Support Our Work in 2023 With a New Year's Gift
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.
Every Day of the Year: Point Your Compass Toward the Occupation
In the occupied West Bank, the New Year began like the old one ended - with Israelis killing Palestinians. Adam Ayyad, 15, became 2023's first child victim when he was shot by soldiers raiding his refugee camp. 2022 was the deadliest year in two decades for Palestinians living under the Occupation: Aged 12 to 80, they were shot in the head, eye, back, running away. Adam's will lamented all "I wished I could do" if not living "in a country where realizing your dreams is impossible" - and where 15-year-olds make wills.
Authorities - the U.N., media sources, human rights groups, Palestinian officials - say Israeli violence against Palestinians in 2022 was the worst since the Second Intifada began in 2000. As Palestinian resistance against conditions under the Occupation has risen, so, too, has brutal suppression by Israel's apartheid regime - a response unlikely to change with the launch of its newly barbaric, most rabidly far-right government in history. Estimates of fatalities range from 220 to 231 Palestinians killed, mostly in Jerusalem and the West Bank, especially in Nablus and Jenin; they include 34 to 54 children under 17. Monthly killings ranged from a low of six to a high of 30 in October - almost one a day. The vast majority were bystanders or civilians killed during raids by Israeli forces; most were unarmed, or throwing stones or occasionally Molotov cocktails toward soldiers while posing no real danger to them. In the same year, Israeli forces demolished 950 Palestinian homes, Israeli settlers carried out over 800 attacks on nearby Palestinian villages, and more than 9,000 Palestinians were wounded in disparate acts of violence.
The dead include Palestinian political prisoners who died of "direct medical negligence" in prison, where 150 Palestinian children are also detained. But by far most were random victims of the systemic military violence needed to sustain a genocidal Occupation - especially since late 2021, when Israel further loosened its open-fire rules to pretty much, "Shoot what moves." The killings began the first week of January - the father of an 18-month-old shot in the head, a man going to work run over by a settler - and didn't stop. A 16-year-old shot in the eye, an 18-year-old shot walking home from school, a man shot dropping off his nephews at school, a 14-year-old shot running away from soldiers, a 16-year-old shot riding a motorcycle, a 17-year-old shot in his abdomen by "an exploding bullet that ruptured his blood vessels," a 47-year-old widow and mother of six driving her car shot "on suspicion," a 57-year-old with diabetes suffocated from tear-gas during a raid, two teens shot respectively in the chest and, when his friend came to his aid, in the back of the head. Shot hiking, looking for work, watching a protest, walking with friends.
Two 80-year-olds were killed: One run over by an Israeli truck, one after a patrol claimed he "resisted a check"; soldiers dragged, gagged, blind-folded, zip-tied and dumped him in a warehouse where he died of a heart attack, his body left there. Seven-year-old Rayyan Sulaiman also died of a heart attack after soldiers chased him. Jana Majdi Zakarneh, 15, was shot twice in the face while playing with her cat on the roof of her house; Zaid Ghonaim, 15, was shot while hiding in a garage; among seven girls killed were Fulla al-Masalma, shot the day before her 16th birthday, and Hanan Khaddour, 18, shot walking home from school. At least five Palestinians died at the hands of not soldiers but settlers whose brutality is only growing. 12-year-old Ahmad Dawabsheh is the only survivor of a 2015 attack in which settlers fire-bombed his family's home in the village of Duma, burning to death his mother, father, and 18-month-old brother Ali; today, settlers have attacked the village a dozen more times and Ahmad is still undergoing surgeries from a gruesome crime the uncle raising him bitterly blames on "not just one settler" but a murderous Occupation itself.
Its latest victim Adam Ayyad died when soldiers conducted a brutal early-morning raid on the Bethlehem-area Dheisheh camp to detain Adnan Ajouri. As they retreated, they fired tear gas, sound bombs and live ammunition at a group of furious, helpless young people who'd begun throwing stones; Adam was hit in the chest and died soon after, the third Palestinian killed in 2023. Hassan Manna, owner of the bakery where Adam worked, called him "a happy kid, with an electric personality" who'd been devastated by the killing of his friend Omar Manna, who also worked at the bakery, during another raid to arrest Omar's brother. The two friends died within a month of each other. After Adam's death, a photo circulated on social media of a hand-written last will and testament his family reportedly found in his pocket. "I want to tell you martyrdom isn’t death - it's an honor to yourself and the whole world," he wrote. "Set your compass and point it toward the Occupation." Adam echoed the hope of recently killed resistance fighter Ibrahim al-Nabulsi that "the people will wake up." "There were a lot of things I wished I could do," he noted, "but we live in a country where realizing your dreams is impossible." And where - unconscionably, inconceivably - 15-year-olds write their wills. May he rest in peace and power.
Most, but not all, of the over 200 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in 2022.Photo illustration by Gaza's AlShabab Radio.
Adam Ayyad, left, was devastated by the death of his friend Omar Manna, right, last month. Omar was killed by Israeli forces as they were arresting his brother.Photo from Twitter
'Groundbreaking' Report Shows Promise of Greener Jobs for Former Fossil Fuel Workers
A new analysis out Tuesday shows how a just transition towards a green economy in California—one in which workers in the state's fossil fuel industry would be able to find new employment and receive assistance if they're displaced from their jobs—will be "both affordable and achievable," contrary to claims from oil and gas giants and anti-climate lawmakers.
The study published by the Gender Equity Policy Institute (GEPI) notes that a majority of workers in the oil and gas sectors will have numerous new job opportunities as California pushes to become carbon neutral by 2045 with a vow to construct a 100% clean electricity grid and massively reduce oil consumption and production.
"The state will need to modernize its electrical grid and build storage capacity to meet increased demand for electricity," reads the report. "Carbon management techniques, plugging orphan wells, and the development of new energy sources such as geothermal will all come into play, providing economic opportunities to workers and businesses alike."
GEPI analyzed the most recent public labor data, showing that the oil and gas industries in California employed approximately 59,200 people as of 2021 across jobs in production, sales, transportation, legal, and executive departments, among others.
The group examined potential job opportunities for fossil fuel workers "in all growing occupations, not solely in clean energy or green jobs," and found that about two-thirds of employees are likely to find promising opportunities outside of fossil fuel-related work.
"Our findings show that a sizable majority (56%) of current oil and gas workers are highly likely to find jobs in California in another industry in their current occupation, given demand in the broader California economy for workers with their existing skills," the report says.
Roughly a quarter of oil and gas workers are employed in jobs that are projected to decline over the next decade, while 18% work in production and extraction, sectors which will contract as the state begins to move away from fossil fuel extraction.
"For all declining occupations in oil and gas industries, there are available jobs in similar occupations in California that would allow workers to transition without the need for retraining," GEPI reported.
About 16,100 people who will be at risk of displacement into lower-paying jobs over the next two decades will be able to benefit from income subsidies and relocation assistance, which GEPI estimated would cost the state $68.9 million or less annually—far less than a 2021 estimate by the Department of Economics and Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, which said aid for displaced oil and gas workers would cost up to $830 million per year. Importantly, PERI's estimate included pension guarantees and income-level guarantees while GEPI's factored in only financial aid for people who face pay cuts.
GEPI's study showed that "California can achieve a just and equitable transition away from fossil fuels for oil and gas workers," said the Los Angeles-based advocacy group Climate Resolve.
\u201cIn this new, groundbreaking report, @TheGepi's findings illustrate that California can achieve a just and equitable transition away from fossil fuels for oil and gas workers. https://t.co/uZnAnpDhTp\u201d— Climate Resolve (@Climate Resolve) 1672766518
"As the carbon neutral economy advances, supporting workers at risk of displacement from jobs in oil and gas industries is one important component of creating an equitable and sustainable future for all the people of California," reads GEPI's report. "These men and women are expected to be able to transition with ease to other industries without retraining or a period of unemployment."
'He's Failed to Take Real Action': Buttigieg Under Fire for Handling of Airline Debacle
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is facing growing backlash from members of Congress and corporate watchdogs who say his department failed to take sufficient action in the lead-up to mass flight cancellations surrounding the Christmas holiday, a meltdown that has its roots in decades of airline consolidation, greed, and lax oversight.
On Thursday, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) took to Twitter to argue that "this mess with Southwest could have been avoided," singling out the airline responsible for the overwhelming majority of recent flight cancellations in the United States.
Khanna noted that he joined Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) earlier this year in urging the Department of Transportation (DOT) "to implement fines and penalties on airlines for canceling flights" after a wave of cancellations during a July 4 travel surge. Sanders specifically called for a "fine of $27,500 per passenger for all domestic flights that are delayed more than two hours and all international flights that are delayed more than three hours when passengers are forced to wait on the tarmac," as well as a "fine of $15,000 per passenger for all domestic flights that are delayed more than two hours."
"Why were these recommendations not followed?" Khanna asked Thursday.
The Transportation Department did fine six airlines a total of $7.25 million in November for major delays in refunding customers whose flights were canceled or changed, but Southwest and its top competitors were spared any penalties, prompting criticism that Buttigieg left out the "worst offenders."
William McGee, a senior fellow for Aviation and Travel at the American Economic Liberties Project, argued Thursday that while "there's plenty of blame to go around" for the latest cancellation crisis, "Secretary Buttigieg has spent months appearing to regulate rather than actually regulating."
"How do I know? Because I've spent thousands of hours annually for 23 years fighting airlines. Those of us in advocacy trenches can testify to DOT inaction," McGee wrote. "Criticizing [Buttigieg's] lack of action is neither unfair nor inaccurate. When advocates met with him in 2021, most of us were impressed and optimistic. But he's failed to take real action."
"He has broad powers to act on unfair and deceptive acts—and airlines have done both," McGee added. "Southwest was inevitable after he failed to punish awful behavior all year."
\u201c17/17 And so @econliberties is proposing a better, more passenger friendly industry. Let's eliminate federal preemption, so airlines can be treated as all companies are\u2014subject to oversight. And please write to #EndAirlineGreed:\nhttps://t.co/pw5PkumlrK\nhttps://t.co/GcbDONkmj1\u201d— William J. McGee (@William J. McGee) 1672387670
In the face of mounting criticism, Buttigieg on Thursday sent a letter to Southwest CEO Bob Jordan calling the airline's mass cancellations "unacceptable" and demanding that affected passengers be refunded as required under federal law, which mandates refunds if airlines cancel or significantly delay flights and the customer opts not to travel.
"I hope and expect that you will follow the law, take the steps laid out in this letter, and provide me with a prompt update on Southwest's efforts to do right by the customers it has wronged," wrote Buttigieg, who in September downplayed the potential for holiday travel chaos.
The letter and Buttigieg's promise to investigate airline violations are unlikely to quell outrage over the Transportation Department's tepid approach to the industry's misconduct, which state officials and members of Congress had been vocally warning about months ahead of the current debacle.
In November, Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) called on Buttigieg to strengthen the Transportation Department's proposed rule aimed at bolstering protections for customers seeking ticket refunds.
The senators argued the rule, which has yet to be finalized, doesn't go nearly far enough to safeguard consumers and prevent airlines from skirting the law.
"Of the nearly 16,000 complaints to DOT in the first half of 2022, nearly two-thirds—10,089—were about airline refunds, compared to just 742 refunds complaints in 2019, an increase of 1,260%," the lawmakers wrote. "These numbers tell a clear story: Airlines are delaying and canceling historic numbers of flights and failing to provide consumers with the refunds to which they are entitled."
As The American Prospect's Robert Kuttner explained, the DOT rule in its current form "does nothing to force the airlines to refund the roughly $10 billion still owed to consumers for canceled flights since the pandemic began in 2020."
"It does nothing but allow DOT and Buttigieg to claim they are making an advance on policy while actually taking a step backwards. Codifying the policy will take time and resources away from just enforcing the existing interpretation, at a time when cancellations are high," Kuttner added. "These actions amount to a smoking gun. The airlines are mocking DOT policy, and Buttigieg is letting them get away with it. By kicking the can down the road with a new rule that will be subject to an extended comment period and further delay, Buttigieg lets the airlines off the hook for actions that flagrantly violate current DOT policy right now."
In early August, Markey joined Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and other lawmakers in introducing legislation that would "provide consumers an enforceable right to a full cash refund for flight and ticket cancellations" and enact other reforms that go beyond the DOT's proposed rule.
"Enough is enough: Travelers are sick of wasting their valuable time fighting the airlines to receive their legally-required cash refunds," Markey said at the time. "And they are tired of making flight reservations months in advance, only to face a health scare that forces them to choose between canceling a nonrefundable flight, or traveling and risking the health of their fellow passengers."
No Matter Who Leads House GOP, Advocates Say, 'They All Want to Cut Your Social Security'
It's unclear who will ultimately wield the House speaker's gavel and lead the GOP's narrow majority in the chamber after Rep. Kevin McCarthy failed to win enough support in three consecutive votes on Tuesday.
But progressive advocates say the appearance of intense and seemingly insurmountable divisions within the Republican conference—which corporate media outlets have made the center of attention in recent days—belies the extent to which the party is united on issues of critical importance to the U.S. public.
One such issue is Social Security, a program that Republicans have targeted for cuts and privatization for years under the guise of "saving" it from insolvency even though its finances remain strong and it can't—by law—add to the deficit, rendering common GOP talking points moot.
"Republicans may be in ruins, with the lunatic extremists fighting the slightly less extreme extremists," Social Security Works PAC president Jon Bauman wrote on Twitter as Tuesday's speakership vote descended into chaos.
"But there's one thing you can count on," he added. "They ALL want to cut your Social Security."
Months before the internal GOP struggle over the top House post burst into the open, a group known as the Republican Study Committee (RSC)—comprised at the time of 158 of 212 members of the House GOP caucus, including McCarthy supporters and detractors—released a policy agenda that called for gradually raising the Social Security eligibility age to 70 and means-testing the program's benefits.
The RSC plan, unveiled in June, also called on lawmakers to "consider legislative options that allow employers and employees to reduce their payroll tax liability and use those savings to invest in private retirement options."
"There's one thing you can count on. They ALL want to cut your Social Security."
In subsequent months, including shortly before the November midterms, a number of House Republicans made plain their intention to pursue deeply unpopular cuts to Social Security and Medicare should they retake control of the chamber.
Specifically, GOP members such as Reps. Jason Smith (R-Mo.), Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), Buddy Carter (R-Ga.), and Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.)—all of whom voted for McCarthy on Tuesday—threatened in October to use a looming fight over the debt ceiling to force long-sought cuts and changes to Social Security.
The federal government is expected to reach the borrowing limit, an arbitrary figure set by Congress, sometime early this year, once again raising the specter of default.
McCarthy, who is now locked in a struggle to lead his party's slim House majority, signaled in October that he would support attempts to enact spending cuts in exchange for any agreement to raise the debt ceiling. The California Republican also joined the far-right flank of his caucus in vocally condemning the recently passed omnibus funding package, which averted a government shutdown last month.
Additionally, in a proposed House rules package released earlier this week, the GOP "replaced Democrats' preferred pay-as-you-go rule, which requires legislation adding to the deficit to be offset with spending cuts or tax increases, with a cut-as-you-go rule that only requires offsets if bills increase mandatory spending within a five-year or ten-year budget window," Roll Callreported.
"This means Republicans can pass tax cuts that would add to the deficit," the outlet noted.
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) denounced the proposed rule change as an attempt to "more easily cut taxes on billionaire corporations while slashing the social safety net."
In a new column, Vox's Andrew Prokop argued that the "speakership chaos," which resumed Wednesday, "could well presage a catastrophic collapse of American governance over the debt ceiling and funding issues this year—or at least a very tense situation until a deal can be worked out."
"We could be in for a dangerous showdown—one in which Biden may have to explore options for addressing the debt ceiling without congressional support at all," Prokop added.
Social Security Works echoed that warning on Tuesday, writing on Twitter that "the Republican caucus is in chaos, with their most extreme members in the driver's seat."
"In response," the group added, "Democrats must stand strong and united to protect Social Security from Republican hostage-taking."
'Much-Welcome Step': FDA Rule Change Will Let Retail Pharmacies Offer Abortion Pills
The Food and Drug Administration late Tuesday formalized a regulatory change that will allow retail pharmacies in the U.S. to dispense abortion pills for the first time, removing a major barrier to access as Republican lawmakers wage all-out war on abortion throughout the country.
Prior to the newly finalized change, the provision of mifepristone was heavily restricted, with only certified doctors or clinics allowed to offer the drug—one of two medications that can be taken in tandem to induce an abortion. In 2020, medication abortion accounted for more than half of all abortions in the U.S.
The New York Times, which first reported the FDA's move Tuesday, noted that "in December 2021, the FDA said it would permanently lift the requirement that patients obtain mifepristone in person from a health provider, a step that paved the way for telemedicine abortion services which conduct medical consultations with patients by video, phone or online questionnaires and then arrange for them to receive the prescribed pills by mail."
"On Tuesday, the FDA officially removed the in-person requirement from its regulatory rule book for mifepristone, leaving in place the remaining two requirements: that health providers be certified to show they have the knowledge and ability to treat abortion patients and that patients complete a consent form," the Times added.
Patients will still need a prescription to obtain abortion pills from CVS, Walgreens, and other retail pharmacies.
Mini Timmaraju, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, applauded the FDA for "following the science and taking this much-welcome step to permanently lift the in-person dispensing requirement for medication abortion care and expand access through pharmacies."
"For more than 20 years, millions of people have used medication abortion," Timmaraju said in a statement. "It is a safe, effective option. With abortion access being more restricted now than ever before, it is all the more important that we continue expanding access to care. This was a science-based decision that will empower folks to get the care they need in the way that best works for them. We look forward to continuing our work with the Biden administration to restore the right to abortion and expand abortion access for all."
The regulatory move was made public by the FDA with little fanfare amid the absurd spectacle of Republicans trying—and repeatedly failing—to decide who will lead their narrow majority in the House of Representatives.
"This is the most important government action today and it didn't involve Kevin McCarthy," The American Prospect's David Dayen wrote of the FDA news.
"With abortion access being more restricted now than ever before, it is all the more important that we continue expanding access to care."
Despite the FDA's change, retail pharmacies located in Republican-controlled states where abortion is heavily restricted or illegal will likely still be unable to offer abortion pills.
"State laws that ban or restrict abortion apply to medication abortion just as they apply to abortion procedures," the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) explains. "Even though the federal FDA has approved mifepristone as safe and effective, following the Dobbs decision, the availability of medication abortion today depends on state laws. Even before the Dobbs decision, however, some states restricted access to medication abortion either by blocking the use of telehealth abortions by mandating in-person visits for abortions, imposing requirements for in-person dispensing, or limiting the kinds of clinicians who could dispense the pills (only permitting MDs to dispense). In many states, these laws are now superseded by state laws that ban abortion."
The reproductive rights group UltraViolet lamented that fact Tuesday, writing on Twitter that "in abortion-hostile states, retail pharmacies may not be able to dispense mifepristone due to abortion bans like Texas' S.B. 8, which criminalizes and punishes those who help others access abortion."
In a separate decision Tuesday, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel said federal law "does not prohibit the mailing, or the delivery, or receipt by mail of mifepristone or misoprostol where the sender lacks the intent that the recipient of the drugs will use them unlawfully"—a legal opinion that will allow the U.S. Postal Service to carry abortion pills into red states.
"There are manifold ways in which recipients in every state may use these drugs, including to produce an abortion, without violating state law," the OCL opinion reads. "Therefore, the mere mailing of such drugs to a particular jurisdiction is an insufficient basis for concluding that the sender intends them to be used unlawfully."
Kirsten Moore, director of the Expanding Medication Abortion Access Project, toldPolitico on Tuesday that "in a post-Roe world, patients need all available options to get the care they need, whether in-person, by mail, or at the local pharmacy."
"Millions of people still live in states where abortion care is banned entirely," said Moore. "The kind of care you get shouldn't depend on where you live, but that's the reality anti-abortion politicians have created."
This story has been updated to correct the spelling of NARAL Pro-Choice America's president.
'Every War Ends in a Diplomatic Way': Ukrainian Foreign Minister Floats February Peace Summit
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said Monday that his government is aiming to hold a "peace summit" in February with the goal of ending Russia's assault, which is now in its 10th month.
"Every war ends in a diplomatic way," Kuleba said in an interview with the Associated Press. "Every war ends as a result of the actions taken on the battlefield and at the negotiating table."
Kuleba suggested the summit could be mediated by United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, a vocal advocate of diplomatic talks to end an invasion that has killed thousands of civilians, devastated Ukraine's infrastructure, and sparked a massive humanitarian crisis.
"The United Nations could be the best venue for holding this summit, because this is not about making a favor to a certain country," the foreign minister said. "This is really about bringing everyone on board."
But Kuleba added that Ukraine would only extend an invite to Russia if it first faced war crimes prosecution in an international court—a precondition certain to draw objections from Moscow. The International Criminal Court is currently investigating alleged war crimes by Russian forces in Ukraine.
Kuleba's remarks came hours after Russian President Vladimir Putin said he is "ready to negotiate" an end to the war, though he has refused to discuss withdrawing forces from the territories he illegally annexed in September.
Peace talks to end the war in Ukraine have been backed by dozens of countries around the world.
During his visit to the United States last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said a "just peace" would entail "no compromises as to the sovereignty, freedom, and territorial integrity of my country" and "payback for all the damages inflicted by Russian aggression."
Zelenskyy recently dropped his demand that Putin be removed from power before peace talks can resume.
The Biden White House approved another $2 billion in military assistance for Ukraine during Zelenskyy's visit, agreeing to send the war-torn country a Patriot missile system as well as so-called precision bomb kits.
'Congress Must Stop Funding Apartheid,' Tlaib Says as Israel Razes West Bank Homes
"Not even one week into 2023, the new far-right apartheid government is moving to ethnically cleanse entire communities—which would displace more than 1,000 Palestinian residents, including 500 children," said the Michigan Democrat. "All with American backing, bulldozers, and bullets."
As chaos continued in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday, the first Palestinian-American woman ever elected to the chamber took aim at Israel's new far-right government for its plans to forcibly displace over 1,000 Palestinians in the Masafer Yatta region of the illegally occupied West Bank.
After noting that "2022 was one of the deadliest years for Palestinians on record," U.S. Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.)—an outspoken critic of violence by Israeli forces and settlers, and the United States' military aid to Israel—declared that "Congress must stop funding apartheid."
"Not even one week into 2023, the new far-right apartheid government is moving to ethnically cleanse entire communities—which would displace more than 1,000 Palestinian residents, including 500 children," Tlaib tweeted. "All with American backing, bulldozers, and bullets."
The congresswoman also shared a tweet from the U.S.-based group Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), which pointed to video footage of Israeli occupation forces destroying homes and other infrastructure in Masafer Yatta.
Just days after the new Israeli government is sworn in, families in Masafer Yatta are already facing more ethnic cl… https://t.co/2RcHh1x8eR— Jewish Voice for Peace (@Jewish Voice for Peace) 1672770808
In a statement Wednesday, JVP managing director Tallie Ben-Daniel also called out Israel's most far-right government in history—Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud party was again sworn in as prime minister last week after forming a controversial coalition with right-wing parties—for escalating the forced expulsion of Palestinians from Masafer Yatta.
"The horrifying actions of this new government, only five days in, prove exactly what Palestinians have been saying all along: Israel is an apartheid state, where Palestinians are treated as inferior," said Ben-Daniel. "The dangerous escalations by the new Israeli government make clear that now is the time for action. All Jewish people who believe in justice should support Palestinians' calls for freedom and speak up against this far-right, extremist new government."
\u201cIsrael regularly destroys Palestinian water infrastructure as part of its inhumane apartheid regime. This has devastating consequences for Palestinian health & the environment \ud83d\udca7\ud83c\udf0d\n\nNo aspect of life is safe under Israeli occupation\n\n#SanctionsOnIsrael #SaveMasaferYatta\u201d— Friends of Al Aqsa (@Friends of Al Aqsa) 1672851302
JVP political director Beth Miller put pressure on U.S. President Joe Biden, who said last week that "I look forward to working with Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has been my friend for decades," while also claiming that "the United States will continue to support the two-state solution and to oppose policies that endanger its viability or contradict our mutual interests and values."
Miller argued that "the Biden administration has enabled and paved the way for this extremist Israeli government by ensuring total impunity for Israel's actions and actively fighting against any attempts to hold the Israeli government accountable for its human rights violations. Claims by the administration to 'oppose' escalatory policies are empty without concrete action to end U.S. complicity in Israeli apartheid."
\u201cThe Israeli authorities must immediately halt the forcible eviction of 1,000+ Palestinians from Masafer Yatta. \n\nDispossession is one of the key pillars of Israel\u2019s racist system of apartheid over Palestinians. It cannot go on. \n\n#SaveMasaferYatta\u201d— Amnesty UK (@Amnesty UK) 1672763229
Al Jazeerareported Wednesday that human rights groups and residents of Masafer Yatta said the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) "has informed Palestinian officials of their imminent plans to forcibly displace more than 1,000 Palestinian residents," which was approved last May by the Israeli High Court of Justice, despite charges of "ethnic cleansing" from critics worldwide.
According to the report:
"They may come without notice—they may isolate each village and displace them one by one, or they may carry out mass displacement at once. We don't know," Nidal Younis, head of the Masafer Yatta Village Council, told Al Jazeera.
"In the last period, especially after the court decision, they paralyzed the movement of people in this area," continued Younis. "There are villages with checkpoints at their entrances, and only residents of the area are allowed to enter and exit," he added, noting that the army has held up residents for up to 12 hours in the past."
The forcible transfer of protected residents—defined by the Geneva Convention as "civilians who find themselves in the hands of a party to the conflict of which they are not nationals" in occupied territory is classified as a war crime under international law.
The Israeli human rights group B'Tselem also made that point in a statement Monday, noting Israeli plans to expel Palestinians from their lands and homes to an "alternate location."
"Forcible transfer of protected persons in occupied territory is a war crime," said B'Tselem. "Therefore, the Israeli 'offer' of an alternative is meaningless. It is a violent threat that leaves the residents with no choice."
\u201cSince Israel confiscated makeshift tents in the community about a month ago \u2013 after demolishing the school itself some six weeks ago \u2013 the teachers have been folding the tent up after every school day in the hope of preventing its confiscation. >\u201d— B'Tselem \u05d1\u05e6\u05dc\u05dd \u0628\u062a\u0633\u064a\u0644\u0645 (@B'Tselem \u05d1\u05e6\u05dc\u05dd \u0628\u062a\u0633\u064a\u0644\u0645) 1672844025
In a clear display of international disapproval of the Israeli occupation, the day after Netanyahu took the oath of office last week, the United Nations General Assembly approved a resolution asking the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of Israel's ongoing "occupation, settlement, and annexation" of Palestinian territories.
Concerns Over Disinformation Grow After Musk Relaxes Twitter Ban on Political Ads
Critics expressed concern about the social media giant serving as "a major new forum for massive amounts of money to be spent to influence politics."
As advertisers depart Twitter in the wake of Elon Musk's recent takeover, the billionaire owner continues to shake up the social media platform, which on Tuesday relaxed a ban on political and issue-based advertising put in place for over three years.
When then-CEO Jack Dorsey announced the ban in October 2019, he explained that "this isn't about free expression. This is about paying for reach. And paying to increase the reach of political speech has significant ramifications that today's democratic infrastructure may not be prepared to handle."
The Twitter Safety account revealed the policy change in a pair of tweets late Tuesday:
We believe that cause-based advertising can facilitate public conversation around important topics. Today, we're relaxing our ads policy for cause-based ads in the U.S. We also plan to expand the political advertising we permit in the coming weeks.
Moving forward, we will align our advertising policy with that of TV and other media outlets. As with all policy changes, we will first ensure that our approach to reviewing and approving content protects people on Twitter. We'll share more details as this work progresses.
Politiconoted that "advertisers have fled the platform in droves after Elon Musk's takeover last October, which was followed by a spike in hate speech and the reinstatement of several previously banned right-wing accounts. The move also puts Twitter in alignment with several of the other major social media companies, such as Meta's Facebook and Google's YouTube, which both allow paid political content. One notable exception is ByteDance's TikTok, which still has a ban on political advertising."
Some digital media experts noted issues with the 2019 ban. For example, Fight for the Future director Evan Greer on Wednesday pointed to what climate journalist Emily Atkin called "Twitter's Big Oil ad loophole" in her February 2021 reporting.
\u201cIt's weird this article doesn't mention the pitfalls of Twitter's political ad ban, like the time they allowed banks to run ads about environmental initiatives, but didn't allow environmental activists to run ads about those bands fossil fuels investments https://t.co/xfs6v923f2\u201d— Evan Greer is on Mastodon (@Evan Greer is on Mastodon) 1672846282
As Ars Technicareported Wednesday:
That 2019 ban included exceptions for some cause-based advertising, where advertisers were permitted to conduct some microtargeting of Twitter users based on limited geographic location information, keywords, and interests. Notably, advertisers were not allowed to target audiences based on political affiliation like "conservative" or "liberal." Under these prior rules, Twitter-certified cause-based advertisers approved to promote content created to "educate, raise awareness, and/or call for people to take action in connection with civic engagement, economic growth, environmental stewardship, or social equity."
In 2019, the Electronic Frontier Foundation said that Twitter limiting cause-based advertising wasn't a good policy because the microtargeting exception applies to "an almost impossibly broad range of advertisements adjacent to the banned campaign content." The EFF said this policy had "the potential to worsen the problem it is trying to solve," suggesting that smaller social media platforms that "let users choose the moderation approaches that work for them" do more to empower their users to "protect themselves from manipulative advertising."
Meanwhile, some critics expressed concern about the impacts of the new policy on U.S. democracy.
"A major new forum for massive amounts of money to be spent to influence politics. Awesome!" Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington president Noah Bookbinder sardonically tweeted with a facepalm emoji.
Tim Karr, senior director of strategy and communications at Free Press, said he was skeptical that Musk would pair the ban reversal with the sort of fact-checking "that would actually 'facilitate' healthy public discourse," given the new owner's "obsession with spreading [disinformation] and conspiracy theories."
Republican digital strategist Eric Wilson told The Washington Post that while there would be a "learning curve" for campaigns that choose to now advertise on Twitter, "obviously it's good to have more options" and he expects that political candidates will take advantage of the advertising opportunity as long as journalists continue to use the platform.
"We know voters are not as active on Twitter as they are on places like Facebook and Instagram," Wilson said, referring to Meta's social media platforms. "But it remains important for shaping political narratives."
While advertising was Twitter's primary revenue source pre-Musk, it's not clear that the policy change will notably benefit the company from a financial standpoint. Before the ban, political ad spending for the U.S. 2018 midterm cycle was less than $3 million. Twitter's total revenue was $3 billion in 2018 and in 2021 it topped $5 billion, $4.51 billion of which came from ads.
A few weeks after Musk bought the company in October, Media Matters for America revealed that 50 of its 100 top advertisers—which collectively "accounted for nearly $2 billion in spending on the platform since 2020, and over $750 million in advertising in 2022 alone"—had "announced or seemingly stopped advertising on Twitter."
This post has been updated to clarify Twitter's 2021 revenue figures.
'The GOP Is Irretrievably Broken': House Adjourns After McCarthy Fails to Win Speakership
"Still not sworn in because the Republicans are having a hard time picking their leader," said Democratic Rep.-elect Maxwell Alejandro Frost. "This is a snapshot of how they'll operate for the next two years."
This is a developing story… Please check back for possible updates...
Update (6:45 pm ET):
In a signal of what the U.S. House of Representatives could look for like the next two years, the chamber adjourned Tuesday evening after GOP Congressman Kevin McCarthy repeatedly failed to secure the 218 votes needed to become the next speaker due to a revolt by several far-right Republicans.
During the third round of voting, the California Republican received only 202 votes. Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla). joined with the 19 other Republicans who had backed Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) in the second round, while Democrats maintained their support for Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.).
"Unfortunately, it's the American people who will pay the price for House Republicans' inability to govern."
"If Americans had any doubt that the GOP is irretrievably broken, today's House speaker debacle confirms it," Stand Up America founder and president Sean Eldridge said in a statement after the chamber adjourned until noon Wednesday.
"Political arsonists control the House majority," Eldridge added. "Whether they ultimately choose Kevin McCarthy or another extremist speaker of the House, the MAGA agenda will be the same: sow chaos, waste taxpayer dollars on sham investigations into President [Joe] Biden, and block progress on the pressing issues facing our nation. Unfortunately, it's the American people who will pay the price for House Republicans' inability to govern."
Recalling her warning from just after the November midterms about "Republicans in ruin," Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) took the opportunity to contrast Democratic and GOP House leadership.
\u201cUnder Democrat leadership, the House passed landmark legislation in the 117th Congress to help families and working people.\n\nOne day into the 118th Congress and GOP control, Republicans can't even elect a Speaker. We're now on the third vote with no end in sight.\u201d— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@Rep. Pramila Jayapal) 1672780884
"Thinking about how Democrats have delivered for the people time and again," Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) similarly said. "Meanwhile, Republicans can't even deliver for themselves."
Several other progressives in the chamber also piled on, such as Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who tweeted that "this is embarrassing for McCarthy, and yet another display of Republican dysfunction."
\u201cDem mood rn: Rep. Jamaal Bowman is shouting \u201cy\u2019all don\u2019t get shit done! This is unbelievable!\u201d as he leaves the House chamber\u201d— Nicholas Wu (@Nicholas Wu) 1672784994
"Based on what is going on today, their ability to govern and pass legislation on their own, I think is tenuous at best," Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) toldPolitico. "When you bend everything to an ideological position, as opposed to the work of Congress, this is what you end up with."
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) quipped that "Republicans want to run the country. They can't even figure out who they want to run their party."
\u201cWhat goes round comes round. The right-wing habits of chaos and betrayal the GOP unleashed against the American Republic on Jan. 6 are now destroying Lincoln\u2019s party. The sedition you feed is the sedition that feeds on you.\u201d— Rep. Jamie Raskin (@Rep. Jamie Raskin) 1672785662
Congressman Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) tied Tuesday's events to the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, taking aim at ex-President Donald Trump and Steve Bannon, his former White House chief strategist.
"This once-in-a-century humiliation of a party's nominee for speaker is chickens coming home to roost for McCarthy, who whitewashed right-wing insurrectionism on the House floor," said Raskin. "Nobody's getting killed now, but the House GOP now sleeps in the bed they made with Trump and Bannon."
\u201cChaos on day one because MAGA Republicans have decided that Trumper Kevin McCarthy is not even extreme enough to be their speaker.\u201d— Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (@Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib) 1672781125
"Still not sworn in because the Republicans are having a hard time picking their leader," Congressman-elect Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) tweeted Tuesday. "This is a snapshot of how they'll operate for the next two years."
Earlier:
With several far-right allies of former President Donald Trump leading a charge to block U.S. House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy's bid to become speaker of the chamber, the California Republican repeatedly fell short of the votes he needed to prevail on Tuesday.
During both rounds of voting, McCarthy got only 203 votes from his fellow Republicans, several short of the 218 votes needed to win the leadership position. In the second round of voting, GOP Rep. Jim Jordan (Ohio) received 19 votes.
That came after Jordan secured just six votes in the first round, when 10 Republicans supported Rep. Andy Biggs (Ariz.) while Reps. Byron Donalds (Fla.) and Jim Banks (Ind.) as well as former Rep. Lee Zeldin (N.Y.) each received one vote.
Defectors included outspoken backers of Trump—who urged members to support McCarthy—including GOP Reps. Lauren Boebert (Colo.) and Matt Gaetz (Fla.), who nominated Jordan for the second round even though the Ohio Republican had already spoken in support of McCarthy.
For both rounds, every Democrat backed Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who ended up with more votes than McCarthy but did not win the majority needed for the speakership. Jeffries is expected to become the House minority leader.
Leading up to the first vote, McCarthy agreed to some demands by his detractors, who include members of the House Freedom Caucus. He agreed to include in the House rules a stipulation that members can vote to unseat the speaker at any time, but refused to pledge to hold votes on some bills proposed by ultra-conservative members. He also did not pledge that the party's political action committee would decline to fund primary challengers.
No other members can be sworn in until the speaker is elected, and the House will not be able to proceed with any official business until the matter is resolved.
The second round of voting began shortly after McCarthy lost the first round, with Jordan once again giving a nominating speech in support of the California lawmaker.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) tweeted that McCarthy's failure to win the leadership post shows "the rise of the extreme MAGA caucus [has] already had ramifications."
"House Republicans are showing the American people that they can't govern," said Lieu.
Anticipating the revolt by some House Republicans, The Washington Postnoted last week that "the last time a speaker election took more than one ballot was in 1923, when Speaker Frederick Gillett (R-Mass.) was reelected on the ninth ballot."
EPA’s Soot Pollution Rule Update Falls Short, Again
EPA Must Act Quickly to Further Strengthen Particulate Matter Rule
Groundwork’s Michael Mitchell Previews Final Jobs Report of 2022
reader supported.