June, 25 2013, 02:37pm EDT
Americans Against Fracking on Obama Climate Change Plan
Statement by Mark Ruffalo
WASHINGTON
"President Obama deserves praise for prioritizing climate change, but if he's serious he needs to start by rejecting fracking for oil and gas. Fracking is a dangerous and toxic drilling process that greatly exacerbates climate change and threatens to put us over the edge. 400 ppm is a game changer that requires President Obama stand up to the oil and gas industry. We have clean and abundant wind, water, and solar alternatives that can power the entire U.S. and individual states, according to studies, with existing technologies at equivalent or lower costs than conventional fuels. President Obama can't claim to seriously address climate change and expand fracking for oil and gas - that's a stark contradiction," said actor/director Mark Ruffalo, a spokesperson for Americans Against Fracking.
LATEST NEWS
Campaigners Cheer FCC Plan to Vote on Restoring Net Neutrality Rules
"A healthy democracy requires a well-informed and educated public, but that's not possible without an open and accessible internet."
Apr 03, 2024
Open internet advocates on Wednesday welcomed the Federal Communications Commission's plan to vote on reestablishing FCC oversight of broadband and restoring net neutrality rules on April 25.
"The pandemic proved once and for all that broadband is essential," said FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel, who announced the restoration effort in September, shortly after the U.S. Senate confirmed Anna Gomez to a long-vacant seat on the five-member commission. The following month, the pair joined with Commissioner Geoffrey Starks to start the rulemaking process.
"After the prior administration abdicated authority over broadband services, the FCC has been handcuffed from acting to fully secure broadband networks, protect consumer data, and ensure the internet remains fast, open, and fair," Rosenworcel explained Wednesday. "A return to the FCC's overwhelmingly popular and court-approved standard of net neutrality will allow the agency to serve once again as a strong consumer advocate of an open internet."
The three Democratic commissioners aim to reverse a deeply unpopular rollback that happened under former Republican President Donald Trump by reclassifying broadband as a public service under Title II of the Communications Act and preventing internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking legal content, creating fast lanes, and throttling speeds.
"We've been fighting for this moment since Trump's FCC threw out strong Title II rules and abandoned net neutrality back in 2017—and really for nearly 20 years since net neutrality first came under threat," Free Press Action co-CEO Craig Aaron
said of the upcoming vote. "We welcome and celebrate the FCC's decision to move ahead and make sure that internet users will again be protected against harms by big phone and cable companies like AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon."
"Under these strong but flexible FCC rules, every ISP will be responsible for making resilient networks available to people on just and reasonable terms," he noted. "And they won't be able to pick and choose what any of us can say or see online. Net neutrality is a guarantee that the phone and cable companies will carry our data across the internet without undue interference or unreasonable discrimination."
Aaron warned that "without this clear authority over broadband access, the FCC is vastly weakened in its ability to protect internet users from ISPs' privacy invasions, promote broadband competition and deployment, and take action against hidden junk fees, data caps, and billing rip-offs."
Public Knowledge legal director John Bergmayer similarly applauded the commission's effort, stressing that "broadband is now a necessity for work, education, entertainment, healthcare, social connection, and civic engagement."
"Title II classification is the foundation of net neutrality," Bergmayer said. "With this legal tool, the FCC can reassert its role as the nation's top cop on the broadband beat. It will help the FCC more fully address digital redlining, ensuring that broadband access is not denied or degraded to low-income areas, or based on people's race or other protected characteristics."
"It will give the FCC clearer authority to promote network reliability and resiliency, so that users have a consistent internet experience that is ready for times of crisis and recovers quickly from outages," he continued. "It will also help the FCC combat cyber attacks and address other national security risks that could cripple our increasingly internet-dependent economy and society."
"Title II is also a pro-competition tool. It will help the FCC streamline the deployment of new broadband networks and reduce barriers to competition," Bergmayer added.
The FCC's vote is scheduled to happen just months away from the November presidential election, in which Trump is expected to again face Democratic President Joe Biden, who called for restoring net neutrality with a 2021 executive order.
"The internet is a gateway to democracy for many and every voter has the right to a free and fair internet. From looking up information about candidates to finding polling sites, this net neutrality proposal will make it easier for every voter to participate in our modern democracy," said Common Cause Media & Democracy Program director Ishan Mehta.
"We strongly encourage the FCC to restore net neutrality and return control of the internet to the people," he added. "Especially in a major election year, the FCC must do all it can to protect every voter's right to basic information online."
Former FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, now a special adviser to Common Cause, agreed that the pending rules are especially important for those participating in elections.
"A healthy democracy requires a well-informed and educated public, but that's not possible without an open and accessible internet," he said. "We look forward to strengthening a healthy communications ecosystem for all voters."
