attacks on the Federal Emergency Management Agency during a visit to Hurricane Helene-damaged parts of North Carolina on Friday, announcing he is planning on reforming or “getting rid of FEMA,” and proposed an unprecedented move to condition disaster relief on the passage of a voter ID law by California’s lawmakers, “as a start.” Trump’s trip, which will include travel to California later Friday, appears designed to target the emergency management agency, which he has been criticizing for months. In what appeared to be scripted remarks, Trump later elaborated that he would “sign an executive order to begin the process of fundamentally reforming and overhauling FEMA, or maybe getting rid of FEMA. I think frankly, FEMA’s not good. I think when you have a problem like this, I think you want to go and, uh, whether it’s a Democrat or Republican governor, you want to use your state to fix it and not waste time.”

[...]

In his wide-ranging remarks, President Trump also claimed that “rather than going through FEMA,” disaster relief aid to California and North Carolina “will go through us,” meaning, through his administration. FEMA is a federal government agency under the wide umbrella of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The president nominates the HHS Secretary, a cabinet level official, and the FEMA administrator.

[...] “So, I want two things,” Trump repeated, “I want voter ID for the people of California. They all want it. Right now you have no, you don’t have voter ID. People want to have to voter identification. You wanna have proof of citizenship. Ideally, you have one-day voting, but I just want voter ID to start, and I want the water to be released, and they’re gonna get a lot of help from the U.S.”

Petty Tyrant Trump is seeking to extort California into accepting voter ID policies in order to get disaster relief aid. This is the type of stuff that could cause blue state secession.

[mariacallous]

The kids are all grown up. In the face of international law enforcement pressure, dozens of prosecutions, and worldwide disrepute, the network of young sadists, misanthropes, child predators, and extortionists known as Com and 764 has not shrunk away into obscurity.

Rather, its members have progressed from online extortion and crimes related to child sexual abuse material, to real-world violence, a trajectory that alarms extremism researchers and government officials alike. Knifings, killings, firebombings, drive-by shootings, school shootings, and murder-for-hire plots in North America and Europe have all been connected to a splinter group called “No Lives Matter” that, per the group’s own manifesto, “idolizes death” and “seeks the purification of all mankind through endless attacks.” The group has released at least two “kill guides” that have been connected to violent attacks and plots in Europe and the United States.

The US Department of Justice classifies Com and 764 as a “Tier One” terrorism threat, the highest priority afforded to an extremist group, ideology, or tendency in American law enforcement’s internal rubric. Intelligence documents reviewed by WIRED show a stream of concern from analysts about the group’s harm to juvenile exploitation victims and the growing exhortations to physical violence that embody the No Lives Matter ethos.

However, the phenomenon has proved incredibly hard to combat due to a lack of coherent structure or ideology. Along with the insidious neo-Nazi propaganda group the Terrorgram Collective, over the past four years, Com/764 has morphed into a twisted amalgam of the Columbine Effect and older domestic terror groups like the Atomwaffen Division: Young extortionists and assailants egg each other on to progressively more lurid and debased acts of violence for the sake of internet notoriety and status.

In response, Western governments have employed terrorism charges against young people accused of conspiring to kill homeless people or phoning in bomb threats to schools and religious institutions beyond their own borders. In the United Kingdom, the Crown Prosecution Service recently secured a six-year prison term for 19-year-old Cameron Finnegan, who went by the handle “Acid,” for a raft of 764-related offenses, including possessing CSAM, urging young people to kill themselves, and possessing a “kill manual” authored by No Lives Matter adherents, replete with viable instructions for carrying out lethal attacks with knives, firearms, and vehicles.

"We want to make the public aware of [Com/764]," Detective Chief Superintendent Claire Finlay, the head of Counter Terrorism Policing Southeast, told the BBC following Finnegan’s guilty plea in January. "The threat that they pose, not just within the United Kingdom but globally, is immense."

According to senior DOJ officials who were granted anonymity to speak about internal law enforcement matters, the feds have come across related cases in every field office in the US. US authorities are so hell-bent on pursuing this trend that they are trying to extradite a 17-year-old Romanian boy who prosecutors at the Southern District of New York claim took part in exploiting minors and soliciting and distributing CSAM. The teenager also faces US terrorism charges for allegedly phoning in several hundred bomb threats to dozens of schools and institutions in the US as part of 764 and its splinter groups, according to information obtained by this reporter.

"We’ve seen a lot of hybrid movements and ideologies, new trends that we can’t categorize under the traditional categories,” says Bàrbara Molas, a senior analyst at RAND Europe who specializes in far-right extremism and who testified as an expert witness for the prosecution in Finnegan’s recent Com/764-related case.

For Molas, Com/764 represents that type of hybridity, where participants in the network will pick and choose elements from a series of discrete ideologies—neo-Nazism; the satanist group Order of Nine Angles, which has become prevalent throughout the most transgressive spheres of the transnational far right; Ted-Kaczynski-inspired neo-Luddism—and assemble their own belief pantheon.

“When 764 was only about CSAM, their targets tended to be women—but specifically women from diminished social groups, who were seen as the weak party of society,” Molas says. “That ideal of imposing violence on this part of society has carried on and become more violent.” When members of the network commit violence in the name of the group, Molas says, it “helps them rise within the group and advance the larger cause, which is to change society through violence and chaos.”

The lodestar for this transition towards wanton violence is a German teenager named Nino Luciano, who went by the handle “Tobbz” within 764. Sent to live in a foster home in Romania because his mental illnesses overwhelmed the capacity of institutions in his home country, Tobbz was drawn into 764 during the Covid-19 pandemic and quickly became enthralled with the group, daubing its name on a wall in his room and tattooing himself with “764” and a septagram from the Order of Nine Angles. In March 2022, he committed and livestreamed a series of knife attacks, stabbing an elderly woman to death and severely wounding an old man. He was convicted in August 2023 and is serving 14 years in prison.

