Gaza
Aviator Sunglasses
Listen to a reading by Tim Foley:
https://medium.com/media/f31695ba29dd895686558c83080258a1/href
Aviator sunglasses hide demented eyes
in a skull full of bank logos and forgotten AIPAC speeches,
boozy nights of rapefinger whisperings and Beltway balrogs,
and fundraising wisecracks with smiles made of Gaddafi’s bones,
brain now crowded with paper shredders
and frantic, sweaty interns
staying up all night working
to dispose of the evidence.
Aviator sunglasses with glowing pentagons in them,
with mountains of skulls in them,
with dismembered children in them,
with gutted babies in them,
with screaming mothers in them,
with burning flesh in them,
with flattened neighborhoods in them,
crushed limbs sticking out of rubble in them,
fathers carrying tiny bags of body parts in them,
laughing, mocking, blood-soaked soldiers in them,
bombs and food falling from the sky together in them.
Demented eyes gazing out upon a dying world
through aviator sunglasses full of dead faces,
skin illuminated by a burning sky,
licking an ice cream cone
that is dripping deep red.
________________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Go here to find video versions of my articles. Go here to buy paperback editions of my writings from month to month. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.
Bitcoin donations: 1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
Featured image via Gage Skidmore (CC BY-SA 2.0 DEED)
Pinkwashing the Timeline
Just beneath the surface of pro-Zionist discourse lies a disdain for queerness.
Breaking: ICJ rules that Germany can continue Israel arms sales despite genocide
International Court of Justice reject Germany’s attempts to strike out case but refuses by 15 votes to 1 to issue emergency measures banning weapons sales
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has refused Nicaragua’s request for a provisional order banning Germany from exporting weapons to Israel, despite its earlier ruling that Israel is ‘plausibly’ committing genocide in Gaza. Nicaragua had argued that Germany is enabling genocide. The court rejected Germany’s request to strike out the application.
Germany is Israel’s second-largest arms supplier. The court expressed continued concern about the situation in Gaza but has allowed Germany to continue supplying the slaughter, despite Israel’s complete disregard of the court’s existing orders to protect Palestinian lives and Germany’s repression of pro-Gaza protest. The genocide case continues and is expected to take more than a year to conclude.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Gaza Shows Us The Difference Between Evil Autocracies And Free Democracies
Listen to a reading of this article (reading by Tim Foley):
https://medium.com/media/4182ba84dded7d51652f9a4105756a57/href
We’re always hearing international conflicts framed as a battle between Free Democracies and Evil Autocracies. What is the difference between a Free Democracy and an Evil Autocracy? Well, let’s look at the situation in Gaza to help us understand the distinction.
In Evil Autocracies the leaders commit genocide for hateful and racist reasons, whereas in Free Democracies the leaders commit genocide for noble and righteous reasons.
In Evil Autocracies the police are summoned to break up student protests in order to ensure the safety of the government, whereas in Free Democracies the police are summoned to break up student protests in order to ensure the safety of the students.
In Evil Autocracies the government monitors political speech on university campuses to suppress dissent, whereas in Free Democracies the government monitors political speech on university campuses to suppress “antisemitism”.
In Evil Autocracies the government controls the media and ensures that it only reports information which serves their interests, whereas in Free Democracies it is billionaires who do this.
In Evil Autocracies they imprison journalists who report inconvenient facts, whereas in Free Democracies they do this also, but mostly they just kill them with airstrikes.
In Evil Autocracies they massacre civilians with bullets and blades, whereas in Free Democracies they massacre civilians with military explosives and siege warfare, like civilized people.
In Evil Autocracies political speech is heavily restricted by the government, whereas in Free Democracies political speech is heavily restricted by Silicon Valley in collaboration with the government.
In Evil Autocracies they mow down disobedient civilians and bury them in mass graves, whereas in Free Democracies they mow down disobedient civilians and bury them in mass graves, and then their allies solemnly say they’re waiting for more information about these very serious allegations.
In Evil Autocracies they bomb hospitals, schools and religious centers, assassinate cultural leaders and journalists, and deliberately target civilian infrastructure in the name of inflicting death and terror, whereas in Free Democracies they bomb hospitals, schools and religious centers, assassinate cultural leaders and journalists, and deliberately target civilian infrastructure in the name of self-defense.
In Evil Autocracies they flagrantly disregard international law, whereas in Free Democracies they flagrantly disregard international law.
In Evil Autocracies they drop bombs on areas full of civilians because of genocidal bloodlust, whereas in Free Democracies they drop bombs on areas full of civilians because of “human shields”.
In Evil Autocracies you’ll get thrown in prison if you go on TV and speak out against the government, whereas in Free Democracies nobody who would speak out against the government is ever allowed to have a TV job.
In Evil Autocracies people are afraid to speak out against war crimes, injustice and oppression because they’ll be punished, whereas in Free Democracies people are afraid to speak out against war crimes, injustice and oppression because they’ll be accused of hating Jews.
In Evil Autocracies they arm terrorists with AK-47s and RPGs to help them inflict violence and suffering upon the innocent, whereas in Free Democracies they arm terrorists with war planes and 2,000-pound bombs to help them inflict violence and suffering upon the innocent.
In Evil Autocracies people are kept too brutalized and cowed to rise up against their rulers, whereas in Free Democracies people are kept too propagandized and indoctrinated to rise up against their rulers.
In Evil Autocracies the media feed the public a nonstop deluge of propaganda and people know it’s propaganda, whereas in Free Democracies the media feed the public a nonstop deluge of propaganda and people think it’s the news.
______________________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Go here to find video versions of my articles. Go here to buy paperback editions of my writings from month to month. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.
Bitcoin donations: 1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
Featured image via Montecruz Foto (CC BY-SA 3.0 DEED)
US declares Israeli units guilty of war crimes – but whitewashes them as ‘individual’ acts
US laws ban sale of arms if they might be used in war crimes – but there will be no pause
The US government has declared five Israeli army units guilty ‘gross violations of human rights’, according to the State Department.
However, while going through the motions of attributing guilt, the US has simultaneously whitewashed the IDF’s systematic genocide and war crimes by describing the crimes as “individual incidents of gross violations of human rights” against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank before the current genocidal onslaught – and claiming that the units in question have taken ‘remedial’ corrective measures.
No findings have been made against the IDF for its slaughter of more than 40,000 Palestinian civilians in Gaza, mostly women and children and including summary executions and deliberate bombing of families, schools and hospitals – despite the recent discovery of mass graves in Gaza and the advice of senior government officials to the State Department that Israel is committing war crimes with US-made weapons.
State Department spokespeople have told journalist that it has found no evidence that Israel is committing war crimes in its slaughter since 7 October. The US government is currently trying to stop the International Criminal Court issuing international arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli ministers.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Columbia Philosophy Grad Students Condemn Campus Arrests
“We call for the reversal of student suspensions and for departments to refuse to comply with university investigations or sanctions of students and employees participating in non-violent political action.”
[Philosophy Hall, Columbia University]
Current graduate students in the Department of Philosophy at Columbia University, as well as alumni of its graduate program, some of whom are professors elsewhere, have released a statement about the protests that have been taking place at the university this month.
Students at Columbia have been protesting Israel’s response to Hamas’s October 7th attack. A few days into the protest, Columbia University President Minouche Shafik suspended students taking part in them and authorized the New York Police Department to arrest protestors. Over 100 people were arrested.
In the statement the Columbia philosophy students “unequivocally condemn President Minouche Shafik’s decision” and demand “the reversal of student suspensions and for departments to refuse to comply with university investigations or sanctions of students and employees participating in non-violent political action.” They also “call on the Columbia administration to commit to never again call police onto campus to suppress student speech.”
Here’s the full text and signatories:
Statement on Recent Events from Graduate Students and Alumni of the Department of Philosophy at Columbia University
We, current and former graduate students of the Department of Philosophy at Columbia University, are appalled at the decision taken on April 18th by the University President to violate principles of academic freedom and free speech by authorizing the forcible removal and arrest of 108 of our students and colleagues.
On April 18th, the President of Columbia University, in the name of “safety,” brought armed police into our campus to use physical force against students who had established a non-violent encampment in support of Palestine on Columbia’s South Lawn. The encampment did not disrupt classes. It did not block access to campus or buildings. Nevertheless, the police were called in after only a day. The President took this action against the recommendation of the University Senate, violating principles of shared governance established in the wake of the 1968 protests. As a result of these arrests and suspensions, students have sustained injuries, lost access to Columbia health services, and been evicted from student housing with less than 15 minutes to gather their belongings.
This followed months of tensions at Columbia since the horrifying events of October 7th and the devastating aftermath. These events have been the topic of difficult and traumatizing discussion. Columbia’s administration could have responded by promoting dialogue and mutual understanding. Instead, the administration heavily restricted speech on campus and disproportionately acted to silence one voice in particular – the voice of those protesting against the ongoing oppression and killing of Palestinians. It was in this environment of institutional repression that the student protesters decided to take action.
The University’s decision to arrest student protesters was thus the culmination of months of restriction against the public expression of support for Palestinians. The past few years have seen an alarming trend of bad faith political actors attempting to silence political speech they disagree with by policing academic institutions, thereby undermining elementary principles of academic autonomy. Columbia’s Board of Trustees has demonstrated more interest in appeasing these external forces than responding to the needs of their students, as have the administrations of other universities. We have witnessed the actions of police at other college campuses where professors are thrown to the ground and department chairs are dragged away in zip ties. Regardless of where we stand on the issue of Israel and Palestine, we should all agree that such attempts to suppress discourse are utterly unacceptable in any decent society committed to liberal principles.
As educators, we believe that it is our special responsibility to speak out when the University denies students the right to freely pursue their education. And as philosophers, we have a duty to uphold the values of free thought and open discourse, just as Sidney Morgenbesser and other members of our department did in 1968.
We therefore unequivocally condemn President Minouche Shafik’s decision. We call for the reversal of student suspensions and for departments to refuse to comply with university investigations or sanctions of students and employees participating in non-violent political action. We oppose further efforts from the administration to forcibly remove the new encampment, and call on the Columbia administration to commit to never again call police onto campus to suppress student speech. The best path forward, in our view, is for the administration to continue to negotiate with the representatives of Columbia University Apartheid Divest in good faith and without further threats.
Signed,
Current graduate students and alumni of the Department of Philosophy at Columbia University
Updated List of Signatures:
-
- Ola Aksnes (Graduate Student)
- Avery Archer (Alum)
- Elizabeth Benn (Alum)
- Noah Betz-Richman (Graduate Student)
- Michael Brent (Alum)
- Simon Brown (Alum)
- Ellen Nora Burns (Graduate Student)
- Samara Burns (Graduate Student)
- César Cabezas (Alum)
- Qian Cao (Graduate Student)
- Bard Cash (Graduate Student)
- May Chen (Alum)
- Lisa Clark (Graduate Student)
- Conor Cullen (Lecturer, Alum)
- Rivka Chuyun Dai (Graduate Student)
- Amelle Djemel (Visiting Scholar)
- Beibei Du (Graduate Student)
- Jeremy Forster (Alum)
- Anthony Garuzzo (Graduate Student)
- Nemira Gasiunas-Kopp (Alum)
- Justin Xingzhi Guo (Graduate Student)
- Joe Hamilton (Graduate Student)
- Thimo Heisenberg (Alum)
- Yarran Hominh (Alum)
- Yitu Hu (Graduate Student)
- Ethan Jacobs (Graduate Student)
- Ye-Eun Jeong (Graduate Student)
- Alex Jensen (Graduate Student)
- Jared Jones (Graduate Student)
- Bennett Knox (Alum)
- Brittany Koffer (Lecturer, Alum)
- Dabin Kwon (Alum)
- Anya Leinberger (Graduate Student)
- Yifan Li (Graduate Student)
- Lisa Liu (Graduate Student)
- Helen Han Wei Luo (Graduate Student)
- Eleonora Maccarone (Alum)
- Laura Martin (Alum)
- Cornelia Mayer (Graduate Student)
- William McCarthy (Alum)
- Katharine McIntyre (Alum)
- Devin Morse (Graduate Student)
- Usha Nathan (Alum)
- Fred Neuhouser (Alum)
- Andreja Novakovic (Alum)
- Ignacio Ojea (Alum)
- Shivani Radhakrishnan (Alum)
- Danielle Alma Ravitzki (Graduate Student)
- Andrew Richmond (Alum)
- Melissa Rees (Alum)
- Amogh Sahu (Graduate Student)
- Weiming Sheng (Graduate Student)
- Xinyi Song (Graduate Student)
- Mariam Sousou (Graduate Student)
- Paul Spohr (Alum)
- Sapphire Qiaochu Tang (Graduate Student)
- Nandi Theunissen (Alum)
- Chuyu Tian (Graduate Student)
- Naser Tizhoosh (Graduate Student)
- Aaron Xiaolong Wang (Graduate Student)
- Connie Wang (Graduate Student)
- Sara Wexler (Graduate Student)
- Philip Yaure (Alum)
- Chi Zhang (Graduate Student)
The post Columbia Philosophy Grad Students Condemn Campus Arrests first appeared on Daily Nous.
University of California Faculty Statement on Protests
“We believe that the ability to protest nonviolently is essential to our democracy and a basic human right that must be respected and protected.”
[from a protest at UCLA, via The Los Angeles Times]
Faculty across the University of California system have signed onto the statement, “Support Students’ Right to Nonviolently Protest at the University of California.”
The statement continues to be open to signatures from UC faculty.
It says:
Nonviolent student protests at the University of California change the world. Entire academic departments owe their existence to nonviolent student protests at the University of California. The nationwide student movement to end the Vietnam War can trace its beginnings to nonviolent student protests at the University of California.
As faculty and staff at the University of California, we believe that the ability to protest nonviolently is essential to our democracy and a basic human right that must be respected and protected. We bear the responsibility of ensuring the safety, welfare, and basic human rights of our students. After more than 108 students engaged in a peaceful protest were arrested, suspended from their courses, and evicted from university housing on April 18, 2024 at Columbia University, with NYPD Chief of Patrol John Chell stating that “the students that were arrested were peaceful, offered no resistance whatsoever, and were saying what they wanted to say in a peaceful manner,” we believe that this basic human right requires our active protection.
Arresting or punishing students who protest peacefully and nonviolently on our campuses is antithetical to our university’s highest ideals of learning and scholarship and violates our university’s fundamental values of decency and respect. Especially during difficult moments of intense political contestation, it is essential that all members of our university community respect each other and not engage in authoritarian power plays. Our university has witnessed acts of police violence against students protesting peacefully (Davis in 2011), suspensions, evictions, and mass firings without due process (Santa Cruz in 2015 and again in 2020), and the use of university facilities as a field jail (Los Angeles in 2020). These infamous and disgraceful actions damage our confidence in each other and must not be repeated. In every action we take, we express our values as members of our treasured community.
As our students stand up and use their voices, we will always do our best to support them and their basic human rights, and thereby support our university and our democracy.
You can see the list of signatories here.
(via Andy Lamey)
Related: the Los Angeles Times on university protests in California.
The post University of California Faculty Statement on Protests first appeared on Daily Nous.
Breaking: Columbia University ‘will not divest from Israel’
University president continues capitulation to Israeli pressure
The student protest camp for Gaza at Columbia has been assaulted several times by police
Columbia University in New York will not divest its investments in Israeli firms and firms that supply weaponry to Israel, according to the university’s president Minouche Shafik, despite demands from thousands of its students who are protesting in solidarity with the Palestinian people and against Israel’s genocide. Shafik, echoing the narrative of Israel lobbyists, has even claimed that the protests have made the university unsafe for Jewish students, even though Jewish students and faculty members are playing a leading role in the protests, as if the feelings of some students, who don’t like to be confronted with the reality that a country they support is engaged in genocide, are more important than stopping mass murder of women and children.
The announcement continues Shafik’s shame after she failed to challenge a narrative spouted by pro-Israel lawmakers during her questioning by politicians – and claimed a pro-Palestine professor at the university had been sacked and would never teach at Columbia again, a claim denied by Professor Mohamed Abdou.
Columbia is one of a string of universities across the US that have shamed themselves by calling in armed police to arrest and disperse protests against the genocide in Gaza. Some, parroting the pro-Israel lobby, have even accused the students of ‘siding with terrorists’.
Meanwhile, Israel continues to slaughter hundreds of Palestinians daily, mostly women and children – and the US is trying to block a planned warrant by the International Criminal Court for the arrest of Israel’s war criminal prime minister and other ministers for Israel’s war crimes.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
US trying to stop ICC issuing Netanyahu arrest warrant despite war crimes advice
‘Non-stop’ diplomatic push to save far-right Israeli PM even though senior US officials have said he’s breaking international law
The Biden government is trying to stop the International Criminal Court (ICC) issuing a warrant for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for Israel’s war crimes in Gaza, according to Israeli and international media.
Israeli news site Walla has described Netanyahu’s ‘non-stop’ phone calls to the White House to try to get the arrest warrant arrest warrant cancelled and Biden and his pro-Israel fundamentalist Secretary of State Antony Blinken are said to be in agreement – despite ‘senior US officials’, in documents exposed by news agency Reuters, advising Blinken that Israel’s claims not to be committing war crimes with US-made weapons are not ‘credible or reliable’.
The ICC has been criticised for the level of US influence on its actions, even though the US is not a signatory to its authority and has previously sanctioned ICC officials for trying to bring US citizens before the court for alleged crimes. Despite this, Netanyahu is said to be in a panic over the prospect of an ICC arrest warrant, which would oblige signatory countries to hold him if he appears on their territory.
Many of the airstrikes in Israel’s genocide in Gaza, including devastating attacks on hospitals that killed hundreds of civilians at a time, have been attributed to Israel’s use of US-made ‘Hellfire’ and other missiles. The news of the expected arrest warrant appears to have been ignored by many UK ‘mainstream’ media outlets.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Opposing The Gaza Genocide While Supporting Biden Is A Dishonest, Nonsensical Position
Listen to a reading of this article (reading by Tim Foley):
https://medium.com/media/3841536c6c6c99359aaf33db976199b4/href
Nobody who claims to oppose the Gaza genocide while simultaneously supporting Joe Biden actually opposes the Gaza genocide. They’re just saying what needs to be said to win approval in the political sector they want the approval of. They’re not taking a moral stand, they’re cultivating an image. They’re building a brand.
One of many possible examples of this ridiculous posturing is Instagram progressive Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who has called Israel’s atrocities in Gaza “an unfolding genocide” while continuing to support and defend the US president who’s currently backing that genocide, and who recently attended one of the pro-Palestine campus demonstrations which her president recently smeared as “antisemitic protests”.
What AOC is doing here is attempting to straddle the impossible divide between what progressive Democrats claim their party is about and what it’s actually about in real life. She’s paying lip service to opposing injustice, supporting a ceasefire and siding with anti-genocide activists because that’s the sort of thing progressives are supposed to do, while simultaneously throwing her political support behind an administration that is facilitating injustice, keeping the genocide going, and smearing those who protest against it.
You really couldn’t put together a more incoherent position if you tried. You can’t acknowledge that Israel is committing genocide without also acknowledging that the Biden administration has been actively participating in that genocide. If you acknowledge that Biden is guilty of genocide, then you are acknowledging that he is guilty of the most horrific crime a state leader can possibly commit short of initiating a nuclear exchange.
Tamara Nassar on Twitter: "Maybe you can ask him about the mass graves https://t.co/k6Ae20Ui7T pic.twitter.com/iUQjRq6avS / Twitter"
Maybe you can ask him about the mass graves https://t.co/k6Ae20Ui7T pic.twitter.com/iUQjRq6avS
Once you’ve acknowledged that Biden is guilty of doing pretty much the worst thing any state leader could possibly do, you’ve crossed a threshold. After such an acknowledgement, it is not logically or ethically coherent to follow it by saying you support him anyway because at least he’s a bit nicer to LGBT people than Donald Trump would be, or because he might try a tiny bit harder to reduce global warming.
You’ve acknowledged that he is participating in genocide. Genocide. There’s no “but” that could possibly follow that. It’s like saying “Sure my husband’s a serial killer, but he’s great with the kids.” If someone said that to you, the only conclusion you could possibly come to is that they’re really not all that bothered by the serial killing.
Those who support Israel’s actions in Gaza are the worst people on earth, but at least their position has some kind of integrity. They’re not contradicting themselves by pretending to oppose what they’re actually fine with. They’re not tearing themselves in half trying to straddle two completely incompatible positions while smiling for the camera and pretending it doesn’t hurt. They’re not posturing as compassionate anti-imperialists while serving the evil empire.
Those who are supporting Biden while opposing the destruction of Gaza do not have any kind of integrity. They’re just wearing whatever mask is politically convenient based on the way the winds are blowing on a given moment, while continuing to support the US-centralized empire which cannot be sustained without nonstop tyranny and bloodshed. They are providing social media-friendly soundbites which pay lip service to peace, while their true loyalty lies with the globe-spanning power structure whose existence makes peace impossible.
_________________
My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece here are some options where you can toss some money into my tip jar if you want to. Go here to find video versions of my articles. Go here to buy paperback editions of my writings from month to month. All my work is free to bootleg and use in any way, shape or form; republish it, translate it, use it on merchandise; whatever you want. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.
Bitcoin donations: 1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2
Featured image via POTUS Instagram.