

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.

Sonya E Meyerson-Knox, sonya@jvp.org, 929-290-0317
From across the globe, hundreds of activists, intellectuals and artists launched an open letter calling on Facebook to ensure that any amendments to its hate speech policy keep all people safe and connected. The petition garnered over 14,500 signatures in its first 24 hours.
Led by 24 organizations, the global campaign "Facebook, we need to talk" began in response to an inquiry by Facebook to assess if critical conversations that use the term "Zionist" fall within the rubric of hate speech as per Facebook's Community Standards. Facebook may make a decision as soon as the end of February 2021. Zionism is a political ideology and movement that emerged in the 19th century and led to the founding of the state of Israel on Palestinian land; It has been deeply contested since its conception, including within the Jewish community.
Notable human rights activists and cultural figures such as Hanan Ashrawi, Norita Cortinas, Wallace Shawn and Peter Gabriel have signed the petition, which notes that if Facebook restricts the usage of the word "Zionist," it would prevent Palestinians from talking about their daily lives, shield the Israeli government from accountability for human rights violations, and do nothing to make Jewish people safer from antisemitism.
"We are deeply concerned about Facebook's proposed revision of its hate speech policy to consider "Zionist" as a proxy for 'Jew' or 'Jewish,'" the petition reads. "The proposed policy would too easily mischaracterize conversations about Zionists -- and by extension, Zionism -- as inherently antisemitic, harming Facebook users and undermining efforts to dismantle real antisemitism and all forms of racism, extremism and oppression."
This attempt to stifle conversations about Zionist political ideology and Zionist policies -- both of which have real implications for Palestinian and Israeli people, as well as Jewish and Palestinian people around the world -- is part of an emerging pattern of political censorship by the Israeli government and some of its supporters. The most prominent example of these efforts to shield the Israeli government from accountability is the current campaign to impose the controversial IHRA working definition of antisemitism on campuses and civil society, and to codify it in government legislation. The IHRA definition conflates antisemitism with holding the Israeli government accountable for rights violations, stifling protected political speech that is necessary for healthy, open discussions about foreign policy and human rights.
After 12 hours the petition already had thousands of signers, including: Atilio Boron, Judith Butler, Michael Chabon, Noam Chomsky, Julie Christie, Richard Falk, Amos Goldberg, Marc Lamont Hill, Adnan Jubran, Ronnie Kasrils, Elias Khoury, Karol Cariola, Ken Loach, Miriam Margloyses, Ilan Pappe, Vijay Prashad, Prabir Purkayastha, Rima Berns-McGown, Jessica Tauane, Einat Weizman and Cornel West. (See facebookweneedtotalk.org/petition-text/english for a complete list of initial signatories.)
The campaign was launched by 7amleh - The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media, Palestine Legal, MPower Change, Jewish Voice for Peace, Independent Jewish Voices Canada, Eyewitness Palestine, BDS National Committee, American Muslims for Palestine and Adalah Justice Project. (See below for a complete list of cosponsors.)
Rabbi Alissa Wise, Deputy Director of Jewish Voice for Peace: "If Facebook decides to add "Zionist" to its hate speech policies, it will be in order to shield the Israeli government from accountability. This is not an earnest effort seeking to dismantle antisemitism on its platforms. Facebook should be focusing on those involved in white nationalist groups inciting violence, not Palestinians seeking to share their experiences living under Zionism with the world."
Lau Barrios, Campaign Manager at MPower Change: "This move by Facebook would represent them actively siding against Palestinians and those fighting in solidarity alongside them for Palestinian liberation. It would also set a dangerous precedent around Big Tech's ability to further target our movements and harm marginalized communities for sharing their lived experiences. Facebook must stop harming and silencing Palestinians living under apartheid and start cracking down on white supremacist groups -- like the Proud Boys -- that have used their platform as a recruitment site and to push anti-Semitic, anti-Black, and Islamophobic rhetoric for years. That would require looking in the mirror. We hope they finally do so -- and listen to Palestinians and the most impacted communities."
