Elderly White man Norman Finklestein needs to learn to stay in his lane. Which, at his age, actually means take his keys away. I don't like him and I never have. Even when he first got minor 'famous' among the left for defending Palestinians. Didn't like him them. He'd come on to, for example, DEMOCRACY NOW! and Amy Goodman would be interviewing him only for him to suddenly get all angry and dismissive with her. He was rude and that was helped by the fact that he worse so much make up. And then of course, 'brave' Norman started trashing BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions -- something that actually can help the Palestinians).
I'm really offended by him now as he gets more hateful every year. I also don't care for Katie Halper trying to defend earlier this year when it was clear that he'd entered White Pride and didn't need rescuing, just needed to f**king die.
He's never going to get better people. Stop talking to him.
So what prompted this? We were watching BLACK POWER MEDIA at work (C.I.'s got me really interested in THE REMIX MORNING SHOW and, turns out, friends at work are interested in it too) and Dr. Jared Ball did not what an asshole Norman was when he interviewed him. And then my boss e-mailed me, a few hours after lunch, this garbage Norman had published.
Elderly White man Norman is offended -- and made this clear when he was promoting his book that didn't sell -- that the biggest crime in the world is that he's no longer brought on by the media to address the state of Black America.
Sorry, Massuh Norman, but we can talk for ourselves.
And should.
He's another one of those crap ass people who used racism to push themselves to the front of the line on racial issues and now that we finally a sliver of a voice, he's offended that not only do we not want him to speak for us, but that most White people now realize he shouldn't be speaking for us.
In Dr. Ball's interview with him, Norman was creepy and disgusting. And let's note that Amy Goodman had to ban him from the show because he got creepy and disgusting with one of her interns who felt it was sexual harassment. I'm sure it was sexual harassment but to Norman, she should have been thrilled that an elderly White man was noticing her and talking about her and her body.
So in the interview with Dr. Ball, Norman starts attacking Angela Davis. She's a sell-out! And then he starts going back to how he was attracted to her in the sixties and making disgusting comments about African-American women.
He's attacking her in his latest column.
I'm real sorry that he doesn't like her answers -- even sorrier that he tried to sexualize Angela -- in his White gaze -- what the f**k were you thinking, Katie Halper -- but tough crap old White man, you don't run the world today.
Reality, if Angela Davis had been White, she never would have topped the FBI's most wanted list. She is not the radical -- and never has been -- that so many White people think she is. She's a Marxist. She's a feminist. That's about really it.
That's why, please note, they send her up in NETWORK. That's supposed to be Angela Davis running the revolutionary group but really just interested in money.
That was in the 70s. All these decades later, he's only now catching up.
He's an idiot and he needs to stop trying to speak for Black America. He doesn't try to speak to us, of course, because we'd tell the racist to shut the hell up.
He concludes his racist garbage with this:
Adroitly parlaying her radical youth to wow woke audiences, Dr. Davis is a cover feature in liberal white media; charges many tens of thousands of dollars when she speaks on college campuses “in solidarity with the oppressed”; and markets a Los Angeles-based “radical” fashion line. Woke drivel pays. If only she “transitioned,” Amy Goodman would feature Davis on Democracy Now! every morning. Proving that a broken clock is right twice a day, Alan Dershowitz recalls in his memoir that
I ran into an older Angela Davis on the porch of the Chilmark Store on Martha’s Vineyard. She was wearing a bicycle outfit and was cycling around the island with some mutual friends, including her trial lawyer in [Davis’s] murder case, who had become a judge. It was a strange scene in this bastion of bourgeois affluence to see these former radicals enjoying the comforts of capitalism.
Structural racism, indeed.