Tobbz’s behavior inspired other young extremists in the Com/764 network, who have since either tried to emulate his livestreamed attacks or commit similar acts of violence to boost their notoriety and status within their extremist peer group. No Lives Matter’s exhortations to commit mass casualty events and distribution of detailed guides to violence are patterned off Tobbz’s example, according to experts who’ve studied the network.

Baron Martin, a resident of Tucson, Arizona, was charged in federal court with cyberstalking and sexual exploitation of a child that included the production of CSAM. According to court records, the government also accused Martin of soliciting the murder of the grandmother of one of his victims under the handle “Convict.” He allegedly sent the following message to a Discord server, court records show: “know anyone in [state] thats willing to do kidnappings or shootings...i need someone to tobbz a grandma. Somebody wanted to dox one of my egirls. now I’m getting their grandma merked.” The use of “Tobbz” as a synonym for murder was not casual: Martin allegedly offered to pay another user to carry out the hit, which was never realized.

According to court documents, Martin, through his handle, was connected to authoring a detailed guide widely distributed in 764’s channels on how to groom victims for extortion, which the FBI claims Martin bragged online was “the catalyst for thousands of extortions.” (Martin has pleaded not guilty.)

Molas, of RAND Europe, says Martin’s alleged path from extortion to soliciting a homicide traces a familiar path of transgressive behavior often seen in Com/764’s online world. “They’ll start with little acts of sin—shoplifting, then robberies, abuse of minors, weapons violations, then all the way up to kidnapping and murder,” Molas says.

In mid-February, Jairo Tinajero, a 25-year-old Arkansas man who took part in the 764 splinter group 8884, pleaded guilty to CSAM and conspiracy charges for extorting an underage girl in Louisville, Kentucky. According to his plea agreement, Tinajero confessed to plotting to kill the girl once she stopped complying with him, posting her address and personal information about her and her family family in 764’s servers, unsuccessfully trying to buy an assault rifle, and talking through a murder plot with other 764 members.

Tinajero also admitted taking part in 764 online chats where prior mass casualty attacks were discussed along with “future attacks on heavily populated areas such as malls or other large gatherings, LGBTQ+ events and gatherings, schools, public places, government buildings and police stations” with the intent to “destabilize society and cause the collapse of governments and rule of law.”

Most recently, neo-Nazi Aidan Harding’s inspiration from 764 was brought up during a mid-February federal court hearing for CSAM possession charges. In addition to participating in public actions with a number of Pittsburgh-area extremist groups, prosecutors claimed that Harding and another man were deeply interested in the Columbine massacre, visiting the memorial in Littleton, Colorado, and posing for a photo in front of a swastika flag while dressed as Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris. “Eric and Dylan were kickstarting a revolution,” Harding wrote in a message, which prosecutors showed in court. Harding and the other man, who hasn’t been charged, also discussed carrying out mass shootings through Instagram direct messages, which were presented in court. “The only thing holding me back is a partner … I don’t want to do it alone or die alone,” Harding wrote.

According to two researchers who attended Harding’s three-and-a-half-hour court appearance related to probable cause on February 12, an FBI agent claimed during questioning that investigators found reams of videos depicting children being raped, ultraviolent videos of executions, and the extremist mass shootings in Buffalo, Nashville, and Columbine, along with a photo on Harding’s phone of a phrase daubed in blood: “I sold my soul to 764,” above a swastika and a Lviathan cross often used by 764. Another photo, handed up to the judge and not shown in court, depicted the naked chest of a young girl wearing a cross, with the words “No Lives Matter” carved into her body with a sharp instrument.” Harding has pleaded not guilty.

The crimes described in court cases this year follow a months-long surge in No Lives Matter–related violence. In October, authorities claim, a 14-year-old Swede committed eight attacks on unsuspecting passersby in Stockholm. The attacker, per national broadcaster SVT, took part in 764 and went by the handle “Slain” in the group. Documents circulated by 764 participants on Telegram and elsewhere claim “Slain764” as one of their own, and identify Sweden, the UK, and Bulgaria as countries where their group has a presence.

In mid-February, Italian police arrested a 15-year-old boy on suspicion of planning to murder a homeless man and livestream the act. Police said the teenager was reportedly involved in 764 and faces charges for explosives possession and possession of CSAM material. Italian authorities claim he planned his actions as part of a “week of terror” along with unspecified colleagues.

There is also evidence of 764’s praxis and imagery merging with that of the Terrorgram Collective, a neo-Nazi propaganda network that aims to radicalize young people and inspire solo acts of sabotage and mass murder.

Solomon Henderson, a Tennessee teenager whom police said shot up his high school last month, posted a sprawling manifesto that referenced both mass shooters inspired by Terrorgram as well as homicidal 764 members, including Tobbz. Henderson’s social media accounts also show extensive imagery from 764’s channels as well as the Order of Nine Angles “The influence I see most heavily in that agenda is the Order of Nine Angles,” Molas says.

That confluence of extremist inspirations is highly unpredictable, and may prove influential: There is reportedly evidence that social media accounts connected to Henderson may have communicated with accounts linked to Natalie “Samantha” Rupnow, a young Wisconsin woman who killed two and wounded classmates in a mid-December shooting at her school before dying by suicide. Earlier in December, a high school student in Guadalajara, Mexico, livestreamed an axe attack on his classmates before they were able to subdue him. The young man’s social media posts were rife with O9A influence, including photos of himself with butchered animals and another with a blood pact, a common O9A practice.

[girlactionfigure]

Worn and weary, balding, with sad eyes, Raoul Wallenberg looked much older than his 31 years of age when in 1944 he was assigned the responsibility of saving Jews in Hungary. The assignment came by way of the War Refugee Board, an American organization formed that same year with the goal of saving Jews from persecution by the Nazis.