Nadim Nashif, Executive Director of 7amleh - The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media: "Suppressing critical discussion of Zionism and Zionists on the Facebook platform would be a political act that would severely restrict Palestinians and human rights defenders from communicating about the history and the lived reality of Palestinians."
Liz Jackson, Senior Staff Attorney at Palestine Legal: "The policy Facebook is considering would be yet another tool to silence Palestinians and their allies who are trying to tell the world about the impacts of Zionism on their daily lives. Every year Palestine Legal hears from hundreds of people in the U.S. -- Palestinians and their allies -- who are censored, punished and harassed for speaking out for Palestinian freedom. The vast majority are accused of antisemitism because they criticized the political positions of Zionists, in defense of Palestinian lives. Facebook must resist this censorship, not reinforce it."
To read the full text of the open letter, list of signatories, and background about the campaign, visit facebookweneedtotalk.org. For interviews with petition organizers or signatories, contact Sonya E. Myerson-Knox at sonya@jvp.org or 929-290-0317.
Campaign background
We all want to connect. And social media can be a powerful tool to help us get past walls and share our stories, grow our networks and stand up for one another. But some politicians and governments are trying to turn these necessary guardrails into walls that keep us apart, generating fear and keeping us divided so they can avoid being held accountable for their actions.
Right now, Facebook is reaching out to stakeholders to ask if critical conversations that use the term "Zionist" fall within the rubric of hate speech as per Facebook's Community Standards. Basically, Facebook is assessing if "Zionist" is being used as a proxy for "Jewish people or Israelis" in attacks on its platform.
Facebook may make a decision as soon as the end of February 2021.
This move is part of a concerning pattern of the Israeli government and its supporters pressuring Facebook and other social media platforms to expand their hate speech policies to include speech critical of Israel and Zionism - and falsely claiming this would help fight antisemitism. They are hoping that by mischaracterizing critical use of the term "Zionists" as anti-Jewish, they can avoid accountability for its policies and actions that violate Palestinian human rights. Such a move would do nothing to address antisemitism, especially the violent antisemitism of right-wing movements and states -- which, as recent events have shown, is the source of the most tangible threats to Jewish lives.
Attempts to stifle conversations about Zionist political ideology and Zionist policies carried out by state actors -- both of which have real implications for Palestinian and Israeli people, as well as Jewish and Palestinian people around the world -- are part of an emerging pattern of political censorship by the Israeli government and some of its supporters.
The most prominent example of these efforts to shield the Israeli government from accountability is the current campaign to impose the controversial IHRA working definition of antisemitism on campuses and civil society, and to codify it in government legislation.
If Facebook does move to restrict use of the word Zionist, this would block important conversations on the world's largest social media platform, harm Facebook users attempting to connect across space and difference, and deprive Palestinians of a critical venue for expressing their political viewpoints to the world. Palestinians need to be able to talk about Zionism and Zionists in order to share their family stories and daily lived experience with the world. That language is essential to clearly distinguishing between Judaism and Jewish people, on the one hand, and the State actors responsible for human rights violations against Palestinians, on the other.
Jewish Voice for Peace is a national, grassroots organization inspired by Jewish tradition to work for a just and lasting peace according to principles of human rights, equality, and international law for all the people of Israel and Palestine. JVP has over 200,000 online supporters, over 70 chapters, a youth wing, a Rabbinic Council, an Artist Council, an Academic Advisory Council, and an Advisory Board made up of leading U.S. intellectuals and artists.
(510) 465-1777"This unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration's threats and ongoing pressure," said Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell revealed in a defiant statement late Sunday that the US Department of Justice is threatening him with criminal charges, a step the central bank chief condemned as "intimidation" for not bowing to President Donald Trump's demands on interest rate policy.
"I have deep respect for the rule of law and for accountability in our democracy. No one—certainly not the chair of the Federal Reserve—is above the law," Powell said in a video statement. "But this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration's threats and ongoing pressure."