I don't think Angela Davis is "a cover feature in liberal White media" -- but that is the position that Norman had for years -- as our self-appointed representative and now the media has gotten wise enough to say, "Maybe when the issue the lives of Black people, we should hear from Black people?" Second, why is he trying to drag transgender into this? Oh, that's right he's a transphobe -- and Katie Halper you let him off on that. What kind of leftist are you, Katie? It's Pride Month, you haven't Tweeted one word nor have you had any guests on. In fact, Black trans women are facing more and more violence and that's not an issue to you? But stroking Norman's ego is? You're as bad as Aaron Mate and Matt Tiabbi. No wonder you hang with those men -- and no wonder you hung with the ones before.
Third, I don't know why anyone on the left would feel the need to quote Alan Drsh*t but Norman quotes him, insults him, but quotes him.
Why is that?
Fourth, Amy Goodman is not the bad guy for calling you out -- privately -- about creeping her intern with your out of date harassment that is no longer acceptable but, yes, would have been tolerated a few decades back. You should have learned from her calling you out but instead you've tried act as though that makes you the victim. You're creepy and disgusting Old Man, clean up your own act.
Fifth, the real issue is that a Black woman being on Martha's Vineyard upsets Norman's racist construct.
I'm sick of it, White people get your s**t together. I shouldn't have to educate on this. Your grown ups, you host your own bad YOUTUBE programs, you should be able to suss this out all by your own damn self.
I'm sick of it.
Let me return to BLACK POWER MEDIA and put a link to them in. And let me note, C.I.'s has done more for that program than anyone realizes. When she reposts it at THE COMMON ILLS, she tries to do a title for it. Why? Because all BPM ever does is title it "The Remix Morning Show." There's no description or anything to indicate how one episode is different from the other. C.I. tried to find two or three things discussed in the episode and put those after "The Remix Morning Show" -- like today, "The Remix Morning Show: The Ear Dr brings the jokes, Digable Planets, air quality." And the Ear Dr did get a good one on Jared today. It's these titles that have got my friends at work listening and that shouldn't surprise me because it's these titles that let me know when I need to listen. I don't have time to just listen to everything online.
Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Wednesday, June 7, 2023. Calls for ending the persecution of Julian
Assange grow louder, Amnesty International calls out the disappeared in
Iraq, hate merchants attacks on LGBTQ+ people is so great that the US
military is having to move some American families to different bases,
and much more.
Excerpt:
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González, as we turn now to look at the case of Julian Assange as calls grow for him to be freed.
The WikiLeaks founder has been locked up for four years in London’s
Belmarsh prison, where he awaits possible extradition to the U.S. to
face espionage and hacking charges for publishing leaked documents about
U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. He faces up to 175 years in
prison in the United States, if convicted.
This comes as a growing number of politicians in Australia are
calling on the United States to drop its case against Julian Assange,
who is in Australian citizen. In April, 48 Australian lawmakers signed a
letter to the U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland saying the U.S.
prosecution of a journalist and publisher has, quote, “set a dangerous
precedent for press freedom.” A group of Australian lawmakers also met
recently with U.S. Ambassador to Australia Caroline Kennedy. Australia’s
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has also spoken out. In May, he talked
about Assange during an interview with the Australian Broadcasting
Corporation, ABC.
PRIME MINISTER ANTHONY ALBANESE:
Enough is enough. This needs to be brought to a conclusion. It needs to
be worked through, including we’re working through diplomat channels.
But we’re making very clear what our position is on Mr. Assange’s case. …
When Australians look at the circumstances, look at the fact that the
person who released the information is walking freely, now having served
some time in incarceration but is now released for a long period of
time, then they’ll see that there’s a disconnect there. There is nothing
to be served by his ongoing incarceration.
AMY GOODMAN: That is the Australian prime minister.
Last week, The Sydney Morning Herald made headlines when it reported the FBI has restarted its probe of Julian Assange, but representatives of WikiLeaks say the U.S. investigation was never closed.
We’re joined now in London by the Australian human rights attorney
Jen Robinson, who’s been a legal adviser to Julian Assange since 2010.