Raoul, who had some Jewish lineage but was not considered Jewish, was born in Sweden to a prominent family of bankers, diplomats, and politicians. He was expected to follow in the footsteps of his family, but he decided to become an architect.

He went to study architecture in America, at the University of Michigan. During his time in college, Raoul worked odd jobs despite his family’s wealth, and hitchhiked across the US, Canada, and Mexico during holidays. He continued hitchhiking even after getting robbed and thrown into a ditch by four men who offered him a lift. In a letter to his grandfather, Raoul wrote of his love of hitchhiking, “When you travel like a hobo, everything’s different. You have to be on the alert the whole time. You’re in close contact with new people every day. Hitchhiking gives you training in diplomacy and tact.”

Raoul finished the University of Michigan with honors, even winning a medal for his scholastic achievements. Unable to find architecture work in Sweden after graduation, Raoul briefly lived in South Africa, soon moving to Palestine for a banking apprenticeship. It was in Palestine that Raoul first encountered Jewish refugees from Germany. The refugees made a strong impact on Raoul.

Upon returning to Sweden, Raoul went into the import/export business with a man of Hungarian Jewish decent. Once it became harder for his partner to travel to Hungary due to his being Jewish, Raoul started making the trips himself. He traveled frequently to Budapest, learned Hungarian in addition to his already knowing French, English, German, and Russian, and ultimately went on to head the international arm of the business, soon becoming a joint owner of the company.

In 1944 Germany occupied Hungary. At the time of the occupation, Hungary had close to 700,000 Jewish citizens. By the time Raoul arrived in Hungary on his mission of rescue, over 400,000 of them had been sent to Auschwitz.

Raoul wasted no time. He did everything he could think of to save Jewish people. He bribed, extorted, bluffed, and threatened to achieve his aims of saving as many people as possible.

With a fellow Swedish diplomat he created official looking protective passes to give out to Jews granting them Swedish citizenship and making them exempt from wearing the yellow badge that Nazis required them to wear. Sandor Ardai, one of Raoul’s drivers, recalled a time when Raoul came upon a train full of Jews about to depart to Auschwitz,

“He climbed up on the roof of the train and began handing in protective passes through the doors which were not yet sealed. He ignored orders from the Germans for him to get down, then the Arrow Cross [the Hungarian Nazi party] men began shooting and shouting at him to go away. He ignored them and calmly continued handing out passports to the hands that were reaching out for them. I believe the Arrow Cross men deliberately aimed over his head, as not one shot hit him, which would have been impossible otherwise. I think this is what they did because they were so impressed by his courage. After Wallenberg had handed over the last of the passports he ordered all those who had one to leave the train and walk to the caravan of cars parked nearby, all marked in Swedish colours. I don’t remember exactly how many, but he saved dozens off that train, and the Germans and Arrow Cross were so dumbfounded they let him get away with it!”

In total Raoul gave out tens of thousands of such protective passes, but the German government eventually caught on to the ruse and ruled the passes invalid. When Raoul heard of this, he called on Baroness Elisabeth Kemeny, the wife of the Hungarian Minister for Foreign Affairs in Budapest, for help,

‘’Raoul implored me to help. He was desperate. I talked to my husband and said he must do something. He told me ‘I can’t fight the whole cabinet.’ But after midnight word came that 9,000 passes would be honored. I can still remember Raoul’s elation, his happiness.’’ The baroness had finally persuaded her husband to help by threatening to leave him if he didn’t.

When the Germans abandoned the use of trains to transport Jewish prisoners, instead forming 125 mile death marches toward Auschwitz, Raoul began visiting stopping areas to save people.

“‘You there!’ The Swede pointed to an astonished man, waiting for his turn to be handed over to the executioner. ‘Give me your Swedish passport and get in that line,’ he barked. ‘And you, get behind him. I know I issued you a passport.’ Wallenberg continued, moving fast, talking loud, hoping the authority in his voice would somewhat rub off on these defeated people…The Jews finally caught on. They started groping in pockets for bits of identification. A driver’s license or birth certificate seemed to do the trick. The Swede was grabbing them so fast; the Nazis, who couldn’t read Hungarian anyway, didn’t seem to be checking. Faster, Wallenberg’s eyes urged them, faster, before the game is up. In minutes he had several hundred people in his convoy. International Red Cross trucks, there at Wallenberg’s behest, arrived and the Jews clambered on…”

In one of his final acts of rescue, Raoul intimidated the supreme commander of German forces in Hungary, Major-General Gerhard Schmidthuber, into not blowing up a Jewish ghetto housing 70,000 people. As the war was coming to an end and there was not enough time to send the remaining Jews to Auschwitz, Adolf Eichmann, a major organizer of the Holocaust, ordered the slaughter of all Hungarian Jews in one mass execution. When Raoul found out about this, he sent word to Schmidthuber that if he were to go through with the slaughter, Raoul would personally see that he was hanged for crimes against humanity after the war. Knowing that Hitler was close to defeat, Schmidthuber acquiesced and called off the massacre.

Raoul took such risks because his perspective on the work he was doing was simple, “I will never be able to go back to Sweden without knowing inside myself that I’d done all a man could do to save as many Jews as possible.”

In total Raoul saved close to 100,000 Jews. He himself was captured by the Soviets on suspicion of being a spy and is presumed to have died a Soviet prisoner.

