LIVE COVERAGE
Fog Of Bullshit: Racist Clowns, Liars and Psycopaths
The surreal and deadly lurches on. In the last, frantic, script-flipping week, MAGA went from threatening to kill Dems who reminded troops to obey the law to scurrying to parse or ignore the news their macho, bungling Secretary of War Crimes evidently blew apart (at least) two guys in the water for no reason - an action universally deemed either murder or war crime, but def against the law. Now see Kegseth et al thrash, bluster, scapegoat the other guy. Trump doctrine: Deport, raze, blame, kill first; think (sic) later.
Most notably, a flailing presidency of "malevolence tempered by incompetence" - Cue the bonkers holiday greeting, "A very Happy Thanksgiving salutation to all of our Great American Citizens and Patriots who have been so nice in allowing our Country to be divided, disrupted, carved up, murdered, beaten, mugged, and laughed at" - is now embroiled in the detritus of a toxic, slapdash revenge tour targeting perceived, if often outlandish, enemies, both here and abroad. Last week's berserk campaign focused on six, mouthy Democratic lawmakers and veterans who had the chutzpah to post a brief video reminding the military of their oaths to follow the law and if needed disobey orders that don't - a bedrock tenet of the military so vital it's engraved on a plaque at West Point: "Should orders and the law ever conflict, our officers obey the law." Pretty radical.
The measured response from the Mob-Boss-in-Chief: Hysterically charging them with "SEDITION," "TREASON," "MILITARY TRIBUNALS," and calling them "traitorous sons of bitches" who should be "EXECUTED." Even as death threats followed, he was swiftly joined by every MAGA lickspittle, especially the lickspittlest - manly Whiskey Pete, the preening, pig-eyed, fragile creator of the War Department famed for strutting on stage to spout inane bullshit about a "warrior ethos" that demands "more lethality, less (sic) lawyers" 'cause who needs rules and laws? Shrieking the Dems' "screed" was "despicable, reckless, and false," he zeroed in on Sen. Mark Kelly - Macho Twit Goes After Actual Mensch - announcing he'd heard "serious allegations of misconduct” by Kelly, he'd "determine further action," and maybe recall Kelly to active duty so he could court-martial him.
It was a brilliant move by a National Guardsman whose drunken, inept, sexual assaulting career peaked in a Civil Affairs job and a weekend TV host gig until his absurd appointment, savaged as "an affront" to anyone who ever served, especially after he leaked war plans - a move just found to have violated Pentagon policy and put at risk military personnel. Veterans eviscerate him as "an absolute jackass," "an imposter," "a coward," "a blowhard" in makeup, "that officer, a total blue falcon" who screws his comrades. Now pols are too. Sen. and former Marine Ruben Gallego: "This is fucking insane." Kelly, in contrast, is a decades-long, much-decorated Navy pilot who saw 39 combat missions in Operation Desert Storm, an astronaut who flew four space shuttle missions including the mission to recover the Columbia crash victims, a husband who retired to nurse his wife back to health after she was shot in the head, and a respected Senator.
Kelly, who's seen much worse, fought back: "(Hegseth) runs around on stage talking about lethality and the warrior ethos (like) a 12-year-old playing army, and it is ridiculous, embarrassing. This is not a serious person." He noted the "wild" irony of Hegseth attacking him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which is what the six traitors recited: "You can't make this shit up." He also posted an image of his 20-plus medals to illustrate how he'd served and loved this country. In response, Pete sneered to "Captain" Kelly not only did he do "sedition" but his medals "are out of order," and he'd get to that. Alexander Vindman (and half of America): "Ever heard of a picture being mirrored? Good reminder: You’re out of your depth." Shut down, a pouting Pete went after our real enemy, vowing to cut support for a DEI-infected Boy Scouts who've become "genderless" and failed to "cultivate masculine values." Welcome to the Gulf of Fragile Masculinity.
This is what the "Secretary of War" is busy doing. This is who this petty macho arrogant jerk is. This is the guy who, as the Washington Post reported days later, allegedly ordered a SEAL Team on Sept. 2, in the first of nearly two dozen military strikes on fishing boats in the Caribbean that have killed 83 mostly anonymous "narco-terrorists" in extrajudicial assassinations, to "kill everybody" after the smoke from an initial strike cleared and revealed two wounded survivors in the water, clinging to wreckage of the burning boat. "Kill them all," writes JoJoFromJerz. "That was the order, plain, deliberate, and damnable, issued by the booze and bronzer-brined (Hegseth) as if American power were his personal cudgel and human life his disposable currency. The directive slithered down the chain of command like toxic runoff," and in moments the two helpless men were "blown apart in the water."
The murderous "double-tap" strike was needed, the Pentagon argued, to sink the boat and avoid a "navigation hazard” - a claim Rep. and Marine veteran Seth Moulton called "patently absurd," just like Trump's underlying "novel" claim the U.S. is in an "armed conflict" with oil-rich Venezuela' and its drug cartels. Despite American opposition, to date he's threatened ground strikes, hinted at regime change, and unilaterally declared Venezuelan airspace closed along with 83 killings so politically and legally dubious the U.K. has stopped sharing intelligence on traffic in the Caribbean to not be complicit. All this, despite a total lack of evidence the victims are drug traffickers or any accountability for their deaths, and the fact most potentially lethal fentanyl doesn't even come from the Caribbean. One pundit: "So what gave him the idea blowing up small boats in international waters was a thing?" Especially when, per Marcie Wheeler, it took four shots for these killer clowns to do the lawless dirty deed.
Inept Warrior Pete is on it anyway, damn near swooning from blood lust, with his ridiculous renaming stunt - "WAR.GOV/JOINTHEFIGHT - rabid calls for "lethality," firing of military Judge Advocate Generals who act as legal guardrails against possible future illegal commands (hmm), and queasy, chest-thumping zeal for the fight: "Trump ordered action - and the Department of War is delivering! Operation SOUTHERN SPEAR defends our Homeland!" The WaPo story of his verbal command to "kill everybody" shouldn't surprise anyone; it's part of the long, sordid, bellicose narrative arc of a laws-are-bullshit buffoon who only feels big if he makes others small, or per Trump, "like, dead," and can then brag about it. A wildly unqualified, uber-macho cartoon version of a weak man willing to do anything to prove he isn't, he fits right in with all the other flame-throwing hacks and sycophants now inexplicably handed the terrifying reins of power.
Meanwhile, the consensus of virtually every military expert or lawyer asked is that Hegseth is, by his actions, either a war criminal or a murderer. The legal bottom line: "There is no basis in law for the maritime attacks. Period. Full stop." Even if there were, international and US law render the targeting of defenseless persons - showing them "no quarter" - "patently illegal." They add, "Violations of these obligations are war crimes, murder, or both. There are no other options." And anyone who issues or follows those orders should be prosecuted. Many cite for reference a "textbook war crime," as in, "If we were at war, Hegseth committed one. If not, it's outright murder." Laurence Tribe, who taught law at Harvard for 50 years, helpfully adds that the DOD Law of War Manual, Sec. 18.3.2.1 includes the "requirement" to refuse illegal orders. Their example? "Orders to fire upon the shipwrecked."
Also, in case anyone ever believed Trump's "war" was about drugs: Last week he pardoned former Honduran president and cocaine kingpin Juan Orlando Hernández, sentenced last year in a US court to 45 years in prison for conspiring to traffic over 400 tons of cocaine into the U.S.; with his brother, he also helped turn Honduras into a major producing hub and transit point for cocaine heading to the US, and once said he wanted to “stuff the drugs right up the noses of the gringos." Trump's brazen flaunting of his "charade" of a drug war may be why even Newsmax (sadly) argues the strikes are war crimes, and Repubs on House and Senate Armed Services Committees say they may even do some oversight of this one crime among so many by their mad king; it remains unclear how many are willing to "fall on their swords" for the grossly incompetent, unsavory Hegseth.
South Park's latest, savage skewering of "fucking douchebag Pete Hegseth" may help them decide, or not. Trump sends him to town to free Peter Thiel; armed with his selfie stick but thrown out by the "woke" police chief, he teargasses the annual, Saudi-sponsored 5K Turkey Trot, mistaking the race for an Antifa mob; then he bickers with ICE Barbie - who shoots another dog livestreaming and yelling, "Like and subscribe, guys! The Department of War will not be intimidated!" Possibly confusing art with life, Hegseth tried Friday to sneeringly meme his way from the outrage by trashing "fake news," doubling down with, "We have only just begun to kill narco-terrorists," and posting a grotesque, quickly blasted, parody of kids' icon Franklin the Turtle firing rockets at small boats. Up next: "Franklin Goes to the Hague For War Crimes" and "Franklin On Trial at the ICC."
The White House, meanwhile, feverishly tried to quiet the uproar. Press Barbie babbled the second strike was "in self-defense to protect Americans in vital United States interests" (sic) and insisted "presidentially-designated Narco-terrorist groups are subject to lethal targeting." Also, they suddenly found a scapegoat, Admiral Frank Bradley: "Bus, meet Admiral Bradley. Admiral Bradley, meet bus." Hegseth "authorized Adm Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes. (He) worked well within his authority and the law to ensure the boat was destroyed and the threat to the United States was eliminated," said Barbie, a renowned scholar of maritime law. Pete's stupid, rank deceit reportedly set off "furious backlash" at the Pentagon. "He is selling out Bradley and sending chills down the spines of his chain of command," said Sen. Chris Murphy. "A case study in how not to lead."
The morning after the Sept. 3 attack, Hegseth told Fox News he tracked the strike in real time: "I watched it live." At Tuesday's Cabinet circle jerk, Trump dozed from his night's hypomanic episode of rage-posting160 times, and Pete's story slimily shifted. As the big boy leader, he said, of course "you want to own that responsibility." So he saw the first strike, but "at the Dept.of War we got alotta things to do," and he had, umm, a thing, so he didn’t stay for "the hour and two hours or whatever where all the sensitive site exploitation digitally occurs" yada yada. Huh. Hours later, he learned "the commander had made the - which he had the complete authority to do" whoosh under the bus and "we have his back." Asked if he saw survivors, he lost it: "The thing was on fire. This is called the fog of war. This is what you in the press don’t understand. You sit in your air-conditioned offices, plant fake stories, nit pick, kill everybody, not based on anything, American heroes, I wrote a book, yada yada, go war fighters!
Wait. "The fog of war"? You mean the fog of bullshit? You mean the cloud of smoke you see in your own air-conditioned office far away as drones on a screen incinerate small boats and the poor souls in them, also the rare survivor who desperately hangs on in the flames and water until you flick a blithe switch to kill him too? That fog of "war"? Fuck you, you gutless vapid self-serving ghoul, whining and snarling you're all doing "what is necessary, dark and difficult things (on) behalf of the American people." Right. On Tuesday, the Columbian family of one victim filed the first court petition charging their husband and father, Alejandro Carranza Medina, 42, was illegally killed in a 2nd US strike on Sept. 15. They said he was a fisher who often set out for marlin and tuna; they named Trump and Hegseth as his killers. Trump had bragged that day of "a SECOND Kinetic Strike against positively identified, extraordinarily violent drug trafficking cartels and terrorists." He said they were "from Venezuela."
Update: Good news from The Borowitz Report for the Manchild King: The Hague has invited him to receive an award. "They said it was in response to things I've done as president," he boasted, before nodding off.
Trump EPA Finalizes 'Indefensible and Illegal' Delay to Methane Pollution Standards
With methane more than 28 times as potent as carbon at trapping heat in the atmosphere in a 100-year period, climate experts agree that reducing methane leaks from oil and gas fields would be one of the fastest and most effective ways of making a measurable impact on planetary heating—but President Donald Trump's Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday flatly refused to do so, instead announcing a delay on a requirement for fossil fuel companies to limit methane emissions.
The Biden administration had introduced the requirement for oil and gas firms to begin reducing their emissions this year, but the EPA said companies will now have until January 2027 to comply with the rule. The administration is also considering repealing the requirement entirely.
Lauren Pagel, policy director for Earthworks, called the delay "indefensible and illegal."
"The Trump administration has once again chosen polluters over people, sacrificing the health of communities and climate to serve the fossil fuel industry," said Pagel. “Every day national methane rules are delayed means more methane in the air, more toxic pollution in our lungs, and more irreversible climate damage."
The EPA claimed it was providing companies with a "more realistic timeline" for complying with the requirement, and said the action would "save an estimated $750 million over 11 years in compliance costs."
Methane can leak from oil and gas wells, pipelines, and other fossil fuel infrastructure, and companies often intentionally release methane through flaring. The fossil fuel industry is the largest industrial source of methane emissions in the US, where emissions of methane have risen sharply in recent years as the Biden administration oversaw record production of oil and gas, even as it sought to reduce emissions through the methane requirement and other regulations.
While saving money for fossil fuel companies, the delay on the rule could lead to 3.8 million more tons of methane entering the atmosphere, according to the Trump administration's own estimates.
"After years of scientific work and public engagement, this administration’s decision to delay methane pollution standards implementation yet again is a blatant act of climate denial and disregard for public health. The EPA’s job is to protect people, not pad the pockets of oil and gas executives," said Pagel.
In addition to contributing to global heating and the extreme flooding, hurricanes, heatwaves, and other destructive weather events that come with it, methane emissions are linked to higher ground-level ozone pollution made up of tiny particles that can cause respiratory and cardiac problems, cancer, and strokes.
Grace Smith, senior attorney at the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), noted that the methane standards have already been working "to reduce pollution, protect people’s health, and prevent the needless waste of American energy"—progress that will now be reversed by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin and Trump.
“The rule released today means millions of Americans will be exposed to dangerous pollution for another year and a half, for no good reason,” said Smith. “Delaying the methane standards threatens people’s health and undermines progress by industry leaders.”
“What’s more, the Trump administration rushed to push through this harmful rule without meaningful transparency or a chance for the public to weigh in,” added Smith. “EDF is already in court challenging EPA’s first attempt to delay these vital protections. We will continue to oppose the rule released today, so that people can breathe cleaner air.”
EDF and the grassroots group Moms Clean Air Force expressed particular concern over nearly 18 million people in the US who live near active oil and gas wells.
"Children in my community and across the nation need a strong and comprehensive oil and gas methane rule as soon as possible," said Patrice Tomcik, senior national field director for Moms Clean Air Force.
EDF noted that "proven, cost-effective solutions are available to help oil and gas operators meet the standards while reducing waste and monetary losses," and both large and small producers have expressed support for the federal methane regulation as fossil fuel-producing states have begun implementing the standards.
The rule announced Wednesday, said EDF, "ignores the strong opposition to the rule from members of impacted communities and wide variety of other Americans."
‘Yikes’: New Jobs Data Further Undermines Trump Fiction of Thriving Economy
Economists on Wednesday expressed significant concerns after new data from global payroll processing firm ADP estimated that the US economy lost 32,000 jobs last month.
As reported by CNBC, small businesses bore the brunt of the job losses, as firms with fewer than 50 employees shed a total of 120,000 jobs, more than offsetting the 90,000 in job gains reported by firms with 50 or more employees.
The loss of 32,000 jobs in November marked a major miss for economists' consensus estimate of 40,000 jobs added on the month, and CNBC noted that the total number of jobs lost according to ADP data "was the biggest drop since March 2023."
Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, noted in a post on X that the job losses recorded by ADP were widespread across the US economy.
"Yikes," she wrote in reaction to the report. "Most industries were doing layoffs. The only ones still are hiring are hospitality and healthcare."
Long also said the disparity between small and large businesses in terms of job growth was more evidence that the US is experiencing a "K-shaped" economy in which those at the top of the economic ladder thrive, even as everyone else struggles.
"Larger companies are still hiring," she explained. "Smaller firms (under 50 workers) are doing the layoffs. It's been a very tough year for small biz due to tariffs and more selective spending from lower and middle-class consumers."
Kevin Gordon, head of macro research and strategy at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, observed that ADP hasn't reported such a big drop in small-business employment since October 2020, when the US economy was suffering through the peak of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, cautioned against reading too much into ADP data, although he added that "in the absence of up to date government payrolls, all other signs point to a further deteriorating labor market."
Charlie Bilello, chief market strategist at financial planner Creative Planning, argued that the ADP jobs numbers were part of a negative three-month trend in which the US economy lost an estimated 4,000 jobs per month, which he said was "the first three-month decline since the 2020 recession."
Bilello added that "a year ago, we were adding over 200,000 jobs per month."
Diane Swonk, chief economist at accounting firm KPMG, argued that the ADP report showed job losses in the US economy were "broad based" and "were accompanied by a cooling of wage gains" for workers who still have jobs or are switching from one job to another.
"Those with a job are clinging on, while those without are left wanting," she explained.
Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, argued that the ADP report blows up President Donald Trump's spin about the health of the US economy.
"The booming job market exists only in Donald Trump's demented head," he wrote.
Medicare for All Sees Key Polling Shift as Americans Fume Over Surging For-Profit Insurance Premiums
With Affordable Care Act premiums surging and lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle scrambling to cobble together a last-minute fix, recent polling data shows that a strong majority of the American public supports a transformative proposal that few members of Congress are vocally advocating.
Data for Progress released survey results late last month showing that 65% of likely US voters—including 78% of Democrats, 71% of Independents, and 49% of Republicans—either strongly or somewhat support "creating a national health insurance program, sometimes called 'Medicare for All,' that would cover all Americans and replace most private health insurance plans."
Overall support for such a system dropped just two percentage points when survey respondents were informed that Medicare for All would replace insurance premiums with higher taxes, abolish most private insurance, and eliminate copays and deductibles. In an analysis posted last week, The Lever's David Sirota observed that those results are a shift from earlier polling showing a sharp decline in support for Medicare for All once respondents were told the proposal would wipe out private insurance.
"That might have been the end of Medicare for All for another generation—except now the ACA is epically and undeniably failing to guarantee 'affordable' healthcare," Sirota wrote. "As private health insurers are now jacking up premiums for tens of millions of Americans, a new poll shows a huge majority of Americans now want Medicare for All—even if it entails eliminating private insurers and raising taxes."
The Data for Progress survey came as Republican and Democratic lawmakers continued floating temporary, Band-Aid solutions to avert catastrophic premium increases stemming in large part from the looming expiration of enhanced ACA tax credits, which lapse at the end of the year.
A new poll released Thursday by KFF found that "six in ten adults (61%) who buy their health coverage on the ACA marketplace say it is very or somewhat difficult to afford their deductibles and out-of-pocket costs for medical care."
"When asked what they would do if the amount they pay for health insurance each month doubled, one in three enrollees (32%) say they are very likely to shop for a lower-premium plan (with higher deductibles and out-of-pocket costs), and one in four (25%) say they would be very likely to go uninsured," KFF noted.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on Thursday pitched a three-year extension of the ACA subsidies ahead of a planned vote next week—a proposal that Republicans are certain to oppose.
On the Republican side, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)—who is linked to the largest Medicare fraud case in US history—is convening a group of Republican lawmakers to craft a likely dead-on-arrival ACA alternative that would implement some proposals floated by President Donald Trump, including new savings accounts that critics say would further enrich banks and insurance giants.
Scott warned in a statement to Axios earlier this week that "the more Republicans refuse to engage on this issue, the more we allow radical Democrats to lead our country on a slow creep towards the Socialist single-payer healthcare system they've always wanted."
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), meanwhile, is reportedly planning to finalize a healthcare bill early next week, though no details were immediately available.
There's also a bipartisan framework led by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) and Jen Kiggans (R-Va.), which calls for a one-year extension of the enhanced ACA tax credits "with targeted modifications," including intensified means-testing that would phase out the subsidies for those with incomes between 600% and 1,000% of the federal poverty level.
The Medicare for All Act, led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the Senate and Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) in the House, would have no such means-testing, guaranteeing comprehensive coverage to all for free at the point of service.
"Everybody recognizes that our current healthcare system is broken. That’s why over 60% of the American people support Medicare for All," Sanders said at a rally with nurses in the nation's capital on Wednesday. "The day will come when working-class Americans will be able to go to the doctor, dentist, or a nursing home without having to worry about the cost. We’re going to win this fight."
Report Shows How Recycling Is Largely a 'Toxic Lie' Pushed by Plastics Industry
A report published Wednesday by Greenpeace exposes the plastics industry as "merchants of myth" still peddling the false promise of recycling as a solution to the global pollution crisis, even as the vast bulk of commonly produced plastics remain unrecyclable.
"After decades of meager investments accompanied by misleading claims and a very well-funded industry public relations campaign aimed at persuading people that recycling can make plastic use sustainable, plastic recycling remains a failed enterprise that is economically and technically unviable and environmentally unjustifiable," the report begins.
"The latest US government data indicates that just 5% of US plastic waste is recycled annually, down from a high of 9.5% in 2014," the publication continues. "Meanwhile, the amount of single-use plastics produced every year continues to grow, driving the generation of ever greater amounts of plastic waste and pollution."
Among the report's findings:
- Only a fifth of the 8.8 million tons of the most commonly produced types of plastics—found in items like bottles, jugs, food containers, and caps—are actually recyclable;
- Major brands like Coca-Cola, Unilever, and Nestlé have been quietly retracting sustainability commitments while continuing to rely on single-use plastic packaging; and
- The US plastic industry is undermining meaningful plastic regulation by making false claims about the recyclability of their products to avoid bans and reduce public backlash.
"Recycling is a toxic lie pushed by the plastics industry that is now being propped up by a pro-plastic narrative emanating from the White House," Greenpeace USA oceans campaign director John Hocevar said in a statement. "These corporations and their partners continue to sell the public a comforting lie to hide the hard truth: that we simply have to stop producing so much plastic."
"Instead of investing in real solutions, they’ve poured billions into public relations campaigns that keep us hooked on single-use plastic while our communities, oceans, and bodies pay the price," he added.
Greenpeace is among the many climate and environmental groups supporting a global plastics treaty, an accord that remains elusive after six rounds of talks due to opposition from the United States, Saudi Arabia, and other nations that produce the petroleum products from which almost all plastics are made.
Honed from decades of funding and promoting dubious research aimed at casting doubts about the climate crisis caused by its products, the petrochemical industry has sent a small army of lobbyists to influence global treaty negotiations.
In addition to environmental and climate harms, plastics—whose chemicals often leach into the food and water people eat and drink—are linked to a wide range of health risks, including infertility, developmental issues, metabolic disorders, and certain cancers.
Plastics also break down into tiny particles found almost everywhere on Earth—including in human bodies—called microplastics, which cause ailments such as inflammation, immune dysfunction, and possibly cardiovascular disease and gut biome imbalance.
A study published earlier this year in the British medical journal The Lancet estimated that plastics are responsible for more than $1.5 trillion in health-related economic losses worldwide annually—impacts that disproportionately affect low-income and at-risk populations.
As Jo Banner, executive director of the Descendants Project—a Louisiana advocacy group dedicated to fighting environmental racism in frontline communities—said in response to the new Greenpeace report, "It’s the same story everywhere: poor, Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities turned into sacrifice zones so oil companies and big brands can keep making money."
"They call it development—but it’s exploitation, plain and simple," Banner added. "There’s nothing acceptable about poisoning our air, water, and food to sell more throwaway plastic. Our communities are not sacrifice zones, and we are not disposable people.”
Writing for Time this week, Judith Enck, a former regional administrator at the US Environmental Protection Agency and current president of the environmental justice group Beyond Plastics, said that "throwing your plastic bottles in the recycling bin may make you feel good about yourself, or ease your guilt about your climate impact. But recycling plastic will not address the plastic pollution crisis—and it is time we stop pretending as such."
"So what can we do?" Enck continued. "First, companies need to stop producing so much plastic and shift to reusable and refillable systems. If reducing packaging or using reusable packaging is not possible, companies should at least shift to paper, cardboard, glass, or metal."
"Companies are not going to do this on their own, which is why policymakers—the officials we elected to protect us—need to require them to do so," she added.
Although lawmakers in the 119th US Congress have introduced a handful of bills aimed at tackling plastic pollution, such proposals are all but sure to fail given Republican control of both the House of Representatives and Senate and the Trump administration's pro-petroleum policies.
Human Rights Group Warns US Gaza Plan Will Impose 'Unlawful Collective Imprisonment' of Palestinians as New Details Emerge
A prominent international human rights organization is warning that the United States' plan for postwar Gaza will impose "unlawful collective imprisonment" on the Palestinian civilians who have survived two years of genocide.
In November, several news outlets reported on the Trump administration's plan to carve Gaza in two: a so-called “green zone” controlled by Israel and a “red zone” controlled by the militant group Hamas.
The US would construct what it called “Alternative Safe Communities” for Palestinians to live in the Israeli-controlled portion of Gaza, which is over half of the territory under the current "ceasefire" agreement.
The New York Times described these communities as "compounds" of 20,000 to 25,000 people, where Israeli officials reportedly argued they should not be allowed to leave.
The initial reporting raised fears that the US and Israel were constructing what would amount to a "concentration camp," where Palestinians would be forced to live in squalid conditions without freedom of movement.
On Wednesday, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor released new details on how Palestinians, currently facing mass displacement from their homes in the portion of the strip not occupied by Israel, would be corralled into the green zone under the US proposal.
The Geneva-based group issued a stark warning about the plan, which it said carried "grave risks, including the effective displacement of Palestinians from their homes and the transformation of large parts of Gaza into closed military zones under the direct control of the Israeli army."
“Entry and exit would be permitted only through security screening, effectively converting these sites into overcrowded detention camps that impose severe restrictions on residents’ freedom of movement and daily life."
Euro-Med's report explains that the transfer of Palestinians would be carried out using "various pressure tactics."
"This is done by creating a coercive environment in the red zone and making access to relative protection and basic services conditional on relocating to designated areas within the green zone, following extensive security screening and vetting," the report says. "This removes any genuine element of consent and places the process squarely within the scope of forced displacement prohibited under international humanitarian law."
It also provides new details on the conditions Palestinians would be subject to once they've arrived: "The plan includes the establishment of 'cities' of prefabricated container homes (caravans) in the green zone, each housing around 25,000 people within an area of no more than one square kilometer and enclosed by walls and checkpoints."
This means these Palestinian cantons would be over three times as densely populated as the Tel Aviv District, the most crowded in Israel, which has about 8,130 people per square kilometer.
"Entry and exit would be permitted only through security screening, effectively converting these sites into overcrowded detention camps that impose severe restrictions on residents’ freedom of movement and daily life," the report continues.
This is not the first proposal to use the promise of safety to lure Palestinians into an enclosed space without the right to leave.
Earlier this year, following US President Donald Trump's call for the people of Palestine to be forcibly removed from the Gaza Strip, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz proposed the creation of a massive “humanitarian city” built on the ruins of Rafah that would be used as part of an “emigration plan” for hundreds of thousands of displaced people.
Under that plan, Palestinians would have been given “security screenings” and once inside would not be allowed to leave. Humanitarian organizations, including those inside Israel, roundly condemned the plan as essentially a “concentration camp.”
Euro-Med said that the design laid out in the new US plan "mirrors the historical model of ghettos, in which colonial and racist regimes confined specific groups to sealed areas surrounded by walls and guard posts, with movement and resources controlled externally, as seen in Europe during World War II and in other colonial contexts."
'One of the Worst Awards Someone Could Possibly Get': FIFA Blasted for Giving Trump Made-Up 'Peace Prize'
"Winning the FIFA Peace Prize is like winning the Dahmer Culinary Award," said one critic.
President Donald Trump, whose administration is engaged in a boat-bombing campaign in the Caribbean that human rights organizations and legal experts consider a murder spree, has finally been given a peace prize.
Although Trump tried unsuccessfully this year to get the Norwegian Nobel Committee to award him its prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, he was given something of a consolation gift on Friday when FIFA, the official governing body behind the World Cup, gave him its first-ever FIFA Peace Prize.
After being given the award, Trump called it "truly one of the great honors of my life," and suggested he deserved it for supposedly "saving millions and millions of lives."
A Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health study released last month estimated that Trump's decision to shutter the US Agency for International Development (USAID) earlier this year has already caused hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths, and a study published this summer by medical journal The Lancet projected that the end of USAID will lead to up to 14 million preventable deaths over the next five years.
According to the New York Times, the announcement awarding Trump the prize was "so hastily arranged that it surprised several of the body’s most senior officials, including board members and vice presidents."
The paper also noted that the prize was just the latest effort by FIFA president Gianni Infantino to shower Trump with flattery whenever possible.
"Mr. Infantino has lauded Mr. Trump at almost every opportunity, attending events that have little to do with soccer, handing over major FIFA trophies to Mr. Trump, and presiding over FIFA’s rental of office space in Trump Tower in New York two years after the organization opened a gleaming North American hub in Miami," the Times reported.
Human Rights Watch was quick to blast FIFA for giving Trump any sort of peace prize given what it described as the administration's "appalling" human rights record.
Jamil Dakwar, human rights director at the ACLU, also said that Trump was undeserving of the award, and he noted the administration "has aggressively pursued a systematic anti-human rights campaign to target, detain, and disappear immigrants in communities across the US—including the deployment of the National Guard in cities where the World Cup will take place."
Dakwar also called on FIFA "to honor its human rights commitments, not capitulate to Trump’s authoritarianism."
Daniel Noroña, Americas advocacy director for Amnesty International USA, also warned FIFA that many soccer fans could end up being targeted by federal immigration officials for trying to attend World Cup games in US cities next year.
"The threat of excessive policing, including immigration enforcement, at World Cup venues is deeply troubling, and FIFA cannot be silent," he said. "FIFA must obtain binding guarantees from US authorities that the tournament will be a safe space for all, regardless of political stance, opinion, or immigration status."
Anti-war group CodePink protested against Trump's award of the FIFA prize in Washington, DC, and argued that the president is "escalating war on Venezuela, protecting Israel’s continued attacks on Palestine, and terrorizing our communities with [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and the National Guard," and thus should not receive any honors for his supposed peacemaking efforts.
Other critics, however, argued that FIFA was the perfect organization to give the president a made-up peace prize given its long history of corruption and bribery scandals.
@EiFSoccer, an account on X primarily dedicated to soccer news, said that "the FIFA Peace Prize is unironically one of the worst awards someone could possibly get," given that it was being handed out by "one of the most corrupt sporting institutions of all time."
"Winning the FIFA Peace Prize is like winning the Dahmer Culinary Award," joked journalist Mark Jacob on Bluesky.
Fashion commentator Derek Guy, meanwhile, wondered "WTF is a FIFA Peace Prize" and then equated it to "being an NFL laureate in physics."
'A Tragedy in the Making': CDC Panel Votes to Adjust Hepatitis B Vaccine Policy for Newborns
"This unfounded change to the childhood vaccine schedule will only lead to entirely preventable disease outbreaks in the years ahead," said the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, ranking member of the top US Senate committee on public health, demanded on Friday that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explain to lawmakers why experts he convened had scrapped a policy that one academic recently called "one of the most significant public health achievements in US child health over the past several decades."
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), said Sanders, "in strong disagreement with the medical and scientific community, voted to end a decades-long recommendation that newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine. This vaccine saves lives."
Since 1991, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) adopted a policy of recommending the hepatitis B vaccine for all newborn babies in the US, the number of children who test positive for the disease has plummeted by 99%, from nearly 20,000 annually to the single or low-double digits.
On Friday, ACIP—whose 17 previous members were all fired and replaced by Kennedy—voted to potentially erase that progress, which, as Kelly Gebo, dean of the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, said this week, has "prevented tens of thousands of deaths, and remains a safe, effective, and essential measure."
The panel voted 8-3 that women who test negative for hepatitis B should work with their healthcare provider to decide "when and if" their children will be vaccinated against the virus, which causes an infection of the liver and can be transmitted through blood or other bodily fluids. The disease can cause a chronic infection and eventually lead to cirrhosis, liver failure, or liver cancer.
Under the new guidance, parents will be advised to “consider vaccine benefits, vaccine risks, and infection risks” and administer the shot at two months of age at the earliest.
At Stat News, Helen Branswell noted that while the revised policy, as stated, is only a recommendation in cases of a pregnant person who is at low risk for hepatitis B, the across-the-board recommendation helped ensure babies would not slip "through the safety net meant to protect them against infection at birth."
"All pregnant people are supposed to be tested for hepatitis B during pregnancy," wrote Branswell. "But testing doesn’t always occur, some test results are faulty, and some pregnant people become infected later in pregnancy, after being tested."
The ACIP members who voted to change the policy repeated claims made by Kennedy throughout the debate—that babies in general are at low risk and that hepatitis largely affects sex workers, drug users, and people from countries with high hepatitis B rates.
But critics of the decision said it will place unvaccinated infants at risk of being exposed to the virus, especially since as many as 70% of the roughly 2 million Americans who have hepatitis B are not aware of their diagnosis.
James Campbell, vice chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics’ infectious diseases committee, told Stat News about a 15-year-old girl he cared for who had not been vaccinated against hepatitis B in infancy because she was not believed to be at risk. She developed a chronic infection and ultimately died after two failed liver transplants.
“This is a very dangerous decision. It will certainly cause harm,” Campbell told Stat News.
Consumer advocacy group Public Citizen added that the vote is a "tragedy in the making."
In Massachusetts, Democratic Gov. Maura Healey indicated she plans to take action to circumvent ACIP's new guidelines and ensure parents are given the data about hepatitis B infection and the benefits and safety of the vaccine that's been recommended for more than three decades.
"RFK, that panel, they are not doing their jobs," Healey told CNN on Thursday night, ahead of the vote. "And in the face of that, as governor, I'm going to do mine, which is to take actions to make available science-based information. To give people real truth, real information, not conspiracy theories or ideologies, and we're going to continue to make available vaccines that people want."
Kennedy has spread misinformation about the measles vaccine and angered senators from both sides of the aisle earlier this year when the Food and Drug Administration, under his leadership, limited access to Covid-19 vaccines—leading Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Chair Bill Cassidy (R-La.) to accuse him of "denying people vaccine" after Kennedy had pledged he would not restrict Americans' ability to be immunized.
Cassidy, a physician, grilled Kennedy during his confirmation hearing about his plans for vaccine policies—but ultimately voted in favor of his confirmation.
On Friday, Cassidy said ACIP's new recommendation for the hepatitis B vaccine was "a mistake" and urged CDC Director Jim O'Neill to retain "the current, evidence-based approach."
But Charles Idelson, former communications strategist at National Nurses United, said Cassidy and the other senators who voted to confirm Kennedy to serve as the nation's top health official "own him."
"If you had the political courage to back up this position," said Idelson, "you would surely now call for Kennedy to resign for his lies to you, for his malfeasance, for his reckless advocacy of conspiracy theories, and for endangering the health of all Americans."
On Friday, Aaron Siri, a lawyer who specializes in vaccine injury cases, was scheduled to present to ACIP regarding the broader childhood vaccine schedule and potential changes to recommendations.
As AI Data Centers Disrupt US Cities, Wisconsin Woman Violently Arrested After Speaking Out
"Police should not be allowed to violently detain a person who is nonviolently exercising their free speech. This used to be something all Americans agreed on," said one state senator.
Public opposition to artificial intelligence data centers—and the push by corporations and officials to move forward with their construction anyway—were vividly illustrated in a viral video this week of a woman who was arrested after speaking out against a proposed data center in her community in Wisconsin.
Christine Le Jeune, a member of Great Lakes Neighbors United in Port Washington, spoke at a Common Council meeting in the town on Tuesday evening. The meeting was not focused on the recently approved $15 million "Lighthouse" data center set to be built a mile from downtown Port Washington—part of a project developed by Vantage Data Centers for OpenAI and Oracle—but the first 30 minutes were taken up by members of the public who spoke out against the project.
As CNBC reported last month, more than 1,000 people signed a petition calling on Port Washington officials to obtain voter approval before entering into the deal, but the Common Council and a review board went ahead with creating a Tax Incremental District for the project without public input. The data center still requires other approvals to officially move forward.
"We will not continue to be silenced and ignored while our beautiful and pristine city is taken away from us and handed over to a corporation intent on extracting as many resources as they can regardless of the impact on the people who live here," said Le Jeune. "Most leaders would have tabled the issue after receiving public input and providing sufficient notice. But you did nothing, and you laughed about it."
Le Jeune spoke for her allotted three minutes and went slightly over the time limit. She then chanted, "Recall, recall, recall!" at members of the Common Council as other community members applauded.
Police Chief Kevin Hingiss then approached Le Jeune while she was sitting in her seat, listening to the next speaker, and asked her to leave.
She refused, and another officer approached her before a chaotic scene broke out.
Last night, the Port Washington Police Department used excessive force to arrest a woman for speaking up against the Vantage data center.
We are thankful that this local advocate is safe, and we condemn the Port Washington PD’s actions in the strongest possible terms. SHAME! pic.twitter.com/35dhEKvojL
— Our Wisconsin Revolution (@OurWisconsinRev) December 3, 2025
City officials had told attendees not to speak out of order during the meeting, and Le Jeune acknowledged that she and others had spoken out of turn at times.
But she told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that she had been surprised by the police officers' demand that she leave, and by the eventual violence of the incident, with officers physically removing her from her seat and dragging her and two other people across the floor.
The two other residents had approached Le Jeune to protest the officers' actions.
"I never expected something like that to happen in a meeting. It was very strange," she told the Journal Sentinel. "Suddenly this police chief showed up in front of me, and all I was thinking was: 'Wait, what is going on? Why is he interrupting her speech? ... It felt like [police] were kind of primed tonight to pounce."
State Sen. Chris Larson (D-7) said that "police should not be allowed to violently detain a person who is nonviolently exercising their free speech. This used to be something all Americans agreed on."
William Walter, executive director of Our Wisconsin Revolution, filmed the arrest and told ABC News affiliate WISN, "I've never seen a response like that in my life."
"What I did see was a lot of members of the Port Washington community who are really frustrated that they're being ignored and they're being dismissed by their elected officials," he said.
AI data centers, he added, "will impact you. They'll impact your friends, your family, your neighbors, your parents, your children. These are the kinds of things that are going to be dictating the future of Wisconsin, not just for the next couple of years but for the next decade, the next 50 years."
After Le Jeune's arrest, another resident, Dawn Stacey, denounced the Common Council members for allowing the aggressive arrest.
"We have so many people who have these concerns about this data center," said Stacey. “Are we being heard by the Common Council? No we’re not. Instead of being heard we have people being dragged out of the room.”
“For democracy to thrive, we need to have respect between public servants and the people who they serve," she added.
Vantage has distributed flyers in Port Washington, which has a population of 17,000, promising residents 330 full-time jobs after construction. But as CNBC reported, "Data centers don’t tend to create a lot of long-lasting jobs."
Another project in Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin hired 3,000 construction workers and foresees 500 employees, while McKinsey said a data center it is planning would need 1,500 people for construction but only around 50 for "steady-state operations."
Residents in Port Washington have also raised concerns about the data center's impact on the environment, including through its water use, the potential for exploding utility prices for residents, and the overall purpose of advancing AI.
As Common Dreams reported Thursday, the development of data centers has caused a rapid surge in consumers' electricity bills, with costs rising more than 250% in just five years. Vantage has claimed its center will run on 70% renewable energy, but more than half of the electricity used to power data center campuses so far has come from fossil fuels, raising concerns that the expansion of the facilities will worsen the climate emergency.
A recent Morning Consult poll found that a rapidly growing number of Americans support a ban on AI data centers in their surrounding areas—41% said they would support a ban in the survey taken in late November, compared to 37% in October.