Jen, welcome back to Democracy Now! You’re just back from
Australia, where you live, where actually President Biden was expected
to go for the Quad meeting with the prime minister of Australia, but had
to cancel that and return from Hiroshima to Washington to negotiate the
debt ceiling legislation. Can you talk about what Albanese now is
calling for? And what response do you have to this information from The Sydney Morning Herald that the U.S. has reopened a probe that no one knew had been closed?
JENNIFER ROBINSON: Well, first, great to speak to you again, Amy, and great to be back on Democracy Now!
I’ve just returned from Australia, where I was in Australia for a
visit with Stella Assange, Julian Assange’s wife. It was her first trip
to Australia, which we had planned to coincide with Biden’s visit to
Australia. What Biden would have seen, had he come to Australia, was a
huge amount of support both from the Australian public — we saw a huge
protest in Sydney against the extradition request and the United States’
prosecution of Assange. We saw a packed-out room of MPs in a
cross-party briefing. Now in Australia, we have bipartisan support, so
it’s not just our prime minister, Prime Minister Albanese, calling for
this case to be brought to an end, it is also the leader of the
opposition. And when Stella and I briefed MPs in Parliament, there was
standing room only. There was that many MPs from across the political
spectrum there wanting to hear from Stella and I about the latest in the
case, and who are pushing for this case to be brought to an end. So
we’ve seen a sea change in the political response in Australia. We’re
seeing polling, unprecedented polling, of an overwhelming majority of
the Australian public who support our government in seeking to have this
case closed. And the question is now what the United States will do
with it.
The story last week about the FBI
supposedly reopening this investigation, this is an investigation that
has been open for a number of years. This is a Trump administration
indictment. We know that the FBI had been conducting inquiries in the interim period. And it’s important to recognize that the FBI reached out to — or, allegedly reached out to a ghostwriter on Julian’s book. This, to us, shows the desperation of the FBI
and how they’re grasping at straws in terms of their investigations in
this case. There are no new facts in this case. The U.S. government has
known the facts that form the basis of this indictment since Chelsea
Manning went on trial back in 2012. And the fact that the FBI
is now suddenly starting to make inquiries from bit part players is — I
think, goes to show the lack of the strength, or lack thereof, of the
U.S. case.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Jen
Robinson, I wanted to ask you about other developments in the case,
especially concerning the surveillance conducted of Julian Assange while
he was in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Spain’s El País had a story headlined “Police omitted folder called 'CIA' from the computer of Spaniard who allegedly spied on Julian Assange.” Who was this Spaniard? And what do you know about this?
JENNIFER ROBINSON:
So, in addition to fighting the extradition case and fighting the
prosecution of Assange, Julian and our legal team have been fighting
back through various different legal actions. There’s the action that I
took successfully against the British government for unlawful sharing of
information with the United States government as Julian’s lawyer. We
have the action against the CIA in the United
States, taken by a group of lawyers on Julian’s team who visited him in
the embassy, and the Spanish case, which you’ve just raised, where
Julian has taken a criminal complaint against David Morales, who was the
head of UC Global, the security company that was providing,
quote-unquote, “security” inside the Ecuadorian Embassy. But it was
revealed by El País in recent years, thanks to whistleblowers, that he was providing information — allegedly providing information to the CIA.
We’ve learned just this week that in the disclosure in those
proceedings, in which Mike Pompeo himself has been subpoenaed to give
evidence about the nature of this unlawful spying on Julian and on us as
his lawyers, which fundamentally flaws the U.S. criminal investigation,
that the Spanish police failed to disclose further evidence, including
files marked ”CIA,” that further indicate the involvement of the CIA
in spying on us as lawyers inside the embassy. This is really important
revelations. As Daniel Ellsberg, the Pentagon Papers leaker, said in
our extradition case, his case, his espionage case, was thrown out under
the Nixon administration for unlawful spying on his doctors. In this
case, you’ve seen so much more abuse.
So, a Trump-era indictment, now under a Biden administration, this
prosecution is still being pursued, despite widespread and huge amounts
of evidence of unlawful spying on lawyers, on the seizure of legally
privileged information, and, indeed, plots to kidnap and kill Julian
Assange by the CIA in London. At this point,
you need to ask — even leaving aside the free speech implications of
this case, the First Amendment concerns that are now increasingly being
raised by Democrat lawmakers in the U.S. calling on the U.S. to drop
this case, there has been so much abuse in this case, and it begs the
question: If abuse of this nature was enough to throw out a case under
the Nixon administration, why is he still being pursued under the Biden
administration?
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And you
mentioned a group of Democrats in Congress pushing for the case to be
dropped. Do you have hopes that the Biden administration will stop
seeking his extradition and that Julian can be freed?
JENNIFER ROBINSON:
We certainly hope that the Biden administration will do the right thing
and drop this case. We now have the Australian government and our prime
minister coming out hard in support of the case being dropped. We have
special relationships with the United States, between Australia and the
United States. And this is — the Australian government should be able to
make this ask of the United States.
But separate from the international concerns, we are thrilled to see that Democrat lawmakers like Rashida Tlaib, AOC,
Ilhan Omar have written to Garland, pointing out the First Amendment
consequences of this case, asking for the case to be dropped. And I
think the more that there’s noise in Washington pressuring the DOJ
to do the right thing, pressuring Biden to do the right thing, then
we’ll get to the right outcome. And the right outcome is that this case
is dropped.
AMY GOODMAN:
Can you talk about the model that the Julian Assange case brings? I
mean, let’s remember, we say four years in the Belmarsh prison. But
before that, seven years really in captivity in the Ecuadorian Embassy.
He had been granted political asylum, but he could never leave the
embassy in order to — or, the consulate in order to get to Ecuador,
because he was afraid of being arrested and then extradited. But this
issue of a publisher facing these espionage and treason charges in the
United States? You have Evan Gershkovich, who has been arrested in
Russia. The world recognizes the problem with a journalist — they say he
was trying to get military secrets. It’s really what journalists do.
What did Julian Assange do? He published State Department, Pentagon
secrets and, he said, and many people agree, including human rights
lawyers around the world, evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq and
Afghanistan. It may not be convenient for the U.S., but it is the job of
a journalist. Can you talk about what this case means for how, then,
the U.S. can raise cases like Evan Gershkovich, that he should be freed
by Russia?
JENNIFER ROBINSON:
Thank you for raising this point, Amy. It is such an important point.
First of all is the precedent that’s set by this case. This case means
that any journalist anywhere in the world could be extradited and
prosecuted in the United States for publishing truthful information.
That is creating a dangerous race to the bottom globally. What message
does that send to Russia and to China about extraditing and prosecuting
journalists who publish the truth about Russia or China?
Then we get to the point of how it diminishes the moral authority of
the United States to be able to raise free speech issues. Now, in the
Evan Gershkovich case, we’re seeing a case where Russia is using the
espionage charges against a journalist for the first time since 1987.
So, this is picking up and running with the precedent that the United
States is setting at home because of the Assange case. That is
dangerous. When you’ve got a country that purports to bring democracy
and free speech to the rest of the world prosecuting a journalist for
espionage, it is a dangerous situation that we’re in. It threatens the
First Amendment, but it actually threatens free speech around the world.
And that’s one of the reasons why this case needs to be dropped.
The new evidence, adding as it does to a mountain of previous
disclosures, underscores the criminality of the US pursuit of Assange.
It again makes clear that the attempted US extradition and prosecution
of Assange, for publishing evidence of US-led war crimes, is the
pseudo-legal arm of a murderous campaign that has involved violations of
innumerable laws within domestic jurisdictions and internationally.
Previously, there had been substantial indirect evidence of the CIA spying. On the one hand, a Yahoo! News article
in late 2021 had indicated that the Trump administration and the CIA
had conducted dirty tricks against Assange while he was in the
Ecuadorian Embassy, up to and including discussions of a kidnap attempt
or an assassination. Those revelations were based on the statements of
30 former US officials.
On the other hand, whistleblowing former
employees of UC Global, the Spanish security firm contracted at the time
by the Ecuadorian authorities to provide security for its London
embassy, alleged that the company had essentially gone rogue.
Behind
the backs of the Ecuadorian government, it had installed extensive
surveillance equipment which it had transmitted to secret third parties
in the United States. It was alleged that UC Global had entered into
relations with the company of Trump ally and casino mogul, Sheldon
Adelson, whose firm appeared to have played the role of a cutout for US
intelligence in obtaining the material. That UC Global had conducted
spying was clear from vast amounts of video and audio material of
Assange in the embassy, including privileged discussions with lawyers.
The
latest revelations bring the two threads together. They establish
irrefutably that UC Global was acting as the essential ground force of
the CIA campaign against Assange.
UC Global’s owner, David
Morales, is being criminally prosecuted in Spain on several interrelated
charges, including for spying on Assange, his lawyers and other
journalists.
[. . .]
In other words, all of the US legal efforts targeting Assange,
including the superseding indictments adding Espionage Act charges and
the extradition bid, can be traced back to illegal CIA operations
targeting the WikiLeaks founder when he was a political refugee. That
entirely refutes the assertions of the US Justice Department, which has
said that even if the CIA did spy on Assange, it has no bearing on their
case due to the supposed “Chinese walls” between different branches of
the American government.
The
frenzied US-CIA campaign against Assange in 2017, moreover, was not
motivated by fears of any risks he and WikiLeaks posed to the
population, or even of prior wrongdoings. Instead it was retribution for
WikiLeaks’ March 2017 publication of Vault 7, a vast trove of documents
proving that the CIA was conducting illegal spying on a global scale
and was one of the world’s largest purveyors of computer malware.
Assange
has not even been charged by the US for those publications, which
plainly were the central motive of the campaign against him that
culminated in his arrest, detention and prospective extradition.
Julian is only one target in a world of persecution. Here in the US, hate merchants target the **LGBTQ+ persons**.
Audrey Decker (DEFENSE ONE) reports the effect this persecution is having on some military families:
Troops with LGBTQ+ family members have been forced
to move to new bases because of harassment at school, a Department of
the Air Force official said.
“When I'm forced to move families
from installations, because their school will do nothing when their LGBT
kid is being bullied—that worries me, because that's distracting from
the mission, that's detracting from our readiness,” said Alex Wagner,
assistant Air Force secretary for manpower and reserve affairs.
Wagner’s comments come amid escalating attacks
by right-wing politicians on the LGBTQ+ community. For instance, in
Florida, home to several Air Force and Space Force bases, Gov. Ron
DeSantis’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay”
bill bans public school teachers from talking about sexual orientation
or gender identity in the classroom. Hundreds of other anti-LGBTQ+ laws
have been introduced or passed elsewhere in the country.
The Air Force could not immediately say which military bases Wagner was referring to.
“If
servicemembers are thinking and concerned about the experience their
kids are having, they're not going to be focused on their jobs. They're
not gonna be focused on their mission,” Wagner said Tuesday at the
Center for a New American Security’s annual National Security
Conference.
The first encounter with racism that Harmony Kennedy can remember
came in elementary school. On a playground, a girl picked up a leaf and
said she wanted to “clean the dirt” from Harmony’s skin.
In sixth
grade, a boy dropped trash on the floor and told her to pick it up,
“because you’re a slave.” She was stunned — no one had ever said
anything like that to her before.
As protests for racial justice
broke out in 2020, white students at her Tennessee high school kneeled
in the hallways and chanted, “Black lives matter!” in mocking tones. As
she saw the students receive light punishments, she grew increasingly
frustrated.
So when Tennessee began passing legislation
that could limit the discussion and teaching of Black history, gender
identity and race in the classroom, to Harmony, it felt like a gut punch
— as if the adults were signaling this kind of ignorant behavior was
acceptable.
“When I heard they were removing African American history, banning
LGBTQ, I almost started crying,” said Harmony, 16. “We’re not doing
anything to anybody. Why do they care what we personally prefer, or what
we look like?”
As conservative politicians and activists push for
limits on discussions of race, gender and sexuality, some students say
the measures targeting aspects of their identity have made them less
welcome in American schools — the one place all kids are supposed to
feel safe.
Some of the new restrictions have been championed by conservative state leaders
and legislatures, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who say they are
necessary to counter liberal influence in schools. Others have been
pushed by local activists or school boards arguing teachers need more
oversight to ensure classroom materials are appropriate.
Books have been pulled from libraries. Some schools have insisted on using the names transgender students had before they transitioned. And teachers wary of breaking new rules have shied from discussions
related to race, gender and other politically sensitive topics, even as
students say they desperately need to see their lived experiences
reflected in the classroom.
Among them are a transgender student
at a Pennsylvania school where teachers are directed to use students’
birth names, a bisexual student in Florida who sensed a withdrawal of
adult support, and Harmony, a Black student outside Nashville alarmed by
efforts to restrict lessons on Black history.
For these and other students of color and LGBTQ+ kids, it can feel like their very existence is being rejected.
It's
not about helping children, it never was. And it's past time to be
calling out the hate merchants who think it's all a chuckle. I'm not
talking about children in school who hopefully don't know better. I'm
talking about the hate merchants who spread this crap -- Lauren Boebert,
Marjorie Taylor Greene, self-loathing Glenn Greenwald, Max Blumenthal's
ugly wife, Jonathan Turley, Tulsi Gabbard, John Stauber -- and their
co-workers who stay silent and think that's helping. These hate
merchants need to be called out. And don't anyone e-mail about Glenn
being gay. Doesn't matter, he's happily engaged in attacks on
transgendered persons -- Chelsea Manning was correct when she noted it.
And, if you missed it, the gay message board DATALOUNGE had gay men
going to town on Elliot Page over the weekend, deadnaming him, mocking
him, saying that it was time to drop support for transgender people.
Because it is a gay site, it also had people defending Elliot. But that
a LGBTQ+ site (predominately gay men -- and the ones attacking were of
Glenn's age) would see so many trans attacks goes to the fact that
middle aged gays like Glenn include a lot of trans-hating voices in
their generation.
For the first time in its four-decade history, America’s largest
lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer civil rights organization
has declared a national state of emergency for members of the LGBTQ+
community, the Human Rights Campaign said Tuesday.
“LGBTQ+ Americans are living in a state of emergency. The
multiplying threats facing millions in our community are not just
perceived – they are real, tangible and dangerous,” the group’s
president, Kelley Robinson, said. “In many cases they are resulting in
violence against LGBTQ+ people, forcing families to uproot their lives
and flee their homes in search of safer states, and triggering a tidal
wave of increased homophobia and transphobia that puts the safety of
each and every one of us at risk.”
Alongside the emergency declaration, the group will release a digital guidebook, including health and safety resources, a summary of state-by-state laws, “know your rights” information and resources designed to support LGBTQ+ travelers and those living in hostile states, it said.
The historic announcement – just a few days into Pride Month – follows “an unprecedented wave of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation in 2023,” according to the Human Rights Campaign, as violence against LGBTQ people continues and the community’s rights have become a flashpoint in the 2024 election.
Years after 49 people were killed at the Pulse gay nightclub in Florida, Club Q in Colorado in November became the site of a massacre at a beloved LGBTQ “safe space.”
And the Human Rights Campaign just last month issued an updated travel notice
for Florida, outlining potential impacts of six bills recently passed
there, many already signed by GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican
contender for president who’s championed “don’t say gay” and pronoun bills.
Across US state legislatures, at least 417 anti-LGBTQ bills
were introduced in roughly the first quarter of 2023 – a new record and
twice the number of such bills introduced all of last year, according
to American Civil Liberties Union data.
