Türkiye: Erdogan denounces Congress' reception of 'Hitler of our time'

Türkiye: Erdogan denounces Congress' reception of 'Hitler of our time'

    Friday, July 26, 2024   No comments

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan denounced the US Congress' hosting of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Erdogan said on Friday during an introductory meeting on the high-tech promotion program at the Ataturk Cultural Center in Istanbul, "Imagine that Congress applauds a murderer who has killed nearly 40,000 children, women and elderly people," in full view of the entire world.

He described Netanyahu as "a murderer and perpetrator of genocide against the Palestinian people," in the war that the occupation has been waging for nearly 10 months on the Gaza Strip.

Erdogan added that those who "have always taught the world lessons in democracy and human rights" "did not feel an ounce of shame while celebrating the Hitler of our time."

On Wednesday, Netanyahu delivered a speech before Congress amidst mass demonstrations against his visit to Washington and denouncing the Israeli war of extermination against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

Netanyahu focused on attacking the demonstrations against him and the war, claiming that "Iran is funding the demonstrators outside Congress now" and that they also want to destroy the United States" during a large part of his speech.

 

Media review of Netanyahu's visit to the US: He may have expedited US declining support Israel's War instead of increasing it

Media review of Netanyahu's visit to the US: He may have expedited US declining support Israel's War instead of increasing it

    Thursday, July 25, 2024   No comments

Israeli political leaders may not have wanted to see so many protesters in the street and in congress, but that is what Netanyahu have achived by his visit to the US: For the first time, American public displayed public displeasure with Israeli conduct. This is clear when even the most friendly TV channels, like Foxnews, give a fail review of his performance.

Fox News: Has Netanyahu Lost America?

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is back in Washington, and in his fourth address to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday night, he broke the record of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. For years, he has been a fixture in American and Israeli politics, but that seems to be changing,” Fox News wrote in a report. “Things seemed different today, not just because Netanyahu is a controversial figure who has drawn thousands of anti-Gaza protesters to the streets of Washington, but because he has become increasingly marginalized,” the website added in a report by its correspondent Joshua Keating.

Fox News confirmed that Netanyahu’s speech to Congress offered little indication of a plan to end the war in Gaza, and likely undermined ongoing diplomatic efforts to achieve this. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described Netanyahu’s speech as “the worst presentation by any foreign dignitary before Congress.”

According to the site, Netanyahu’s speech was remarkably defensive, devoting itself more to rebutting criticism of Israel than charting a path forward out of the quagmire it finds itself in.

He continued by recounting the horrors of Hamas’s attacks on October 7, and vowing that Israel would fight until it destroyed the movement’s military capabilities and rule in Gaza “and returned all the captives to their families.” However, these families are not inclined to believe him and are urging him to accept a ceasefire agreement to secure the release of their relatives.

Fox News was surprised by Netanyahu's attack on anti-Israel protesters in the United States, accusing them of being "useful idiots for Iran" and criticizing university presidents, and the site commented sarcastically, "This is likely to be the first speech on Middle East policy that includes a shout-out to the brothers at the University of North Carolina."

The report said, "Netanyahu may have gotten what he wanted today: a standing ovation, even if it was mostly from Republicans. But more than 70% of Israelis now say Netanyahu should resign."

He continued, "In the past, Washington was a safety valve for Netanyahu, a place where he could count on strong support. But today, the magic is gone and the era of the man who mastered verbal acrobatics is over," said Nimrod Novick, a member of the "Israel Policy Forum" and a senior foreign policy adviser to former Prime Minister Shimon Peres.

The Fox News correspondent concluded by saying, "Netanyahu has become accustomed to being a controversial figure in the more than 40 years since he came to Washington. Perhaps he should get used to being an insignificant figure."

Protesters greet Israeli leader inside and outside US Congress

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has harshly criticized pro-Palestinian protesters in the United States, saying, “Iran is funding the protesters… You have officially become useful idiots for Iran.”

Reacting to the Israeli leader's characteraization of Americans protesting what they see as a genocidal war, the Biden administration reacted with dismay. White House officials dismissed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s description of Americans protesting Israeli attacks on Gaza as “useful idiots for Iran,” calling it “a sad and wrong idea.” White House National Security Adviser John Kirby said they do not find it right that Netanyahu has described Americans protesting Israeli attacks on Gaza as “useful idiots for Iran.”

Kirby said that the long-running demonstrations in the United States, criticizing the policies of the Netanyahu administration, are a reflection of people's real concerns, adding that "democracy is exactly that."

For his part, US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said, “We recognize that the vast majority of protesters in the United States are not taking their orders from Iran.”

Miller added that they strongly support the right of protesters in the United States to demonstrate, stressing that the vast majority of people who have demonstrated in the streets of Washington since Wednesday in protest of Netanyahu’s visit to Washington are patriotic Americans expressing their opinions, and we support their right to do so.

In response to Netanyahu’s use of the term “idiots” and “morons” to describe the American protesters, Miller said, “As always, I will adopt a rule of not responding to specific things that the Israeli prime minister says.”

Instead of joining thousands of anti-genocide protesters outside, Rashida Tlaib chose to confront Netanyahu in Congress with keffiyeh and 'war criminal' sign

Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib objected to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the US Congress on Wednesday, holding him responsible for the genocide in the Gaza Strip. During Netanyahu's speech, Tlaib wore a keffiyeh and a Palestinian flag, and held up a black-and-white sign with the words "War Criminal" on one side and "Guilty of Genocide" on the other.

Trump's hot potato characterization of the Gaza War: Do what you want but do it fast!

Even Trump does not want to handle this hot potato if he wins the election and take over the White House in 2025. He wants this war to end fast, so that he does not want to deal with it.

Former President Donald Trump – one day before meeting Benjamin Netanyahu – called for a swift end to Israel’s war on Gaza and the return of its captives, stating that the US ally is "getting decimated" by bad publicity.

"I want him to finish up and get it done quickly, he’s got to get it done quickly," Trump told Fox News.

"For whatever reason you have Jewish people out there wearing yarmulkes and they’re, you know, pro-Palestine. You’ve never seen anything like this… They’ve got to get this done fast because the world is not taking lightly to it, it’s really incredible."

Presidential candidate Trump did not attribute his demand for an end to Israel's genocide of Palestinians over the past nine months, which has killed over 40,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and injured more than 100,000. Instead, he attributed his demand to Israel's negative reputation.

Middle East Media Coverage

Media outlets in the Middle East, including those published historically West-friendly nation states in the Gulf (Alkhaleej Online), concluded that the visit caused more damage and achieved nothing. Other outlets, including the Lebanese paper Alakhbar, summarized the visit with this headline, "Half of Democrats Boycott Speech: Israel's 'Sanctity' Is Not Okay", and explained it further in editorials like these.

Amidst a broad boycott by members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, especially from the Democratic Party, the Prime Minister of the occupation, Benjamin Netanyahu, tried to send a message to American officials, stating that the “fate” of the United States is linked to the fate of Israel, and that the two parties are facing one hostile “axis” and are fighting the “same battle,” and therefore, the “victory” of the latter will be a victory for the former. Apart from the “lies” that Netanyahu adopted, especially regarding the number of Palestinian martyrs in Rafah, as he claimed, when asked about the number of civilians killed there, that “no one was killed,” “except for one incident, when shrapnel from a bomb hit a Hamas weapons depot, killing twenty people,” Netanyahu’s speech, according to observers, did not carry anything new, and did not add any changes to the division within the United States regarding the war in Gaza. According to a report published by the Atlantic Council, although Netanyahu only mentioned the Lebanese front relatively quickly in his speech, the “framework” in which he placed the threat posed by Hezbollah seemed striking; he classified the latter as an “existential threat” to Israel, which cannot be separated from “Israel’s struggle against Hamas, the Houthis, and Iran.” According to those who hold this view, one of the possibilities raised is that “the speech aims to pave the way for a ground incursion into southern Lebanon, and to soften global public opinion regarding such a decision.” The report adds that “opening a new active front against Hezbollah would be disastrous for several reasons, both humanitarian and strategic,” noting that “for the besieged (Israeli Defense Forces),” such a scenario “means entering into a large-scale war against a well-armed opponent,” and increases the possibility of the war expanding regionally. In his speech, which lasted about an hour, Netanyahu stressed the need to strengthen American support for Israel and lift the ban on some weapons, considering that “fast-tracking American military aid could greatly accelerate the end of the war in Gaza and help prevent a wider war in the Middle East,” and claiming that “Israel is participating in intensive efforts to secure the release of the hostages.” Regarding his vision for “the day after,” which remains a point of contention between him and Washington, Netanyahu said that he wants “a demilitarized and non-extremist Gaza,” led by Palestinians “who do not seek to destroy Israel.” After focusing on attacking the axis of resistance with all its components, Hamas responded by issuing a statement about the speech, in which it considered that the latter “reflects the depth of Netanyahu’s military, security, and international crisis,” stressing that “his talk about intensive efforts to return the hostages is a complete lie and misleading of Israeli, American, and international public opinion, while he is the one who thwarted all efforts aimed at ending the war and concluding a deal to release prisoners (...) which holds him fully responsible for the repercussions of this position and for the fate of the prisoners in the Gaza Strip.” The movement also stressed that “the war criminal Netanyahu’s perceptions about the future of the Gaza Strip are mere illusions and fantasies that he is trying to market,” considering that “his attack on the axis of resistance reflects the depth of his military and security crisis due to the open fronts.” The movement concluded by calling on the “United Nations,” the “League of Arab States,” and the “Organization of Islamic Cooperation” to “declare their position of rejecting the occupation and working to end it by all means, and to support the steadfastness of our Palestinian people and their resistance.”

At the Capitol complex, protests were held in which thousands of people opposed to the visit of the occupation prime minister and his speech before the joint session of Congress participated, while American media reported that the Secret Service is looking into reports that the demonstrators managed to reach the hotel where Netanyahu is staying in Washington, DC, where they released insects in the hotel and “activated the fire alarms.” These demonstrators had their “share” of the attack in Netanyahu’s speech, in which he described them as “idiots who benefit from Iran” and who are funded by them, claiming that “when the tyrants of Tehran who hang gays from cranes and kill women for not covering their hair praise you, promote you and fund you, you have officially become idiots who benefit from Iran,” he claimed. As for inside the Capitol, approximately 100 Democrats from the House of Representatives and 28 Democrats from the Senate attended, according to a tally conducted by Axios. This means, in practice, that about “half” of the Democrats in both chambers were absent from the speech, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, making the boycott much wider than the one Netanyahu faced in 2015, when 58 Democrats were absent from his speech. However, even some officials who attended the session were keen, in one way or another, to “annoy” Netanyahu and express their opposition to the genocide being committed in Gaza. For example, among the attendees were a number of critics of the occupation prime minister, including progressive Jewish representatives Jamie Raskin (Democrat of Maryland) and Jerry Nadler (Democrat of New York), who was carrying—and sometimes reading—a book titled “The Netanyahu Years,” which criticizes the “failures” of the latter’s rule, in a photo that was widely circulated on social media. Also in attendance was Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian-American in Congress and a vocal critic of Israel, wearing a keffiyeh and holding a small sign reading “Guilty of Genocide” and “War Criminal.” Today, Netanyahu is expected to meet with former President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, according to a post on his Truth Social platform, in their first meeting since relations between them deteriorated since the 2020 elections. Trump’s post also included: “During my first term, we saw peace and stability in the region, even signing the historic Abraham Accords,” “and we will do it again,” stressing that the wars in Ukraine and Gaza must end through the implementation of the “peace through strength” agenda, adding: “Millions are dying, and Kamala Harris is in no way capable of stopping it.”

+

Consensus of International media outlets: Netanyahu's rhetoric will not garner support without resolving the Gaza crisis

International newspapers focused on the repercussions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech in the US Congress and his pressure on the White House to approve a specific list of weapons in the upcoming presidential elections. The British newspaper "The Times" saw that Netanyahu had resorted for decades to giving a speech in Congress when he was facing a decline in the voting rate, noting that the speech did not provide clear answers to those wondering about victory in the Gaza war and the threats accompanying

She pointed out that "the most difficult thing Netanyahu will have to face after his trip to Washington is the Israeli public, which is accustomed to his speeches."

In the same context, the Israeli newspaper "Haaretz" said that Netanyahu's eloquence will not mobilize support for Israel without a final solution to the crisis in Gaza, adding that "Netanyahu's words have no weight since he is in no hurry to free the prisoners and continues to refuse to discuss a clear plan for the day after the war in Gaza."

The newspaper stressed that the Israelis are more interested in the return of the prisoners and the end date of the war, not Netanyahu's popularity at home.

On the Israeli-American relations front, Politico revealed that the delegation accompanying Netanyahu during his visit to Washington is putting pressure on the administration of US President Joe Biden to agree to provide Israel with a specific list of weapons. According to the newspaper, Israel is trying to boost its transfers and weapons stockpile before the presidential elections, and quoted a source familiar with the weapons list as saying that Israel is concerned about the possibility of a larger confrontation with the Lebanese Hezbollah.

In turn, the French newspaper "Le Monde" said in its editorial that Biden has a good chance to save the two-state solution and fight forcefully against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank after announcing that he will not run for the upcoming elections.

Biden has a historic opportunity to match his words with his actions, according to the newspaper, especially since the extremist policy pursued by the ruling coalition in Israel is in stark contrast to the official American position.

As for the American newspaper "New York Times", it focused on a British study that concluded that the death toll and injuries provided by the Ministry of Health in Gaza during the first weeks of the war are credible.

___________
> Content was updated to include media reactions after Wednesday's speech, and subsequent developments.

Sampling reactions on social media, newspapers commentaries, and government officials' statements

Palestinian factions sign 'Beijing Declaration'; agree to form an "interim national reconciliation government"

Palestinian factions sign 'Beijing Declaration'; agree to form an "interim national reconciliation government"

    Tuesday, July 23, 2024   No comments

The Palestinian factions announced at the conclusion of meetings held in China their agreement to reach a "comprehensive national unity" that includes all forces within the framework of the Palestine Liberation Organization, and to form an interim national consensus government.

The factions participating in the meeting: Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Palestinian People's Party, the Palestinian Popular Struggle Front, and the Palestinian National Initiative Movement.

The meeting was also attended by the Popular Front - General Command, the Palestinian Democratic Union (FIDA), the Palestine Liberation Front, the Arab Liberation Front, the Arab Palestinian Front, and the Vanguard of the Popular Liberation War (Sa'iqa Forces).

The factions said in a statement: "The national factions agreed during their meetings in China to reach a comprehensive Palestinian national unity that includes all Palestinian forces and factions within the framework of the Palestine Liberation Organization, and to commit to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, in accordance with United Nations resolutions, and to guarantee the right of return in accordance with Resolution 194."

She added: "Based on the National Accord Agreement signed in Cairo on May 4, 2011, and the Algiers Declaration signed on October 12, 2022, the factions decided to continue following up on the implementation of the agreements to end the division with the help of Egypt, Algeria, China and Russia."

The factions specified in the statement four items related to following up on the implementation of the agreements to end the division, the first of which is the commitment to "the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, in accordance with the relevant United Nations resolutions, especially resolutions 181 and 2334, and ensuring the right of return in accordance with resolution 194."

As for the second, according to the statement, it stipulates "the right of the Palestinian people to resist and end the occupation in accordance with international laws and the United Nations Charter and the right of peoples to self-determination and their struggle to achieve this in all available forms."

The third is based on "forming a temporary national accord government with the agreement of the Palestinian factions and by a decision of the president based on the Palestinian Basic Law in force, and for the formed government to exercise its powers and authorities over all Palestinian territories in a manner that confirms the unity of the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip."

The statement said that the expected government "will begin by unifying all institutions in the territories of the Palestinian state and begin rebuilding the sector, and preparing for holding general elections under the supervision of the Palestinian Central Elections Commission as soon as possible in accordance with the approved elections law."

In the fourth item, the factions said in the statement: "In order to deepen the political partnership in bearing national responsibility and in order to develop the institutions of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the agreement was confirmed to activate and regulate the temporary unified leadership framework for partnership in political decision-making, in accordance with what was agreed upon in the Palestinian National Accord Document signed on May 4, 2011, until the practical steps to form the new National Council are implemented in accordance with the approved elections law."

In this context, the factions agreed in Beijing to "resist and thwart attempts to displace Palestinians from their land, and to emphasize the illegitimacy of settlements and settlement expansion in accordance with the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly of the United Nations and the opinion of the International Court of Justice."

The factions also agreed to "work to lift the brutal siege on Gaza and the West Bank, and the importance of delivering humanitarian and medical aid without restrictions or conditions," in addition to "supporting the families of martyrs and the wounded and all those who lost their homes and property."

The statement indicated that the factions agreed on "a collective mechanism to implement the provisions of the declaration in all its aspects," without announcing this mechanism.

The factions also considered "the meeting of the secretaries-general a starting point for the work of the joint national teams and decided to set a timetable for implementing this declaration; without mentioning it," according to the statement.

For his part, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi confirmed on Tuesday that 14 Palestinian factions have reached an agreement to form an "interim national reconciliation government" to manage the Gaza Strip after the war.

Wang explained, during the signing of the "Beijing Declaration" in the Chinese capital, that the most important point in the agreement is the formation of this government. He also pointed out that "reconciliation is an internal matter for the Palestinian factions, but at the same time it cannot be achieved without the support of the international community."

The Chinese minister expressed China's keenness to play a constructive role in "maintaining peace and stability in the Middle East."

The secretaries-general of the factions held two meetings during the past few years, the first in the Lebanese capital Beirut on September 3, 2020, and the second in the Egyptian city of El Alamein on July 30, 2023.

The Chinese government spokesperson, according to Chinese media, supported and guided the work to the meeting. Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated in his speech, the most important consensus of this dialogue is achieving grand reconciliation and unity among all 14 factions. The core outcome is the clear recognition that the PLO is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. 

The most notable highlight is the consensus reached on post-war governance in Gaza and the formation of a temporary national reconciliation government. The strongest call is for the genuine establishment of an independent Palestinian state based on relevant UN resolutions, the spokesperson said.

Wang also proposed a "three-step" initiative in response to the current Gaza conflict. 

The first step is to achieve a comprehensive, lasting, and sustainable cease-fire in Gaza as soon as possible, ensuring smooth access to humanitarian aid and relief. 

The second step is to jointly promote post-war governance in Gaza, adhering to the principle of "Palestinians governing Palestinians." 

The third step is to push for Palestine to become a full member of the United Nations and begin implementing the "two-state solution." These three steps are interlinked and indispensable.

Tanzania's president dismisses two ministers as part of a constitutional amendment

Tanzania's president dismisses two ministers as part of a constitutional amendment

    Monday, July 22, 2024   No comments

Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan has dismissed two senior ministers in a major cabinet reshuffle, acting presidential communications director Sharifa Nyanga has said.

The dismissals of Foreign Minister Januye Makamba and Minister of Information, Communications and Information Technology Nabi Nnuye came amid rumours that they were secretly planning to challenge President Hassan’s re-election bid.

The current Tanzanian president took office after the death of her predecessor, populist leader John Magufuli.

In a statement issued by Tanzania’s Secretary-General Musa Kusaluka, he announced the appointment of Mahmoud Thabit Kombo as a member of parliament and minister of foreign affairs and East African cooperation. Kombo was Tanzania’s ambassador to Italy.

According to the statement, Jerry Sila will replace Nnuye as the new Minister of Information, Communications and Information Technology. Sila previously served as Minister of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development.

The amendments also included a number of figures in official positions at different levels in the state, including the Minister of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development, a Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office, a Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, a Deputy Minister in the Office of the Head of Public Service and Good Governance, and a Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation in East Africa.

Deogratius John Ndigimbe was appointed as the new Minister of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development, who previously held the position of Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office for the portfolio of "Labor, Youth, Employment and Persons with Disabilities".

According to the statement, Ridwani Kikwete was appointed as Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office, who previously held the position of Deputy Minister of State in the Office of the President for "Public Service and Good Governance".

Kosatu Shumi was also appointed as Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, succeeding Mabrouk Nasser Mabrouk, who will be assigned other duties. Meanwhile, Deus Clement Sango was appointed as Deputy Minister in the Office of the President for "Public Service and Good Governance".

Dennis Lazaro Lunda was also appointed Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and East African Cooperation, replacing Stephen Lugwahuka Byabatu, whose appointment was cancelled. The cabinet reshuffle also includes the appointment of permanent secretaries and district chief administrators. According to the Turkish Anadolu Agency, the latest cabinet reshuffle reflects the Tanzanian president’s efforts to strengthen her administration and address internal challenges as she prepares for her re-election campaign.

Israeli Minister says US Sanctions blow to State sovereignty

Israeli Minister says US Sanctions blow to State sovereignty

    Sunday, July 21, 2024   No comments

Historically, the US government has imposed sanctions on private citizens and government officials of other countries. Recently, with the continued attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinians in West Bank the US government decided to sanction some Israelis who are responsible for the violence. Last week, US media sources reported that the administration of President Joe Biden is considering imposing sanctions on Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich, due to the deterioration of the security situation in the occupied West Bank.

Reacting to the news, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has described US efforts to impose sanctions on him over settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank as a “fatal blow to Israeli sovereignty.”

“Imposing US sanctions on an elected official and a senior minister is a fatal blow to Israeli sovereignty and relations between the two countries,” said Smotrich, who heads the Religious Zionism party.

“Washington’s efforts to impose sanctions on me stem from the domestic political goals of those who claim to lead the largest democracy in the world,” he added.

Smotrich claimed that his duty was to strengthen Tel Aviv’s grip on parts of the homeland in Judea and Samaria (the biblical name for the West Bank) and prevent the establishment of a state that would endanger Israel’s existence.

Of note, this week the International Court of Justice issued a ruling that Israel's activities in West Bank and Jerusalem are illegal, must be stopped, and Palestinians harmed by these activities must be compensated.

The Racist History of Psychology

The Racist History of Psychology

    Thursday, July 18, 2024   No comments

“The general wards were abysmal, and there were only five doctors, four of them foreigners, who were not licensed to practice in the United States, and did not have credentials as psychiatrists in their home country. The fifth psychiatrist was in charge, and he was clearly unfamiliar with modern psychiatry, and looked like he was running a plantation in some southern state.” This was part of the report written by Inspector Marilyn Rose, when she participated in a 1967 committee to inspect psychiatric hospital facilities, especially in Alabama and Mississippi, where black people with mental health problems, or what would now be known as psychopaths, were cared for.

Yes, they were treated separately, in institutions that did not allow them to mix with the white population, within the context of racial segregation and the persecution of blacks that the United States of America has known since its founding, until recently, and the face of psychiatry was ugly in that matter, and at that time.

In the history of the establishment of psychiatry, many psychological experiments and studies have sought to distort and oppress black people. In fact, many pioneers of psychology who have made significant contributions to the field of psychology have been involved in supporting this racism and strengthening its control over their scientific and research work.

From the facilities of psychiatric hospitals in the states of Alabama and Mississippi, we move to the College of Education at Stanford University, specifically in the early twentieth century, where Lewis Madison Terman, one of the most prominent American psychologists, worked. He later became famous as a pioneer of educational psychology, and among his achievements was the development of a special test to measure a person's intelligence level, called the "Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test".

Terman was one of the prominent scientists who supported the idea of ​​"improving" the race, and he was a member of a well-known organization at that time called "Human Improvement", in addition to holding the position of President of the "American Psychological Association".

In his work on the IQ test, Terman made several statements that were later deemed extremely racist against people of color, including saying that black people were "innately dull" and that "the children of these groups [of color] should be separated into special classes and given concrete and practical instruction...they cannot handle abstract matters." Terman also said that "from the eugenics point of view, 'blacks' pose a serious problem because of their unusually prolific breeding."

Black people, "They're not supposed to get sick"

This racist school of psychology believed that black people were immune to mental illness and would not fall into the clutches of depression or other neurotic symptoms, all because of their special psychological and mental makeup, or in Terman's words because of their "innate dullness," as he claimed.

Dr. Uchenna Umeh, a former doctor in San Antonio, Texas, and a woman of Nigerian origin living in the United States, decided to leave her job in 2018 to focus on public lectures, with the aim of spreading and raising awareness about mental disorders among people of African descent in the United States.

Dr. Oceana explains that for many years, many black people believed that they were supposed to be free from mental health problems, based on the bizarre idea of ​​John Galt, a physician and medical director of the Williamsburg, Virginia, Asylum, published in 1848, that black people had a natural immunity to mental illness.

Galt based his earlier view on the assumption that Africans were enslaved, that slaves owned nothing, had no role in free enterprise, and did not participate in civic affairs or engage in political activities such as voting or holding office. Based on this assumption, the risk of developing mental health problems would be higher among whites who are exposed on a daily basis to the effects of political activities, the competition for ambition and advancement within entrepreneurial and commercial communities, and the resulting stresses that accompany gains or crises that follow losses.

Samuel Cartwright was one of those doctors who argued that slavery was the “natural state” of African Americans, adding that they benefited from hard labor and were unable to care for themselves outside of this system. Cartwright also claimed that people of color displayed a “childish” simplicity of feeling and a lack of complex emotional processes, which he saw as characteristic of their entire race.

Based on Cartwright’s view that slavery was the “natural” state of black people, deviation from this “natural” state was a mental disorder. This is exactly what Cartwright explained in 1851, when he published a report in which he invented two “psychic” disorders, the symptoms of which included the tendency of “slaves” to escape or resist hard labor, and these disorders were classified as “mental diseases,” and he called them “draeptomania” and “dysaesthesia aethiopica.”

Hospital administrators used Cartwright’s ideas to justify their medical opinions that there were no real psychiatric treatments for African American patients, that they did not feel the same way as whites, or that they were not suitable for things like psychoanalysis or group therapy. This is why black patients were segregated into separate, substandard hospital facilities, and were put to work in the hospital laundry, kitchen, and fields.

“My family, my friends, my acquaintances, my patients, their parents, their grandparents, we are all black, so we are supposed to never have to struggle with mental health issues,” says Nigerian-American physician Uchenna Umeh. “Unfortunately, we ourselves have bought into this narrative [of Galt and others like him], that mental health issues do not exist in our race, and we have unconsciously spread this narrative to our detriment.”

During her work, Dr. Uchenna noticed a significant increase in depression and suicidal ideation among her patients. “Suicide rates among African American children ages 5 to 11 have increased steadily since the 1980s and are now twice as high as those of their Caucasian peers,” she says. “Black men accounted for 80 percent of African American suicide attempts in 2015. And those numbers are rising.”

In order to understand the practice of racism and its presence in psychiatry historically and sequentially, let us tell you the roots of the matter from the beginning. Specifically, between 1861 and 1865, the period in which the "Civil War" took place between the northern and southern states of America, and during which the American field of "psychology" was officially institutionalized, where programs, departments, academic degrees, societies and schools specialized in the study of psychology were established and created.

This war is considered one of the worst bloody events that the American Federal Union has been exposed to, and one of its main causes was the "slavery/servitude" system. At a time when the northern states wanted to restrict the scope of slavery and put in place laws that would achieve this, the southern states were expanding slavery, and even relying primarily in their economic system based entirely on agricultural slave labor.

The Civil War freed nearly four million slaves across the South, but this did not lead to more enlightened medical attitudes toward the treatment of African Americans. Quite the opposite, as psychiatry continued its racist sectarianism.

In 1895, Dr. Powell, the superintendent of the Georgia State Asylum, as it was called, noted an alarming increase in mental health problems among blacks in his state. Powell attributed this increase to the three decades of freedom that had preceded the emancipation of slaves, as a large segment of them had not been able to adjust to the openness and consequences of the Civil War. Powell seemed to see slavery and freedom as biologically innate and inevitable.

Powell argued that when former slaves gained their freedom, they were unable to control their desires and emotions, which in turn led to abuses that led to higher rates of mental health diagnoses.

Of course, Powell did not see the truth, which was right in front of him, but his racism prevented him from going to the root of the problem, as the reason for the increase in mental health problems among blacks goes back to a long history of living under extremely poor social and economic conditions, including poverty, racial discrimination, and the specter of violence that may have reached the point of execution, but he chose the easiest way; he said that black people obtaining freedom is the root of their mental and psychological problems.

Colonial Psychology

When the American Psychological Association was founded in 1892, it was headed by Granville Stanley Hall and had 31 white male members elected to its membership. At that time, formal psychology was primarily white-led and heavily relied on the then-popular theory of evolution. The Western psychological field gave its full support to the idea of ​​"white" male superiority, as a result of its findings, and focused its entire attention on demonstrating individual differences among different racial groups.

In 1904, G. Stanley Hall, the founding president of the American Psychological Association, published his theory of "adolescence." In it, he described the First Nations, the indigenous peoples of the Americas before the time of Christopher Columbus, as living in a phase of "human childhood," and that their adults were more like the adolescents of white children or adolescents.

Hall developed colonial "civilization programs" specifically designed to meet what he saw as the needs of the First Nations. These programs provided the moral framework for colonialism, and the result was the cultural genocide of different peoples, with the glamorous goal: we are doing this in order to civilize them and subordinate them to the Western model, under the rule of the white man.

But after World War I, a reverse movement occurred, as some of the sons of poor peoples rushed to the United States and other rich countries of the North, and unprecedented numbers of immigrants arrived, accompanied by a surge in anti-immigration sentiment, and here the theory of "eugenics" emerged, using the principles of genetics. Here, African Americans, who were said to suffer from mental "deficiencies", faced a new and more serious threat to their safety.

The science of "eugenics" was based on two parallel principles: encouraging births among people with a "good" genetic stock, and sterilizing those who were not fit to reproduce, including individuals suffering from mental illness, as well as the poor and those accused of sexual abuse. The focus was on sterilizing African Americans. In California alone in the 1930s, African Americans, who represented 1% of the population, accounted for 4% of the victims of legal sterilization.

Many pioneers in psychology advocated a social agenda that sought to limit the number of children born to people classified as “less fit,” and people of color classified as “less fit” were considered inferior in Western society in terms of knowledge and common law.

Sir Francis Galton, one of the early leaders of psychology, was the first to coin the term "eugenics". Galton is considered one of the icons of "race science", a branch of science that studies the origins and characteristics of different peoples. The "eugenics theory" played a major role in supporting the idea of ​​racial distinctions in their personal and psychological abilities.

His book "Hereditary Genius", published in 1869, was considered the first scientific attempt to study "genius and greatness", and was seen as one of the early literature that contributed to the study of individual differences and psychological measurements in European and American psychology. He concluded that the average intellectual level of the "Negro race" is two degrees lower than that of the white man.

Francis’s book was a major reference and was widely used by the first generation of psychologists who founded the American Psychological Association, the first recognized psychology journals, and the most influential research programs. Many prominent academics were implicated in popularizing notions of white superiority not only in intelligence, but also in moral, cultural, and psychological terms.

In the journal Psychological Review, just one year after the first issue of the American Psychological Review, a study was published showing that samples of so-called First Nations and blacks sometimes had “faster” reaction times than whites, which they interpreted as indicating a greater degree of haste and impulsiveness in their responses, due to their propensity for violence. The study’s authors argued that the quick response was due to “primitiveness,” and that the more developed intelligence of the white participants led to deeper thinking and slower responses.

Many psychologists continued to support the idea of ​​white superiority in both public and academic outlets. For example, in 1922, psychologist James Rowland Angell, president of Yale University, gave a series of lectures describing the hierarchy of races, espousing white supremacy, and discussing the low intelligence of blacks.

In 1922, the Journal of Comparative Psychology published a study linking the degree of “white blood” in First Nations peoples to higher IQ scores. In 1933, more studies were published arguing that First Nations children were more dishonest than white children.

Perhaps the logical question here is: Was the research or results conducted at the time falsified in order to prove that whites were superior to their colored counterparts? The answer: Perhaps not, but the study itself and the results drawn from it were conducted through a mindset dominated by the idea of ​​white evolution and superiority, so that even if the research and studies came back with the opposite results that people of color were superior in some aspect, this result would be viewed and formulated within an interpretive framework from the position and reference of white superiority.

This is what happened in 1897, when a study conducted on black and white children concluded that colored children had stronger memories, and that they generally outperformed white children on a memory task.

Here, although the results of the study were positive for black people, they were formulated in a completely negative way, as the author attributed the strength of black children’s memories to the ability of their “primitive brains” to remember more than others, and described black children as deficient in thinking.

Racism controls psychiatric diagnosis

Psychiatrists’ preconceived biases against people of color have led to unscientific diagnoses that do not adhere to professional standards. A 2023 study found a significant disparity in the prevalence of schizophrenia spectrum disorders (seeing imaginary figures and hearing voices) between people of color in the United States and Canada and whites in those same countries. Black people are diagnosed with these disorders at higher rates than other groups.

The consequences of this scientifically inaccurate diagnosis are exacerbated by punitive societal effects throughout life, including increased stigma, reduced opportunities, poorer care, and increased likelihood of criminalization and arrest. Stereotypes associated with psychotic symptoms may put these patients at risk for police violence and premature death.

The unfortunate side of this is that, as new data show, the differences in diagnosis rates are unlikely to be genetic, but rather societal in origin. Overdiagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders is largely due to racial biases among clinicians.

The study showed how misunderstandings of race confound attempts to diagnose and treat schizophrenia spectrum disorders in black individuals, in addition to implicit biases preventing black patients from receiving appropriate treatment from primarily white mental health providers, which the study described as a “lack of empathy” among doctors for their patients.

In the same context, Dr. Uchenna Umeh, in her article published on the “blackpast” website, questioned the validity of the diagnosis of children detained in psychiatric hospitals and mental health disorders, as she explained that asylum authorities often praised the abilities and skills of these children, which raises many questions about the validity of their mental illness diagnosis in the first place.

Here Uchenna says: “If these black people were truly ‘lost their minds’, how were they able to perform continuous, hard work that required special skills, while white patients were often too ‘weak’ mentally to work?!”

The National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) explains that there is a long history of discrimination and racism in mental health care. People with mental illness have always been discriminated against, denied full participation in society, labeled dangerous and criminal, and many were held in institutions that were more like prisons designed to punish than hospitals designed to treat.

This discrimination was bad for anyone with a mental illness or disorder, but it was especially bad for the most marginalized, including African American men, women, and children. Some centers in states like Alabama and Mississippi segregated patients on racial grounds, and even claimed that it was “medically” necessary to separate patients on racial grounds.

In the 1960s, a series of federal legislation and lawsuits attempted to end this discrimination. The Community Mental Health Centers Act (CMHA) was passed to improve the provision of treatment and care for people with mental illness, or what is now known as mental disorders. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act was passed, which included a provision that made it illegal for any facility or service receiving federal funds to discriminate on the basis of race.

At the time, some states still had segregated treatment policies, which put them at risk of losing funding and receiving no financial support to provide medical care. Instead of accepting these provisions and finding ways to end segregation, states including Alabama and Mississippi chose to fight the federal government in court. They claimed that they had the right to administer state services without federal interference, and that it was “medically” necessary to separate patients on the basis of race.

As with research, experiments, and statistics, doctors based their view of the need for “segregated” treatment on a long history of racist ideas in psychiatry. And Dr. John Galt, who made the preposterous claim that black people shouldn’t have mental health problems, was not the only one whose medical opinion was driven by racism. Since the early 19th century, some psychiatrists have argued that African Americans were biologically “inferior” to other people and races.

Here, Dr. Ochena explains the conditions of treatment for black people with mental health problems: “Most pre-Civil War mental health facilities in the South typically denied treatment to enslaved people.”

It seems clear that mental health experts believed that housing blacks and whites in the same facilities would negatively impact the recovery of whites. Housing conditions in Southern asylums for the few who accepted enslaved people were disastrous compared to white patients. Blacks were often housed outdoors near these institutions or in local jails. There were accounts of some black children being housed in asylum grounds.

"Apology"

Finally, after all this long history of injustice and oppression in mental health and psychiatric institutions for black people, the American Psychiatric Association in 2021 acknowledged and apologized for all of the above. In January, the 176-year-old association issued its first-ever apology for its racist past. It acknowledged what it called the profession's "horrific" past actions, committed its board of directors to identifying, understanding, and correcting past injustices against black people, and pledged to adopt new anti-racist practices aimed at ending this long history of discrimination.

However, some critics saw this apology as insufficient, and doubted that any real positive step would take place, noting that the American Medical Association issued a similar apology in 2008 for its "racist" history of more than 100 years of promoting or accepting racial inequality negatively, and excluding African American doctors, without offering anything actual or realistic after this apology.

Critics inside and outside the APA have made clear that the association needs to overcome significant obstacles to fix its problems and address its racial equity issues in a meaningful way, including the association’s diagnostic biases, the persistent shortage of black psychiatrists, and a physical structure that tends to exclude people who cannot pay for services out of pocket. This may make the crisis of racism in psychiatry too deep and entrenched to be resolved with an “apology” and a “promise” of reform. This was confirmed in the summer of 2020, when Dr. Ruth Shim, director of cultural psychiatry and professor of clinical psychiatry at the University of California, Davis, left the APA, explaining her departure in a tone that expressed her frustration and frustration and in the important statement that “institutional racism is an existential crisis in psychiatry.”

  - Arwa Nagib

Syria's Assad: Ready to meet Erdogan if it serves Syria's interest

Syria's Assad: Ready to meet Erdogan if it serves Syria's interest

    Monday, July 15, 2024   No comments

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad confirmed on Monday that he is ready to meet his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, "if the meeting serves the country's interest."

Speaking about the return of relations with Turkey, following his vote today in the legislative elections, President al-Assad said: "If meeting President Erdogan leads to results, or if hugging or reprimanding serves the country's interest, then I will do it."

He explained that "the problem does not lie in the meeting, but in its content," noting that proposing the meeting "may be important, as it is a means to achieve a goal, but we have not heard what the goal is, and what the solution to the problem is."

President al-Assad added that "the first question we ask is why have relations deviated from their natural course for 13 years?", noting that "he has not heard any Turkish official speak about this point, in an explicit manner."

In this context, President Assad stressed that the meeting is "a means, and the means need rules and references for work," adding that "the failure of this means at some point may make us go in a worse direction, and pay a higher price."

At the same time, he stressed the positive spirit towards any initiative to improve the relationship, saying that this is "the natural thing, no one thinks of creating problems with his neighbors," but that "does not mean going without rules."

He added: "In any potential meeting, we will ask what its reference is. Will this reference be the cancellation or termination of the causes of the problem, which are represented by supporting terrorism, and withdrawing from Syrian territory?", stressing that this "is the essence of the problem, and there is no other reason."

President Assad said that "if there is no discussion about this essence, then what does the meeting mean?", noting that Syria "seeks to work that achieves results, as it is not against any procedure or meeting, but what is important is that it leads to positive results that achieve the interests of Syria and Turkey, at the same time."

He stressed that "any meeting that will take place with the Turkish side will be announced, there is nothing secret," adding that "Syria insisted that the meeting is necessary, regardless of the level, and the talk here is not about a meeting between two presidents."

President Assad pointed out that "the meetings have not stopped, but are ongoing," revealing that "there is a meeting being arranged at the security level by some mediators, and we were positive in this regard."

Assad explained that "the term normalization of relations with Turkey is a mistake. Normalization of relations with a country is a coercive process that aims to impose normal relations that do not exist," while "we are talking about a neighboring country, and we have relations that date back centuries, which means that relations must be normal."

He added: "If we want to reach normal relations, and this is what we seek in Syria, can the occupation and support for terrorism be part of normal relations between countries?" Assad replied that this is "of course impossible."

Accordingly, President Assad stressed the necessity of "withdrawing all that is abnormal in this scene" in order to talk about "normal relations between Syria and Turkey."

He stressed that "relations will be normal when the abnormal matters are withdrawn without normalization or coercive measures, and without the opinion of governments," so that "these relations will proceed in their natural form in the direction of returning to what they were before the war," especially since normal relations "have proven that they lead to protecting the borders that Turkish officials are talking about, as was the case previously."

In this context, President Assad explained that "friends are fully aware of these facts, and they have known this position since the first initiative that took place 5 years ago."

He explained that "talking about initiatives is new, but the beginning of the initiatives was 5 years ago, and during that time we repeated the same position: remove the reasons for the results to appear," adding that the matter "does not need political and media tactics and acrobatics."

He said that "Syria's friends sometimes demand some measures that are open to dialogue and discussion, but measures are one thing, and bypassing the principle is another," stressing that "we cannot bypass the principles on which we build our national interests."

President Assad added that "no guarantees have been provided to Syria so far," and "we are proceeding in a positive manner, but based on clear principles, based on the principles of international law and sovereignty."

The Syrian president stressed that "if positive results are not achieved, the results will be negative, in this case, either we win or we lose, we, Turkey and the allies", meaning that "everyone wins or everyone loses, there is no middle ground".

President Assad's statements come at a time when official Turkish statements regarding developments in relations with Syria are continuing.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan confirmed earlier that he had issued directives to Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan to meet with President Assad and "begin restoring relations between the two countries".

In a press conference on the sidelines of the NATO summit in the US capital, Washington, the Turkish president revealed that Fidan is authorized to organize a meeting with President Assad in a third country.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein announced on Friday evening that an initial agreement had been reached with Syria and Turkey regarding holding a meeting that would bring together officials from the two countries in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

Hussein said, in statements from Washington, that "there is communication at the level of the Iraqi leadership with the Syrian and Turkish sides, and the date will be determined after returning to Baghdad."

Dehumanizing Opponents as an Instrument of Supremacism: "human animals"

Dehumanizing Opponents as an Instrument of Supremacism: "human animals"

    Monday, July 15, 2024   No comments

We have not forgotten the descriptions and expressions that Yoav Galant, the occupation's Minister of War, made at the beginning of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip, when he said, "Israel is fighting human animals and is acting accordingly," until he returned, after more than nine months of the war of extermination that "Israel" is practicing in the Strip, to repeat the same descriptions about the resistance and its people. Is it a coincidence that Galant, followed by Netanyahu, returned two or three days later to the same speech, or is the matter related to considerations and a general context that governs Israeli colonial behavior. The expressions that Minister Galant used at the time, or those he uses today, were not born of the moment of the shock of the flood or the "outburst of anger" that was generated in Israeli society immediately after October 7, as some like to describe it, and this behavior of "Israel" is not a new policy that it is practicing today, but rather an extension of a colonial policy that it has been practicing for many years, the title of which is death, destruction, pain and terror, and what it produced in this war is nothing but a double mixture of the same horrors.

Looking at "others" with inferiority, from a position of superiority, as something "different", as "goyim", primitives, or "human animals" living in this universe that is harnessed to serve the "chosen Jew" and is fed by a huge store of hatred and arrogance.

This superior, “Western in origin” view of the “backward” world has not disappeared since the time of colonial Europe, just as racism has not disappeared today in the Zionist racial mentality, even after 9 months of massacres, and even after these racist, supremacist descriptions were used against “Israel” and its leaders by the South African representative and by judges in the International Court of Justice.

Although it was met with strong international human rights rejection, as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch considered the statements of the occupation’s minister of war “disgusting and an explicit call to commit war massacres,” Netanyahu and his Zionist minister of war still see Gaza as a “human animal cage,” slaughtering whoever he wants, whenever he wants, and however he wants, then razing it to the ground, and torturing its “primitive” people, who are cut off from electricity, water, and food, just as the Minister’s European ancestors did with the “human animals” they brought from Senegal and the Congo until they died of thirst, cold, and disease outside the walls of the Roman Catholic Church in Brussels, because they are “human animals, nothing more.” This description, which Galant deliberately and provocatively uses, is enough to indicate Israel's intention, coupled with action, to do everything and anything to take revenge on the Palestinians, even if this revenge results in killing children and the elderly and demolishing hospitals, shelters, schools and mosques on the heads of the displaced. As long as these are just "human animals", any harm that Israel inflicts on them, no matter how heinous, is "permissible and legitimate because they deserve it".

More importantly, in addition to what we have indicated about the deep-rootedness of this approach in the Israeli consciousness and behavior since the inception of this usurping entity, understanding the Israeli reaction, which adopts a policy of complete destruction without restrictions and without any regard for the rules of international humanitarian law, requires understanding the backgrounds and motives that specifically drive it today and push its leaders to return and insist on repeating its ABCs, especially describing the Palestinians as "human animals".

The first of these motives is to reproduce the narrative of the war and its spirit within Israeli society as if it were its first day, so that Israeli society remains led by its government and its agenda, thus silencing all voices and protests calling for an end to the war and demanding a negotiating path that leads to political arrangements, allowing Netanyahu and his partners to evade the societal accountability that will end the rule of this extremist right-wing coalition if the war stops, as if the charge of anger that is being fueled by the continued evocation of the narrative of “human animals” will, over time, reduce the extent of what many of them described as the massive military and security failure on October 7 and what followed. Because this narrative needs support to remain present in the consciousness of Israelis and the world, it must continue to be reminded and broadcast through media platforms from time to time. The second is the fierce competition in which the leaders of "Israel" compete to incite against the Palestinians and the people of Gaza in particular, as Israeli politicians, military personnel and religious men excel in inciting against the Palestinians, to the point that repeatedly describing the Palestinians as "animals" has become an essential part of their political discourse.

In this race of incitement, "Israel", its leadership and its army are using everything they have at their disposal without limits, crushing all of Gaza and leveling it to the ground without mercy. For the people of Gaza and Palestine in general, mercy has always been outside the dictionary of Israeli aggression, which means that the repeated mention of "human animals" in Galant and Netanyahu's speech was nothing more than a "natural" description in the context of the spirit of war and fighting that has inhabited Israeli society since its inception.

The third is that "peaceful" and "civilized" "Israel" must weave its vision of the other "barbaric and backward" party, as the Palestinians are not human beings, and it is determined to give the world a new narrative that moves it from the position of self-defense to the position of "exterminating animals", while preserving its "humanity".

In order to ensure that it "whitens its image and behavior", Israel must continue to criminalize and dehumanize the "other", to ensure that the world does not turn against it while it exterminates "these animals", accusing it of confronting what it calls "atrocities" with greater atrocities, and what it calls "terrorism" with more horrific terrorism. This is what was expressed by the position of the Chief of Staff of the occupation army, Herzi Halevi, a few months after the beginning of the war, when he said: "We fight with determination and remain human, unlike the other side that fights like animals."

The fourth motive is the contempt for international law and its institutions, as "Israel" has a superior ability to destroy, and its history is littered with the rubble of cities and villages and human remains, and its record also has a long history of destroying international law, kicking it and turning its back on it, as Netanyahu stood proudly a few days ago, saying: "We have proven that no force in the world can stop us."

Because international law, when it comes to "Israel", is very theoretical, very timid, very weak, and far removed from reality, all its prohibitions are violated and violated to the point of insane chaos as long as the victim is a "Palestinian Arab" and the killer is an "Israeli Jew." Perhaps this is also a message to those who rely on the rules of international law and the Geneva Conventions, and bet on "rationalizing" "Israel's" behavior and preventing it from targeting unarmed civilians, as the Israeli army, according to Galant, does not see itself bound by these agreements, as it kills "human" animals, and these rules and agreements do not include them. It seems that stripping opponents of their humanity has become a basic method in racist wars, and "Israel" is the protégé of the colonial West and its creation and image, imitating today, as it used to do in the past, what its early Western European colonial ancestors did, and it is inhabited by narratives of violence that shape the public conscience in "Israel", and in which religion, culture, and art intertwine by pressing the trigger of the fire that Gaza is burning with Today, the earth is uprooted and its "human animals" are burned alive.

_________

Muhammad Halsa, Writer and researcher; content of byline articles express the opinion of author(s).

Media Review: Washington Post | The Israeli army is "exhausted to the core" and the invasion of Lebanon is a trap for an endless war

Media Review: Washington Post | The Israeli army is "exhausted to the core" and the invasion of Lebanon is a trap for an endless war

    Monday, July 15, 2024   No comments

 The American newspaper "Washington Post" reported on Monday that the Israeli "army", exhausted by the war in the Gaza Strip, is now looking with caution at the war on the northern front with Hezbollah.

The newspaper said that Israeli leaders say that they "do not want a war in Lebanon, but they are prepared for any scenario," but now that their resources have been depleted in the war against the Gaza Strip, the soldiers are "exhausted and unprepared for a new front in the north."

The newspaper pointed out that the Israeli war against Hamas "did not lead to its defeat, and Netanyahu is politically besieged and has not yet determined his exit strategy from the war."

The Washington Post also noted that Hezbollah is professional and that "Israel" will face from Lebanon "an enemy that is larger, better armed and more professional than Hamas in the Gaza Strip." The northern settlements remain deserted as pressure from displaced Israelis increases on the government to move to return them.

Israeli military leaders have been developing plans to attack Lebanon for months. Earlier, outgoing War Cabinet member Benny Gantz and others had asked Netanyahu to allow an Israeli incursion into Lebanon in March, but Netanyahu was hesitant.

Imran Khan's party's presence in parliament gains strength months after the elections

Imran Khan's party's presence in parliament gains strength months after the elections

    Friday, July 12, 2024   No comments

Pakistan's Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the party of jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan is eligible for 23 additional seats in parliament, adding pressure on the country's weak coalition government.

Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party ran as independents in the Feb. 8 election after being barred from taking part, and won the most seats, but the Election Commission said independents were ineligible for the 70 seats reserved for political parties only.

On Feb. 20, two major parties, the military-backed Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), announced they had reached a power-sharing deal that would return Shehbaz Sharif to the premiership after this month's election failed to produce a clear winner.

The committee ordered the reserved seats to be distributed to other parties, most of which belonged to the ruling coalition parties.

The reallocation of the 23 reserved seats does not affect the parliamentary majority of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s coalition government, but the decision strengthens the political position of Khan’s supporters, who have accused the Election Commission and the interim government that oversaw the elections of rigging the elections to deny them victory.

Under Pakistani electoral rules, 70 seats are allocated to parties, 60 to women and 10 to non-Muslims, in proportion to the number of seats won by each party. This brings the total number of seats in the National Assembly to 336.

Khan was ousted from power in 2022 after falling out with the country’s powerful military leaders, while the military denies interfering in the country’s politics.

It is noteworthy that Imran Khan has been behind bars since August 2023, after he was arrested by the police, as he faces long sentences on corruption charges, but he says there are political motives behind the charges, aimed at removing him from power.