Historical Snapshots

[collapsedsquid]

Israeli newspaper Haaretz has published two eyebrow-raising pieces in a row that cast doubts on Israel’s democratic norms. On Wednesday, it published an opinion piece by Jonathan Pollak with chunks of text redacted, referencing a standing gag order preventing media from discussing “administrative detention” – a system under which Israeli forces hold Palestinians indefinitely without charge or due process. The following day, it published a story detailing how, two years ago, the Israeli government prevented it from publishing an investigation using “emergency powers” and threats. This story later became the subject of an explosive report by +972 Magazine and the Guardian, alleging intimidation efforts by its intelligence agency, Mossad, against an International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor.

[...]

Megiddo, who was the author of the earlier investigation, said that before he published that investigation, he received a call from a senior security official summoning him to his office. During his meeting with the official, he was told that if he published, he “would suffer the consequences and get to know the interrogation rooms of the Israeli security authorities from the inside”, he said.

The report by +972 and the Guardian, published on Tuesday, centred on allegations that then-Mossad head Yossi Cohen attempted to extort then-ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, to force her to drop an investigation of alleged war crimes committed by Israel in Palestine.

[dukeofankh]

There is something very odd and nebulous happening with language around the Trump administration that I think is bad, but obviously it's kind of a bird's eye analysis of a landscape that has a lot of variability. It's not gonna be universally applicable. Do not Bean Soup me.

Put simply, the discussion of the "flood the zone," "shock and awe" strategy employed by the Trump administration is starting to shift into something much less useful and accurate, in my opinion.

Like, obviously it is preferable, from the administration's perspective, that you feel too overwhelmed and attacked to do anything. That is true. But this has kind of bled into the concept of things being done as a "distraction" until we reach a place in the discourse where like...

People do get that the point of the Trump Administration isn't to make them feel bad, personally, right?

Like, there is a distinct strain of "own the libs" messaging, to be sure, but that is largely to shore up support among their own base. You, whichever marginalized identity or even just vague progressiveism you represent, are serving the same role that the Jews and Communists and Queer people served the Nazis. They just need a scapegoat, someone weak they can defeat to look strong and convince their base that something is being done. Making you feel bad is not, actually, the point.

But I see people saying that all manner of full blown legislative actions are "just a distraction", that "they just want to overwhelm you". And like...no. Trump does have goals. He is attempting to reorder the power structure of the globe, smash and grab and extort and put himself on top of, at the very least, North America, with Europe possibly pawned off to Russia to play with and with China contained as much as possible.

As part of that, yeah. They are attempting to eliminate the entire current civil government of the United States and replace it with one fully loyal to Trump so that when he inevitably refuses to accept the results of the next election, they wont remove him from power. This is all part of it.

The idiocy isn't an attempt to make you personally feel bad. I am trying to find a way to kindly tell you that you need to get over your main character syndrome and realize that they are not overthrowing the faux-peaceful post-war order of the globe to give you anxiety.

Take the Gulf of America thing. Was it just a "flood the zone" distraction? No. That doesn't mean it was a diabolical master plan, either. It was a symbolic spit in the face of Mexico, a country that they will almost definitely be invading within the next few years now that cartels are officially designated as foreign terrorist organizations. It also serves as a loyalty test. Google and Apple had to show that they are willing to go along with anything, no matter how stupid. They were. The Associated Press refused, and they've been barred from press access to the White House as a result. There will be hundreds of tests like this, and the punishments for being a normalass person will get progressively harsher and harsher.

Don't confuse the way that these actions make you feel, and the benefits that the administration wants from the way you feel, to lead you to the mistaken conclusion that these events are part of a huge plot, the entire purpose of which is to make you sad. Those feelings have no purpose. They aren't a victory for them if they trigger them in you, they aren't their goal, and they aren't something that you have to push down "or they win" or something.

Don't get sad. Get angry. Because they have a goal, and it's way, way worse than your anxiety.

[ultra-raging-ghost]

Ok so on top of all the crimes listed by the federation here's the list he's provided us himself (possibly incomplete):

-cannibalism -robbery -Poaching -assassination -public nudity -Possible trafficking -Loitering -squatting -Supplying of illegal food -Vandalism -dumping waste -Summoning things from the underworld -war crimes (Theres like 32 of these) -Colonization/property theft -Kidnapping an alien -Document falsification -Counterfeiting -Organ trafficking -Organ theft -Cyberbullying -Poisoning -Conspiracy -Unlawful surveillance of private property -Pillaging and arson -failed extortion -destruction of private property -Several counts of Identity theft -Espionage -Crimes against heaven and earth -1st degree murder -2nd degree murder -3rd degree murder -money laundering -obstruction of justice -Shoplifting -Assault on a federation personel -Prison escaping -Attempted pyramid schemes -Enslavement -bribary of a government official -Practicing law without a lisence

And the ones the federation listed:

[peachteagaming]

Someone pointed out that the Crows are similar to the Mafia and I haven’t stopped thinking about it. If Treviso is culturally inspired by Italy, it’s kinda messed up that BioWare romanticised the Crows so much. The Mafia was a huge issue in Italy, and I once accidentally naively (I was young and dumb) joked about the Mafia with a Sicilian friend. They did not take it lightly. I apologised of course and they understood. The Mafia left behind a legacy of violence, extortion, and corruption that a lot of Italians still feel today. It’s present in so many forms of their media still. But BioWare why draw inspiration from cultures and romanticise the dark elements of it while ignoring the very real struggles people went through?

Also Treviso’s lack of a formal army and its occupation by the Antaam, with the Antivan Crows acting as a de facto military force, mirrors aspects of Italy’s experience during WWII. When foreign forces occupied Italy, the country relied on resistance groups and clandestine organizations in place of an official military, filling a void in a time of instability. Similar to these resistance movements, the Crows step in as protectors for Treviso. However, by romanticizing the Crows in this role, The Veilguard sidesteps the complex and often harsh realities of occupation and resistance, casting the Crows as noble protectors rather than engaging with the moral ambiguity and struggles that typically accompany such roles. Likewise, the Mafia exploited the gaps in Italy’s government and military during and after WWII, deepening the country’s disarray and asserting control over communities under the guise of protection. It just feels very much like a US based gaming company has done what it’s always done - which is take a country’s history and culture and romanticise elements of it, while largely ignoring the dark sides of history.

It was so great to see a reflection of my family’s culture in a video game (we not rich bitches tho), and then have none of the real elements of the story addressed was a punch to the gut. Like there’s a reason my grandparents immigrated here, there’s a reason my Silician Nonna who refused to speak English was so hardened. Anyway thank you for coming to my little rant.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Promises Kept.

January 5, 2024

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

When Joe Biden declared his candidacy for president in 2019, the nation was bruised, battered, and divided by three years of Trump's unrelenting chaos and carnage. During Biden’s year-long campaign, Trump plunged America into darker waters as he tried to extort Ukraine into fabricating lies about Joe Biden and his son. Trump then engaged in gross dereliction of duty by mishandling the nation’s response to Covid, ultimately resorting to lies and quackery as the death toll mounted.

Biden stepped into the breach, promising “to restore the soul, honor, dignity, and decency” of America. In word and deed, Biden has kept those promises—despite virulent and violent opposition by MAGA extremists who sought to prevent the peaceful transfer of power—and who still seek to destroy our democracy today.

Historians may view Biden’s greatest success as the restoration of normalcy, decency, and rationality to the executive branch of the US government. Biden’s legislative accomplishments are historic and will be an enduring legacy standing alone.

Identifying Biden’s legislative successes is easy; identifying the depth and breadth of Biden’s restoration of decency and rationality is more difficult—because living in a normal frame of reference is subtle and ineffable. It infuses every aspect of democracy and political discourse. It is the absence of chaos, it is not waking up every morning thinking, “Oh, God. What has he tweeted now?”, and it is not hearing every governmental action re-interpreted through Trump's lenses of narcissism, delusion, and insecurity.

Joe Biden acts within a rational political framework. His policies can be praised or criticized because they exist (in writing) and reflect the reasoned judgment of Biden and his staff after a period of reflection and debate. They are not made up “on the fly” in response to reporters’ questions shouted over the noise of helicopter rotors.

The return to normalcy, decency, and dignity is neither sexy, compelling, nor “made for TV.” But it was precisely what the nation needed after the chaos of Trump's tenure as president. Joe Biden kept his promises. For that, we owe him a debt of gratitude that we must repay in 2024.

On the eve of the third anniversary of January 6, Biden is launching his 2024 campaign in earnest. In a political ad previewed on MSNBC, Biden said that he is making “the preservation of democracy” the centerpiece of his campaign. In the ad, Biden says, in part,

All of us are being asked, “What will we do to maintain our democracy?” History is watching. The world is watching. Most importantly, our children and grandchildren will hold us responsible . . . .

A campaign theme of “preserving democracy” is neither sexy, compelling, nor “made for TV.” But it is precisely what the nation needs as it stares into the abyss of a second Trump term as president.

I have heard from dozens of readers this week who are disappointed with Biden’s responses regarding immigration and the war in Gaza. Some have suggested that they will not vote or will vote for a third-party candidate. Both of those options are the functional equivalent of voting for Trump.

The freedom to criticize the president is a privilege of our democracy guaranteed in the Constitution. We can debate presidential policies only if we have a democratic frame of reference within which to hold those debates.

That democratic frame of reference will exist under a second Biden term. Under Trump, the democratic frame of reference will be replaced by a simple test: Does speech praise Trump? If not, the speaker will act at their peril. Trump’s vigilantes will threaten the speaker, and state and federal agencies will pretend the threats are harmless jokes or over-exuberant expressions of loyalty to Trump.

The threat of vigilantism to punish speech is not hyperbole. As we approach the third anniversary of January 6, elected officials who criticize Trump or apply the law to his unlawful conduct are being deluged with death threats. They are being “swatted” by sick individuals who call 9-1-1 to make false reports of crimes in progress—resulting in the deployment of armed emergency responders to the elected officials’ homes.

Like Joe Biden, Trump has made promises. He has promised his followers that, if re-elected, “I will be your retribution.” He has also promised that he will be a dictator “on day one” if he is elected to a second term.

Joe Biden has kept his promise “to restore the soul, honor, dignity, and decency” of America. We should take Biden at his word that he will work to preserve democracy if re-elected in 2024.

As with Biden, we should take Trump at his word: He will exact retribution and act as a dictator on day one of his second term.

The competing promises of Trump and Biden tell us everything we need to know about the choice we face in the 2024 election.

Concluding Thoughts.

The choice between presidential candidates in 2024 could not be starker. There is no ambiguity, nuance, or grey area. We must help Joe Biden communicate that fundamental difference and help people understand that the choice in 2024 is not about policies or the economy. It is about democracy—and whether we are for it or against it.

[nando161mando]

"... Walmart makes the places it operates in poorer than they would be if it had never shown up at all. Sometimes consumer prices are an incomplete, even misleading, signal of economic well-being."

[maklodes]

I feel like I barely have the right to get into “Star Wars would be so good if it were good” posting given that I haven’t actually watched VII-IX, but I keep thinking about the myriad plots and subplots that could follow VI, after the fireworks stop, all without slamming the reset button.

Like, as of Episode VI’s end, Emperor Palpatine, Darth Vader, and Grand Moff Tarkin are all dead, but much of the rest of the Imperial bureaucracy and military are still intact. Maybe there’s a legal chain of succession that establishes who’s next, but probably it’s pretty weak, because tyrants generally don’t like saying “you know who would benefit greatly if I were to ‘accidentally’ drink poisoned blue milk and die? That guy!” So there’s a likelihood of power struggles, different factions emerging among moffs and admirals. How would the Alliance respond to two moffs waging a brutal war against each other, extorting civilians to death for supplies, bombarding civilian population centers that are not logistically accessible enough for their side to extort but that they think the other side will, etc? Can the Alliance afford to intervene to help the innocents suffering in this conflict, or is it best to just let their enemies weaken themselves and clean up afterwards?

Meanwhile, some moffs and governors see the writing on the wall, and are approaching the Alliance and saying “Yes, I was a high official in the Empire, but I was one of the good ones, working within the system to make it as humane and decent as possible. Now I am preparing to join the New Republic, and preparing to hold free elections on my planet(s) (supervised, of course, by the erstwhile-Imperial bureaucracy under my control – who else is around that could competently manage such an affair?) Yes, there are a few incidents during my reign that can be classified as atrocities, but I can assure you that if anyone else in the empire had been in charge, they would have been more numerous and severe (anyone harsher than me would’ve been worse, and anyone gentler would’ve been force-choked to death by Darth Vader and replaced), so let’s just leave those in the past and work together toward a better future.” Can the Alliance accept such a defector on those terms? Can the Alliance afford not to?

At the same time, former members of the senate – dissolved at the beginning of IV – are saying “Alright! With that tyrannical emperor gone, we are ready to get back into the action and help rebuild the Republic,” while more radical members of the Alliance are like “no, FUCK those old senators. Those were the guys who elected Palpatine chancellor. Then they kept giving him more and more emergency powers. Then they voted to make him emperor. Then they stuck around as a rubber stamp Imperial Senate for like fifteen years legitimizing the Empire, before the emperor finally dissolved the senate. A few of them may be okay, but they are all on probationary status in the politics of the New Republic at best, and many of them should be charged with corruption/oath violation/etc and barred from politics and maybe incarcerated/executed.”

Some people might even question the whole idea of One Galaxy Government going forward. Sure, there are advantages to having a singular Republic/Empire coordinating things, but there are risks. Maybe local control – with the risk of the occasional local dictator, or local border war – is safer than putting all eggs into one basket? Coordinating the resources of a galaxy has proven useful in destructive massive scale projects like planet-killer battle stations. Is there a more productive use case for that much broad scale coordination? 

As more systems democratize and lift censorship and restrictions on holonet, you get paranoia and rumors going around that this or that office-seeking politician is the Next Palpatine. When a planet’s leading candidate for senator faces rumors of being a Dark Sider, the runner-up currently polling at 48% clears her throat and says “The threat of the Dark Side is too serious to be turned into a political issue, and unfounded rumors and partisan smears do nothing to help us re-establish our still-fragile democratic norms. At the same time, any credible allegations of Dark Side influence merit a thorough and independent investigation. After all, recent experience has shown just how destructive the Dark Side can be: whole inhabited planets got destroyed! Once we establish a transparent, impartial process to examine these claims, we can move beyond all this baseless speculation about my opponent (and the baseless speculation that the first anonymous rumors were traced to a holonet account belonging to my campaign’s chief of staff).” You could have HUAC / McCarthy hearings type shit.

You could have some genuine (aspiring) Dark Side guys – no one who knows the true Sith teachings, but maybe some force sensitives who see the force as a Will To Power thing. (The Jedi haven’t been abducting children who show force potential for decades, and the Sith had no room beyond two, so I guess force sensitives have mostly sorta been figuring out what they could of this stuff themselves for a few decades? Most of them are probably pretty weaksauce compared to trained Sith/Jedi like Yoda or Palpatine, but maybe they can influence weak minds and shit) You could have any combination of actual Dark Side influence and rumors: have some people correctly accuse real Dark Side guys, have Dark Side guys spreading false rumors that their innocent opponents are on the Dark Side, have two different candidates both being Dark force sensitives, spreading rumors about each other (or one spreading rumors, being a down and dirty political fighter, and the other refusing to stoop to that and going for the Stately Above the Fray vibe, but secretly being comparably ruthless), or (perhaps most common) rumors of Dark Side influence being spread in politics when no one involved is actually even Force sensitive let alone in touch with the Dark Side.

You could go a little deeper: some people in the aftermath of the Empire might think  that the Force – both the Dark and Light sides – has held the galaxy kind of kind of technical and moral cul-de-sac, accounting for the ways in which the whole setting combines backwardness and advancement:

Why is it that in spite of having overcome the light barrier many millennia ago and being able to build small planet-sized battle stations, they seem to have made negligible progress against senescence and death generally? Because the Force provides a frame in which you either embrace the Dark Side, in which case triumph over mortality is a personal achievement to be hoarded and lorded over your inferiors, or you adhere to the Light Side, in which case you reject the “unnatural abilities” of Dark immortality. Progress against mortality at a collective, civilizational level doesn’t make sense from either of those perspectives.

Why is it that in spite of apparently being fully sentient in many cases, droids are still treated as chattel property without rights? Why is it that they still seem to have widespread animal agriculture? Maybe because the Force doesn’t notice forms of sentience that have no or negligible midichlorian counts or force sensitivity or whatever. Obi-Wan could probably walk past a droid refurbishing facility where droids are getting reset to factory settings, or a slaughterhouse, and not feel any “disturbance in the force, voices crying out in terror and suddenly being silenced” etc, and when the Light Side is treated in some respects as the moral arbiter of the setting, and when a big part of the Light Side is “trust your feelings,” and when the “force feelings” don’t really apply to beasts or droids, they don't get a lot of consideration.

Why is it that the only visions of authority are somewhere on a spectrum from “centralized, despotic autocracy” (the Empire) to “decentralized, semi-feudal oligarchy” (the Republic, with a Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth-style weak senatorial authority, proliferation of local nobles like counts and princesses, etc, and, perhaps to an even further extent along that spectrum, the Confederacy of Independent Systems)? Maybe because it reflects  how the Force tends to structure itself: the Dark Side tends to concentrate power in the hands of a couple of megalomaniacs. The Light Side tends to distribute it across a broader order of Force-wielding elites, but still very rare as a fraction of the  population.

You might say that these ideas don’t really get to the essence of the core appeal of Star Wars, which is more like stuff like starfighter battles and lightsaber duels and such, but I’m not saying these themes would necessarily be debated in great detail to the exclusion of action and stuff. They just could be the reason for the lightsaber duels and starfighter battles and such. Consider: in Episode I, the pretext for a lot of the action was a dispute over tariffs. Stated baldly, I think that’s drier than anything I mentioned.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jay Kuo at The Status Kuo:

If you’re Justice Paula Xinis, you’re probably about ready to tear your hair out. And if you’re Chief Justice John Roberts, you hopefully understand by now that if you give this administration even the slightest bit of wiggle room, it will exploit it to thwart your rulings. Let’s set the scene. Last week, the Supreme Court ordered the government to facilitate the release of Kilmar Ábrego García from custody. Ábrego García is a Salvadoran who entered the U.S. without authorization in 2011, but in 2019 was awarded the right not to be removed by a federal immigration judge. That judge had ruled that Ábrego García had a credible fear of persecution back in El Salvador, where his family business was being extorted by gangs with direct threats upon him and his family, ICE nevertheless detained Ábrego García and ignored this judge’s specific order. It deported him last month to a notorious prison in El Salvador, then admitted that this was due to “administrative error.” Judge Xinis ordered the government to “facilitate and effectuate the return” of Ábrego García from prison in El Salvador, calling the government’s actions “wholly lawless.” The government appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, and it lost. But rather jaw-droppingly, the government is now pretending like it won. To understand how, we need to dive in a bit to see how the government is playing cute and parsing words, but if I’ve done my job you’ll soon see why it’s all bad faith nonsense. [...]

Putting words in the justice’s mouths

So how did the government’s lawyers try to wiggle out of the Supreme Court’s ruling? First, they once again claimed that the federal courts have no say over the conduct of foreign affairs and that only El Salvador can release Ábrego García. This is something that it already argued when the Supreme Court considered the case. It lost on that argument. It doesn’t get a second bite at this apple. And in any event, it is one thing to say courts should not interfere in foreign affairs. It’s entirely another to say courts have no power to order the government to ask for the return of one prisoner who was wrongfully deported. Courts have power over U.S. officials and can order them to correct egregious wrongs, no matter the imagined foreign policy impact. The administration also rather stunningly claims that the only thing it must “facilitate” is Ábrego García’s re-admission to the U.S., but if and only if El Salvador lets him go.

[...] It could then hide behind “diplomatic concerns” or even “state secrets” to thwart any inquiries as to the whereabouts and status of the prisoners, even after being told to do so by no less than the Supreme Court. In all likelihood, this is now going to wind up back before the Supreme Court. Because the justices asked for clarification over what Judge Xinis meant by “effectuate”—which she took care of by not even requiring the government to do anything but tell her what it was doing to “facilitate” his return. But this administration showed it was prepared to exploit any opportunity to avoid compliance with the ruling. The question then becomes, will the Supreme Court stand by its ruling, or will it surrender its power by conceding that the White House can defy it all in the name of “foreign affairs” and “diplomatic concerns”? Stay tuned.

The Trump Regime’s handling of the case of the wrongly deported Kilmar Ábrego García is duplicitous.

[mariacallous]

Even as a growing number of foreign governments commit to protecting the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) people, others are actively marshaling their resources against them. From the Hungarian government’s legal and political attacks on LGBTQI+ people to Iraqi legislation that punishes those who “promote homosexuality” and increases criminal penalties and fines for same-sex relations, the negative trends are significant and concerning.

In many places, politicians blame LGBTQI+ people for a wide array of societal ills to boost their popularity at home and their geopolitical interests abroad, distracting from the real economic, social, and political challenges their countries face. In Georgia, for example, the ruling party may have used anti-LGBTQI+ rhetoric to manipulate the political landscape ahead of elections. Meanwhile, in Lebanon, a country long considered relatively welcoming for LGBTQI+ people in the Middle East, one activist described a political leader’s rhetoric as “the manufacturing of a moral panic in order to justify a crackdown, and to deviate public attention away from their unpopular policies.”

Although human rights are seen by some as a lower-priority foreign-policy issue for the United States than so-called hard security threats, the failure to protect them abroad can have significant negative consequences for U.S. interests. Now more than ever, the United States needs to push back against foreign-government repression of LGBTQI+ rights while also doing this work at home. As U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken put it recently, this matters “not just because we have a moral imperative to do so,” but because doing so “helps strengthen democracy, bolster national security, and promote global health and economic development.”

Across a range of issues, it’s clear that anti-LGBTQI+ policies and rhetoric can cause significant damage to many of the United States’ top foreign-policy priorities.

To start, efforts to repress LGBTQI+ rights are often a canary in the coal mine for more severe persecution to come. A 2022 report found, for example: “From Nazi Germany to genocide in Darfur to the breakup of former Yugoslavia, the imposition of ‘moral’ codes that directly assault sexual and gender identities and freedoms came before widespread state-led physical violence and atrocity crimes.”

The targeting of LGBTQI+ people can also be a precursor to, or occur alongside, abuses against other vulnerable populations. The Taliban-promoted sexual assault of and life-threatening attacks on LGBTQI+ people, for example, have occurred concurrently with brutal restrictions on women’s and girls’ participation in education, work, and other aspects of public life. Likewise, vicious torture of gay men in the Russian Republic of Chechnya has taken place against a wider backdrop of long-term human rights abuses by Chechen authorities.

Erosion of LGBTQI+ human rights can also signal and exacerbate the breakdown of democratic norms and institutions, including restrictions on independent media and judicial review, serving as a bellwether for the state of civil society more generally. Russia’s recent detention and prosecution of LGBTQI+ people have paralleled its crackdown on independent journalists, human rights defenders, and civil society.

Countries in which the human rights of LGBTQI+ people are less respected also frequently have greater levels of corruption, partly because discriminatory legal regimes create barriers to reporting wrongdoing by corrupt officials, making LGBTQI+ people an easy target for extortion. Corruption, in turn, compounds other pressing problems: It degrades the business environment, drives migration, and impedes responses to public health crises and climate change. States with endemic corruption are also more vulnerable to terrorist networks, transnational organized crime, gang-related criminal actors, and human traffickers. This is, in part, because threats to transparent and accountable governance are among the root causes of radicalization, and restrictions on LGBTQI+ and other civil society organizations reduce the capacity of those groups to mitigate the conditions conducive to violent extremism, terrorism and other criminal activity.

Not only are anti-LGBTQI+ policies a drag on economic growth, but they are also detrimental to public health. Punitive laws fan the flames of stigma and discrimination, in turn making vulnerable communities reluctant to seek life-saving and public health-protecting services. Across 10 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, HIV prevalence in countries that criminalize homosexuality is five times higher among men who have sex with men than in countries without those laws.

Taken together, the failure to protect LGBTQI+ people’s human rights can create disastrous effects for U.S. interests. State-sponsored discrimination and violence undercut the United States’ tremendous investments in international anti-corruption efforts, counter-terrorism programs, economic development, and public health. And, as the COVID-19 pandemic made clear, a disease threat anywhere can quickly become a disease threat everywhere. The same can be said for terrorism, corruption, and economic instability. When governments target LGBTQI+ people, they also increase the chances that the symptoms and consequences of this repression will spread in their communities and across borders.

Given the stakes, it is crucial that the United States uses the tools and powers it has to promote accountability for human rights abuses and mitigate their harms to U.S. citizens and businesses.

In this respect, the recent heightened repression by the Ugandan government is illustrative. In May 2023, Uganda signed into law the Anti-Homosexuality Act (AHA), which mandated the death penalty for certain “serial” offenses and a 20-year prison sentence for the mere “promotion” of homosexuality. Although the legislation was decried by human rights advocates, it was lauded by some of Uganda’s geopolitical partners as evidence of shared interests. Shortly after the legislation was passed, the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi visited Uganda and made the unfortunately common—and demonstrably inaccurate—claim that homosexuality is a Western import. He also identified opposition to Western support for LGBTQI+ people as “another area of cooperation for Iran and Uganda.” In similar fashion, an editorial on the pro-Kremlin Tsargrad website summarized the law as “a geopolitical victory [for Russia], which they see as the direct result of years of their hard, methodical work [on a] global anti-LGBTQ hate campaign.”

The AHA was the final, egregious straw amid an ongoing decline in respect for human rights, including of LGBTQI+ people, and democratic backsliding in Uganda, and the United States’ response was swift and comprehensive. Underscoring the link between the violation of the human rights of LGBTQI+ people and broader harms to American interests, U.S. President Joe Biden described the law as part of an “alarming trend of human rights abuses and corruption.” The United States issued a business advisory; updated the U.S. Travel Advisory and Country Information Page for Uganda; expanded existing visa restrictions to include those repressing vulnerable populations, such as human rights advocates, LGBTQI+ people, and environmental defenders; supported the World Bank’s decision to pause Uganda’s access to new funds; and imposed sanctions on the Commissioner General of the Uganda Prisons Service for widespread violations of human rights, including credible reports of physical abuse of political opposition and LGBTQI+ people. President Biden also determined that Uganda did not meet the eligibility requirements of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), “on the basis of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”

Although the law remains in place, these actions and international attention have had effect: Uganda’s government has not conducted widespread roundups of or ordered death sentences against LGBTQI+ people. But violence, abuse, and evictions have increased in the country, and arrests of LGBTQI+ people have persisted and likely risen under an earlier, colonial-era law that criminalizes same-sex conduct.

As the situation in Uganda demonstrates, the United States has options to respond to foreign governments that fail to uphold their human rights obligations. These measures can be unilateral, as is the case for issuing travel advisories or removing trade preferences, or multilateral, which could involve working with the United Nations, the World Bank, or other multilateral institutions. They can also be affirmative, as opposed to punitive—for instance, expanding humanitarian and development assistance for human rights defenders and mobilizing private sector capital to support businesses that operate consistent with international non-discrimination standards.

As with all diplomatic efforts to address wrongdoing, the choice among these options will vary depending on circumstances, such as whether a government is launching a new campaign against LGBTQI+ people or has an older but little-enforced criminal law on its books. Inevitably, the importance of raising human rights concerns will be weighed against other U.S. priorities, and human rights will not always prevail. However, increasingly, LGBTQI+ issues are being integrated into bilateral relationships, even when doing so is not easy and when quiet diplomacy is the only option. In all circumstances, consultation with LGBTQI+ civil society must be prioritized in weighing the benefits and risks of action to ensure that efforts do not contribute to backlash or negative repercussions for LGBTQI+ people on the frontlines of global human rights movements.

In a recent State Department convening on LGBTQI+ rights in U.S. foreign policy, Secretary Blinken made our commitment clear, telling civil society leaders: “Our promise is this: We will be with you every step of the way. We’ll persevere with you. We’ll listen to you. We’ll learn from you. We’ll help resource and support your fight. And we’ll bring our strength together with yours so that finally together we can build a world where all people are genuinely free—free to be who they are, free to love who they love.”

Although this work may have been in the spotlight during Pride month, it requires our focus year-round. Indeed, our national security depends on it.