July, 18 2023, 07:56pm EDT
JVP Action condemns House Passage of GOP Resolution Erasing Israel's Racism
"Our elected officials are wasting their time trying to prove which political party loves Israeli apartheid more."
Jewish Voice for Peace Action condemns the House of Representatives' passage of a GOP resolution attacking progressives and attempting to erase the reality of Israel’s systematic racism against Palestinians.
H.Con.Res 57 was introduced and pushed through by Republicans in under 24 hours with the goal of making an example of Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal for her accurate statement that Israel is a racist state. It is undeniable that the Israeli government engages in discriminatory and outright racist policies. As affirmed by the UN, legacy human rights organizations, Palestinian and Israeli human rights groups, the Israeli government upholds separate and unequal legal systems for Palestinians and Israelis in the West Bank, continues to forcibly displace Palestinians from their land to encourage illegal Israeli settlement, and even discriminates against Palestinian Americans trying to travel through an Israeli-controlled port of entry.
JVP Action applauds the bold members of Congress who opposed this cynical and dangerous resolution.
Beth Miller, Political Director of JVP Action: “This vote is truly an embarrassment for Congress. As we face devastating climate change, attacks on bodily autonomy, gun violence, attacks on trans children, and more, our elected officials are wasting their time trying to prove which political party loves Israeli apartheid more. Congress is trying to force a lie from the top down, but as more Americans demand accountability for Israel’s oppression of Palestinians, the lie will not hold for much longer.”
Jewish Voice for Peace Action (JVP Action) is a multiracial, intergenerational movement of Jews and allies working towards justice and equality for Palestinians and Israelis by transforming U.S. policy.
(510) 465-1777LATEST NEWS
'Enough Is Enough': South Africa Urges ICJ to Halt Israeli Assault on Rafah
Israel's assault on Rafah provides "evidence of the crime of genocide," one legal expert said. "This attack is the final blow that is intended to destroy the Palestinian group in Gaza."
May 16, 2024
South African officials on Thursday made their case before the International Court of Justice to stop Israel's brutal invasion of Rafah, warning once again that Israeli officials have displayed clear "genocidal intent" and "genocidal conduct" in their military campaign in Gaza.
The case for the ICJ to stop the attack on Rafah was made by a number of lawyers, legal experts, and ambassadors, with the South African representatives outlining the bare facts of Israel's military campaign, blocking of humanitarian aid, and statements of intent, just as they did when the court heard South Africa's original claim that Israel is committing genocide.
That case, argued in January, resulted in a preliminary ruling in which the court said South Africa had made a "plausible" case and ordered Israel to prevent genocidal acts by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
On Thursday, South Africa urged the ICJ to see that Israel has not followed that order.
"It is difficult to imagine that the situation could get worse" than it was in January, international law professor John Dugard told the court. "But unfortunately, it has... Israel has now commenced its long-threatened assault on Rafah. It has ordered the evacuation of Palestinians in Rafah to the barren sand dunes of Al-Mawasi. It has closed critical border crossings to humanitarian aid, medical supplies, goods, and fuel, upon which the population depends."
"Israel's actions are in violation of fundamental international humanitarian law, but in addition, they provide evidence of the crime of genocide," Dugard continued. "This attack is the final blow that is intended to destroy the Palestinian group in Gaza."
Watch the livestream of the ICJ hearing below:
The South Africans made their case as the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) said Thursday that an estimated 600,000 people have now been forcibly displaced from Rafah by Israel.
Despite tepid warnings from the U.S.—the biggest international funder of the IDF—for Israel to avoid attacking "population centers," the IDF this week has moved into dense residential neighborhoods in central Rafah.
The U.S. has also called for Israel to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza, but the IDF's seizure of the Rafah crossing between the enclave and Egypt last week led the World Food Program (WFP) on Thursday to warn that food and fuel rations "will run out in a matter of days." Dozens of Palestinians have been starved to death so far by Israel's blocking of relief shipments.
"The threat of famine in Gaza never loomed larger," said the WFP as South Africa made its case in The Hague.
Three months after giving a 22-minute speech detailing the numerous statements of genocidal intent made by top Israeli officials since the Gaza assault began in October, South African lawyer Tembeka Ngcukaitobi during Thursday's hearing, used the more recent words of Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who publicly described the aim of the Rafah invasion as "total annihilation."
In his presentation before the court, Ngcukaitobi invoked Smotrich's language by arguing that the Rafah incursion "is the last stage of 'total annihilation' of Palestinian life."
