ANDREW MITCHELL: APOLOGIST FOR GENOCIDE

Spread the love

https://www.declassifieduk.org/andrew-mitchell-apologist-for-genocide/

Andrew mitchell with prime minister Rishi Sunak (Flickr)

Britain’s foreign minister has played the lead government role in defending the indefensible – the UK’s support of Israel as it engages in the mass killing of Palestinians.

Andrew Mitchell has consistently defended and apologised for Israel’s war on Gaza since it launched its brutal campaign following the Hamas attacks of 7 October last year.

His support, delivered in numerous parliamentary debates and questioning, is part of the UK government’s extraordinary backing of Israel. 

This includes substantial military activities not reported by Britain’s mainstream media, defence of Israel at the United Nations and ongoing negotiations to increase trade between the two countries – all taking place as Israel has killed over 30,000 Palestinians.

Mitchell’s tireless assistance to Israel while it accused by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) of “plausibly” conducting a genocide, has covered numerous aspects of Israel’s war.

‘Wrong and provocative’

In particular, the foreign minister has led the vociferous UK government rejection of South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the ICJ. 

Mitchell has said that “South Africa’s decision to bring the case was wrong and provocative”. Indeed, he has dismissed the charge of genocide against Israel as “hideous”.

In parliament, Mitchell has repeatedly said the case is “unhelpful and we do not support it”. He has added: “We do not believe that calling this genocide is the right approach. It is wrong to say that Israeli leadership, and Israel as a country, have the intention to commit genocide”. 

https://www.declassifieduk.org/andrew-mitchell-apologist-for-genocide/

Continue ReadingANDREW MITCHELL: APOLOGIST FOR GENOCIDE

Thousands rally across Britain against ‘Tories’ ramping up of racism’

Spread the love

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/thousands-rally-across-britain-against-tories-ramping-up-of-racism

People take part in an anti-racism march in central London orgainised by Stand Up To Racism and trade unions, March 16, 2024

THOUSANDS of anti-racism campaigners rallied across Britain at the weekend to reject the Tories’ “desperate attempt” to win votes by ramping up division and to show support for MP Diane Abbott.

The rallies took place just days after reports emerged that a major Tory donor had said that Britain’s longest-serving black MP “should be shot.”

And in the same week, the government ramped up its Islamophobic rhetoric, with Communities Secretary Michael Gove unveiling a new definition of extremism targeting Muslim groups.

Sabby Dhalu, co-convener of organisers Stand up to Racism, told the Morning Star: “We mobilised to reject the Tories’ ramping up of racism, Islamophobia, hatred, and division in a bid to gain votes at the general election.”

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/thousands-rally-across-britain-against-tories-ramping-up-of-racism

Continue ReadingThousands rally across Britain against ‘Tories’ ramping up of racism’

Gore Calls Out Fossil Fuel Industry ‘Shamelessness’ in Lying to Public

Spread the love

Original article by OLIVIA ROSANE republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Al Gore, former vice president of the United States, speaks onstage at The New York Times Climate Forward Summit 2023 at The Times Center on September 21, 2023, in New York City. (Photo: Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for The New York Times)

“They are continuing to do similar things today to try to fool people and pull the wool over people’s eyes just in the name of greed,” the former vice president said.

In reflecting on nearly 50 years of climate advocacy, former Vice President Al Gore said that he had “underestimated” the greed of the fossil fuel industry.

The remarks came in an interview published in USA Today on Sunday. When asked if he had any regrets, Gore responded that he had “put every ounce of energy” he had into climate advocacy, but added:

“I was pretty slow to recognize how important the massive funding of anti-climate messaging was going on. I underestimated the power of greed in the fossil fuel industry, the shamelessness in putting out the lies.”

“They are continuing to do similar things today to try to fool people and pull the wool over people’s eyes just in the name of greed,” Gore continued.

“What’s at stake is so incredible.”

Gore, who tried to raise awareness about the climate crisis in the U.S. House of Representatives as early as 1981 and brought the issue to national attention in 2006’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth, has taken a harsher tone against oil, gas, and coal companies in recent months. In August 2023, he said that the “climate crisis is a fossil fuel crisis,” and in September, he implored the industry to “get out of the way.” In December, he lamented that the industry had “captured the COP process,” referring to the appointment of the United Arab Emirates national oil company CEO Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber to preside over the United Nations’ COP28 climate conference in that country.

In the USA Today interview, Gore also named the fossil fuel industry when asked about his greatest frustration.

“Well, that we haven’t made more progress,” Gore answered, “and that some of the fossil fuel companies have been shameless in providing, continuing to provide lavish funding for disinformation and misinformation.”

“What’s at stake is so incredible,” he added.

However, Gore told USA Today that he tried not to focus on his anger, but instead on continuing to raise awareness about the crisis and what can be done about it. And he remained hopeful that his grandchildren would live in a world in which people had come together and acted in time.

“We’ve got all the solutions we need right now to cut emissions in half before the end of this decade,” he said. “We’ve got a clear line of sight to how we can cut the other 50% of emissions by mid century.”

He also encouraged more people to get involved with the climate movement.

“I would say the greatest need is for more grassroots advocates because the most persuasive advocates are those in your own community,” he said.

Original article by OLIVIA ROSANE republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingGore Calls Out Fossil Fuel Industry ‘Shamelessness’ in Lying to Public

Morning Star: Defending democracy – how can we beat back Gove’s dangerous authoritarianism?

Spread the love

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/e/defending-democracy-how-can-we-beat-back-goves-dangerous-authoritarianism

Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Michael Gove speaking during the Scottish Conservative party conference at the Event Complex Aberdeen, March 2, 2024

The left cannot confine ourselves to condemning what the government does. We need strategies to undo it. This applies to the toxic new definition of extremism announced by Michael Gove last week, which could have catastrophic long-term consequences.

The new definition — and its associated practice, the labelling of certain organisations as extremist by ministerial decree — must not be allowed to bed in. We need mass refusal to accept it, declarations by devolved and local government, trade unions, charities and campaigns that we wholly reject it.

The joint statement by key organisers of the mass street movement for Gaza that Gove’s “redefinition of extremism … is in reality an assault on core democratic freedoms” is the right approach.

Our defence must be to go on the attack against the extremism definition, to campaign publicly for its reversal and to sign up every organisation that cares for its democratic image to officially oppose it.

The next government should inherit a policy that is already utterly discredited and unworkable because its right to define extremists is universally rejected.

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/e/defending-democracy-how-can-we-beat-back-goves-dangerous-authoritarianism

Continue ReadingMorning Star: Defending democracy – how can we beat back Gove’s dangerous authoritarianism?

How bad are private jets for the environment?

Spread the love

https://www.energymonitor.ai/sectors/transport/how-bad-are-private-jets-for-the-environment/

Private jet use is increasingly under scrutiny as the effects of climate change become apparent. Credit: zorazhuang via Getty Images.

As public pressure grows, some governments are attempting to reduce the number of private and commercial short-haul flights.

Recent coverage of celebrities like Taylor Swift and politicians using private jets for short journeys has reignited a debate about the justifiability of their use. As public pressure to curb carbon emissions grows, some governments are attempting to reduce the number of short-haul flights undertaken by commercial and private jet aircraft.

The crux of the issue with private jets, is they have a dramatically higher carbon footprint per passenger than commercial alternatives.

A 2021 report from Brussels-based campaign group Transport and Environment found that private jets are five to 14 times more polluting per passenger than commercial flights and 50 times more polluting than trains.

The report also stated that some private jets emit two tonnes of CO2 per hour, which is staggering when compared to the average annual output per person of 8.2 tonnes in advanced economies.

“Aeroplanes are one of the most polluting methods of transport due to the variety of released gases,” explains GlobalData analyst Will Tyson. “It is not just CO2 emissions, but also nitrogen oxides and the effects of vapour trails.

“The altitude from which the gases are emitted also has an impact due to the greenhouse effect being stronger the higher in the air you are.”

As a whole, air travel accounts for 2% of CO2 emissions. In contrast, militaries around the world contribute 5.5% of CO2 emissions.

Global NGO Greenpeace is part of a growing number of organisations lobbying to ban private jet use once and for all, arguing that, despite 80% of the world’s population having never taken a flight, the super-rich 1% are responsible for half of the world’s aviation emissions.

https://www.energymonitor.ai/sectors/transport/how-bad-are-private-jets-for-the-environment/

One of the many occasions climate destroyer and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak uses a private jet.
Climate destroyer and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak often uses private jets.
Continue ReadingHow bad are private jets for the environment?

Politicians call on Labour to reinstate Diane Abbott at packed show of support in Hackney

Spread the love

https://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2024/03/16/politicians-labour-reinstate-diane-abbott-show-of-support-hackney/

Diane Abbott surrounded by supporters at last night’s rally. Photograph: Maya Sall

Hundreds of people gathered outside Hackney Town Hall last night for a rally in support of Diane Abbott, MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington.

On Monday, the Guardian revealed that the Conversative party’s largest donor, businessman Frank Hester, told colleagues that looking at Abbott makes you “want to hate all Black women” and that the MP “should be shot”.

At the demonstration, crowds chanted ‘We stand with Diane’ and heard speeches from people including independent Islington MP Jeremy Corbyn and a representative of Sistah Space, a domestic violence charity for Black women.

The speakers called for Labour to restore the whip to Abbott after it was removed in May last year.

Abbott has been MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington since 1987, making her the first Black female MP and the longest-serving Black MP.

Addressing the crowd, she thanked local residents: “It is Hackney that work to get me elected in the ’80s, and it is Hackney people who have stood by me year after year, decade after decade.”

“What I want to say is this: this is not about me,” the MP continued. “This is about the level of racism that there is still in Britain. This is about the way that Black women are disrespected.”

Abbott talked about the institutional racism faced by her mother after she emigrated to Britain in the 1950s, and said that racism is still embedded in our society today.

Image of Jeremy Corbyn MP, former leader of the Labour Party
Jeremy Corbyn MP, former leader of the Labour Party

Corbyn praised Abbott for her “steadfastness in coping with the personal stress that goes with the abuse”, and criticised the fact that she was unable to defend herself in parliament this week.

During Wednesday’s Prime Minister’s Question Time, Abbott stood up 46 times in 35 minutes to ask for an opportunity to address the Commons.

It is tradition that if an MP is embroiled in a particular issue, or is in the news, the Speaker will call on them to address parliament. However, Abbott was never called.

In a post on X, Abbott wrote: “I don’t know whose interests the Speaker thinks he is serving. But it is not the interests of the Commons or democracy.”

Cllr Adejare spoke passionately about Abbott’s legacy. “She paved the way for so many of us. Without her, it’s more likely than not that people like me would not be in politics.”

Commenting on how quickly the rally was organised, she added: “It’s about making sure that when we look back in history, we know as a community that we stood up in solidarity against the oppression that’s Diane Abbott has experienced.”

https://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2024/03/16/politicians-labour-reinstate-diane-abbott-show-of-support-hackney/

Continue ReadingPoliticians call on Labour to reinstate Diane Abbott at packed show of support in Hackney

Will abandoning left-wing voters backfire for Keir Starmer?

Spread the love

Original article by Paul Rogers republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence

Labour leader’s reluctance to differ from Tories on policy or Gaza sets stage for progressive independent candidates

Keir Starmer has moved Labour to the right – leaving left-wing voters without a political home  | Belinda Jiao/Getty Images

Almost all of Britain’s pollsters agree: the Labour Party is heading for a massive victory in this year’s general election, while Rishi Sunak’s Tories are set for a historic defeat. But there is another, far less talked about shift underway, which could see a wave of independent left-wing MPs elected.

Most polling firms expect Labour to win a majority of more than a hundred seats. A ‘poll of polls’ by political forecasting website Electoral Calculus suggests the party is on course for a 200+ majority.

These polls could all be wrong, but little seems to shake them. There is some evidence, though, of another trend that is yet to be reflected in the polls: Keir Starmer’s unwillingness to set out any clear policy differences from the Conservatives may be backfiring.

One area likely to cause the Labour leader trouble is his position – or lack thereof – on Israel’s war on Gaza.

Several polls in recent months have indicated that around 70% of people in the UK want an immediate ceasefire, and there are weekly demonstrations in towns and cities across the country in support of Palestinians. Organisers of a march in London last week estimated that up to 400,000 people had gathered to demand an end to the violence.

These protests receive minimal coverage in the mainstream media, bar senior Conservatives labelling the peaceful crowds as ‘hate mobs’. The government maintains strong support for Israel, continuing to sell arms and share intelligence with the country, as well as allowing it to use RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus as a support base – a position Labour has largely agreed with.

This leaves a huge gap in political representation, at least from the biggest two parties, for swathes of people nationwide.

It was in this opening that former Labour MP George Galloway – who was kicked out of the party in the 2000s after objecting to the UK entering the Iraq war – was elected as an independent MP for Rochdale last month, following a campaign that centred the need for a ceasefire in Gaza.

Another gap in political representation has been created by Starmer’s remodelling of the Labour Party, which has been sanitised to ensure it poses little or no threat to the political establishment. The majority of his policies so far appear to be a continuation of the status quo, suggesting little will change if the party wins the forthcoming election.

In contrast, so bold and progressive were the policies of his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn, that the higher echelons of the Labour Party and the wider political and media establishment were determined to get rid of him from the offset.

A leadership challenge was mounted against him in the summer of 2016, little over a year after he was elected the party’s leader. Corbyn won comfortably – a fact I found unsurprising, having seen first-hand how he could pull a crowd of more than a thousand people to a hurriedly arranged event half a mile from a city centre.

Internal party opposition to Corbyn surged following his re-election, again backed by the mainstream media. When then Tory prime minister Theresa May called an election in 2017, many anticipated she would win a landslide victory that would consign ‘Corbynism’ to the outer margins.

Instead, Corbyn and his Labour manifesto struck a chord with many voters. Labour gains resulted in a hung parliament, to the horror of the political establishment, which worked to eliminate this threat from the left over the following two years.

After Labour lost the 2019 general election, Corbyn resigned and Starmer moved the party rightwards – prompting tens of thousands of its members to desert it as a result. Their votes are now up for grabs, and left-wing independents are hoping to win them.

Take a meeting in London just last weekend, scarcely reported on except by socialist paper The Morning Star. Two hundred of Labour’s former parliamentary candidates, councillors and supporters gathered to develop an alternative to its current stance on Gaza and other issues.

A sense of the mood at the event was best summed up by Tyneside’s independent socialist mayor Jamie Driscoll, who quit Labour after the party decided not to select him to run again for the north-east mayoral election in May.

In a video message played at the meeting, Driscoll said: “In the next election, both parties will have the same manifesto and the same rich donors pulling the strings.”

similar event is planned in Blackburn next month – just one part of a much wider movement that will likely see independent left-wing candidates standing against Labour candidates in many seats in the general election.

This is already being seen in England’s upcoming local council elections, where clusters of non-party, progressive candidates are working together in many parts of the country. In Blackburn, for example, every ward will have an independent left-wing candidate standing, as will all six wards in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire. Early indications suggest similar trends in Merseyside and parts of London.

The accepted political wisdom in the UK is that once a general election is called, voters tend to revert to the usual pattern of voting. But if independent candidates were to pick up substantial numbers of votes in the local elections, even taking some council seats, it could indicate a political shift that means this wisdom will not apply this year.

This may seem unlikely but there is undeniably a political vacuum waiting to be filled – and a sense that something is afoot in British politics that is simply not being recognised.

Original article by Paul Rogers republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence

Status Quo, again and again and again and again
Continue ReadingWill abandoning left-wing voters backfire for Keir Starmer?

Where Labour and the Tories got their money from in 2023

Spread the love

Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak saw donations to their respective parties increase significantly last year
 | Leon Neal & Carl Court/Getty Images

Labour’s cash from private donors now dwarfs donations from unions, while the Tories got their biggest bung ever

Britain suffered a bleak economic landscape in 2023, with wages stagnant and costs rising across the board, but political donors and the parties they give to seem to have been unimpacted. All parties declared more than £93m in total compared with £52m in the previous year. And the cash looks set to keep pouring in ahead of the general election, which could take place as soon as May – although our money is on a November poll.

The Conservatives received the most donations by far, raking in £44.5m in cash, compared with Labour’s total of £21.6m, £6m for the Liberal Democrats, £610,000 for the Green Party and £255,000 for Reform – who now have their first MP in the form of ‘Red Wall Rottweiler’ Lee Anderson. The SNP registered only £76,000 cash donations in 2023, with £50,000 from the estate of a donor who passed away some years prior.

In addition to this, parties received non-cash donations – for things like premises, staff costs, sponsorship, consultancy services and more – worth £4.2m in total. Other regulated recipients like Labour Together, The New Conservatives, Labour First, and the Carlton Club Political Committee, took in £2.5m – these are campaigning organisations affiliated to political parties but legally separate from them, and often provide financial support to a particular faction within a party.

We’ve had a closer look at some of the underlying trends behind the numbers and picked out a few key points to look out for in the months ahead, based on what these donations tell us about the state of play in the two main parties.

Labour’s reliance on companies and individuals over trade unions

Much has been made of Labour’s increasingly close relationship with big business and the wealthy under Keir Starmer. Supporters of the party leadership argue that Labour has to be able to compete with the spending power of the Conservatives in the general election, and so has to look beyond the traditional funding source of the trade union movement toward people and businesses with deep pockets. Critics, however, might suggest that the interests of the trade union movement and the interests of those with the deepest pockets may not accord.

The concern among those of the latter view is that, as donations from the wealthy come to represent a larger proportion of the party’s war chest, there could be a shift in policy in that direction. Dark Arts has already reported on the access and influence enjoyed by corporate lobbying firms who employ Labour candidates to connect their clients with senior party figures. I’ve also written for openDemocracy about the millions that have poured into the party from bankers and financiers under Starmer. And our analysis of donations data for 2023 shows another potentially concerning trend for those worried about a corporate takeover of the party.

Of the £21.5m in cash received by the party in 2023, just £5.9m came from the trade union movement, compared with £14.5m from companies and individuals – a huge increase on the previous year, and indeed more than in the three previous years of Keir Starmer’s leadership combined. As trade union contributions have dipped slightly, from around £6.9m in 2020 and 2021 to £5.3m in 2022, donations from businesses and individuals have soared: they totalled £2.3m in 2020 and rose to £3m in 2021 and £7.6m in 2022 before nearly doubling last year.

Around £10m of this total comes from just four sources: Gary Lubner (£4.6m), David Sainsbury (£3.1m), Fran Perrin (£1m) and Ecotricity (£1m), the green energy firm owned by prominent eco-activist Dale Vince. This means that just two individuals gave the Labour Party more money last year than all the trade unions combined.

Lubner is the former CEO of Belron, a global firm specialising in vehicle glass repair. He has been donating to the party since meeting shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves at a dinner hosted by the big-four consultancy firm PwC in 2021. Sainsbury – of supermarket fame – has been an on-off Labour donor for decades, forging a close relationship with the party during the New Labour years when he got a seat in the Lords and served as a science minister. His daughter, Fran Perrin, was an adviser in Tony Blair’s Downing Street.

Including trade unions, there were 114 donors who gave £25,000 or more last year, while the overall average sum donated over the year was £111,499.

Tories in need of new funding sources ahead of GE

It is perhaps an indictment of the British political system that two of the largest individual donors to political parties last year were both men with the last name Sainsbury. David Sainsbury’s contribution to Labour was dwarfed by the £10m left by his cousin, Tory peer John Sainsbury, to the Conservatives in his will – the largest single donation ever received by the party.

Of the £44.5m in cash received by the Conservatives last year, more than £20m came from two sources: John Sainsbury and Frank Hester, an IT entrepreneur from Leeds who has given £5m personally and another £5m through his firm, The Phoenix Partnership. Hester’s firm has profited from public sector contracts and his ties with the party are under heightened scrutiny following the publication of an investigation by the Guardian that revealed he had said former Labour MP Diane Abbott made him “want to hate all black women” and should be shot.

A further £11.3m came from five individuals:

  • Mohamed Mansour, Egyptian-born billionaire who controls the behemoth conglomerate Mansour Group, which has interests in real estate, finance, retail and tech: £5m
  • Graham Edwards, co-founder of one of the largest private companies in the UK, Telereal Trillium, which owns thousands of properties and approximately 60 million square feet of land: £2m
  • Amit Lohia, son of billionaire petrochemical and fertiliser tycoon Sri Prakash Lohia, chair of Indorama: £2m
  • Christopher Barry Wood, founder of biotech firm Medannex: £1.3m
  • Alan Howard, hedge fund manager who co-founded Jersey-based Brevan Howard and has significant interests in crypto-currency: £1m

Even without the mega-donation from John Sainsbury, the party comfortably brought in more than Labour last year, and plans pushed through recently by the government raising the amount that political parties can spend at a general election have been widely seen as a sign the party still believes it can leverage its financial pull to good effect against Starmer’s Labour.

However, when the one-off £10m donation is discounted, the party’s fundraising efforts slowed down significantly in the latter half of last year. In the first six months of 2023 the party received £20.6m, compared with just £12m in the second half of the year. Without the £10m from Lord Sainsbury, the party would have taken in just £3m in the third quarter, a huge drop from Q2 (£9.2m) and Q1 (£11.4m).

This might suggest that, at least into the latter portion of last year, the Conservatives were not planning on holding an election in the early portion of 2024, as we would expect to see an uptick in fundraising in anticipation of that.

Overall, there were 286 donors who gave the Conservative Party £25,000 or more last year. The average Tory donor gave £90,811 over the course of the year.

If you’re concerned about the influence of money in politics and want to support our reporting in this area, sign up to our newly-launched newsletter, The Dark Arts, on Substack.

Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Continue ReadingWhere Labour and the Tories got their money from in 2023

Ansar Allah announces expansion of attacks on Israel-bound ships to all of Indian Ocean

Spread the love

Original article republished from peoples dispatch under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA) license.

A leader of the Ansar Allah movement criticized the US for providing weapons to Israel’s genocidal war and held airdropping aid to Gaza as insulting to Palestinians

Sayyed Abdulmalik al-Houthi, leader of Yemen’s Ansar Allah, said on Thursday, March 14 that his country’s armed forces will expand their attacks against ships moving to Israel from the Red Sea region to the whole of Indian ocean.

Stating that attacks on Israeli ships in the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb will continue until there is a ceasefire in Gaza, al-Houthi declared that “we [now] aim to prevent ships associated with the Israeli enemy from crossing [Indian] Ocean towards South Africa and the Cape of the Good Hope” as well.

He warned that international shipping companies should take Ansar Allah’s declaration seriously and avoid any links with Israel as “any ship linked to Israel is vulnerable to Yemeni missiles.”  

Ansar Allah and the Yemeni Armed Forces have been carrying out attacks against the ships associated with Israel in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden since November last year, in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza who have been facing devastating Israeli aggression since October 7 which has killed close to 32,000 of them and injured over 72,000.

Ansar Allah has been a part of the regional Axis of Resistance against imperialist interventions and colonialism along with Iraqi resistance forces and Hezbollah in Lebanon. They have targeted Israel and US installations in the region in solidarity with Palestinians.

Al-Houthi asserted that the attacks carried out by the US and the UK on Yemen will not be able to deter the country from supporting Gaza. Those attacks have “one outcome, which is the widening of the conflict and war at the regional level” he said. 

The US and the UK launched aerial strikes inside Yemen in December despite concerns that any such move will escalate the war in Gaza to the regional level. Since then, they have carried out over hundred of such attacks.

On Thursday, the US and the UK carried out a total of 11 airstrikes. According to Al-Mayadeen, Thursday’s attacks brings the total number of such airstrikes in Yemen to over 35 in just five days since the start of the month of Ramadan. Most of the airstrikes targeted the port city of Hodeidah. However, provinces such as Saada and Sanaa were also been targeted. 

US and Israel linked ships and warships targeted  

Al-Houthi claimed that at least 34 Yemenis have been killed in operations carried out in support of Gaza since November. He however asserted that Yemen will not be deterred and will continue to act in solidarity with Palestine.

He also stated that Yemeni Armed Forces have carried out at least 12 operations against ships and warships in the Red Sea, Arabian Sea, and Gulf of Aden region by launching 58 ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones in the past week. He added that the total number of ships and warships hit by Yemen since November has reached 73.

On Thursday, the UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported that it received reports of two more ships being attacked off the coast of Hodeidah with missiles. At least one of those two ships was damaged in the attack.

Al-Houthi also praised popular support for the Palestinian cause in Yemen and the large participation in the weekly million-person marches in solidarity with Palestinians. He appealed to the Yemeni people to participate in the next “million Yemeni march” organized across the country on Friday.

Al-Houthi criticized the role of most of the regional countries in the Israeli war in Gaza claiming apart from Iran, most others “did not take any serious practical stand” in support of Palestinian people. 

Al-Houthi claimed that “the Israeli occupation is carrying out a crime of the century, with American participation and contribution” from other western countries. He termed the US airdropping of aid into Gaza “an insult” to Palestinians underlining how it has bypassed the official UN channels of aid.

Original article republished from peoples dispatch under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA) license.

Continue ReadingAnsar Allah announces expansion of attacks on Israel-bound ships to all of Indian Ocean

Protests and Parody Paper Decry New York Times’ Pro-Israel Bias in Gaza Coverage

Spread the love

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

A reader holds up a copy of a satirical paper, “The New York War Crimes,” mocking The New York Times’ biased coverage of the Gaza genocide, on March 14, 2024 in New York City. (Photo: Nicki Kattoura/X)

“The Times is not unique among media in manufacturing consent for war, for exploitation, for genocide. It is, rather, exemplary.”

More than 100 pro-Palestine demonstrators were arrested Thursday after staging a protest at The New York Times‘ Midtown Manhattan headquarters, where activists handed out copies of a satirical knockoff of the newspaper that skewered what organizers called its biased coverage of the Gaza genocide.

After surrounding the Times‘ printing plant in College Point, Queens, members of Writers Against the War on Gaza (WAWOG), Palestinian Youth Movement, and other groups shut down the paper’s Midtown West headquarters, where they chanted, “New York Times you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide,” “free, free Palestine,” and “from the river to the sea.”

Around 150 demonstrators occupied the Times building, where they called on passersby to “boycott, divest, and unsubscribe.” Some passersby confronted the demonstrators. One angry man attempted to steal a large banner from protesters. The New York Police Department said 124 protesters were arrested.

Some of the activists handed out parody copies of the Times, renamed as the The New York War Crimes. The paper’s creators also changed the Times‘ “All the News That’s Fit to Print” motto to “All the Consent That’s Fit to Manufacture.”

“The Times is not unique among media in manufacturing consent for war, for exploitation, for genocide,” notes the satirical paper, which also has a website. “It is, rather, exemplary. Indeed, perhaps the deadliest weapon of all is the Times‘ sense of its own importance, its self-appointed role as the arbiter of what counts as good journalism.”

“If theTimes says it, it must be true; if they print it, it must be fit to print,” the publication adds. “The Times‘ reputation for liberalism, for rigor, for nonpartisan independence is precisely what makes it so dangerous, because it hides what it really is: media that serves the interests of U.S. imperialism.”

One article, “How to Make a Genocide Disappear,” breaks down how Times coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza uses language, framing, and focus that favors Israel:

According to this story, Israel has responded to an unexplainable attack by Hamas, a shadowy Islamist terror group, with proportional force. A story in which attacks on hospitals and schools are regrettable but necessary evils. In the Times‘ surrealist account, the Israeli military stands on the frontlines of feminism, queer rights, and democracy. Hamas is to blame for the deaths of 30,000 Palestinians. The United States is a reproachful ally, not a calculating and enabling accomplice. A handful of Israeli hostages are worthy of dozens of tearfulstories and op-eds, while thousands of Palestinians are kidnapped and tortured without fanfare. Even Israel’s widespread, targeted murder of at least 125 journalists—a horror that the newspaper, with its much-touted reverence for journalism, might be expected to take particular heed of—is rendered invisible.

The New York War Crimes‘ site also highlights the Times‘ past support for U.S. wars, coups, and other crimes, from the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of democratically elected governments in Iran and Guatemala in the 1950s through the 21st-century events like the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq on false pretenses.

Responding to the protest, a Times spokesperson said that “the Israel-Hamas war is one of the most divisive global events in recent history,” and that “we will not let critics or advocacy groups sway us from covering the conflict fully and fairly.”

At the Queens demonstration—which took place from around 1:00-3:30 am—protesters laid down in a driveway and locked themselves to each other using chains and PVC pipes. Other activists held signs reading, “Stop the presses. Free Palestine” and “Consent for genocide is manufactured here.” The protesters dispersed after police said they could leave freely or face arrest.

As Hell Gatereported:

A night shift worker from another operation down the block strolled over to see what the growing traffic jam was all about. “Oh, that’s what’s up,” he said, when he saw the banners. “I’m Egyptian.” Activists explained the goals of their action, and he bumped their fists. “You guys are putting in work!” he said.

The New York War Crimes tells readers that “now is the time to act.”

“Those who believe in a free Palestine have long refused to buy products from American companies that make weapons for Israel,” the paper states. “For exactly the same reason, we boycott all the offerings of The New York Times. We do not share their articles or listen to their podcasts. We do not cook their recipes or read their newsletters. We do not play their games. We divest ourselves of the notion that they either deserve or bestow merit.”

“If you still subscribe to the Times, unsubscribe,” the publication implores. “If you read the Times, stop. Write the editors an email telling them why you’re boycotting, divesting, and unsubscribing.”

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). 

Continue ReadingProtests and Parody Paper Decry New York Times’ Pro-Israel Bias in Gaza Coverage