Keep ReadingShow Less
White House Spokesman Condemned for 'Absurd' Claim Aid Bombing Wasn't Illegal
"The IDF has an affirmative responsibility to know what it is dropping bombs on," said former Biden official Jeremy Konyndyk. "Kirby confirms they ignored that."
Apr 03, 2024
A former official of the Biden and Obama administrations was among those expressing shock late Tuesday at the Biden administration's comments on Israel's conduct in its continued bombardment of Gaza, in which a U.S.-Canadian citizen is now among the tens of thousands of victims.
John Kirby, the White House national security communications adviser, spoke to reporters at a press conference less than 24 hours after the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) killed seven workers with World Central Kitchen (WCK), and made clear that the bombing of the U.S. nonprofit's convoy in Gaza was not an event that would push the administration to halt the delivery of military aid to Israel.
Kirby appeared exasperated as Selina Wang of ABC News asked how the U.S. "can continue to send military aid into Israel without any conditions."
"Is there no red line that can be crossed here?" Wang asked.
Kirby repeated the administration's frequent remark that it is pushing Israel to make sure the IDF is "precise" and ensuring that humanitarian aid can reach Gaza, where parts of the population are now living in famine, according to a United Nations-backed analysis.
But the spokesperson said the U.S. will not "hang some sort of condition over [Israel's] neck" to ensure the nation abides by international law and refrains from violating human rights—suggesting Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act, which bars the U.S. from providing military aid to countries that impede humanitarian aid, does not apply to Israel.
U.S. law "is in fact a condition hanging over your neck, John Kirby," said journalist Krystal Ball.
Kirby also chastised a reporter for asking whether "firing a missile at people delivering food and killing them" is "a violation of international humanitarian law."
"There is no evidence" that the IDF deliberately targeted the WCK convoy, which Israel claimed it struck unintentionally, Kirby said, adding that the State Department has not observed any violations of international law by Israeli since it began attacking Gaza in October.
Jeremy Konyndyk, the president of Refugees International who previously served in the Biden and administrations at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), called Kirby's remarks "absurd and risible" and called for him to be taken "off the podium."
"Apart from the clearly marked aid convoy that had been cleared with the IDF in advance?" asked Konyndyk regarding Kirby's claim that there was no evidence of a deliberate bombing.
Al Jazeera's Sanad Verification Agency on Tuesday found that, based on images taken from the bombing sites in the central Gaza Strip, the WCK vehicles' roofs and windshields were clearly marked as belonging to the nonprofit group.
According to WCK, the group had coordinated its movements with the Israeli military before the aid workers left a warehouse in Deir el-Balah, where it has unloaded 100 tons of aid, and headed toward Rashid Street in the city.
Jose Andres, chef and founder of the group, toldReuters the IDF targeted the convoy "systematically, car by car."
The attack was not a "bad luck situation where, 'oops, we dropped the bomb in the wrong place,'" Andres told the outlet. "Even if we were not in coordination with the [Israeli army], no democratic country and no military can be targeting civilians and humanitarians."
Konyndyk added that Kirby's defense of Israel, which the spokesman said did not know it was aiming at aid workers, serves as an admission that Israel violated the internationally recognized laws of war, which requires that parties make a distinction between combatants and civilians.
"The IDF has an affirmative responsibility to know what it is dropping bombs on," said Konyndyk. "Kirby confirms they ignored that."
Zachary Carter, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, added that Kirby's defense of the WCK attack was "embarrassing" considering the readily available evidence of deliberate targeting, and his continued claim that Israel is attempting to avoid civilian casualties.
"Israel has killed more than 200 aid workers in Gaza, at least 95 journalists, and more than 33,000 Palestinians," said Carter. "Israel is in violation of a U.N. cease-fire resolution and Gaza is starving. It is not credible to declare each act of violence an unusual aberration from humane conduct."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Beyond Parody': Biden Pushing for $18 Billion Warplane Sale to Israel
"Does anyone wonder why Netanyahu ignores Biden's pleas for restraint in Gaza?" asked one critic.
Apr 03, 2024
Palestine advocates on Wednesday slammed the Biden administration as it pushes Congress to approve the sale of $18 billion worth of F-15 fighter jets to Israel, despite public pronouncements of anger over ongoing Israeli atrocities in Gaza and a federal ban on the U.S. arms transfers to human rights violators.
The New York Times reported that the U.S. State Department has informally asked two congressional committees to begin the legislative review process for the deal, which involves the sale of as many as 50 McDonnell Douglas F-15 fighters to Israel, as well as munitions, training, and other support.
"As Israel is bombing and starving Palestinian civilians, Biden still wants to sell it $18 billion of F-15 fighter jets."
The proposed deal—which would be one of the largest and most lucrative arms sales to Israel in years—comes amid Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza, during which more than 115,000 Palestinians have been killed, maimed, or are missing and presumed dead.