Powell said that the Justice Department, which Trump has repeatedly wielded against his political opponents, served the Federal Reserve on Friday with grand jury subpoenas related to the central bank chair's congressional testimony on Fed office building renovations.
But Powell, who was first nominated to his role by Trump in 2017, said accusations that he misled lawmakers about the scope of the renovations were a "pretext" obscuring the real reason the Justice Department is pursuing a criminal indictment.
"The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president," said Powell. "This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions—or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation."
Video message from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell: https://t.co/5dfrkByGyX pic.twitter.com/O4ecNaYaGH
— Federal Reserve (@federalreserve) January 12, 2026
The New York Times reported Sunday that the investigation into Powell was approved late last year by Trump loyalist Jeanine Pirro, a former Fox News host now serving as US attorney for the District of Columbia. Trump claimed he didn't "know anything about" the Powell investigation, but added, "He's certainly not very good at the Fed, and he's not very good at building buildings."
Powell, whose term as Fed chair ends in May, has repeatedly defied Trump in public, dismissing the president's threat to remove him from the helm of the central bank as unlawful and, at one point, fact-checking Trump to his face about the estimated cost of Fed renovations.
Powell has also publicly blamed Trump's tariff policies for driving up inflation.
"It's really tariffs that are causing the most of the inflation overshoot," Powell said last month, following the central bank's December 10 meeting. The Fed cut interest rates three times last year, bringing them down by a total of 75 basis points.
But Trump has pushed for much more aggressive rate cuts and attacked Powell—who does not have sole authority over interest rate decisions—as a "moron" and "truly one of my worst appointments."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, applauded Powell's "bold defense of the rule of law" and said that Fed policy "should not be subject to intimidation and bullying by Trump loyalist prosecutors."
"The Department of Justice should serve the rule of law, not the vindictive instincts of an authoritarian president," said Gilbert. "And it should never misuse its criminal enforcement powers to pursue pretextual prosecutions against the president’s political opponents or those who show a modicum of independence.”
"He is abusing the law like a wannabe dictator so the Fed serves him and his billionaire friends."
Democratic members of Congress also rose to Powell's defense.
"Threatening criminal action against a Fed chair because he refuses to do the president's bidding on interest rates undermines the rule of law, which is the very foundation for American prosperity," Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) wrote on social media.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) added that "no one should lose their sense of outrage about what is happening to our country."
"This is an effort to create an autocratic state. It's that plain," said Murphy. "Trump is threatening to imprison the chairman of Federal Reserve simply because he won't enact the rate policy Trump wants."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a frequent critic of Powell and Fed rate policy during his tenure, wrote late Sunday that Trump "wants to nominate a new Fed chair AND push Powell off the board for good to complete his corrupt takeover of our central bank."
Powell's term as a Fed governor runs through January 2028. Trump's top economic adviser, Kevin Hassett, is widely seen as the president's likely pick to replace Powell as chair of the central bank.
Warren called on the Senate to "not move ANY Trump Fed nominee" amid the DOJ investigation into Powell.
"He is abusing the law like a wannabe dictator so the Fed serves him and his billionaire friends," Warren said of Trump.
"Protesters... are furious, and tensions are exploding," said one independent journalist. "This is escalation, not policing."
Amidst peaceful demonstrations and shows of empathy and solidarity in Minneapolis and other US cities following the killing of Renee Nicole Good by a federal agent last week, videos appearing online over the weekend also show increasing levels of outrage directed at immigration officers who community members say they no longer want to see terrorizing their streets.
While Trump has reportedly ordered more officers to Minneapolis in the wake of Good's killing—even as local and state officials have called for the end of operations in order to tamp down tensions in the city—the clips circulating online reveal mounting frustration by neighbors no longer willing to tolerate the situation.
On Sunday, journalist and documentarian Ford Fischer posted video from Minneapolis he described as ICE agents being "followed by dozens of activists on foot and in vehicles" in the city.
While agents are seen holding bear spray and warning people to stay back, the procession of civilians following them heckled the officers and made it clear they are not wanted in the city.
"You are murderers!" yells one man at the officers. Several others can be heard screaming, "Go home!" and "Fuck you!"
Just now: ICE followed by dozens of activists on foot and in vehicles in Minneapolis. pic.twitter.com/vFXmZIr0TA
— Ford Fischer (@FordFischer) January 11, 2026
In another video, posted by FreedomNews.TV, federal agents are seen pulling two people from a vehicle on a residential street and placing them under arrest before being confronted by neighbors and onlookers telling them to "Get out of our fucking state!"; "Get the fuck out!"; and "Get a real job!"
🚨 HOLY SMOKES: New video shows ICE agents smashing the window of a protester’s vehicle and forcibly pulling him out in Minneapolis and he was immediately detained.
Protesters in the area are furious, and tensions are exploding.
This is escalation, not policing. pic.twitter.com/CfHMQyPOOg
— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) January 11, 2026
"Protesters in the area are furious, and tensions are exploding," said independent journalist Brian Allen in response to the video. "This is escalation, not policing."
The latest scenes appear to indicate growing anger by the public towards President Donald Trump's authoritarian deployment of federal agents to cities nationwide over the last year. With Good's killing, the growing tensions are palpable.
NOW: Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino hounded by activists and shoppers protesting his presence as he and a federal agent caravan leave a Target in St Paul, Minnesota for a restroom break. pic.twitter.com/Ti21rQbuyd
— Ford Fischer (@FordFischer) January 11, 2026
While many state and local lawmakers and other officials calling for calm and peaceful protest in response, many—including Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) also believe that Trump and members of his administration are intentionally trying to provoke the civilian population in order to justify an ever harsher repressive response.
In comments on Saturday, as Common Dreams reported, Omar warned that the ultimate goal is "to agitate people enough where they are able to invoke the Insurrection Act to declare martial law."
While the individual episodes documented above reveal the very real anger that many are feeling as masked federal agents target people in their communities, the overall protests against the policies that led to Good's killing—which took place in hundreds of cities over the weekend—have been resoundingly peaceful.
🚨 JUST IN: Families, including parents with children, are present at PEACEFUL protests in Minneapolis, underscoring that these are community demonstrations, NOT riots.
If federal agents escalate force against crowds that include families, that will be a choice by the state, not… pic.twitter.com/SKoHKleGFb
— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) January 11, 2026
"A peaceful night in Minneapolis," the city posted to its social media accounts following Saturday night's demonstrations. "As more demonstrations are planned today, we appreciate and thank the community for using its collective voice in harmony and love."
"Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. Nobody dictates what we do," said Cuba's President Miguel Diaz-Canel in response to the latest threat from the authoritarian US president.
President Donald Trump was ripped by humanitarians and anti-war voices on Sunday after he again threatened Cuba by saying the US military would be used to prevent oil and other resources from reaching the country, threats that come just over a week after the American president ordered the unlawful attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
In a social media post Sunday morning, Trump declared:
Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela. In return, Cuba provided “Security Services” for the last two Venezuelan dictators, BUT NOT ANYMORE! Most of those Cubans are DEAD from last weeks U.S.A. attack, and Venezuela doesn’t need protection anymore from the thugs and extortionists who held them hostage for so many years. Venezuela now has the United States of America, the most powerful military in the World (by far!), to protect them, and protect them we will. THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA - ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. Thank you for your attention to this matter. President DJT
Cuba's President Miguel Diaz-Canel rejected Trump's latest comments and threat of military force, saying the island nation was ready to defend itself.
"Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. Nobody dictates what we do," Diaz-Canel said in a social media post. "Cuba does not attack; it has been attacked by the US for 66 years, and it does not threaten; it prepares, ready to defend the homeland to the last drop of blood."
Progressive critics of the US president were also quick to hit back. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group CodePink, said the "true extortionist" in this situation is Trump himself, as she detailed the mutual benefit of the relationship between the Venezuelan and Cuban governments over recent decades:
Trump says Cuba is “extorting” Venezuela.
Yet, it was Cuba that sent 250,000 health workers to Venezuela, lowered infant mortality, restored eyesight, and trained local doctors.
The true extortionist is Trump. pic.twitter.com/79b9IafeSH
— Medea Benjamin (@medeabenjamin) January 11, 2026
"What is extortion?" Benjamin asks. "It's what Donald Trump is doing: taking over those oil tankers, confiscating 30-50 million tons of oil—that is extortion. And saying to Venezuela, 'We're going to run your country." Donald Trump is the greatest extortionist our country has seen."
Reuters reports Sunday, citing shipping data, that Venezuela has been Cuba's "biggest oil supplier, but no cargoes have departed from Venezuelan ports to the Caribbean country since the capture of Maduro.
Speaking with CBS News on Sunday, Rep. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) said that Trump's threats to strangle the people of Cuba by enforcing a resource blockade were "like magical" in her ears and those of her right-wing constituents who live in Miami's large community of Cuban exiles.
Welcoming Trump's efforts to bully Cuba into submission, Salazar claimed that Cuba's government is "hanging by a threat" she said, before correcting herself, "a thread, I should say."
Oddly—but notably—Salazar continued her remarks by saying it was Cuba that has been an "immense" threat to the United States, as she described it as a nation "with no water; they have no electricity; they have no food—nothing. So if you think Maduro is weak, Cuba is even weaker. And now they do not have one drop of oil coming from Venezuela."
President Trump announced on TruthSocial that “there will be no more oil or money going to Cuba,” Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL) responded saying “those words are like magical.”
“Cuba is really a center of power for our enemies,” Salazar told @margbrennan. “Now, I think… pic.twitter.com/CSZNRI30lZ
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) January 11, 2026
But progressive voices opposed to Trump's authoritarian violations of international law, his bullying of allies and enemies alike with claims that the US can do whatever it likes in the name of national security and claims of national interest, are warning that the threats against Cuba and other nations represent a chilling development that must be met with international opposition and condemnation.
"The US blockade of Cuba is the longest-standing act of collective punishment in the world," said David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, pointing to Trump's remarks. "It is condemned by the entire international community every year at the UN. And now, the US president is doubling down on this cruel and illegal punishment. Enough."
"This is an emergency," Progressive International explained in a dispatch last week, warning about Trump's overt hostility toward Cuba, Colombia, Mexico, and other nations in the wake of the US attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of Maduro and Flores.
"The United States is rapidly escalating its assault on the Americas—and the principle of self-determination at large," warned the international advocacy group. "Under the banner of the Monroe Doctrine, Donald Trump and his cronies are leading a campaign of imperial aggression that stretches from Caracas to Havana, Mexico City to Bogotá."
According to the dispatch:
What we are witnessing today is class struggle played out through imperial violence. The United States stands as the political and military instrument of capital: Big Oil bankrolling politics; arms manufacturers profiting from destruction; and financial power thriving on plunder and permanent war. These sections of capital pay for the policies they desire and are richly rewarded. The share prices of US oil majors soared around 10% following Maduro’s kidnapping, representing a return of around $100 billion on an investment of $450 million in the last US elections.
The government serves its donors, so aggression can proceed without consent. Public opinion has repeatedly shown opposition to U.S. military action in Venezuela — a gap between elite appetite and popular will bridged by force, not democracy.
Venezuela — like many nations before it — represents a different possibility: that the popular classes might govern themselves, control their resources, and chart a future beyond imperial command. And that possibility represents an existential threat to empire.
The group said Sunday's latest threat by Trump against Cuba—openly saying that the US military might will be used to prevent life-sustaining resources from reaching the island nation—should be seen for what it is: a coercive "threat to strangle Cuba of critical energy and resources" at the end of a barrel of a gun.
"Through manipulation, coercion, and now direct military action," the group warns, the US government under Trump "has made absolutely clear its intention to dominate Latin America."