Which
brings us back to John Stauber. If he notes the article above (or any
at another outlet), he will mock it and downplay it and -- since he's
been seized by the crazy -- will start screeching "Soros funded! Soros
funded!" I have no idea whether or not George Soros donates to the HRC
and I don't care. I do care about John Stauber's turn to embrace
homophobia, transphobia and xenophobia. And I don't understand why no
left outlet wants to call his crazy ass out as he pimps one
'replacement' conspiracy theory after another, month after month. He's
nuts. And those who elevated him in the past should be commenting on.
AP notes, "Louisiana is poised to become the latest state to enact laws targeting
the LGBTQ+ community, after the Republican-controlled Legislature on
Tuesday sent a package to the Democratic governor that includes a
ban on gender-affirming care
for minors." They also note that the governor, . John Bel Edwards, a
Democrat, hasn't said whether he'll veto it or not. He should veto it.
It could prove costly for the state.
Daniel Villarreal (LGBT NATION) reports:
A federal judge has struck down parts of Florida’s laws and policies banning gender-affirming care,
saying that the bans contradict “widely accepted standards” of medical
care. While the judge’s decision only affects three of the seven
families of trans youth who sued state officials over the ban, legal
observers say the judge’s ruling could help restore healthcare for
countless trans Floridians of all ages.
In his 44-page ruling,
U.S. District Court Judge Robert Hinkle (appointed in 1996 by President
Bill Clinton) affirmed the existence of transgender identities. He also
said that the defendants’ families may pursue puberty blockers and
hormone replacement therapy (HRT), and their doctors may provide it
without fear of criminal or civil penalties.
Hinkle’s ruling noted that an estimated 1% of the population identifies
as trans and that Florida officials only presented one defense expert
(Dr. Stephen Levine) who has actually treated a significant number of
transgender patients. Hinkle added that the state’s experts all seemed
to hold the “unspoken suggestion… that transgender identity is not real,
that it is made up.”
The judge noted that among the state’s experts, Dr. Paul Hruz called
trans identity a “charade” or “delusion,” and Dr. Patrick Lappert called
gender-affirming care a “lie,” a “moral violation,” a “huge evil,” and
“diabolical.” Hinkle wrote that he considered Cruz “a deeply biased
advocate, not as an expert.”
Hinkle noted that other state employees and consultants have called
gender-affirming healthcare a “woke idea” or a profiteering scheme by
the pharmaceutical industry or doctors.
The judge wrote that “any proponent of the challenged statute and
rules should put up or shut up” by stating clearly whether they
acknowledge the existence of individuals whose gender identities differ
from the sexes they were assigned at birth. “Dog whistles ought not be
tolerated,” he added.
Iraq: Authorities must act to reveal fate of 643 men and boys abducted by government-linked militias
The Iraqi authorities must take concrete action towards revealing the
fate and whereabouts of at least 643 men and boys who were forcibly
disappeared in June 2016 by the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) in the
context of military operations to retake Fallujah from the so-called
Islamic State, Amnesty International said, marking seven years since the
men and boys were abducted.
The PMU are comprised of large, well-established militia groups and are legally considered part of the Iraqi Armed Forces.
“It has been seven years since then-Prime Minister Haidar Abadi
formed a committee to investigate those disappearances and other abuses
committed by the PMU during the Fallujah operations. But so far, the
committee has not made any of its findings public and no one has been
held accountable,” said Aya Majzoub, Amnesty International’s Deputy
Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
“The victims of enforced disappearances are not only those who are
missing, but also their families and loved ones who continue to live in
agony not knowing the fate of their loved ones. Multiple governments
have failed to provide these families with the answers that they deserve
and with reparations. In order to end the reign of impunity in Iraq,
the government must make the findings of the investigative committee
public, ensure that any information on the fate or whereabouts of the
missing men and boys is disclosed to their families, and that evidence
is shared with judicial authorities so that perpetrators can be brought
to justice in fair trials without recourse to the death penalty.”
“To this day, we don’t know anything about them”
In early June 2016, thousands of men, women and children
fleeing the area of Saqlawiya in Anbar Province were met by armed
individuals carrying machine guns and assault rifles. They were
identified by witnesses as members of the PMU, based on emblems on their
uniforms and flags.
As detailed in a 2016 Amnesty International investigation,
the armed men put some of the captured men and boys onto buses and a
large truck. The fate of those who were driven away in these vehicles
remains unknown. Despite multiple attempts by the families of the
disappeared over the years to press the authorities for investigations,
they have not been given answers.
One woman, who was among those captured by the PMU on 3 June 2016,
told Amnesty International that at least six other members of her family
were abducted. Her husband and one of her brothers remain missing. She
said: “There is no bigger of a disaster than losing someone dear to you.
We lost our loved ones, husbands, uncles, fathers. Everyone left. I
don’t remember anything other than sadness.”
She was released on the same day of her abduction and four of her
brothers were released three days later. She said that her brothers were
tortured day and night and that they witnessed the PMU burying people
alive and heard the sounds of people being tortured.
Another woman whose loved ones were abducted by armed men in PMU
vehicles on 2 June 2016 told Amnesty International that 15 members of
her family, including her husband, brother and son, remain missing.
Despite her efforts, the authorities have not taken action nor provided
the family any redress.
“We were living a happy life… If they could hear me, I would tell
them enough of being gone. We are tired. We need you, because life is
not worth it without you. Your children need you and they ask about you.
If only you could return… I am prepared to forget everything and forget
all the pain and start life over again and we live happily, if only.”
According to the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances, Iraq has an
estimated range of 250,000 to 1 million missing persons since 1968,
making it one of the countries with the highest number of missing
persons worldwide.
Authorities fail to take concrete action to investigate disappearances
On 5 June 2016, the office of then-Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi set
up a committee to investigate disappearances and other violations
committed in the context of military operations to retake Fallujah,
including by the PMU. He also tasked the local government of Anbar with
setting up a separate investigative committee, which on 11 June 2016
published findings that it sent to the Prime Minister, revealing that
643 men and boys from the area of Saqlawiya were missing. Families of
the disappeared claim that the actual number is higher.
Since that date, it is unclear what steps the committee set up by the
former Prime Minister has taken to effectively investigate the
disappearances, and it has failed to publicly report on any findings.
Rights groups and families told Amnesty International that the
authorities have not communicated any outcome to the families of the
disappeared. To this date, the Iraqi authorities have been silent as to
the action they have taken to address and investigate these violations
and provide justice and redress to victims.
Since 2016, Amnesty International has repeatedly requested
information regarding this investigation, including in letters addressed
to the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on
19 May 2023. To this day, Amnesty International has not received a
substantive response detailing the fate and whereabouts of the
disappeared.
On 4 April 2023, the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances issued a report
following its visit to Iraq in November 2022. It urged Iraq to
“immediately include enforced disappearances as a separate offence”. It
also called upon Iraq to “establish a comprehensive search and
investigation strategy for all cases of disappearances, and to
strengthen and enlarge the national forensic capacity to ensure that all
victims have access to exhumation processes and forensic services”.
An obligation to criminalize enforced disappearances
Enforced disappearance is currently not a crime under Iraqi law and
therefore cannot be prosecuted as a distinct offence. As a state party
to the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons
against Enforced Disappearance, Iraq has an obligation to criminalize
enforced disappearances, investigate, bring perpetrators to justice, and
ensure reparation for victims.
Al Haq Foundation for Human Rights, an independent civil society
organization based in Baghdad, told Amnesty International: “The failure
to legislate a law to protect persons from enforced disappearance is an
indication of the failure to put an end to cases of enforced
disappearance. Our organization continues its efforts to support the
voices of the victims and their families to together reveal the truth
about the fate of thousands.”
Amnesty International calls on the authorities to provide redress and
reparation, including compensation and rehabilitation, for the families
of those disappeared in June 2016 and to pass effective legislation
criminalizing enforced disappearances in accordance with international
law.
We'll wind down with this Tweet noting the publication of Paul Rudnick's latest novel.
New content at THIRD:
The following sites updated:
