

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.

Anna Ghosh, Food & Water Watch, (510) 922-0075, aghosh@fwwatch.org
On Saturday, October 19, thousands of people concerned about the threat that drilling and fracking for oil and gas poses to the environment, communities and their shared resources will unite through approximately 250 actions on six continents for the second annual Global Frackdown. A coordinated international day of action against fracking, the Global Frackdown will gather concerned citizens in over 25 countries who will send a message to elected officials around the world that they want a future powered by clean, renewable energy, not polluting fossil fuels. Initiated by Food & Water Watch, over 350 advocacy, environmental and public health organizations including 350.org, Environment America, MoveOn.org, Progressive Democrats of America, Democracy for America, Breast Cancer Action, Energy Action Coalition, Center for Biological Diversity and Environmental Action are expected to participate in the Global Frackdown.
"Fracking is a global issue with significant policy and political implications both in the United States and overseas," said Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. "In January, President Obama promised to take 'bold action' on climate change, but his plans to accelerate drilling and fracking will only exacerbate the problem. It's time for him to be a leader on the global stage and reject fracking as many communities around the world have already done."
"The Global Frackdown shows that the movement for a ban on fracking is truly worldwide. To frack or not to frack comes down to this simple choice: do we want another fifty years of dependency and addiction to toxic fossil fuels, or do we want to move on, worldwide, to renewable energy," said Josh Fox, the director of Gasland and Advisory Board Member for Americans Against Fracking. "From every perspective be it water and air contamination, global climate change or the health of our democracies worldwide, we need to break from the past. The Global Frackdown is one of many powerful moments where the world is saying we need to move on."
In New York City, a broad coalition of groups will unite at the New York City Wine & Food Festival to articulate how fracking affects food systems and to ask Governor Andrew Cuomo to listen to the science and ban fracking in the state. Meanwhile, Californians Against Fracking will convene a rally in Oakland to urge Governor Jerry Brown to ban fracking. In Culver City, California, a coalition of organizations will hold a rally, followed by a five-mile bike ride and walking brigade, to raise aware of the effects of fracking in the Los Angeles Basin and to support a moratorium on fracking in the city of Los Angeles.
"Our elected leaders--from President Obama to small town city council members--should take notice: fracking is bad for our neighborhoods, bad for our drinking water, bad for the climate and bad for their own legacies, and MoveOn members and allies are holding them accountable," said Victoria Kaplan, campaign director at MoveOn.org Civic Action.
A recent poll released by the Pew Research Group finds that opposition to fracking has grown significantly across most regions and demographic groups. Overall, 49 percent are opposed to increased fracking, while only 44 percent support it. As scientific studies continue to confirm the inherent dangers of fracking to the environment and public health, the American people are seeing through the millions of dollars being spent on advertising by the oil and gas industry, and are increasingly opposing fracking.
"Each fracking operation opens dozens of pathways for polluting our water, our air and our land," observed John Rumpler, senior attorney at Environment America and co-author of the recent report, Fracking by the Numbers: Key Impacts of Dirty Drilling at the State and National Level. "Multiply those threats by tens of thousands of wells and waste disposal sites, and we have an environmental nightmare in the making. The prudent course is to stop this dirty drilling before more damage is done."
Polls in key states such as New York, California and Pennsylvania show similarly high levels of opposition to fracking. A recent poll released by Siena College finds that 45 percent of New York voters oppose the state Department of Environmental Conservation plans to move forward with fracking in the Southern Tier, the part of New York that extends above Pennsylvania. Only 37 percent said they would support such a move. Meanwhile, in California, 53 percent of likely voters polled by the Public Policy Institute of California said they're against the expansion of fracking in the state. According to a poll conducted by The Center of Local, State and Urban Policy at the University of Michigan in conjunction with the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion, almost two-thirds of Pennsylvanians support a moratorium on fracking until its effects can be better studied.
"Thousands of young activists are converging in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for Power Shift 2013, and will join the Global Frackdown, because our generation is determined to use its people power to move beyond fracking," said Whit Jones, campaign director for Power Shift. "The thousands of young people at Power Shift 2013 are fighting fracking in their communities, and we're uniting to demand that the Obama Administration and EPA stand up to fracking too."
Last week, the European Parliament voted to require energy companies to conduct environmental audits before commencing drilling and fracking, and a French court upheld a ban on fracking. Bulgaria and some Swiss and German states have also adopted a ban or a moratorium on fracking activities. Other European Union member states, such as the Czech Republic, Romania and Germany are considering a moratorium on fracking until an adequate regulatory framework has been is in place for unconventional energy projects such as shale gas. To date, 383 communities in the United States have passed measures against fracking.
"On October 19, all of us have an opportunity to make our voices heard about the health and environmental effects of fracking, and the often corrupt process that allows energy companies to take private land and taxpayer-owned assets for fracking and big profits at our expense," said Jim Dean, chair of Democracy for America. "It's time to stand up for the rights of citizens and stand up to big energy. Show up, be counted and let's win this fight."
In August, a million Americans signed petitions objecting to the Obama Administration's plans to frack on federal lands. Nearly 650,00 of those petitions were collected by Americans Against Fracking member organizations, and called for a complete ban. Weeks later, Food & Water Watch, MoveOn.org, Environmental Action, and other allied organizations in Americans Against Fracking and the Stop the Frack Attack Network collected over 250,000 petitions asking the Obama Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency to reopen investigations into the possible link between drilling and fracking and water contamination in Pennsylvania, Texas and Wyoming.
"All over the world people are rising up to say, 'Instead of fracking for ever dirtier fuel, it's time to tap the endless energy of the wind and sun,'" said Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500"The report recommends a full investigation by the International Criminal Court into Britain’s complicity and participation in genocide," said the leftist lawmaker.
A report led by progressive British parliamentarian Jeremy Corbyn and submitted Wednesday to the International Criminal Court recommends that the Hague-based tribunal investigate UK government officials complicit in Israel's genocide in Gaza.
"The Gaza Tribunal report exposes the full scale of Britain's complicity in genocide," said Corbyn, a former Labour leader who represents Islington North for the leftist Your Party. "Complicity demands consequences. That's why, today, we submitted The Gaza Tribunal report to the International Criminal Court (ICC)."
"The report concludes that the British government has failed in its fundamental obligation to prevent genocide, has been complicit in atrocity crimes, and in some instances has even been an active participant in these crimes," Corbyn wrote in a foreword to the publication. "The report recommends a full investigation by the International Criminal Court into Britain’s complicity and participation in genocide."
According to the report, "Britain has played a vital role in Israeli military operations in Gaza," including through weapons sales, Royal Air Force surveillance flights, diplomatic support, and failure to sanction Israeli officials responsible for a war that United Nations experts, jurists, scholars, national and other governments, and others say is genocidal.
Report co-author and international law professor Shahd Hammouri said: “In our hands we have evidence that British officials knowingly hid the truth and distorted the truth. They had the legal advice and chose to overlook it. British citizens in good conscience who sought to uphold their legal and moral obligations of standing up against power were threatened with their livelihoods and asked to either quit their jobs or shut the hell up."
In 2024, the ICC issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged crimes against humanity, and war crimes in Gaza, including murder and forced starvation. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also in The Hague, is weighing a genocide case against Israel filed by South Africa and supported by an increasing number of nations.
"Israel has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Gaza," the tribunal's report states. "The genocide in Gaza must be understood within its historical context: as part of a decadeslong, ongoing, and systematic effort to destroy the Palestinian people in whole or in part. We heard from a range of witnesses who described in devastating detail the human and social reality of displacement, ethnic cleansing, and genocide."
The report notes the deliberate destruction of Gaza's healthcare and education systems, targeting of journalists, and famine caused by Israel's "complete siege" of the embattled strip.
The Gaza Tribunal report notes the UK's legal obligations under international law, which include:
The publication of the Gaza Tribunal report—which is related in spirit and method to a separate Gaza Tribunal headed by former UN special rapporteur Richard Falk—follows last year's finding by the Corbyn-led body that Britain is complicit in the Gaza genocide.
The UK government has also faced international condemnation for persecuting members of Palestine Action and other activists. Last month, the British High Court ruled that the government illegally banned the protest group, some of whose members nearly died while on recent hunger strikes.
The report also comes as Israeli forces continue killing, maiming, and forcibly displacing Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, where the ICJ found in 2024 that Israel is guilty of illegal occupation and apartheid.
To date, more than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded in Gaza, according to officials there. Around 2 million others have been forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened.
"Our dollars are advancing the pain of our global neighbors," said Rep. Delia Ramirez. "We here today are saying 'enough.'"
The lawn outside the US Capitol building was strewn with colorful backpacks and children's shoes on Wednesday afternoon as progressive members of Congress called for an end to President Donald Trump's "illegal" war with Iran.
They were there to memorialize the 168 children, mostly girls aged 7-12, who were killed when the United States bombed an elementary school in Minab on February 28 in the opening salvo of a war that has gone on to claim the lives of more than 2,000 people, including more than 300 children, according to reports from Iranian and Lebanese health authorities.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said each backpack and pair of shoes represented "an Iranian child who should still be with us today... but they were struck down by a Tomahawk missile."
Van Hollen described it as a consequence of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's crusade against what he's derided as "stupid rules of engagement."
"Those rules of engagement are designed to prevent civilian harm," the senator said. "They're designed to prevent a war crime."
The lawmakers described Trump's attack on Iran as a "war of choice" and an act of aggression that violated international law.
"There was no imminent threat" from Iran, said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.). "There is certainly no plan for this war, and most importantly, there is no authorization from Congress."
Shortly after the war was launched, War Powers Resolutions seeking to rein in Trump's ability to use force without authorization narrowly failed in both the House and the Senate, with a handful of Democrats joining Republicans to kill the measure.
The White House is reportedly preparing to ask Congress for an additional $50 billion in supplemental funding to cover the cost of the Iran war on top of the more than $990 billion Congress has already authorized in last summer's GOP budget bill and the latest funding package.
Most Democrats have taken a firm line against more funding, which would require seven of their votes to pass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate, though some pro-war Democrats have signaled a willingness to fund the war, according to reporting earlier this month.
"Civilians in Iran aren't the only ones who are paying the price," said Rep. Sarah Jacobs (D-Calif.). "Our service members and the American people are too."
She noted that 13 members of the US military have been killed since the war was launched less than two weeks ago, saying, "I fear that this number will grow."
Based on Pentagon estimates provided to Congress earlier this month, the war is projected to have already cost US taxpayers more than $24 billion as of Wednesday.
Jacobs said she would oppose "any defense supplemental package" because "every dollar Congress spends on this war without ever authorizing it tells this president and every future president that they can drag this country into any conflict they want and dare us to defund the troops."
"From Palestine to Iran, our bombs are killing women, they're killing children... our dollars are advancing the pain of our global neighbors," said Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) "We here today are saying 'enough.'"
She called for Congress to pass her Block the Bombs Act, which would cut off "offensive" US military funding to Israel, and to pass a war powers resolution limiting Trump's authority to continue striking Iran.
"Not one more dollar for a war with Iran," Ramirez said. "Not one more excuse, not one more bomb."
“While Trump voters by and large stand behind Trump, they overwhelmingly want him to declare an end to the war."
War hawks such as Sen. Lindsey Graham are pushing President Donald Trump to keep escalating the war he is waging against Iran, but a new poll of the president's base—those who voted for him in 2024, when he campaigned on "no new wars"—found that doing so would likely anger the steadily shrinking faction of Americans who have thus far continued to support him.
The poll, commissioned by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and The American Conservative, found that 79% of those who voted for Trump in 2024 want a swift end to the US and Israel's war in Iran, which began on February 28 when the president abruptly ended talks regarding Iran's nuclear program and joined Israel in attacking the country.
The survey revealed a political reality at odds with Trump's recent claim that "MAGA loves what I’m doing—every aspect of it."
More than a year after they cast votes for Trump, who campaigned relentlessly on making life more affordable for Americans, the poll found that 55% of people who supported the president are concerned about rising gas prices as a result of the war. The average price of gas has been steadily rising since the US and Israel began the war, leading Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which around a fifth of the global oil supply flows. As of Wednesday the average price in the US was up to $3.842 per gallon.
Fifty-eight percent of Trump voters said they would oppose sending US troops to fight on the ground in Iran, a step the president is reportedly considering taking in order to seize Iran's crucial oil hub on Kharg Island in the Strait of Hormuz.
Just over three-quarters of people who backed Trump in the last election said they supported the president's decision to go to war, but less than a month into the conflict, that number is down eight points from 84% on February 28, according to a Fox News poll at the time.
Quincy Institute executive vice president Trita Parsi noted that even the White House is seemingly searching "for an off-ramp from this widening conflict," in which 13 US troops have been killed and 200 have been wounded. More than 1,300 Iranians have been killed, according to the country's ambassador to the United Nations, as well as more than 900 Lebanese civilians, and at least 15 people in Israel.
"Trump’s base favors a face-saving declaration of victory by Washington that could enable a ceasefire and prevent further economic shocks."
Trump said earlier this week that "maybe we shouldn’t be there at all," and his advisers have reportedly been calling on the president to quickly determine an exit plan to avoid a political backlash.
Meanwhile, said Parsi, "neoconservatives are pressuring President Trump to double down on this war. But this poll shows that Trump’s base favors a face-saving declaration of victory by Washington that could enable a ceasefire and prevent further economic shocks."
In Responsible Statecraft, which is published by the Quincy Institute, Kelley Beaucar Vlahos noted that young MAGA voters, whose support was instrumental in delivering the White House for Trump in 2024, are "driving much of the rising opposition to the war among the president's base."
Only 54% of Trump voters aged 18-29 said they supported the war, while 46% opposed it.
"The cracks are beginning to show in President Donald Trump’s base" over the war, wrote Beaucar Vlahos.
Saagar Enjeti, conservative host of the popular Breaking Points podcast, told Responsible Statecraft that "the Republican base is clearly willing to trust President Trump up to a point but remain weary of any potential escalation."
“As evidenced by this polling the wisest move would be to declare victory and end this immediately," he said.
The poll, which was taken between March 12-14, was released a day after Joe Kent, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, announced he was resigning from his position because Iran had "posed no imminent threat to our nation" when Trump began the war. The president, said the longtime Trump loyalist, had attacked Iran "due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby."
Kent, whom critics noted has ties to white nationalists and conspiracy theorists, is the most prominent Trump administration official to resign from the White House in protest of the president's policies and actions.
On Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said in her opening statement that the US intelligence community determined that US airstrikes last year "obliterated" Iran's nuclear enrichment program, before claiming that the president alone can determine whether a country poses an "imminent" threat.
While those who voted for the president "by and large stand behind Trump, they overwhelmingly want him to declare an end to the war,” said Parsi on Wednesday. “Trump risks losing significant portions of his base if he escalates the war with ground troops and allows the war to further push up gas prices.”