"For Palestinians to be able to continue to exist as a protected group under the Genocide Convention, they need a place from which to rebuild," he continued. "Rafah is that place, the last stand... Without Rafah, the possibility to rebuild will be lost forever."
In her speech, Irish lawyer Blinne Ni Ghralaigh outlined other developments in Gaza since the ICJ issued its preliminary ruling that illustrate the need for the court's "invaluable intervention."
Ni Ghralaigh detailed the destruction of hospitals like Al-Shifa, where mass graves have been found with the remains of women, children, and medical workers, and warned that "the same fate now awaits Rafah's remaining hospitals, doctors, and medics."
She also pointed to evidence that the IDF is treating evacuated areas as "extermination zones," where soldiers are ordered to kill any remaining people, and its use of an error-prone AI system to target Palestinians.
The South African legal team said the court must order Israel "to immediately take all effective measures to ensure the access of persons able to investigate ongoing atrocities," and called on the ICJ to "at least modify its provisional measures" from March, when it demanded that Israel allow humanitarian aid into Gaza.
"The court has the power to modify or make an explicit order for Israel to cease its military operations in Rafah, Gaza, and to withdraw from the Gaza Strip," said Ni Ghralaigh, pointing out that the provisional measure from March could only take full effect if a cease-fire agreement was reached.
"No such resolution is in place. The court must itself, therefore, create the circumstances necessary for its provisional measures to take full effect. It must order Israel to cease its military operations system finally," she said. "Enough is enough."
Israel is expected to address the ICJ at a second day of hearings on Friday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
11,000% Return: Trump's $1 Billion Offer Could Yield $110 Billion Windfall for Big Oil
A new analysis explores the possible payout if fossil fuel companies—who have already shown a willingness to put a price tag on the value of planet Earth—agree to the presumptive Republican nominee's election year "quid pro quo" deal.
May 16, 2024
A new analysis reveals that the alleged $1 billion election year "quid pro quo" offer that presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump made to executives of major oil company's could, if they agreed to the deal, bank them a handsome profit.
According to the study by Friends of the Earth Action, first reported by The Guardian on Thursday, the "remarkably blunt and transactional" offer from Trump—in which $1 billion in campaign funding put together by the nation's major oil companies would be repaid upon his election with massive deregulation of the oil and gas sector as well as tax relief for the industry—would yield a major windfall for those same corporations, including an estimated $110 billion from the tax breaks alone.
As The Guardian reports:
Biden wants to eliminate the tax breaks, which include long-standing incentives to help drill for oil and gas, with a recent White House budget proposal targeting $35bn in domestic subsidies and $75bn in overseas fossil fuel income.
"Big oil executivess are sweating in their seats at the thought of losing $110bn in special tax loopholes under Biden in 2025," said Lukas Ross, a campaigner at Friends of the Earth Action, which conducted the analysis.
Ross said the tax breaks are worth nearly 11,000% more than the amount Trump allegedly asked the executives for in donations. "If Trump promises to protect polluter handouts during tax negotiations, then his $1bn shakedown is a cheap insurance policy for the industry" he said.
Republicans in Congress last year confirmed that if Trump wins back the White House and the GOP resume control of both chambers, they will move aggressively to make the Republican's 2017 tax cuts, which largely benefited the wealthy and corporations, permanent. As some of the most profitable companies in the U.S., oil and gas companies stand to benefit greatly from that outcome.
In Florida last month, not long before his meeting with oil executives, Trump told a different crowd of "rich as hell" supporters gathered at Mar-a-Lago: "We're gonna give you tax cuts, we're gonna pay of our debt." The problem with the second half of that claim is presented in a recent CBO report which found that another wave of tax cuts like those passed by the GOP in 2017 would skyrocket the national debt by an estimated $4.6 trillion over the next ten years.
Earlier this week, House Democrats, led by Oversight Committee Ranking Member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), launched a probe into the "quid pro quo" allegations between Trump and Big Oil, including letters to company executives believed to have been in attendance.
The blatant nature of Trump's corrupt intent, according to some political observers, is an opportunity that Democrats and champions of climate action and other progressive causes should not miss.
Writing about the circumstances in The New Yorker on Wednesday, journalist and veteran climate activist Bill McKibben argued that the stakes of this election are made plain in what Trump has offered the fossil fuel industry in exchange for its financial backing.
"Trump's reported billion-dollar offer to fossil-fuel executives shows that this is the key year to save the planet," McKibben writes.
"Given four years to finish the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act, a second-term Biden Administration might finally be able to break the hold of fossil fuel’s political influence," his essay explains. "Another term of Trump, however—and with all that it means for undercutting global efforts at climate regulation, as well—offers an entirely plausible and entirely opposite outcome: climate chaos combined with continued fossil-fuel dependence."
What's true, according to McKibben, is that the fossil fuel industry "might well decide that defeating Biden in November is worth a lot of money." Citing recent profits by Chevron of $21 billion and ExxonMobil's $36 billion, he said the oil giants will "definitely give Trump something, and the return on investment on that donation—if successful—would be better than the luckiest well they ever hit."
The new analysis by Friends of the Earth Action shows that McKibben—once again—probably has the math right.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Jail Time Should Seriously Be Considered,' Pocan Says of Big Oil Price Fixing
"I would recommend 'Orange Is the New Black,'" said the Wisconsin Democrat. "We're feeling it at the pumps and clearly this kind of behavior, we know, isn't isolated."
May 15, 2024
As Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan appeared before a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee on Wednesday, Congressman Mark Pocan highlighted recent FTC action against fossil fuel industry price fixing and urged criminal consequences.
"I just did a little napkin math," Pocan (D-Wis.) said. If collusion led to a $0.40-0.60 increase in the price for a gallon of gas for a vehicle, "for the average person filling their tank, that's $8 or $10 a week," he explained. "That's $500 a year of added cost."
If half of the residents in Pocan's congressional district have a car, "that's $175 million a year," he said. If that figure is applied across all 435 districts, it translates to billions of dollars "that we're being gouged because of someone like this who's trying to price collude," he continued, referring to Scott Sheffield, the founder and longtime CEO of Pioneer Natural Resources.
The FTC earlier this month barred Sheffield from serving on the board of directors of or as an adviser to ExxonMobil, which just acquired Pioneer, due to his alleged collusion with the representatives of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and OPEC+.
While welcoming the FTC's move, Pocan noted that "if you commit theft, the average sentence... in the United States is 23 months" and the multibillion-dollar profit that fossil fuel giants make from price gouging "is more than grand larceny theft."
🚨BIG: @RepMarkPocan applauds @FTC for revealing an oil price-fixing scheme that cost Americans billions from 2021-2023.
"I just did a little napkin math ... That's $175 million a year—just for people in my district—that we're being gouged." pic.twitter.com/maM8Uk6usY
— American Economic Liberties Project (@econliberties) May 15, 2024
"What else can we do to these oil companies that are ripping us off?" the congressman asked Khan, an appointee of President Joe Biden with "a pro-working families record."
The FTC chair responded that "price fixing and output reduction in a coordinated way can be criminal violations of the antitrust laws. As enforcers we can't specifically speak to what we're referring and what we're not, but as a general matter, it's been a priority of mine to make sure we are referring more criminal candidates to the Justice Department, because we need to make sure companies and executives aren't just treating fines as a cost of doing business and that they take seriously the rule of law."
Referencing a television show that takes place in federal prison, Pocan told her that "I would recommend 'Orange Is the New Black,' if we need to, to make a point. It would be helpful because we're feeling it at the pumps and clearly this kind of behavior, we know, isn't isolated."
Sharing a video of his remarks on social media, Pocan declared: "Unacceptable! A slap on the wrist isn't enough. I think jail time should seriously be considered."
As the American Economic Liberties Project (AELP) pointed out, Pocan wasn't the only lawmaker to reference the recent price fixing revelations during the Wednesday hearing; he was joined by Reps. Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.).
"Finally it's being noticed!" said AELP's Matt Stoller, who has written about the alleged collusion. "Dem House members get it!"
Stoller wasn't alone in welcoming the discussion in Congress—after days of limited attention on the issue among national figures.
"This illegal oil corporation price fixing conspiracy cost Americans as much as $2,100. Per year," saidMore Perfect Union, sharing a video of Pocan and citingThe American Prospect.
The Ohio AFL-CIO stressed: "Greedflation is not inflation. Pass it on."
Noting that Sheffield is getting a $68 million "golden parachute on his way out," former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich argued Wednesday: "That money (and more) should be refunded to the American people. Not sent to his bank account."
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens similarly said last week that "the Department of Justice should criminally prosecute Scott Sheffield and Congress should tax back the industry's windfall profits and issue every American a refund."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular