#they also planning on banning foreign news

[northernflame]

btw just so y'all zionists pieces of shit know, democratic countries aren't supposed to pass laws that ban news channels that contradict the state power (x)

[qqueenofhades]

“U.S. President Joe Biden issued a memorandum on Thursday requiring allies who receive military aid from the U.S. to provide ‘credible and reliable written assurances’ of their adherence to international law including international human rights law,” the Times of Israel reported. Israel will need to supply written assurances within 45 days or risk loss of aid. The report added, “The memo did not mention specific countries who would be held up to the new standard, but came amid increasing calls in the U.S. to condition aid to Israel due to concerns over its military operations in Gaza which were triggered by the Oct. 7 attacks, in which Hamas terrorists murdered some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and kidnapped 253.” No one should underestimate the impact of the decision. The Associated Press explained, “Democratic senators on Friday called Biden’s directive — meant to bring breadth, oversight, deadlines and teeth to efforts to ensure foreign governments don’t use U.S. military aid against civilians — historic.”

[.......]

Biden also pressed on with intense one-on-one diplomacy. After his comment on Thursday evening that Israel had been “over the top” in Gaza, Biden engaged with Netanyahu on Sunday in a 45-minute conversation — unusually long by most diplomatic standards (and even more so given that no time had to be spent on translation with English-fluent Netanyahu). According to the White House readout, Biden insisted Israel make “credible” arrangements to protect civilians before launching a widely criticized military plan for Rafah, where civilian casualties could mount. He also pressed Netanyahu again to increase humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. Biden’s patient approach with Netanyahu over months has gradually transformed into a private and public pressure campaign. A Biden official told The Post that the leaders had “a pretty detailed back and forth on that.”

-- Biden delivers tough love, takes historic step: Conditioning aid to Israel

Meanwhile Trump?

Trump has said he would implement travel bans on people from certain countries or with certain ideologies, expanding on a policy upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. Trump previewed some parts of the world that could be subjected to a renewed travel ban in a mid-October speech, pledging to restrict people from the Gaza Strip, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen and "anywhere else that threatens our security." During the speech, Trump focused on the conflict in Gaza, saying he would bar the entry of immigrants who support the Islamist militant group Hamas and send deportation officers to pro-Hamas protests.

Also: Trump vows to expand Muslim ban and bar Gaza refugees if he wins presidency

Really, really not sure how much clearer I can make it here for y'all, but sure. Something something Trump's actually a better choice on this issue/overall (sarcasm).

[robertreich]

10 Worst Things About The Trump Presidency

Donald Trump left office with the lowest approval rating of any president ever. But some people now seem to be suffering from amnesia.

Let me jog your memory. Here are 10 Worst Things About the Trump Presidency — in no particular order.

#1. Trump fueled division and sparked a record uptick in hate crimes.

#2. Murder went way up under Trump. He presided over the largest ever single-year increase in homicides in 2020. A number of factors might have contributed to that, but a big one is…

#3. Gun sales broke records under Trump, who has bragged about how he “did nothing” to restrict guns as president in spite of…

#4. Under Trump, America suffered more than 1,700 mass shootings.

#5. Trump said there were "very fine people" among the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville.

I’m halfway to ten. If you think I’m missing something big, leave it in the comments.

#6. Trump allied himself with the Proud Boys, a violent hate group who helped orchestrate the Jan 6 Capitol attack.

#7. Trump’s not wrong when he says…

TRUMP: I got rid of Roe v. Wade.

It is entirely because of Trump’s judicial appointments that 1 in 3 American women of childbearing age now lives in states with abortion bans.

#8. One of Trump’s Supreme Court justices was Brett Kavanaugh, a man accused of sexual assault by multiple women.

#9. Trump’s White House interfered in the FBI’s investigation of Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged sexual assaults.

And now: #10. Trump has been convicted of committing 34 felonies while in office. The criminally false business filings he got convicted for in New York? All of them were committed while he was president.

I’m sorry, did I say the 10 Worst Things About the Trump Presidency? I meant 15.

#11. Trump’s failed pandemic response is estimated to have led to hundreds of thousands of needless deaths. By the time Trump left office, roughly 3,000 Americans were dying of covid every day. That’s a 9/11-scale mass casualty event every single day. How did Trump screw up so badly?

#12. Trump’s White House discarded the pandemic response playbook that had been assembled by the Obama administration.

#13. Trump disbanded the National Security Council’s pandemic response team.

#14. Trump repeatedly lied about the danger of covid, saying it was no worse than the flu or that it would go away on its own.

But behind closed doors, Trump admitted he knew covid was deadly.

#15. Trump promoted fake covid cures like hydroxychloroquine and even injecting people with disinfectants.

After Trump’s “disinfectant” remarks, poison control centers received a spike in emergency calls.

That’s fifteen things. Should I keep going? Ok, I’ll keep going. The 20 Worst Things About the Trump Presidency.

#16. Trump presided over a net loss of 2.9 million American jobs — the worst recorded jobs numbers of any U.S. president in history.

#17. Trump profited off the presidency, making an estimated $160 million from foreign countries while he was president.

#18. Trump also billed the Secret Service over $1 million for the privilege of staying at his golf clubs and other properties while they protected him. That’s your money!

#19. Trump caused the longest government shutdown in U.S. history when he didn’t get funding for his border wall, which he said Mexico was going to pay for.  

#20. Under Trump, the national debt increased by about 40% — more than in any other four-year presidential term — largely because of his tax cuts for the rich and big corporations.

You didn’t really think I was stopping at 20, did you? We’re going to 25 —

#21. Trump separated more than 5,000 children from their parents at the border, with no plan to ever reunite them, putting babies in cages.

#22. The Muslim Ban. Yes, Trump really did try to ban Muslims from entering the country.

#23. Trump sparked international outrage by moving the American Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem while closing the U.S. mission to Palestine.

#24. Trump tasked his son-in-law Jared Kushner with drafting a potential Middle East “peace plan” with zero Palestinian input.

#25. And finally, Trump recognized Israel’s occupation of the Goh-lahn Heights, which is considered illegal under international law.

So there you have it, folks: The 25 Worst — Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Did I mention the impeachments? We’ve got to do the impeachments. Let’s go to 30.

#26. Trump broke the law by trying to withhold nearly $400 million of U.S. aid for Ukraine in an effort to extort a personal political favor from Ukraine’s Pres. Zelensky. Trump wanted Zelensky to interfere in the 2020 election by announcing an investigation into the Bidens. Delaying this aid to Ukraine weakened Ukraine and strengthened Russia.

#27. Trump personally attacked and ruined the careers of everyone who stood in the way of his illegal Ukraine scheme, including Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman.

#28. To cover up the scheme, Trump ordered the White House and State Department to defy congressional subpoenas.

#29. For these reasons, on December 18, 2019, Trump became the third U.S. president to be impeached. He was charged with Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress.

#30. Even while he was being investigated for trying to get Ukraine to interfere in the U.S. election, Trump publicly called for China to interfere in the election.

So those are the 30 Worst Things —

I’ll go to 35.

#31. Long before Election Day, Trump started making false claims that the election would be rigged.

#32. After losing, Trump falsely claimed the election was stolen, even though his own inner circle, including his campaign manager, White House lawyers, and his own Justice Department and attorney general told him it was not.

#33. Trump kept telling his Big Lie even after more than 60 legal challenges to the election were struck down in court, many by Trump-appointed judges.

#34. Trump ordered the Department of Justice to falsely claim that the election “was corrupt.”

#35. Trump and his allies used threats to pressure state leaders in Arizona and Georgia to falsify the election results.

We may go to 40.

#36. When none of the previous schemes worked, Trump and his allies produced fake electoral votes cast by fake electors in multiple swing states. His former White House chief of staff and Rudy Giuliani are among the many members of his inner circle who have been criminally indicted for this scheme.

#37. Trump tried to bully Vice President Pence into obstructing the certification of the election.

#38. Trump invited a mob to the Capitol on Jan 6 with his “be there, will be wild” tweet.

#39. Sworn testimony alleges that when Trump was warned that members of the crowd were carrying deadly weapons, he ordered security metal detectors to be taken down.

#40. Knowing the crowd had deadly weapons, he ordered them to go to the Capitol and…

TRUMP: …fight like hell.

#41 — Yes, yes, I know, bear with me.

Trump betrayed his oath to defend the nation by doing nothing to stop the Jan 6 violence. Instead, according to witness testimony, he sat and watched TV for hours.

#42. On January 13, 2021, Trump became the only president ever to be impeached twice. This time he was charged with incitement of insurrection. It was a bipartisan vote.

#43. The majority of senators — 57 out of 100 — voted to convict Trump, including 7 Republican senators.

So that’s the two impeachments and the Big Lie, but wait, we haven’t dealt with Russia, right? So we’re going to 50.

#44. In a likely obstruction of justice, Trump pressured then FBI Director James Comey to stop the FBI’s investigation into Trump’s National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn. This was documented in the Mueller report.

#45. When Comey didn’t bend to Trump’s will, Trump fired him.

#46. Trump tried to shut down the Mueller investigation by ordering White House Counsel Don McGann to fire Mueller. McGann refused because that would be criminal obstruction of justice.

#47. When news got out that Trump tried to fire Mueller, Trump repeatedly told McGann to lie — to Mueller, to press, to public — and even create a false document to conceal Trump’s attempt to fire Mueller.

#48. Trump ordered his staff not to turn over emails showing Don Jr. had set up a meeting at Trump Tower before the 2016 election with representatives of the Russian government.

#49. Trump convinced Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about Trump’s plans to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, and Cohen served prison time for lying to Congress.

#50. Trump was not charged for criminal obstruction of justice because it’s the Justice Department’s policy not to indict a sitting president, but more than a thousand former federal prosecutors who served under both Republicans and Democrats, signed a letter declaring there was more than enough evidence to prosecute Trump.

So those are the 50 Worst Things About the Trump Presidency. Now I could go on…

And I will! The 75 Worst Things About the Trump Presidency.

#51. Trump said he’d hire only the best people, but…

His campaign chair was convicted of multiple crimes.

So was one of his closest associates.

His deputy campaign chair pleaded guilty to crimes.

So did his personal lawyer

His National Security Adviser

The Chief Financial Officer of his business

A campaign foreign policy adviser

And one of his campaign fundraisers.

They all committed crimes, and Trump pardoned most of them.

#52. Trump said he’d drain the Washington swamp. But he appointed more billionaires, CEOs, and Wall Street moguls to his administration than any administration in history

#53. Trump intervened to get his son-in-law, Jared Kushner top-secret clearance after he was denied over concerns about foreign influence.

#54. Trump hosted a Russian Foreign Minister to the Oval Office, where Trump revealed top-secret intelligence.

Oh, and Trump’s economic policies!

#55 Trump promised that the average American family would see a $4,000 pay raise because of his tax cuts for the wealthy and big corporations. How’d that work out? Did you get a $4,000 raise? Of course not! Nobody did!

#56. Trump vowed to protect American jobs, but offshoring increased and manufacturing fell.

#57. Trump said he would fix America’s infrastructure, but it never happened. He announced so many failed “infrastructure weeks” they became a running joke.

#58. Trump said he would be “the voice” of American workers, but he filled the National Labor Relations Board with anti-union flacks who made it harder for workers to unionize.

#59. Trump’s Labor Department made it easier for bosses to get out of paying workers overtime, which cheated 8 million workers of extra pay.

#60. Trump repeatedly suggested he might serve more than two terms in violation of the Constitution — and continues to do so.

#61. Trump called Haiti and African nations “shithole” countries.

#62. Trump tried to terminate DACA, which protects immigrants brought to the U.S. as children. Luckily this was struck down by the courts.

#63. Trump called climate change a “hoax.”

#64. Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement.

#65. Trump rolled back more than 100 environmental protections.

#66. Every budget Trump proposed included cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

#67. Trump tried (and failed) to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which would have resulted in 20 million Americans losing insurance. And striking down the ACA’s protections for the roughly 130 million people with pre-existing conditions could have driven up their insurance premiums or led to a loss of coverage.

#68. Trump made it easier for employers to remove birth control coverage from insurance plans.

#69. By the end of Trump’s term, the number of people lacking health insurance had risen by 3 million.

#70. Trump lied. Constantly. He made 30,573 false or misleading claims while president — an average of 21 a day, according to Washington Post fact-checkers.

#71. Trump allegedly took hundreds of classified documents on his way out of the White House, reportedly including nuclear secrets, which he then left unsecured in various parts of Mar-a-Lago, including a bathroom. He was even caught on tape showing them off to people.

#72. Trump seriously discussed the idea of nuking a hurricane.

#73. When Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico, Trump delayed $20 billion of aid and allowed Puerto Rico to be without power for 181 days.

#74. Trump suggested withholding federal aid for California wildfire recovery and said the solution was to “clean” the “floors” of the forest.

#75. Trump pulled out of the Iran deal, placing Iran on a path to developing nuclear weapons.

Honestly, there’s so much more, from exchanging “love letters” with North Korea’s brutal dictator to publicly denigrating a Gold Star military widow and making her cry, to the way he attacked journalists, to late night tweet binges.

Look, I can understand why a lot of people want to block all of this out of their memories. But we cannot afford to forget just how terrible Trump’s time in the White House was for this nation.

And we sure as hell can’t afford to put him back there.

[afeelgoodblog]

The Best News of Last Week - May 15, 2023

🐕 - Now It's a Paw-ty

1. World's oldest ever dog celebrates 31st birthday

Bobi was born on 11 May 1992, making him 31 years old, in human years. A big birthday party is planned for Bobi today, according to Guinness World Records.

It will take place at his home in the rural Portuguese village of Conqueiros in Leiria, western Portugal, where he has lived his entire life.

2. The FDA has officially changed its policy to allow more gay and bisexual men to donate blood

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced that they’ve eased restrictions on blood donations by men who have sex with men in an effort to address blood shortages. The new policy recommends a series of individual risk-based questions that will apply to all donors, regardless of their sexual orientation, sex, or gender. Gay or bisexual men in monogamous relationships will now be permitted to donate blood.

3. Illinois passes bill to ensure community college credits transfer to public universities

The Illinois General Assembly has passed a bill that would help community college students transfer to public universities.

It would ensure that certain classes taken at community colleges could be transferred to any higher education institution in the state. Some schools currently only count community college coursework as elective credits.

4. Brazilian President Lula recognizes 6 new indigenous territories stretching 620,000 hectares, banning mining and restricting farming within them

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has decreed six new indigenous reserves, banning mining and restricting commercial farming there. The lands - including a vast area of Amazon rainforest - cover about 620,000 hectares (1.5m acres).

Indigenous leaders welcomed the move, but said more areas needed protection.

5. More than 1,000 trafficking victims rescued in separate operations in Southeast Asia

More than 1,000 trafficking victims were rescued in separate operations in Southeast Asia over the last week, officials in Indonesia and the Philippines said. 

Indonesian officials said Sunday they freed 20 of their nationals who were trafficked to Myanmar as part of a cyber scam, amid an increase in human trafficking cases in Southeast Asia. Fake recruiters had offered the Indonesians high-paying jobs in Thailand but instead trafficked them to Myawaddy, about 567 kilometers (352 miles) south of Naypyidaw, the capital, to perform cyber scams for crypto websites or apps, said Judha Nugraha, an official in Indonesia's Foreign Affairs Ministry.

6. A peanut allergy patch is making headway in trials

An experimental “peanut patch” is showing some promise for toddlers who are highly allergic to peanuts. The patch, called Viaskin, was tested on children ages one to three for a late-stage trial, and the results show that the patch helped children whose bodies could not tolerate even a small piece of peanuts safely eat a few.

After one year, two-thirds of the children who used the patch and one-third of the placebo group met the trial’s primary endpoint. The participants with a less sensitive peanut allergy could safely tolerate the peanut protein equivalent of eating three or four peanuts.

7. Critically endangered lemur born at Calgary Zoo

The Calgary Zoo has released pictures of its newest addition, a baby lemur. The zoo says its four-year-old female black-and-white ruffed lemur, Eny, gave birth on April 7. The pup’s father is eight-year-old Menabe. The gender of the pup has not been confirmed but the Calgary Zoo says the pup appears bright-eyed and active and is on the move.

The black-and-white ruffed lemur is registered among the 25 most endangered primates in the world, due mostly to habitat loss and hunting.

----

That's it for this week :)

This newsletter will always be free. If you liked this post you can support me with a small kofi donation:

Buy me a coffee ❤️

Also don’t forget to reblog.

SUBCRIBE HERE for more good news in your inbox

[sugarprincessbitch]

Imagine if rhaenyra had a younger sister, one that in appearance is very similar to her mother, Aemma. She is not very close with the other members of her family and often is cast outside because of their differences in attitude, she appears to not have that supposed "blood of the dragon" thing that most of Targaryen have or had.

Because of her tranquil and soft nature, she is very close to her mother never leaving her side, specially when she was with child.

Viserys sort of neglected her as a child, being too occupied with his kingly duties and also with rhaenyra, the apple of his eyes, giving all his attention to her. That is not a factor for the sisters to create resentment with each other or have a bad relationship, in fact they're very close with each other.

When Aemma dies giving birth (cof cof when she was literally murder) everything changes. She snap at her family, specially her father, blaming him of the death of her mother. Claiming in front of everyone that he is a murderer, creating a fracture beyond repair in their relationship (Viserys tried to fix it, but his daughter threw venomous words at him each time he dare to come closer). Her relationship with her sister also went cold, because Rhaenyra was to occupied with her new duties as heir and also due that she didn't want to talk with rhaenyra or anyone at that hurtful time. She close herself to her family, and spent most of her time secluded in her chambers not wanting to talk with anyone.

When the marriage between Alicent and her father was announce (She was angry that viserys married without having at least mourn a year Aemma's death being that super disrespectful, in her opinion, to her mother's memory), that was the straw that broke the camel, and in that same night she escaped from Kings landing at the back of her dragon after robbing eggs from the dragon pit and some expensive jewelry. Viserys was heartbroken at knowing he was guilty of her daughter escape (Also two very angry Rhaenyra and Daemon guilt trip him), but Otto convince him to get angry at his daughter instead, banning her from Kings landing forever. This was part of Otto's plan to get rid of any potential threat. Without his sister as a possible ally, Rhaenyra was more vulnerable at court.

She went to Essos, at first jumping from place to place in were they let her stay for a time. She finally decided to stay in Qohor as the wife of a merchant prince who didn't want to pass the opportunity to have as a wife a Targaryen princess.

When Viserys became old and ill, his last wish was to know the parade of his younger daughter, wanting to see her one last time before he was gone. That was the reason that made her came back to Westeros, but not as the sweet princess that her family and the court remeber, instead as a powerful and ferocious merchant woman (Due to her husband early passing she begun to run his business and exploited it to its maximum potential, making her social status to grow equal as her richness, due to this she became part of a select group of powerful merchants in Essos) known in all the free cities as the "Golden dragon".

Her sudden arrival after 15 years of not knowing nothing about her was a surprise to her family, a glad one (only for the blacks, because the greens where not that happy that she came back). The children of alicent didn't know about her existence, so for them it was a bigger shock to know that they had another sister all this time (Viserys didn't want anyone to talk about her deserter daughter, acting as if she never existed in the first place), and also an exotic one (due to her foreign accent and way of dressing). For aemond and specially Aegon (he is a pervert and likes to see women in little clothes) this was super attractive (Also whe know that Aemond likes older women, Soo...).

[bisphenol-a]

Tomorrow, Friday November 17, the German Bundestag will vote on a draft law that could decide that naturalization for residents would be dependent on a commitment to Israel’s right to exist.

The bill, which includes a law that would change the criminal code, was submitted by the Christian Democratic Party’s (CDU) parliamentary group.

It would impact individuals seeking residency, asylum, and naturalization, and its intent is to “provide better protection against the further entrenchment and spread of antisemitism that has “immigrated from abroad.”

“Since the day of the attack,” the law states in its introduction, “disgusting rallies and demonstrations have also taken place on German streets, expressing unconcealed joy at the deaths of Jews and revealing an alarming level of antisemitism.”

A majority of protests across Germany have not only been peaceful but have only called for the German government to back a ceasefire to stop the genocide of the Palestinian people.

I attended multiple demonstrations across Germany, and the only visible threat to public safety has been from the police. In fact, I was a witness to one demonstration in Frankfurt where the police banned it from taking place mere minutes before it was about to begin. Hundreds of people were met with water cannons, extreme levels of police presence, and kettling by law enforcement that led to the detainment of over 300 people.

In another I attended in Mannheim, the only act of antisemitism committed was a man on the sidelines of our protest raising his hand in a Nazi salute to antagonize and intimidate pro-Palestinian demonstrators. He was arrested soon after, and local publications reported he was, in fact, not a part of our planned demonstration.

In 2022, over 80 percent of all antisemitic crimes in Germany were committed by the German far right, according to the federal police. However, the new draft bill does not include these statistics. Instead, it attributes violent antisemitism with sympathy with “Hamas terrorism,” which they claim is “cheered and propagated on German streets and schoolyards.”

The bill clearly singles out Arabs and migrants, claiming antisemitism in Germany is now only “imported.”

“A significant portion of those are obviously immigrants from countries in North Africa and the Middle East, where antisemitism and hostility towards Israel have a particular breeding ground,” the draft law states, backed by no concrete evidence for such remarkable claims.

It continues: “as well as their descendants, the instruments of residence, asylum and citizenship law must be used more consistently than before- in addition to general means such as criminal law- in order to combat antisemitism in Germany more effectively.”

In summary, the law not only creates a prerequisite where a citizenship application will only be granted if the individual declares a commitment to Israel’s right to exist and swears that they did not pursue any endeavors directed against Israel, but it can also strip the residency status and the citizenship of dual nationals who have been convicted of an antisemitic crime. This would also include a prison sentence of at least one year.

“Maintaining the legal status quo is not an option,” the draft law says, “as the current legal situation is clearly not suitable for effectively combating the specific antisemitism that is widespread among some foreigners in Germany.”

In Germany, what constitutes an “antisemitic crime” is extremely ambiguous. In 2017, the federal government officially adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism. Advocates, scholars, and legal experts at the European Legal Support Center (ELSC) as well as other organizations for example, have long criticized the IHRA definition, arguing it redefines antisemitism by wrongly conflating criticism of Israel with anti-Jewish racism.

According to a report conducted by ELSC and published earlier this year, the invocation of the definition almost exclusively targets Palestinian rights advocacy, harming Palestinian and Jewish activists in particular.

Now that Germany has specifically labeled the protests as examples of antisemitism that should be criminalized, there is much cause for concern for pro-Palestinian activists. Already, there have been examples such as the stripping of refugee status from a Palestinian activist from Syria and denying residency to Palestinian doctors who have only been a part of a Palestinian cultural group.

...

“Violent excesses at demonstrations- such as the pro-Palestinian demonstrations in October 2023- must be appropriately sanctioned. However, the increasing abuse of the right to demonstrate can often not be adequately punished,” the draft law says. “The regulation of breach of the peace is too narrow.

We have already witnessed banned demonstrations in cities and violent police arrests detaining people only carrying flags and wearing keffiyehs or simply holding anti-war signs. In Berlin, home to one of the largest Palestinian diasporas in Europe, there have been regular police presence and clear examples of racial profiling, and harassment against anyone who might “look” like they are attending a previously banned demonstration. 

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Dan Pfeiffer at The Message Box:

The generally accepted — and oft-repeated — narrative about Trump is that he is a cult-leader who can bend the Republican base to his will. On issues like free trade and foreign policy, he broke with long-standing Republican orthodoxy and faced no repercussions. He attacked Republican stalwarts like the Bush family and John McCain. Not only was there no blowback, Trump also made these folks' personas non-grata in the Republican Party. Whether it’s indictments, his sexual assaults, or his dalliances and dinner dates with Nazis, Trump could force the Republican Party to go along. The GOP is Trump’s party and what he says goes. Trump is a man accountable to no one. This has benefited him politically and brought in folks who hate politics and distrust institutions. But that image became fuzzy last week when Donald Trump bent to the will of anti-abortion extremists in a stunning flip-flop on abortion that tells us everything we need to know about Donald Trump. He poses an existential threat to reproductive freedom for tens of millions of Americans.

The Flip-Flop to End All Flip-Flops

I have written about Trump’s abortion flip-flop a couple of times in the last week, so if you are a regular reader of Message Box, please feel free to skip ahead. If not… In an interview with Dasha Burns of NBC News, Trump implied that he would vote for the amendment on the Florida ballot guaranteeing access to abortion and effectively overturning the state’s six-week ban. Trump is now a Florida resident and many are unsure how he plans to vote on the amendment. Trump’s stated position on abortion is that it's up to the states. For crass political reasons he has been critical of Florida’s extreme ban. A day ago, Trump flip-flopped, telling Fox News that he would vote NO on the amendment. So what happened in the subsequent twenty-four hours?

Well, the evangelical community and anti-abortion activists went ballistic. They blew up the phone lines to Mar-a-Lago or wherever Trump  was laying his head last week. They argued that Trump’s new stance would depress turnout from his base. Ever since Dobbs, Trump cannot get it right. He watched his slate of hand-picked candidates get mowed down in 2022 and he sees the polls showing large majorities oppose the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the sorts of state and national abortion bans of which Republicans have long dreamed. Trump thought his “leave it to the states” policy would help. It didn’t. Floating the idea of voting for the abortion amendment was another desperate effort to get on the right side of the issue that has cost Republicans nearly every election. This time, Trump crossed a line. The anti-abortion faction of the party told him to reverse course and he did so immediately. One of the core tenets of Trump’s political philosophy is to never, under any circumstances admit to wrongdoing. Heck, Trump doubled, tripled, and quadrupled down on defending and dining with Nazis. So the fact that Trump changed course so quickly and with so little resistance on abortion is quite notable.

[...] These folks will be calling the shots in a Trump Administration. They will influence policy and staffing decisions and that should scare the shit out of anyone who cares about reproductive freedom. Dobbs was the beginning — not the end — of the Far Right’s efforts.

Donald Trump being made to cry “uncle” and say that he is voting no on Florida Amendment 4 after being heavily criticized by anti-abortion commentators when he stated that he would initially consider voting in favor of Amendment 4 is proof that the anti-abortion extremists still call the shots in the GOP.

[simply-ivanka]

What Kamala Harris Believes

The Vice President’s political record reveals the views of a California progressive.

Wall Street Journal

Democrats are rapidly unifying behind Kamala Harris as their party nominee, yet the Vice President remains relatively unknown to most Americans. That means it’s important to look at her record to see what she believes.

As VP she’s closely identified with the Biden agenda, for better or worse, and she embraced that record in remarks on Monday. She said President Biden’s first term has “surpassed the legacy” of most Presidents who have served two.

So mark her down as endorsing the spending blowouts that caused inflation, the Green New Deal, entitlement expansions and student loan forgiveness. Until she says otherwise, we should also assume she’s in favor of Mr. Biden’s $5 trillion tax increase in 2025.

The Vice President’s four years as a Senator from California are another window on her worldview. She sponsored a bill to create a $6,000 guaranteed income for families making up to $100,000. Another Harris proposal: A refundable tax credit that would effectively cap rents and utility payments at 30% of income. Liberal economists panned the subsidy because it would drive up rents.

She co-sponsored legislation with Bernie Sanders that would pay tuition at four-year public colleges for students from families making up to $125,000. This is more honest than the Administration’s back-end student loan cancellation. But it would cost $700 billion over a decade and encourage colleges to increase tuition.

Another Bernie mind-meld: Single-payer healthcare. Ms. Harris co-sponsored his Medicare for All legislation paid for by higher income taxes. She tweaked Bernie’s plan when running for President in 2019 by extending the phase-in to 10 years from four and exempting households making less than $100,000 from the “income-based premium.” But it would still put government in charge of all American healthcare over time.

As a San Francisco Democrat, Ms. Harris shares the state’s hostility to fossil fuels. She used her power as California Attorney General to launch an investigation into Exxon Mobil over its carbon emissions. In 2019 she endorsed a nationwide ban on oil and gas fracking, which would cost tens of thousands of jobs and cause power outages like those that often occur in her home state. Expect this to be a GOP talking point in Pennsylvania.

One question to ask is whether the Vice President wants to restructure the Supreme Court. She said in 2019 she was “open” to adding more Justices, but that idea doesn’t poll well. Does she agree with Mr. Biden’s mooted plan to endorse “reforms” to the High Court that would make the Justices subject to Congressional supervision?

Mr. Biden famously put Ms. Harris in charge of border policy, and we know how that has turned out. Rather than push for border policy changes, her first instinct was to blame the rush of migrants on “root causes” in developing countries, including corruption, violence, poverty and “lack of climate adaptation and climate resilience.”

Climate change makes the U.S. border a sieve? Apparently so. “In Honduras, in the wake of hurricanes, we must deliver food, shelter, water and sanitation to the people,” Ms. Harris declared. “And in Guatemala, as farmers endure continuous droughts, we must work with them to plant drought-resistant crops.” These “root causes” take decades to address, and in the meantime she had nothing to say about actual border security.

Ms. Harris’s foreign policy views aren’t well known, or perhaps even well formed, apart from promoting Mr. Biden’s policies. While she has backed the Administration’s military assistance to Ukraine, she has equivocated about support for Israel. In March she chastised Israel for not doing enough to ease a “humanitarian catastrophe.” Leaks to the press say officials at the National Security Council toned down her speech’s criticism of Israel.

She lambasted the Trump Administration for killing Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Qassem Soleimani, claiming it could lead to bigger war in the Mideast. The killing chastened Iran’s rulers instead, at least until the Biden Administration began to ease sanctions and tried to repeat the 2015 nuclear deal.

It will be especially important for the press to ask Ms. Harris about her national security views. If her handlers control her as much as White House advisers have Mr. Biden, we’ll know they’re afraid that the Vice President might not be able to handle the scrutiny.

A fair conclusion from all of this is that Ms. Harris is a standard California progressive on most issues, often to the left of Mr. Biden. Perhaps as she reintroduces herself to the public in the coming weeks, she will modify some of those views. She would be wise to do so if she wants to win.

Given the rush by Democrats to anoint Ms. Harris as their nominee, the press has a particular obligation to tell the public about who she is and what she really thinks. Does she believe California is a model for the country?

[plethoraworldatlas]

Congress’ unfounded plan to ban TikTok under the guise of protecting our data is back, this time in the form of a new bill—the “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act,” H.R. 7521 — which has gained a dangerous amount of momentum in Congress. This bipartisan legislation was introduced in the House just a week ago and is expected to be sent to the Senate after a vote later this week.

A year ago, supporters of digital rights across the country successfully stopped the federal RESTRICT Act, commonly known as the “TikTok Ban” bill (it was that and a whole lot more). And now we must do the same with this bill. 

As a first step, H.R. 7521 would force TikTok to find a new owner that is not based in a foreign adversarial country within the next 180 days or be banned until it does so. It would also give the President the power to designate other applications under the control of a country considered adversarial to the U.S. to be a national security threat. If deemed a national security threat, the application would be banned from app stores and web hosting services unless it cuts all ties with the foreign adversarial country within 180 days. The bill would criminalize the distribution of the application through app stores or other web services, as well as the maintenance of such an app by the company. Ultimately, the result of the bill would either be a nationwide ban on the TikTok, or a forced sale of the application to a different company.

Make no mistake—though this law starts with TikTok specifically, it could have an impact elsewhere. Tencent’s WeChat app is one of the world’s largest standalone messenger platforms, with over a billion users, and is a key vehicle for the Chinese diaspora generally. It would likely also be a target. 

The bill’s sponsors have argued that the amount of private data available to and collected by the companies behind these applications — and in theory, shared with a foreign government — makes them a national security threat. But like the RESTRICT Act, this bill won’t stop this data sharing, and will instead reduce our rights online. User data will still be collected by numerous platforms—possibly even TikTok after a forced sale—and it will still be sold to data brokers who can then sell it elsewhere, just as they do now. 

The only solution to this pervasive ecosystem is prohibiting the collection of our data in the first place. Ultimately, foreign adversaries will still be able to obtain our data from social media companies unless those companies are forbidden from collecting, retaining, and selling it, full stop. And to be clear, under our current data privacy laws, there are many domestic adversaries engaged in manipulative and invasive data collection as well. That’s why EFF supports such consumer data privacy legislation. 

[reasonsforhope]

Odd jobs are few and far between in Nearobo. Peter knows because every day he walks the streets of his village in south-east Liberia looking for one. In a good month, he might make $20 (£16.70). That’s hardly enough to feed himself, let alone his children.

But today things are looking up. As part of an innovative new donation scheme, Peter receives $40 (£33.40) per month for a minimum of three years. No paperwork. No requests for receipts. No catch of any kind, in fact. Just hard cash transferred straight to his mobile phone. 

The 59-year-old casual labourer plans to use the money to buy materials for a new home for himself and his family, he says. “Although it is going to take long, I will continue until my house is completed.”

The scheme is part of a new-look approach to development assistance that, if taken to scale, could potentially turn the £156bn international aid industry on its head.

At least, so says Rory Stewart, the former UK foreign secretary turned podcaster-in-chief (he co-hosts ‘The Rest is Politics’ with Alastair Campbell, a surprise hit which has topped the Apple podcast charts virtually every week since it launched a year ago). From his new base in Amman, Jordan, Stewart heads up GiveDirectly – the world’s fastest growing nonproft – who are behind the initiative.

“It’s a rather radical, simple idea to help people out of extreme poverty. We deliver the cash directly … there’s no middleman and no government getting in the way.”

It feels like an odd statement from someone who has spent much of his life in government service: first as a junior diplomat for eight years (during which he penned a bestselling book about dodging Taliban bullets and hungry wolves whilst walking across Afghanistan), followed by almost a decade as a politician at Westminster.

Pictured: Rory Stewart and GiveDirectly’s Ivan Ntwali talk with a refugee household in Rwanda. Image: GiveDirectly

His enthusiasm is even more surprising given his initial caution. During his various ministerial stints at the UK’s department for international development (including three months as secretary of state), he was an out-and-out “cash sceptic.” 

Giving away money with no strings attached was, he felt at the time, an impossible sell to tax-paying voters. What’s stopping recipients spending it down the pub? Or investing in a hair-brained business venture? 

Quite a lot it turns out. No one knows the value of money more than those who don’t have any, he argues. Give an impoverished mother-of-four $40 (£33.40) cash and, 99 times out of 100, she’ll spend it on something useful: repairs to the house, say, or school fees for her kids...

By virtue of GiveDirectly’s model, participants can spend their money on whatever they choose, but the charity’s research indicates that most goes towards food, medical and education expenses, durables, home improvement and social events.

On the flipside, Stewart also has numerous examples of well-funded aid projects that deliver next to nothing. A decade ago, the then United Nations general secretary Ban Ki-moon estimated that 30 per cent of aid money disappears in corruption. There is little to suggest much has changed.

The aid industry doesn’t need corrupt officials to see its funds evaporate, however; it has its own voluminous bureaucracy. Stewart recalls once visiting a $40,000 (£33,560) water and sanitation project in a school in an unnamed African country. The ‘deliverables’ were two brick latrines and five red buckets for storing water...

The beauty of direct giving, he stresses, is not just that it annuls opportunities for thievery and red tape; it also frees the world’s poorest individuals from the well-meaning but, very often, misplaced guidance of donors. An aid expert in Brussels or Washington DC may well have a PhD in development economics, but who is best to judge what a single mother in a Kinshasa slum needs most and how to obtain it most cheaply: the expert with her degree, or the mother with her hungry children?

Empowering recipients to decide for themselves helps end the kind of “mad world” where aid agencies pay to ship wheat from Idaho, US, to Antananarivo, Madagascar, only for local people to sell it in order to buy what they really want, Stewart reasons.

“So often, these communities are having to turn the goods we send them into cash anyway, but just in a very inefficient and wasteful fashion … instead [with direct cash transfers] they are given the choice and freedom in how to spend it.” 

Pictured: Villagers in Kilif, Kenya, at a public meeting about the GiveDirectly programme. Image: GiveDirectly

Is the system perfect? No, clearly not. Stewart concedes that opportunities for fraud and coercion exist. To minimise these risks, GiveDirectly employs field officers to meet face-to-face with recipients, as well as a team of telephone handlers and internal auditors to follow up on reports of irregularity.

By his reckoning, however, the biggest impediment to direct giving really taking off is donor reticence. At present, only 2 per cent of official aid is given direct in cash. Stewart thinks it should be closer to 60 or 70 per cent...

‘My children will not have to beg anymore’

Happiness Kadzmila from Malawi enrolled on GiveDirectly’s Basic Income project last summer. She will now receive $50 (£41) a month for a year ($600/£496 in total).

What are the biggest hardships you’ve faced in life?

I am a divorced mother of four children. I got divorced in 2020 while I was eight months pregnant with my last-born child. Since then, I have been depending on working on other people’s farms. I get paid $0.49 (£0.43), or a plate of maize flour per day. As a result, it has been a challenge to feed my children, buy clothes for them, and to pay their school fees My firstborn child is in year 4, the school charges $0.69 (£0.61) per day for her. My second is in year 3, I pay $0.49 (£0.43) for him. There were days when I would have no food in my home, and my children would go to my neighbours’ homes to beg for food. This made me feel sorry for my children as a mother.

What does receiving this money mean for you?

I was so happy the day I received cash amounting to $51.75 (£43.56) from GiveDirectly. I used the money to buy maize at $9.88 (£8.32). My children will not have to go to our neighbours to beg for food anymore. I also bought a sheep at $34.58 (£29.10). I will be selling sheep in future when they multiply. I also bought lotion and soap at $1.88 (£1.58).

How will you spend your future payments?

I plan to renovate my house. I have always admired those who sleep in houses made of a roof with iron sheets because they do not have to think of fetching grass every year for a new roof. I will also start a business selling doughnuts to sustain my income after I receive my last transfer. I did not know that an organisation like GiveDirectly would come to help me this way All I can say to those who are giving us this money is ‘thank you’."

-via Positive News, 3/3/23

More and More People to Help

In addition to their universal basic income programs, GiveDirectly also has dedicated programs where you can donate to emergency disaster relief, people living under the protracted civil war and human rights disaster in Yemen, refugees, and survivors of the Syria-Turkey earthquake.

They have also commissioned a number of large-scale, third-party studies on the effectiveness of their numerous universal basic income models. Find these and other projects here.

[mariacallous]

In April 2018, I was invited by the American ambassador to a meeting at the embassy in Tbilisi, Georgia. The ambassador had assembled a group of nongovernmental organization (NGO) leaders in the field of disinformation to meet with a senior Trump administration official from the State Department. He asked us to describe the main narratives of Kremlin disinformation. As the director of a large international democracy organization, I highlighted Russia’s manipulation of gender and LGBTQ issues to sway Georgians away from the perceived “cultural decadence” of the European Union. The official’s frustration was palpable. His response, tinged with irritation, was telling: “Is that all you people can talk about? The gays?”

A year before, several international organizations partnered with Georgian parliamentarians on a gender equality assessment, supported by several government donors. This collaboration led to an internal conflict. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) wanted to scrub the original report, as it covered abortion, notably legal in Georgia, while the Swedish government and other stakeholders wanted the complete assessment. As a result, at the time of its release, two distinct reports had to be printed, one with references to abortion and one without.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump emerged victorious from last week’s New Hampshire primary and is likely to be the Republican Party’s presidential nominee. His closing statement in New Hampshire praised Hungarian leader Viktor Orban, who embraces the oxymoronic term “illiberal democracy” while suppressing independent media, civil society, and courts. He has repeatedly emphasized the glory of strongmen like Orban. His foreign policy has been clear: stopping support for Ukraine, NATO, and our European allies.

But while there has been plenty of analysis of Trump’s America First impact on foreign policy and security, less covered is how it will also completely redefine foreign aid as well as the liberal democracy agenda. My experience with the first Trump administration as a senior leader in democracy organizations receiving funding from USAID provides some insight into the foreign-aid agenda of a second, but likely only scratches the surface of what is to come.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, established in 2022, offers a detailed roadmap for revamping USAID under Trump—one that will undermine, eliminate, and censor the critical work of thousands of people and organizations committed to building more just societies. The Heritage Foundation has been staffing and providing a pipeline of ideas to Republican administrations since President Ronald Reagan. Project 2025 is a plan to shape the next Republican administration, and its funders have close ties to Trump. The project’s objective is to replace “deep state” employees with conservative thought leaders to carry out an executive-driven agenda.

In the overview, the project articulates its goal to end what it calls USAID’s “divisive political and cultural agenda that promotes abortion, climate extremism, gender radicalism, and interventions against perceived systemic racism.” A key component of the illiberal playbook is to attack gender and marginalized communities, an early warning sign of democratic backsliding. Illiberal strongmen, such as Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Russia’s Vladimir Putin, exploit traditional hierarchies to divide society and create pecking orders of power. Russia refused to sign, and Turkey withdrew from, the Istanbul Convention, a commitment to protect women from domestic violence. The Narendra Modi administration in India filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court against criminalizing marital rape, arguing it would destabilize marriage. Hungary and Poland lobbied to ban the term “gender equality” in international agreements and implemented anti-LGBTQ policies, including local municipalities adopting “LGBT-free” zones as part of a government-supported “Family Charter” in Poland.

As a first step, Trump’s USAID will “dismantle” all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, which Project 2025 calls “discriminatory.” This mandate includes firing the chief diversity officer and all advisors and committees. In 2016, the Obama administration issued a DEI presidential memorandum to ensure USAID, among other agencies, had a diverse and representative workforce. Trump scaled back these efforts. On Jan. 20, 2021, Biden’s first day in office, he signed an executive order that demanded that government agencies devise strategies to tackle DEI issues. Pursuant to this, USAID Administrator Samantha Power signed USAID’s DEI strategy on her first day in May 2021. Project 2025 would reverse this strategy, requiring USAID to “cease promotion of the DEI agenda, including the bullying LGBTQ+ agenda,” which entails support for organizations overseas that work on these issues.

According to Project 2025, Trump’s new USAID will also eliminate the word “gender” full stop, arguing that “Democrat Administrations have nearly erased what females are.” This is bizarre, as I have decades of experience receiving USAID funding for numerous programs to advance women in political life and support women’s organizations. Working for democracy organizations across Asia and the former Soviet Union, I saw USAID provide critical support to expand women’s wings of political parties; recruit women election officials, observers, and administrators; train women’s advocacy and rights organizations; and build women’s committees in parliaments.

The Heritage Foundation report also accuses USAID of “outright bias against men,” an equally strange claim; in fact, gender realignment was needed and implemented. A Trump USAID will fire more than 180 gender advisors and points of contact, who work alongside USAID colleagues “to integrate gender and advance gender equality objectives in USAID’s work worldwide,” and scrub the words “gender,” “gender equality,” and “gender equity” from all documents. This would require a massive purge of decades of USAID materials and websites.

USAID has spent years incorporating gender into all aspects of its programming to ensure the agency addresses the needs of women, including unique development obstacles they face. Removing a gender lens would take us back in time to programming that often harmed women, inadvertently, by failing to analyze the varying effects of programming based on gender and power dynamics in different environments. To erase all of USAID’s tools, learning, and research on how to ensure best practice would have dangerous consequences. For example, when I worked for USAID in Cambodia in the 1990s, the agency supported micro-lending for small community projects, in which most of the loans went to women. This resulted in increased domestic violence, as men were angry about the financial imbalance in the home. Today, USAID has gender analysis and research on risk factors to mitigate against such outcomes.

Relatedly, a Trump USAID will make anti-choice “core” to its mission, removing all “references to ‘abortion,’ ‘reproductive health,’ and ‘sexual and reproductive rights.’” Project 2025’s blueprint singles out specific organizations and U.N. agencies to target and defund. Further, the president himself would have the ability to oversee programming directly: “Current law in the Foreign Assistance Act gives the President broad authority to set ‘such terms and conditions as he may determine’ on foreign assistance, which legally empowers the next conservative President to expand this pro-life policy.” Previous administrations have restricted funding to organizations that provide abortions (the “Mexico City Policy”), which resulted in an increase in maternal and child mortality and unsafe abortions—exactly what the policy claimed to want to prevent. In sub-Saharan Africa, data shows the policy increased abortions by defunding clinics that provided family-planning services. The first Trump administration expanded restrictions further, impacting speech and service delivery around the world.

A Trump USAID would not only stop funding local partner organizations that support gender, LGBTQ, and rights agendas but redirect that money to religious organizations. In fact, it would mandate training and indoctrination for all USAID staff on the link between religion and development. USAID would also ensure conservative oversight of all grantmaking to ensure against “progressive policies” and a “radical agenda.” USAID already engages with faith-based partnerships, alongside secular NGOs, but Project 2025 would like to shift the balance, creating a “New Partnership Initiative” that would help prioritize religious groups.

A stated “key outcome of the transformation of USAID” under Trump will be a complete revamp of the Bureau for Democracy, Development, and Innovation, shifting its focus to trade, the private sector, and religious communities, and purging staff. Importantly, all directors of each center—not just the assistant administrator—will have political leadership, not career experts. In addition, Trump’s USAID will rewrite all policy “as soon as possible” to ensure a conservative agenda.

During the first Trump administration, I felt the impact in my work overseas. I worked closely with the LGBTQ community in Georgia, which faced horrific obstacles—ostracization, violence, homelessness—and which was targeted relentlessly by Kremlin information operations. USAID has long been a defender of human rights and funded projects on these issues. There was a shift under Trump, though I applaud individual USAID employees for creatively trying to find workarounds and continue support—like slight renaming of initiatives or cleverly filing them under more favorable, broader categories like “human rights.” They no doubt prevented damaging cuts to our important work.

I am far more worried about the impact of a second administration. Back then, there was no concrete, detailed roadmap like Project 2025 and no massive replacement of foreign aid professionals with conservative political operatives. Under a second administration, under Schedule F, Trump has planned a sweeping political takeover of our civil service, stripping civil servants of protection, forcing them to implement his political policy agenda, and giving the president unilateral power to fire employees at will.

The organization I now work for, the German Marshall Fund, supports hundreds of civil society organizations across the Balkans, Black Sea region, Ukraine, and Central Europe—thanks to more than a decade of USAID support. USAID has encouraged our goals of promoting democracy; bolstering the rights of women, LGBTQ, and other marginalized communities; and deterring illiberalism through independent media, watchdog organizations, and information integrity efforts. We do this through grantmaking, capacity-building and technical assistance, leadership programs, and policy dialogues.

With democracy in global decline and illiberal strongmen on the rise, we need these efforts more than ever. Backsliding elsewhere affects democracy everywhere. America benefits from strong, free, liberal societies—it is in our national interest and key to our global security and order. While few voters go to the polls with foreign aid on their minds, the consequences for millions of people worldwide are on the ballot this November.

[darkmaga-retard]

Andrew Korybko

Aug 15, 2024

While Afghanistan no longer functions as a US airbase in the Eurasian Heartland, it’s now a source of unconventional threats to the region, but it also has more geostrategic potential than ever before too.

The Taliban returned to power three years ago on 15 August 2021 after capturing Kabul amidst the panicked Western withdrawal from Afghanistan. Most of the world has since forgotten about that country due to the Ukrainian Conflict, however, which is why it’s worthwhile updating everyone about what’s happening there. What follows are the ten things that folks should know about Afghanistan:

----------

 1. American Sanctions Remain A Major Impediment To Socio-Economic Recovery

The US continues to sanction Afghanistan and freeze those of its assets that that the former government placed within its jurisdiction. This has impeded the country’s socio-economic recovery, though that was precisely the point. The US hopes that the difficult living conditions that it contributed to creating might one day give rise to a rebellion that could threaten the Taliban’s control of the country.

2. The Taliban Has Yet To Form An Ethno-Politically Inclusive Government

The Taliban previously pledged to form an inclusive government, which observers interpreted as a commitment to elevate the roles of ethnic minorities and the opposition, but that has yet to come to pass. They’ve also imposed restrictions on woman since returning to power. These policies have served as the pretext for the international community’s refusal to recognize their government’s legitimacy.

3. Afghanistan’s Astronomically Large Rare Earth Deposits Are Still Untapped

The lack of formal recognition has complicated the Taliban’s plans to profit from the estimated $1 trillion worth of rare earth minerals under Afghanistan’s soil, which could make it integral to global supply chains one day. Its economy could also be revolutionized if production facilities are established inside the country and these serve as anchors for more diverse foreign investments.

4. Opium Production Is Practically Non-Existent After The Taliban Banned It

The Talban banned opium cultivation eight months after returning to power, which led to a whopping 95% reduction in production. Afghanistan is now no longer the world’s opium capital, but it’s struggled to replace this crop with other ones, thus leaving some farmers out of work. They might in turn become more susceptible to joining terrorist groups in order to replace their lost income.

5. ISIS-K Hasn’t Been Wiped Out Despite The Taliban’s Best Efforts

ISIS-K is the only force inside of Afghanistan capable of toppling the Taliban, but they haven’t been wiped out despite the latter’s best efforts over the past three years. They continue to recruit new members over social media, train some of them, and plan attacks from their sanctuaries there. The Taliban requires more intelligence and better arms in order to quash this global threat once and for all.

6. The Taliban’s Ties With Former Patron Pakistan Have Deteriorated

The expectation that some had of Pakistan restoring its influence over Afghanistan upon the Taliban’s return to power were shattered after the group turned against its patron by hosting “Pakistani Taliban” (TTP) militants that Islamabad considers to be terrorists. Tensions between these two have pushed them to the brink of war, but cooler heads have prevailed thus far, though they might not prevail forever.

7. A Planned Canal Has Worsened Relations With The Central Asian Republics

Afghanistan’s ties with Pakistan aren’t the only ones to deteriorate over the past three years since the Taliban’s planned Qosh Tepa Canal has worsened relations with the Central Asian Republics. Ties with secular Tajikistan were already troubled since it objects to the fundamentalist Taliban’s alleged mistreatment of its co-ethnics but this brings Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan on its bad side too.

8. India And The Taliban Surprisingly Patched Up Their Prior Problems

Taliban-Pakistani tensions aided the group’s rapprochement with India, against whom it used to train Kashmiri militants, but integration into its North-South Transport Corridor has yet to be completed due to the aforesaid problems with the Central Asian Republics and Iran. Even so, this might have influenced their decision to recognize Kashmir as separate from Pakistan, which aligns with India’s interests.

9. Russia Might Become The First Country To Recognize The Taliban’s Government

Economic and security interests are responsible for Russia officially considering lifting the Taliban’s terrorist designation and subsequently recognizing its government. The Kremlin wants to tap into Afghanistan’s astronomically large mineral deposits that the Soviets first discovered, utilize the country’s transregional connectivity potential, and facilitate the Taliban’s anti-terrorist operations against ISIS-K.

10. Afghanistan Can Play A Pivotal Role In Eurasia’s Multipolar Integration

Last but not least, the restoration of Afghanistan’s independence after two decades of Western occupation enables it to play a pivotal role in Eurasia’s multipolar integration, though ties with its neighbors must improve before that happens. In that event, it can facilitate North-South trade between Russia/Central Asia and Pakistan/India and East-West trade between Iran and Central Asia/China.

[milkboydotnet]

A collection of activists and researchers from Filipino and Filipino-American organizations released the findings of a peace mission that concluded last month. The Philippines hosts the United States military in nine joint military facilities across the country through the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA). The groups claim that the American forces are both violating the terms of their stay and operating without transparency to local communities and even to Philippine authorities.

After a three-week fact-finding mission, the Peace Mission International Delegation finds that “the heightening of US militarism and ramping up of EDCA sites is a threat to Philippine independence and sovereignty and the dignity and safety of Filipino communities,” said Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN) USA. Meanwhile, Renato Reyes Jr, of BAYAN Philippines explained that the “increased deployment of American weapons and soldiers to the Philippines is meant to provoke a heightened military confrontation with China.”

Secret War

The mission went to two EDCA sites and to one province where American military operations had recently taken place.

In Basa Air Base of Pampanga province, even the Philippine military was barred from certain perimeters.

Lal-lo Airport in Cagayan province is one EDCA site and researchers found that even the provincial government was only made aware of its use by foreigners when it was announced in the news.

None of the locals know what kind of armaments are now stored at the site. Moreover, US personnel are tapping the wider community to store military items and supplies. The mission pointed out that it goes beyond the bounds of EDCA as it does not fall under any of the “Agreed Locations.”

Last month, the Balikatan (shoulder to shoulder) joint military exercises between the US and the Philippines concluded. The war games drew in over 16,000 soldiers and for the first time made armed excursions outside Philippine territories, around a hundred kilometers from Taiwan.

The town of Santa Ana in Cagayan, northeast of the Philippines is just 400 kilometers from Taiwan.

The mission alleges that the residents of Santa Ana, were kept in the dark about using their town as a site for military exercises throughout Balikatan.

The mission also documented US marines visiting local high schools in civic-military operations. Additionally “We documented reports of locals saying that the loud noise from US military jets scares them and their children. Not only did this directly disturb the fish supply that these people survive on, but it is aimed at normalizing foreign military occupation in their country,” said *Alex of the mission, using a pseudonym for security.

Not unlike in Cagayan, residents of Ilocos Norte province to the northwest of the country, only learned of Balikatan coming to their neighborhoods through news on Facebook. Live fire drills were carried out and some allege that explosions were heard just 30 kilometers from their homes.

The mission also criticized the five-day “no sail policy” enforced by the military, dealing a large blow to the livelihood of local fisherfolk.

Around 1,000 fishing families were affected by the fishing ban, with estimated losses at Php10,000 per family, a staggering amount that will take them months to recover from. Local government allotted aid worth Php1500 to just over a hundred families.

“The people of Ilocos deserve much more than to be treated as pawns in a US war game,” said *Glaiza of the group Gabriela.

Invitation for war

Balikatan is just one of over 500 planned exercises slated for this year alone. It comes alongside moves in Washington to significantly boost military aid to the Philippines to contain China and pursue its strategic interests in the Pacific region.

Last April, at the Philippines-United States Bilateral Strategic Dialogue in Washington, D.C., both countries held talks to expand the number of EDCA sites, investing US$128 million for infrastructure around these areas and stockpiling a greater volume of supplies.

This year, Marcos announced intentions to upgrade the country’s defense with a US$35 billion boost over the next 10 years.

His plans dovetail with a proposal in the US Senate dubbed the Philippine Enhanced Resilience Act, or PERA bill, which would allot US$2.5 billion over the next five years to Philippine military advancement.

Reyes criticized Marcos Jr’s inclination to plunge the Philippines into war at the behest of America. On June 12, Philippine Independence Day, Filipinos rallied at the US Embassy in Manila against using the country as a stooge in their agenda.

On the same day, Marcos delivered a speech with much bravado saying “We see it in the tenacity of our soldiers as they protect every inch of our territory, adamant as they are in the certainty that Filipinos do not, and shall never, succumb to oppression.”

However, after seeing how the American interests with the complicity of the Marcos regime is fuelling the escalation of the conflict with China, the mission asks “is the Philippines truly free? And what of the Filipino people who are sure to be caught in the crossfire if war were to break out?”

[queersatanic]

On Monday, the university sent Brandeis [Students for Justice in Palestine] a notice that its status as an official campus group had been rescinded “because it openly supports Hamas, which the United States has designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.” “This decision was not made lightly, as Brandeis is dedicated to upholding free speech principles,” the notice said. ... Brandeis’s decision means the group is no longer an officially sanctioned organization. It will not receive university funding and it is prohibited from using the university’s logo. The group was forced to cancel a vigil Monday that it had planned to hold for the victims of the Israeli bombardment of Gaza.

The original Brandeis SJP statement:

[ID: Four panels of Instagram post, text to follow:

We rise today in unwavering solidarity with the Palestinian resistance in all of its forms. It is a moral imperative to recognize and support the resilience of the people who have endured 75 years of oppression, displacement, and the denial of their basic rights. The Palestinian resistance is a multifaced struggle for self-determination, justice, and the restoration of human dignity. It encompasses not only armed resistance, but also civil disobedience, grassroots organizing, and cultural expression. It is a testament to the unwavering spirit of the people who refuse to be silenced in the face of adversity. We reject the characterization of Palestinian resistance as "terrorism" as indicated in President Ron's email to the student body. Such a label ignores the ongoing occupation of Palestine, the expansion of illegal settlements, and the denial of basic human rights. We must understand that the Palestinian resistance, in all of its manifestations, is a response to a history of dispossession and oppression. To condemn resistance but not the terrorist colonial violence, that resistance came as a response to, is despicable, ahistorical, and a deliberate misrepresentation of what is going on in the occupied land. Instead, we should strive for Justice for the Palestinian people. We encourage our community to follow instagram accounts such as @eye.on.palestine and Resistance News Network on Telegram for live news from the ground, and to reach out to us for any clarification on Al-Aqsa Flood battle. From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free. /ID]

[afeelgoodblog]

The Best News of Last Week - May 29, 2023

Rwanda’s life expectancy has increased by 20 years in the last 20 years

What did Rwanda change? Three developments stand out: low-cost community-based health insurance plans, national investments in rural health posts, and ramped-up foreign collaborations. In 2020, more than 90 percent of Rwanda’s people had some kind of health insurance. This stands out relative to other low-income countries, where on average 31 percent of people have health insurance.

2. Brandon School Division rejects call to remove library books on sexuality, gender identity

Loud cheers erupted inside a packed high school gymnasium after the Brandon School Division rejected a call to remove books dealing with sexuality and gender identity from libraries. Hundreds of people in Manitoba's second-largest city showed up for the marathon school division meeting, which ran into the early morning hours.

The trustees ultimately voted 6-1 to reject a proposal to create a committee of trustees and parents to review books available in division schools.

3. Lotto winner pledges to fund classrooms in his native Mali

Happiness for one lucky North Carolina resident comes not from newfound wealth from a lottery win, but using those winnings to help schoolchildren -- in this case, from Mali.

Souleymane Sana of North Carolina won $100,000 from a scratch-off ticket. Relocating to the United States from Mali -- a war-torn county in West Africa -- Sana is using his earnings to create a non-profit to help school kids from his hometown.

4. Mountain gorillas rebound thanks to Ugandan veterinarian

In 2018, as their population topped 1,000, they were removed from the critically endangered list and their status upgraded to just endangered. That positive step was due, in no small part, to Ugandan veterinarian Dr. Gladys Kalema-Zikusoka. 

Her working home is Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, home to roughly half of the world's mountain gorillas. But early on she also realized that to help the animals and keep them free from disease and poaching, she needed to also help their human neighbours, launching successful initiatives to improve the health and well-being of the people living around the park. 

5. Imports of ivory from hippos, orcas and walruses to be banned in UK

Ivory imports from hippopotamuses, orcas and walruses will be banned under new legislation to protect the endangered species from poaching.

The Ivory Act, passed in 2018, targeted materials from elephants, but a loophole meant that animals other than elephants, including hippos, were being targeted for their ivory.

6. Solar power due to overtake oil production investment for first time in 2023

Investment in clean energy will extend its lead over spending on fossil fuels in 2023, the International Energy Agency said on Thursday, with solar projects expected to outpace outlays on oil production for the first time.

Annual investment in renewable energy is up by nearly a quarter since 2021 compared to a 15% rise for fossil fuels, the Paris-based energy watchdog said in its World Energy Investment report.

7. Paralyzed man walks naturally, thanks to wireless ‘bridge’ between brain and spine

Gert-Jan Oskam lost the ability to walk in 2011 when he injured his spine in a cycling accident in China. Six years later, the Dutch man managed to take a few short steps thanks to a small array of electrodes implanted on top of his spinal cord that delivered nerve-stimulating pulses of electricity.

Today in Nature, an international team of researchers reports giving Oskam a better fix, a way to digitally bridge the communication gap between his brain and lower body. Brain waves signaling Oskam’s desire to walk travel from a device implanted in his skull to the spinal stimulator, rerouting the signal around the damaged tissue and delivering pulses of electricity to the spinal cord to facilitate the movement. Oskam can now walk more fluidly, navigate obstacles, and climb stairs.

----

That's it for this week :)

This newsletter will always be free. If you liked this post you can support me with a small kofi donation:

Buy me a coffee ❤️

Also don’t forget to reblog.

SUBCRIBE HERE for more good news in your inbox

[beardedmrbean]

Traditionally incoming Argentinian presidents give an inauguration speech inside of Congress to other politicians. Javier Milei, a former “tantric sex instructor” turned libertarian economist, symbolically gave his speech with his back to the Congress facing towards the people. 

“For more than 100 years, politicians have insisted on defending a model that only produces poverty, stagnation, and misery,” President Milei said. “A model that assumes that citizens exist to serve politics, not that politics exists to serve citizens.” He also promised an “end a long and sad history of decadence and decline” and promote a new era based on peace, prosperity, and freedom.

Since his headline-making election victory last month, media portrayal of Milei has ranged from dismissive to condescending, often depicting him as an eccentric “far-right populist.” Yet, since taking office, Milei has shelved many of his campaign’s more contentious proposals and begun implementing a radical but, by international standards, orthodox reform plan to revitalize Argentina’s faltering economy.

Milei inherited a challenging situation. Argentina’s economy has shrunk by 12 per cent over the last decade, annual inflation reached an extraordinary 160 per cent in November, while the poverty rate increased to 40 per cent in the first half of 2023.

Argentina has a fascinating economic history that led up to this point. In the 19th century post-independence Argentina adopted a liberal constitution that helped deliver an impressive economic expansion.

By the early 20th century, Argentina was one of the world’s richest countries, driven by agricultural exports. Real wages were comparable to Britain and only slightly below the United States. Millions fled destitution in southern Europe for a new life in Argentina. Buenos Aires has been labelled the “Paris of South America” because of spectacular neoclassical architecture built during this era.

This turned to disaster over the subsequent decades because of collectivist rule – from military dictatorships to avidly socialist leaders. Argentina nationalised industries, subsidised domestic production, limited external trade, and introduced an unaffordable welfare state. This has become known as the Peronism, named after 20th century president Juan Domingo Perón, a leftist populist leader who supressed opposition and controlled the press.

This agenda accelerated in recent decades under self-identifying Peronist leaders, turning Argentina into one of the world’s most closed and heavily regulated countries. The latest Human Freedom Index places Argentina at 163rd in the world for openness to trade and 143rd for regulatory burden. This has culminated in an economy on the precipice of economic disaster.

Not wasting any time, Milei has proposed a mega package of over 350 economic reforms to open the economy and remove regulatory barriers. This includes privatising inefficient state assets, eliminating rent controls and restrictive retail regulations, liberalising labour laws, lifting export prohibitions, and allowing contracts in foreign currencies.

There has been a notable absence of some of most radical ideas – such as legalising organ sales or banning abortion. He has also put on hold plans to dollarise the economy and abolish the central bank. Instead, at least by international standards, the agenda contains several orthodox economic reforms.

Many of the measures – such as cutting spending to get the deficit (currently at 15 per cent of GDP) under control, opening the country up to international trade, and liberalising the airline industry through ‘open skies’ policy – would be required to join the European Union. The government is eliminating capital and currency controls and allowing the peso to devalue – measures that the IMF’s managing director Kristina Georgieva said these are important to stabilise the economy.

There are undoubtedly significant challenges ahead and some darker elements to agenda.

Milei has been, uncharacteristically for a politician, honest that “in the short term the situation will get worse”. The removal of price controls, for example, will increase inflation until demand and supply can stabilise to end shortages. But, he says, “then we will see the fruits of our efforts, having created the foundations of a solid and sustainable growth over time.”

The government is facing significant opposition, with the union movement organising mass protests and threatening a general strike. The government has responded by proposing questionable new anti-protest laws, that include lengthy jail sentences for road-blocking and requirements to seek permission for gatherings of more than three people in a public place. Milei, who could struggle to get much of his agenda through Argentina’s Congress, is asking for sweeping emergency presidential powers until the end of 2025. This raises serious questions about democratic accountability.

Nevertheless, there are some positive early signs. Since Milei’s election Argentina’s flagship stock index has risen by almost one-third and the peso’s value has not collapsed. Argentina could soon benefit from a major new shale pipeline pumping one million barrels of crude a day (helped along by reforms that allow exports of oil and sales at market prices) and the mining of the second largest proven lithium reserves in the world.

Argentina has long served as a solemn reminder that prosperity is neither inevitable nor unassailable. Misguided policies can transform mere challenges into a profound crisis. Milei is offering a glimmer of hope: redemption may just be possible. Let’s also hope that Britain’s leaders can similarly take the path of reform, ideally before things get as bad as Argentina.

Matthew Lesh is the Director of Public Policy and Communications at the Institute of Economic Affairs