The planned sale also comes amid growing frustration among Biden administration officials over what President Joe Biden called Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" of Gaza. On Tuesday, Biden said he was "outraged" and "heartbroken" by Israel's airstrike targeting a World Central Kitchen convoy that killed seven humanitarian aid workers, including one U.S. citizen. Biden acknowledged that the attack was "not a stand-alone incident" while asserting that Israel has "not done enough" to protect Palestinian civilians.
"Does anyone wonder why Netanyahu ignores Biden's pleas for restraint in Gaza? Netanyahu sees them as empty words because, as Israel is bombing and starving Palestinian civilians, Biden still wants to sell it $18 billion of F-15 fighter jets," former Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth
said Wednesday, referring to right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Some congressional progressives have also come out against the proposed sale. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) asked: "The United States wants Israel to let in more humanitarian aid, stop bombing civilians, and not invade Rafah. Netanyahu has ignored all of it. Why are we still sending him taxpayer dollars and weapons and expecting a different outcome?"
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, noted that the "signs of hope in the Biden administration's recent shift in rhetoric" and the U.S. abstention from the most recent United Nations Security Council cease-fire resolution have "been destroyed by the administration's recent actions," including the proposed F-15 sale.
"Although the planes might not be delivered for years, agreeing to provide them in the midst of Israel's war on Gaza sends a signal of support that runs contrary to the administration's claims to be pressing the Netanyahu government to avoid civilian casualties and clear the way for humanitarian aid shipments," he wrote.
Hartung continued:
The sad truth is that there have been zero consequences from Washington for Israel's crimes in Gaza. Regardless of the rhetoric, the weapons keep flowing and the killing continues. The Biden administration's argument that it is simply giving Israel the means to defend itself willfully ignores the fact that killing over 32,000 people and attempting to deny them food and other essential goods goes far beyond defense, to the point that the International Court of Justice has suggested that Israel's actions could "plausibly" be considered a campaign of genocide.
"Even worse," Hartung added, "the tragedy in Gaza has been compounded by Israel's attack on Iran's consulate in Syria, which has increased the chances of a wider Middle East war which could easily draw in U.S. personnel."
Hartung and others have also voiced alarm over the Biden administration's approval of the transfer of munitions including 2,000-pound bombs, which Israel has used extensively in Gaza with devastating results. In one of the deadliest bombings of the war, Israel dropped multiple 2,000-pound bombs on the Jabalia refugee camp on October 31, killing at least 126 civilians including 69 children.
Some of the worst Israeli atrocities perpetrated during the 180-day war have involved aerial attacks by missiles, drones, and warplanes. Robert Pape, a U.S. military historian and University of Chicago professor, said in December that Israel's bombardment of Gaza "sits comfortably in the top quartile of the most devastating bombing campaigns ever," and that by some measures, surpasses the Allied "terror bombing" of German cities during World War II.
An analysis published Tuesday by the World Bank and United Nations found that the Israeli onslaught on Gaza has caused approximately $18.5 billion in damage to essential infrastructure in the embattled strip, equivalent to nearly the entire gross domestic product of both Gaza and the occupied West Bank in 2022.
Human rights and Palestine advocates have called for an arms embargo on Israel. However, the Biden administration is seeking an emergency military aid package for Israel worth more than $14 billion and has repeatedly bypassed Congress to fast-track armed assistance to Israel—which already receives nearly $4 billion in U.S. military aid annually. Israel imports nearly 70% of its arms from the United States.
Since the passage of the Foreign Assitance Act of 1961, and later the Leahy Laws, the U.S. government has been statutorily prohibited from providing assistance to foreign security forces who commit gross human rights violations. However, this has not stopped Washington from supporting rights violators—including dictatorships like Saudi Arabia and Egypt and the perpetrators of genocides in Paraguay, Guatemala, Bangladesh, East Timor, Kurdistan, and Gaza—since these laws were enacted.
The Biden administration says Israel is not violating international law in Gaza. During a contentious Tuesday press conference, National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby was asked by Niall Stanage, the associate editor of The Hill, if "firing a missile at people delivering food and killing them" is "a violation of international humanitarian law."
Kirby replied: "The State Department has a process in place. And to date, as you and I are speaking, they have not found any incidents where the Israelis have violated international humanitarian law."
Last month, 25 humanitarian groups urged the Biden administration to comply with U.S. law by suspending arms sales to Israel.
"U.S. weapons, security assistance, and blanket political support have contributed to an unparalleled humanitarian crisis and possible war crimes in Gaza," the groups wrote in a letter to the president. "We demand that you urgently comply with U.S. law, end U.S. support for catastrophic human suffering in Gaza, and use your leverage to protect civilians and ensure the impartial provision of humanitarian assistance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular