SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Congressman
Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today introduced H. Con Res. 248 a privileged
resolution with 16 original cosponsors that will require the House of
Representatives to debate whether to continue the war in Afghanistan.
A rule is expected to provide for three hours of debate which will
occur on Wednesday March 11, 2010.
Speaking
about his resolution on the House floor today, Kucinich said, "There is
a new way to fight war in Afghanistan. U.S. Commanders are publicly
telling the Taliban when we are coming and where we are going to wage
war. This while Karzai tries to cut a deal with the Taliban!
"Meanwhile
a large offensive is being mounted--an assault on Kandahar. The U.S.
is going to have 100,000 troops ready for a big battle by autumn and
logistical problems abound. Here is a quote from the February 20th
National Journal, "So, despite the immense effort to push out supplies,
the front-line fighters sometimes don't even have the minimum they
need. 'We had guys out there at outposts in my area of operations
starving because we couldn't get resupply in to them,'" said one Major.
"What
is this all about? To strengthen corrupt central government officials
building villas in Dubai? I am introducing a privileged resolution to
get us out of Afghanistan and I urge your support," Kucinich added.
Original
cosponsors include Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI); Ron Paul
(R-TX); Jose Serrano (D-NY); Bob Filner (D-CA); Lynn Woolsey (D-CA);
Walter Jones, Jr. (R-NC); Danny Davis (D-IL); Barbara Lee (D-CA);
Michael Capuano (D-MA); Raul Grijalva (D-AZ); Tammy Baldwin (D-WI);
Timothy Johnson (R-IL); Yvette Clarke (D-NY); Eric Massa (D-NY); Alan
Grayson (D-FL); and Chellie Pingree (D-ME).
See a copy of the resolution here.
Dennis Kucinich is an American politician. A U.S. Representative from Ohio from 1997 to 2013, he was also a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States in 2004 and 2008.
One analyst argued the decision was "wrong," writing that "if no one is above the law, then Trump shouldn't be either."
The New York judge overseeing the criminal case stemming from hush money payments that Donald Trump made to porn star Stormy Daniels opted Friday to postpone the Republican nominee's sentencing until after the 2024 election, granting the former president's request for a delay.
New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan wrote Friday that "this is not a decision this court makes lightly but it is the decision which in this court's view, best advances the interests of justice."
Trump was originally scheduled to be sentenced in July for 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, but Merchan noted that the U.S. Supreme Court's sweeping presidential immunity decision provided Trump's legal team an opening to delay the process further.
Prior to Merchan's order Friday, Trump's sentencing hearing was set for September 18.
As The New York Timesreported, "it is unclear whether sentencing Mr. Trump" in the weeks ahead of the November 5 election "would have helped or harmed him politically; his punishment could have been an embarrassing reminder of his criminal record, but could have also propelled his claims of political martyrdom."
Norman Eisen, co-founder and board member of State Democracy Defenders Action, argued in an op-ed for MSNBC last month that Trump's sentencing should not be delayed, writing that "Trump should be denied the special treatment he seeks to delay his sentence simply because he is a presidential candidate."
"To avoid undermining public faith in the rule of law and fairness of the criminal justice system," Eisen wrote, "Trump's sentencing should go ahead as scheduled."
Eisen wrote on social media Friday that Merchan's decision to postpone Trump's sentencing was "wrong."
"Trump has already benefited from extraordinary special treatment," he added. "If no one is above the law, then Trump shouldn't be either."
Merchan wrote in his decision Friday that "this matter is one that stands alone, in a unique place in this nation's history," and experts are uncertain what would happen under various possible scenarios—including if Trump wins the 2024 election and is subsequently sentenced to prison.
One certainty, according to the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, is that "even if Trump is elected to a second term, he would not be able to pardon himself for these crimes because he was convicted on New York state charges."
"Is this a bad joke?" asked one campaigner.
As Saudi Arabia prepares to host a global internet summit in December, 40 human rights groups on Friday urged authorities in the kingdom to release everyone imprisoned for online expression, including an activist serving a 27-year prison sentence for criticizing her country's severe repression of women.
The 40 groups said in a joint statement that "Saudi Arabia must free all individuals arbitrarily detained solely for their online expression ahead of hosting the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Riyadh, which will take place from December 15-19."
"It is counter to the IGF's stated values for Saudi Arabia to host the IGF," the organizations asserted. "In 2024 it adopted a thematic focus on advancing human rights and inclusion in the digital age and Saudi Arabia continues to prosecute, lock up, forcibly disappear, and intimidate people into silence for expressing themselves on social media."
As Amnesty International—which accused Saudi Arabia of "deep hypocrisy"—noted:
Saudi authorities have waged a chilling crackdown against people who demonstrate even the slightest sign of dissenting or critical views online. Among those who have been convicted for their online expression is Salma al-Shehab. She was arrested in January 2021 and, after a grossly unfair trial, sentenced in January 2023 to a shocking 27-year prison term followed by a 27-year travel ban on trumped-up terrorism charges, simply because she tweeted in support of women's rights.
In another deeply disturbing case, in January 2024, Saudi Arabia's terrorism court sentenced Manahel al-Otaibi to 11 years in prison in connection with social media posts promoting women's rights and sharing images of herself online at a mall without wearing an abaya (a traditional loose-fitting long-sleeved robe).
Those targeted also include Abdulrahman al-Sadhan, a Red Crescent worker, who in April 2020, after a grossly unfair trial, was sentenced to 20 years, to be followed by a 20-year travel ban, for his satirical tweets, and Mohammad bin Nasser al-Ghamdi, a retired school teacher, who was sentenced to death in July 2023 for criticizing authorities on X (formerly Twitter) and his online activity on YouTube.
"These cases are emblematic of the Saudi authorities' chilling crackdown on freedom of expression, but they are not isolated examples," the 40 groups said in their statement. "Dozens of people in Saudi Arabia, including visitors to the country, have been detained solely for their online expression."
"Consequently," the signers added, "many civil society organizations and advocates, who would ordinarily attend the IGF, have chosen not to travel to Saudi Arabia, fearing that they cannot safely and freely participate in the conference."
Representatives of some of the 40 groups that signed the statement weighed in on Saudi Arabia hosting the IGF.
"Is this a bad joke?" asked Freedom Forward executive director Sunjeev Bery. "There's a phrase for this: 'rights-washing.' Rights-washing is when a human rights violator tries to hide their crimes by wrapping themselves in human rights language and causes."
"Saudi Arabia's dictatorship is one of the most repressive governments on the planet," Bery added. "Saudi internet users who dare to speak their minds are often arrested, tortured, and jailed for years."
Amnesty International secretary general Agnès Callamard said that "Saudi Arabia's authorities have 100 days before the IGF begins to demonstrate that they will ease their draconian crackdown on freedom of expression, and to show that they will use this event as an opportunity to carry out genuine reforms rather than as part of an image-washing campaign."
"In order to prove that their hosting of the conference about the internet's future is more than just a cynical PR exercise, the Saudi authorities must release all those arbitrarily detained solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression online before the IGF begins," she added.
"People clearly understand that the most severe forms of environmental destruction harm all of us, and that there is real deterrent potential in creating personal criminal liability."
Nearly two-thirds of people living in the world's largest economies believe it should be "a criminal offense" for decision-makers in government or big businesses to knowingly cause serious harm to the climate, according to polling published Friday.
Conducted by Ipsos U.K. for Earth4All and the Global Commons Alliance (GCA), the Global Commons Survey focuses on residents of Austria, Denmark, Kenya, Sweden, and all countries that represent themselves at the G20 other than Russia.
Across the 22 countries, 72% of people agreed that "it should be a criminal offense for leaders of large businesses or senior government officials to approve or permit actions they know are likely to cause damage to nature and climate that is widespread, long-term, or cannot be reversed."
"The majority support (72%) for criminalizing actions which allow serious damage to the climate surprised us," said Earth4All co-lead Owen Gaffney in a statement. "The majority of people want to protect the global commons; 71% believe the world needs to take action immediately. Our survey demonstrates that people across the world's largest economies are acutely aware of the urgent need to safeguard our planet for future generations."
Keyna had the greatest share of people signaling support for ecocide legislation, at 91%, followed by Argentina, Mexico, and South Africa, all at 85%. The United States was 68%. The only country with less than a majority was Japan, at 43%.
"We're seeing significant policy shifts in favor of ecocide legislation at the domestic, regional, and international levels," said Jojo Mehta, co-founder and CEO of Stop Ecocide International. "Most notably, at the start of this year, the European Union included 'qualified offenses' in its newly revised Environmental Crime Directive that can encompass 'conduct comparable to ecocide.' This means E.U. member states now have two years to bring these rules into national law—a huge moment felt across the globe."
"We know this policy-level progress has been significantly driven by widespread civil society demand," she continued. "The new Global Commons Survey makes it obvious that there is already a strong foundation of public support for this law. People clearly understand that the most severe forms of environmental destruction harm all of us, and that there is real deterrent potential in creating personal criminal liability for top decision-makers. Damage prevention is always the best policy, which is precisely what ecocide law is about."
Other legal responses to the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency have included filing civil lawsuits against oil and gas giants for their decades of deception and exploring the possibility of bringing criminal charges against corporate polluters for deaths tied to extreme weather that's becoming more frequent and devastating.
In addition to the ecocide findings, the Global Commons Survey shows that 69% of all respondents believe Earth is close to climate and nature tipping points, 61% are advocating for strong action to protect the environment, 59% are very or extremely worried about the state of nature, and 52% feel very or somewhat exposed to climate and environmental risks.
The groups that commissioned the poll noted that "people in emerging economies such as India (87%), China (79%), Indonesia (79%), Kenya (73%), and Turkey (69%) feel more personally exposed to climate change compared to those in Europe and the United States."
There were also gender disparities—women exhibited higher levels of concern and were less likely to think claims about environmental risks are exaggerated or believe technology can solve such problems without individuals making big lifestyle changes.
"People everywhere are very worried about the state of our planet and they're feeling the pain already," said GCA executive director Jane Madgwick. "Awareness that we are close to tipping points is high, as is concern that political priorities lie elsewhere."
"It all comes down to what we can do collectively to safeguard and restore the global commons which sustain all life on Earth and protect us from the most severe impacts of climate change," she added. "This is going to take bold leadership and a truly global effort, connecting actions across nations and from the ground up."