#u.s. state department issues warning | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

zvaigzdelasas · 3 months

Text

In the week since the International Court of Justice ruled that the Israeli government is plausibly committing genocide and ordered it to prevent potential further acts of genocide, Israeli forces have only continued committing atrocities against Palestinians.

Buoyed by the staying support of American officials, Israeli forces have killed at least 874 Palestinians and injured at least 1,490 in Gaza since last week’s ICJ ruling, according to Palestinian Health Ministry figures from Saturday, January 27, to Friday, February 2. That’s not to mention other acts of Israeli violence in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem.The loss of life should not be dismissed as “collateral damage,” contrary to what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said.[...]

Backgrounding the atrocities in Gaza is the broader misery the entire population faces. The BBC noted that UNICEF’s biggest concern is the “estimated 19,000 children who are orphaned or have ended up alone with no adult to look after them.” CNN reported that Palestinians are eating grass and drinking polluted water amid famine conditions. The Guardian reported that 50-62 percent of all buildings in Gaza have likely been damaged or destroyed.

Earlier this week, a federal court affirmed the ICJ’s finding that Israel may be carrying out a genocide and warned the Biden administration to reconsider its unconditional support for Israel’s war effort. [...]

The Intercept asked Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., to comment on the court rulings that the accusations of genocide by Israel are credible. “I don’t accept that. I reject [the ruling of the International Court of Justice]. I don’t believe that is Israel’s intention: to commit genocide,” said Fetterman, who has emerged as one of Israel’s most staunch Democratic defenders, on Thursday. “I do believe that their goal is to neutralize or dislodge Hamas from that. And I believe that they certainly do not want to take the lives of any innocent Palestinians and I certainly don’t assign higher value to my children versus a Palestinian child. I mean, I wouldn’t want anybody to die throughout all this tragedy, and it’s just an awful situation.”

Within hours of the ICJ issuing its ruling last Friday, Israel alleged that 12 of 30,000 — 0.04 percent — employees of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East were involved in Hamas’s attack on October 7. The United States immediately suspended its funding of UNRWA, the largest provider of humanitarian aid in Gaza, spurring a cascade of other nations to follow suit.

Sky News later obtained an Israeli document that actually downgrades the allegation to 0.02 percent of UNRWA staff (six people) being involved in Hamas’s attack. Sky News reported that the documents, which allege further ties between UNRWA and Hamas “make several claims that Sky News has not seen proof of and many of the claims, even if true, do not directly implicate UNRWA.”

The contrast between the U.S. decision to pause funding based on unverified allegations and its unwillingness to reconsider its military funding of Israel, despite serious allegations of genocide, is stark.

Fetterman also said that he supports the suspension of funding to UNRWA. When asked why the standard of suspending funding while investigating serious allegations doesn’t apply to the Israeli government, Fetterman dodged the question.

Fetterman: Well, again, it — well, it’s not. We need a full investigation and find out just how much a part of it was about that and how much, you know, the old question: how much they knew and when they knew that.

The Intercept: So you’re saying that for Israel as well?

Fetterman: Yeah, OK, so good, all right, well good.[...]

Reporter Said Arikat confronted State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller on the tension Wednesday. “I’ll say with respect to the charges of genocide [at the International Court of Justice], we believe that they’re unfounded,” Miller said. “We continue to support Israel’s right to take action to ensure that the terrorist attacks of October 7th cannot be repeated, but we want them to do so in a way that complies with — fully with international humanitarian law.”

Miller was then asked about Israel receiving aid even as Israeli government officials call for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and maintain good standing in government.

“When the secretary traveled to Israel on his most recent visit,” Miller said, “he made clear that he thought it was important that the Israeli government speak out against those matters and those comments publicly and reiterate that it is not the policy of the Israeli government to force Palestinians from Gaza.”[...]

Two days after the ICJ ordered the Israeli government to prevent and punish incitements of genocide from public officials, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich were among 11 cabinet ministers and 15 coalition members of the Knesset who rallied at conference hosted by hundreds of settlers calling for the settlement of Gaza.

On Tuesday, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant reportedly told members of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that after their military campaign ends, Israel will maintain military control of Gaza, so it can operate similarly to the way it does in the West Bank.

On Thursday, Smotrich said that allowing aid into Gaza contradicts the goals of Israel’s campaign, and that he spoke with Netanyahu, who supposedly assured him that things will change soon. Israeli ministers Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot reportedly called to limit humanitarian aid as well. Meanwhile, at aid crossings, people in Israel have taken cue from their leaders, attempting to block aid trucks from entering Gaza, where hundreds of thousands of people — including the hostages held by Hamas — are at risk of starvation and malnutrition, every day since the ICJ ruling.

One clip even shows a right-wing activist telling an aid truck driver, a Palestinian citizen of Israel, that “I am the owner here, you are a slave here.”

2 Feb 24

4K notes · View notes

metamatar · 7 months

Text

(btw NYT's anti china hysteria is getting journalists in india arrested)

In August 2023, The New York Times published a story “A Global Web of Chinese Propaganda Leads to a U.S. Tech Mogul”. The story investigated whether Chinese funding was being funnelled to advocacy and media organisations across the world to defend the internal authoritarianism of the Chinese state. One of the countries included was India, with a fleeting reference to an Indian digital news organisation NewsClick, which the report said “sprinkled its coverage with Chinese government talking points”.

The report did not suggest that the organisation had committed any crime – let alone sedition or terrorism against the Indian state. But on October 3, the police in Delhi swooped down on the homes of 46 people connected to NewsClick – journalists, staffers, contributors, including academics, historians, satirists – seizing their phones and laptops, subjecting them to hours of questioning, largely about their coverage of protests by farmers and by Muslim women. NewsClick’s founder and editor-in-chief Prabir Purakayastha and the head of the human resources department Amit Chakraborty were arrested under the draconian anti-terror law, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.

When asked about the police action, anonymous government officials invoked the New York Times article. Indian TV channels – nearly all of which are propaganda channels for the Modi regime – used the NYT story to frame the issue as a question of whether “press freedom” should be respected at the cost of “national sovereignty”.

[...] The NYT story has become a pretext to escalate an ongoing campaign to persecute and imprison some of India’s most courageous journalists, academics and activists on baseless charges of abetting “Maoist terrorism”. [...] NYT’s failure to separate specific issues of financial impropriety, propaganda, and political opinion from each other, I feared, would endanger the courageous work of journalists associated with NewsClick: for example, investigations into the financial scandals involving Gautam Adani, the tycoon who is known to be a close associate of the Indian Prime Minister. [...] The story had mentioned several media platforms (a YouTube channel in the US for instance) without identifying these by name, but had chosen to name NewsClick. It had cherry-picked an inoffensive and rather lame line from a NewsClick video and presented this as evidence of pro-China propaganda: “China’s history continues to inspire the working classes.” I pointed out that this is a simple statement of opinion, and cannot be construed as Chinese government propaganda.

Left-wing softness on China or Russia might harm Uyghurs or Ukrainians, and the political health of the Left itself, but this was hardly a problem for the Modi regime.

#india

73 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 3 months

Text

In April 2018, I was invited by the American ambassador to a meeting at the embassy in Tbilisi, Georgia. The ambassador had assembled a group of nongovernmental organization (NGO) leaders in the field of disinformation to meet with a senior Trump administration official from the State Department. He asked us to describe the main narratives of Kremlin disinformation. As the director of a large international democracy organization, I highlighted Russia’s manipulation of gender and LGBTQ issues to sway Georgians away from the perceived “cultural decadence” of the European Union. The official’s frustration was palpable. His response, tinged with irritation, was telling: “Is that all you people can talk about? The gays?”

A year before, several international organizations partnered with Georgian parliamentarians on a gender equality assessment, supported by several government donors. This collaboration led to an internal conflict. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) wanted to scrub the original report, as it covered abortion, notably legal in Georgia, while the Swedish government and other stakeholders wanted the complete assessment. As a result, at the time of its release, two distinct reports had to be printed, one with references to abortion and one without.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump emerged victorious from last week’s New Hampshire primary and is likely to be the Republican Party’s presidential nominee. His closing statement in New Hampshire praised Hungarian leader Viktor Orban, who embraces the oxymoronic term “illiberal democracy” while suppressing independent media, civil society, and courts. He has repeatedly emphasized the glory of strongmen like Orban. His foreign policy has been clear: stopping support for Ukraine, NATO, and our European allies.

But while there has been plenty of analysis of Trump’s America First impact on foreign policy and security, less covered is how it will also completely redefine foreign aid as well as the liberal democracy agenda. My experience with the first Trump administration as a senior leader in democracy organizations receiving funding from USAID provides some insight into the foreign-aid agenda of a second, but likely only scratches the surface of what is to come.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, established in 2022, offers a detailed roadmap for revamping USAID under Trump—one that will undermine, eliminate, and censor the critical work of thousands of people and organizations committed to building more just societies. The Heritage Foundation has been staffing and providing a pipeline of ideas to Republican administrations since President Ronald Reagan. Project 2025 is a plan to shape the next Republican administration, and its funders have close ties to Trump. The project’s objective is to replace “deep state” employees with conservative thought leaders to carry out an executive-driven agenda.

In the overview, the project articulates its goal to end what it calls USAID’s “divisive political and cultural agenda that promotes abortion, climate extremism, gender radicalism, and interventions against perceived systemic racism.” A key component of the illiberal playbook is to attack gender and marginalized communities, an early warning sign of democratic backsliding. Illiberal strongmen, such as Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Russia’s Vladimir Putin, exploit traditional hierarchies to divide society and create pecking orders of power. Russia refused to sign, and Turkey withdrew from, the Istanbul Convention, a commitment to protect women from domestic violence. The Narendra Modi administration in India filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court against criminalizing marital rape, arguing it would destabilize marriage. Hungary and Poland lobbied to ban the term “gender equality” in international agreements and implemented anti-LGBTQ policies, including local municipalities adopting “LGBT-free” zones as part of a government-supported “Family Charter” in Poland.

As a first step, Trump’s USAID will “dismantle” all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, which Project 2025 calls “discriminatory.” This mandate includes firing the chief diversity officer and all advisors and committees. In 2016, the Obama administration issued a DEI presidential memorandum to ensure USAID, among other agencies, had a diverse and representative workforce. Trump scaled back these efforts. On Jan. 20, 2021, Biden’s first day in office, he signed an executive order that demanded that government agencies devise strategies to tackle DEI issues. Pursuant to this, USAID Administrator Samantha Power signed USAID’s DEI strategy on her first day in May 2021. Project 2025 would reverse this strategy, requiring USAID to “cease promotion of the DEI agenda, including the bullying LGBTQ+ agenda,” which entails support for organizations overseas that work on these issues.

According to Project 2025, Trump’s new USAID will also eliminate the word “gender” full stop, arguing that “Democrat Administrations have nearly erased what females are.” This is bizarre, as I have decades of experience receiving USAID funding for numerous programs to advance women in political life and support women’s organizations. Working for democracy organizations across Asia and the former Soviet Union, I saw USAID provide critical support to expand women’s wings of political parties; recruit women election officials, observers, and administrators; train women’s advocacy and rights organizations; and build women’s committees in parliaments.

The Heritage Foundation report also accuses USAID of “outright bias against men,” an equally strange claim; in fact, gender realignment was needed and implemented. A Trump USAID will fire more than 180 gender advisors and points of contact, who work alongside USAID colleagues “to integrate gender and advance gender equality objectives in USAID’s work worldwide,” and scrub the words “gender,” “gender equality,” and “gender equity” from all documents. This would require a massive purge of decades of USAID materials and websites.

USAID has spent years incorporating gender into all aspects of its programming to ensure the agency addresses the needs of women, including unique development obstacles they face. Removing a gender lens would take us back in time to programming that often harmed women, inadvertently, by failing to analyze the varying effects of programming based on gender and power dynamics in different environments. To erase all of USAID’s tools, learning, and research on how to ensure best practice would have dangerous consequences. For example, when I worked for USAID in Cambodia in the 1990s, the agency supported micro-lending for small community projects, in which most of the loans went to women. This resulted in increased domestic violence, as men were angry about the financial imbalance in the home. Today, USAID has gender analysis and research on risk factors to mitigate against such outcomes.

Relatedly, a Trump USAID will make anti-choice “core” to its mission, removing all “references to ‘abortion,’ ‘reproductive health,’ and ‘sexual and reproductive rights.’” Project 2025’s blueprint singles out specific organizations and U.N. agencies to target and defund. Further, the president himself would have the ability to oversee programming directly: “Current law in the Foreign Assistance Act gives the President broad authority to set ‘such terms and conditions as he may determine’ on foreign assistance, which legally empowers the next conservative President to expand this pro-life policy.” Previous administrations have restricted funding to organizations that provide abortions (the “Mexico City Policy”), which resulted in an increase in maternal and child mortality and unsafe abortions—exactly what the policy claimed to want to prevent. In sub-Saharan Africa, data shows the policy increased abortions by defunding clinics that provided family-planning services. The first Trump administration expanded restrictions further, impacting speech and service delivery around the world.

A Trump USAID would not only stop funding local partner organizations that support gender, LGBTQ, and rights agendas but redirect that money to religious organizations. In fact, it would mandate training and indoctrination for all USAID staff on the link between religion and development. USAID would also ensure conservative oversight of all grantmaking to ensure against “progressive policies” and a “radical agenda.” USAID already engages with faith-based partnerships, alongside secular NGOs, but Project 2025 would like to shift the balance, creating a “New Partnership Initiative” that would help prioritize religious groups.

A stated “key outcome of the transformation of USAID” under Trump will be a complete revamp of the Bureau for Democracy, Development, and Innovation, shifting its focus to trade, the private sector, and religious communities, and purging staff. Importantly, all directors of each center—not just the assistant administrator—will have political leadership, not career experts. In addition, Trump’s USAID will rewrite all policy “as soon as possible” to ensure a conservative agenda.

During the first Trump administration, I felt the impact in my work overseas. I worked closely with the LGBTQ community in Georgia, which faced horrific obstacles—ostracization, violence, homelessness—and which was targeted relentlessly by Kremlin information operations. USAID has long been a defender of human rights and funded projects on these issues. There was a shift under Trump, though I applaud individual USAID employees for creatively trying to find workarounds and continue support—like slight renaming of initiatives or cleverly filing them under more favorable, broader categories like “human rights.” They no doubt prevented damaging cuts to our important work.

I am far more worried about the impact of a second administration. Back then, there was no concrete, detailed roadmap like Project 2025 and no massive replacement of foreign aid professionals with conservative political operatives. Under a second administration, under Schedule F, Trump has planned a sweeping political takeover of our civil service, stripping civil servants of protection, forcing them to implement his political policy agenda, and giving the president unilateral power to fire employees at will.

The organization I now work for, the German Marshall Fund, supports hundreds of civil society organizations across the Balkans, Black Sea region, Ukraine, and Central Europe—thanks to more than a decade of USAID support. USAID has encouraged our goals of promoting democracy; bolstering the rights of women, LGBTQ, and other marginalized communities; and deterring illiberalism through independent media, watchdog organizations, and information integrity efforts. We do this through grantmaking, capacity-building and technical assistance, leadership programs, and policy dialogues.

With democracy in global decline and illiberal strongmen on the rise, we need these efforts more than ever. Backsliding elsewhere affects democracy everywhere. America benefits from strong, free, liberal societies—it is in our national interest and key to our global security and order. While few voters go to the polls with foreign aid on their minds, the consequences for millions of people worldwide are on the ballot this November.

34 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 4 months

Text

TikTok has given oxygen to some truly outlandish dietary suggestions. Last year, the recommendation to cook one's chicken in NyQuil trended enough that it caused the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to issue a formal statement warning against the practice. "Healthy Coke" went viral as well after a TikTok influencer claimed that mixing sparkling water with salad dressing could create a healthy alternative to drinking Coca-Cola. Claims or recommendations like these often masquerade as "hacks," but they fly in the face of scientific research - or in most cases, even sound logic.

The latest such trend that's gone viral, thanks to TikTok influencers like Pauly Long and the Liver King, is the suggestion to consume raw meat, purportedly to increase energy and improve digestion.

Can you eat raw beef?

Such benefits aren't backed by science, however, and the recommendation to eat raw beef isn't supported by any health agency either. In fact, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) specifically recommends against the practice or even sampling small amounts of raw or undercooked meat.

Not only should you not eat raw beef, it's also important to be careful when handling it. "Make sure to wash hands, separate raw meat from other foods, and promptly store leftovers to ensure safe handling of all cooked foods," advises Audra Wilson, MS, bariatric dietitian at Northwestern Medicine Delnor Hospital.

What is dangerous about eating raw beef?

Failing to do so or choosing to eat raw meat despite warnings against the practice can lead to some potential consequences. Raw beef often contains harmful bacteria such as salmonella, campylobacter, listeria and E. coli - each of which can disrupt the body's digestive tract and cause foodborne illness. Such illnesses can lead to "food poisoning symptoms like vomiting and diarrhea," cautions Wilson. In the elderly, children, and pregnant women, she adds, such bacteria "can cause more severe illness or even death."

The only way to eliminate such risks and kill harmful bacteria associated with raw meat is by cooking it thoroughly, says Julia Zumpano, RD, a registered dietitian at Cleveland Clinic’s Center for Human Nutrition.

At what temperature is beef considered safe to eat?

That means cooking one's meat to temperatures that surpass even what some people order their steaks at in restaurants. "Rare or medium rare steaks still have potential for these bacteria," cautions Zumpano, "it's just much less when compared to raw beef."

To stay on the safe side, the USDA recommends cooking beef, bison, veal, goat, and lamb until it has an internal temperature of 145 degrees, then letting it rest for 3 minutes before cutting into it or eating. Leslie Bonci, MPH, RDN, a sports dietitian for the Kansas City Chiefs and founder of Active Eating Advice, says that ground beef and sausage needs to be cooked even longer, until it reaches an internal temperature of at least 160 degrees. "That's the only way to destroy harmful bacteria that causes food poisoning," she says.

And don't forget to use a meat thermometer when checking meat temperatures. "Accurately use a meat thermometer by inserting it into the thickest part of the beef," advises Wilson. "Using your eyes or nose alone are not effective ways to determine the doneness of meat," echoes Bonci. ___________________________________

Can we maybe just let the herd cull itself here on this one?

Just this once maybe we could try it

#nunyas news

19 notes · View notes

a-room-of-my-own · 11 months

Text

The FDA hasn’t approved them for gender dysphoria, and their effects are serious and permanent.

The fashion for transgenderism has brought with it a new euphemism: “gender-affirming care,” which means surgical and pharmacological interventions designed to make the body look and feel more like that of the opposite sex. Gender-affirming care for children involves the use of “puberty blockers”: one of five powerful synthetic drugs that block the natural production of sex hormones.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved those medications to treat prostate cancer, endometriosis, certain types of infertility and a rare childhood disease caused by a genetic mutation. But it has never approved them for gender dysphoria, the clinical term for the belief that one’s body is the wrong sex.

Thus the drugs, led by AbbVie’s Lupron, are prescribed to minors “off label.” (They are also used off-label for chemical castration of repeat sex offenders.) Off-label dispensing is legal; some half of all prescriptions in the U.S. are for off-label uses. But off-label use circumvents the FDA’s authority to examine drug safety and efficacy, especially when the patients are children. Some U.S. states have eliminated the need for parental consent for teens as young as 15 to start puberty blockers.

Proponents of puberty blockers contend there is little downside. The Department of Health and Human Services claims puberty blockers are “reversible.” It omits the evidence that “by impeding the usual process of sexual orientation and gender identity development,” these drugs “effectively ‘lock in’ children and young people to a treatment pathway,” according to a report by Britain’s National Health Service, which cites studies finding that 96% to 98% of minors prescribed puberty blockers proceed to cross-sex hormones.

Gender advocates also falsely contend that puberty blockers for children and teens have been “used safely since the late 1980s,” as a recent Scientific American article put it. That ignores substantial evidence of harmful long-term side effects.

The Center for Investigative Reporting revealed in 2017 that the FDA had received more than 10,000 adverse event reports from women who were given Lupron off-label as children to help them grow taller. They reported thinning and brittle bones, teeth that shed enamel or cracked, degenerative spinal disks, painful joints, radical mood swings, seizures, migraines and suicidal thoughts. Some developed fibromyalgia. There were reports of fertility problems and cognitive issues.

The FDA in 2016 ordered AbbVie to add a warning that children on Lupron might develop new or intensified psychiatric problems. Transgender children are at least three times as likely as the general population to have anxiety, depression and neurodevelopmental disorders. Last year, the FDA added another warning for children about the risk of brain swelling and vision loss.

The lack of research demonstrating that benefits outweigh the risks has resulted in some noteworthy pushback in the U.S. and abroad. Republican legislatures in a dozen states have curtailed or banned gender-affirming care for minors. Finland, citing concerns about side effects, in 2020 cut back puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to minors. Sweden followed suit in 2022 and Norway this year. Britain’s National Health Service shuttered the country’s largest youth gender clinic after 35 clinicians resigned over three years, complaining they were pressured to overdiagnose gay, mentally ill, and autistic teens and prescribe medications that made their conditions worse.

Still, the U.S. and most European countries embrace a standard of care that pushes youngsters toward “gender-affirming” treatments. It circumvents “watchful waiting” and talk therapy and diagnoses many children as gender dysphoric when they may simply be going through a phase.

Gender-affirming care for children is undoubtedly a flashpoint in America’s culture wars. It is also a human experiment on children and teens, the most vulnerable patients. Ignoring the long-term dangers posed by unrestricted off-label dispensing of powerful puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, combined with the large overdiagnosis of minors as gender dysphoric, borders on child abuse.

#gender critical #transgender #radfem please interact #radfem

65 notes · View notes

texasobserver · 3 months

Text

“Will Texas Cities Stay Silent on Gaza?” by Gus Bova, from the Texas Observer:

Last Thursday, a stream of Austinites poured into their city hall and packed the council meeting chamber—some carrying signs, some with hands painted red, and many sporting black-and-white keffiyehs, headscarves that serve as international symbols of solidarity with the Palestinian struggle.

The activists were there to push the city council to pass a resolution calling for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. But since no such item was on the agenda that day, they’d simply booked all the slots in an open public comment period to make their case.

“I am a Jewish mother; I am also the descendant of survivors of the Holocaust in Germany and the pogroms in Russia. I have been devastated every day watching this genocide unfold,” said Abigail Mallick, one of a series of Jewish speakers who addressed the council that day to oppose Israel’s recent military actions. “We must pass a ceasefire resolution. … We must join the growing chorus of voices saying ‘never again’—‘never again’ for anyone.”

The testimony was part of a monthslong effort in Austin and other cities across Texas and the country to get local governments to weigh in on the tragedy unfolding across the world in Gaza, the 140-square-mile slice of Palestinian territory that abuts the Egyptian border and the Mediterranean Sea. Since October 7, when Hamas, the Palestinian militant group that governs Gaza, executed a horrific attack in southern Israel that left 1,200 dead and more than 200 kidnapped, Israel has retaliated by unleashing Hell on Earth for 2.2 million Gazans. As of late January, about 25,000 Palestinians have been killed with the majority being women and children, per the Gaza Health Ministry. A quarter of Gazans are starving, and nearly the entire population is displaced.

South Africa has brought claims of genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice; Israel denies the charges. Many scholars have warned for months of a possible genocide unfolding, though Israel’s defenders including the U.S. State Department dispute the claim.

Both Arab and Palestinian Americans are undercounted by the U.S. Census, according to the Arab American Institute, but Texas ranks among the top five states for both communities. The state’s biggest urban areas, especially Harris County and the Metroplex, all boast significant populations.

The Texas Democratic Party was the first among all states to officially call for a ceasefire in Gaza; five of 13 Lone Star Dems in the U.S. House have also done so, in addition to the AFL-CIO central labor councils in San Antonio and Austin. Massive protests have been held across Texas cities, including one in November that was likely the largest demonstration at the state Capitol since the 2017 Women’s March. Nationwide, at least a couple dozen cities have passed ceasefire resolutions, including San Francisco, Atlanta, and Detroit. But, so far, Texas activists are running into brick walls with their municipal representatives as council members either stay silent or argue that endorsing a ceasefire would inflame divisions in their cities or that the issue is simply not a local matter.

At the Austin meeting last week, Council member Chito Vela told the pro-Palestine crowd that he personally supported a ceasefire and had signed an open letter to that effect. “However, I do not want this council to become embroiled in foreign policy matters,” he clarified. “These are far beyond our purview as a local government, and we have too many critical local issues that demand our attention.”

In November, Austin’s Human Rights Commission urged the city council to call for a ceasefire. Three council members issued a joint statement in December expressing their support, and activists believe these three would back a formal resolution. With a fourth member, they could force a vote, but—even in Texas’ most left-wing city—sufficient support remains elusive.

“Our city always was known for standing for human rights and for progressive values,” said Hatem Natsheh, a member of the recently formed Austin for Palestine Coalition and longtime local activist who was born in Palestine’s West Bank. “We need our leaders to stand with us and [against] these horrific crimes that happen to our community.”

Natsheh noted that the council has weighed in on foreign policy before with resolutions condemning ex-President Donald Trump’s Muslim ban and the 2003 Iraq invasion. He also observed that Mayor Kirk Watson, whose office did not respond to a request for comment, spoke at a pro-Israel event shortly after the October 7 attack. “We know that the City of Austin has no power over international issues, but we are not asking because of that,” Natsheh said. “We’re asking them to take a moral stand for humanity.”

Just down I-35, in San Antonio, pro-Palestine activists nearly secured a ceasefire vote earlier this month before a council member reversed course.

With three members supporting, which is enough to convene a special meeting in San Antonio, the Alamo City council was set to vote on a ceasefire resolution in either January or February. But earlier this month, Council Member Manny Pelaez withdrew his support, saying, “It became evident that this was causing more pain and anxiety than was originally intended.” Another council member, Jalen McKee-Rodriguez, called Pelaez’s decision “one of the weakest moves I’ve ever seen from any councilmember ever.”

In late December, a group of Jewish leaders in San Antonio had written city council arguing that the resolution, “while well-intentioned, is morally wrong and will further endanger members of the local Jewish community.” Following Pelaez’s reversal, Mayor Ron Nirenberg penned a memo stating the special meeting was scrapped. In it, Nirenberg suggested the vote would have “exacerbate[d] trauma,” adding that “Wading into a complex and volatile international environment with an incomplete understanding could prove to be reckless.”

The ceasefire push has been led in part by San Antonio for Justice in Palestine (SAJP), a Palestinian-led group that existed prior to October 7 but has been revitalized in the last few months. The group works alongside others including the local chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace, which has coalesced pro-Palestine Jews across the country. “The call is coming straight from Gaza, straight from Palestine … that we need to do everything within our power to make calls for a ceasefire,” said Sara Masoud, a Palestinian SAJP core member and health science professor with family in the West Bank. She noted that the council in 2022 passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Ukraine and also contradicted Nirenberg, saying a “call for a ceasefire actually reduces trauma because it speaks on behalf of peace.”

Masoud said her group and allies will keep working to find a third supporter to replace Pelaez.

In Dallas, council members approved a resolution on October 11 stating that the city “stands with Israel in its fight against Hamas.” Since then, as the death toll in Gaza has soared, Dallasites have repeatedly turned out to push the body to consider a ceasefire resolution. “It’s a city issue in that countless Palestinians here in Dallas have been affected by it, have lost family members,” said Sumayyah El-Heet, a Palestinian organizer with the Dallas chapter of the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM). El-Heet said she knew of Dallasites who are mourning dozens of family members killed in Gaza.

Dallas Council member Adam Bazaldua has authored a ceasefire resolution. Depending on the procedure used, Bazaldua told the Texas Observer, he needs either two or four additional supporters to trigger a vote. He said he has little patience for the argument that the matter is not a local issue or that it would distract from municipal business.

“I personally cannot stand that pushback on any particular item,” Bazaldua said, “because if we were elected and not expected to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time, then I don’t know why the hell we were elected.”

Down I-45, Houston has seen months of large pro-Palestine demonstrations and other events. The Bayou City has one of the largest Arab-American populations in the nation. While some council members have voiced support for a ceasefire, ex-Mayor Sylvester Turner—who left office at the beginning of this month—has said Houston City Council simply does not do resolutions of this sort. In an email, spokesperson Mary Benton told the Observer that Houston “does not have a history of issuing resolutions regarding global conflicts” or other issues beyond city administrative business, though she said she hadn’t yet discussed the matter with now-Mayor John Whitmire.

“Houston holds one of the largest Palestinian and Arab communities in the country right now; we have Houstonians who were trapped in Gaza for months,” said Fouad Salah, an organizer with the Houston chapter of PYM, which has been pushing city council unsuccessfully to take a stand on the issue. “We have Houstonians—I mean, myself, I have family, God rest their souls—who have been murdered in Gaza. … To be clear, a lack of calling for a ceasefire is an endorsement of the genocide of our people.”

#Texas #Palestine #Gaza #Ceasefire #Austin #Dallas #Houston #San Antonio #activism #protest

15 notes · View notes

fatehbaz · 1 year

Text

The “death map” tells the story of decades of sickness in the small northwest New Mexico communities of Murray Acres and Broadview Acres. Turquoise arrows point to homes where residents had thyroid disease, dark blue arrows mark cases of breast cancer, and yellow arrows mean cancer claimed a life.

Neighbors built the map a decade ago after watching relatives and friends fall ill and die.

Dominating the top right corner of the map, less than half a mile from the cluster of colorful arrows [...] : 22.2 million tons of uranium waste left over from milling ore to supply power plants and nuclear bombs. “We were sacrificed a long time ago,” said Candace Head-Dylla, who created the death map with her mother after Head-Dylla had her thyroid removed and her mother developed breast cancer. [...]

Beginning in 1958, a uranium mill owned by Homestake Mining Company of California processed and refined ore mined nearby. The waste it left behind leaked uranium and selenium into groundwater and released the cancer-causing gas radon into the air.

State and federal regulators knew the mill was polluting groundwater almost immediately after it started operating, but years passed before they informed residents and demanded fixes. [...]

---

Uranium mining and milling left a trail of contamination and suffering, from miners who died of lung cancer while the federal government kept the risks secret to the largest radioactive spill in the country’s history. But for four decades, the management of more than 250 million tons of radioactive uranium mill waste has been largely overlooked, continuing to pose a public health threat. [...] At Homestake, which was among the largest mills, the company is bulldozing a community in order to walk away. Interviews with dozens of residents, along with radon testing and thousands of pages of company and government records, reveal a community sacrificed to build the nation's nuclear arsenal and atomic energy industry. [...]

In 2014, an EPA report confirmed the site posed an unacceptable cancer risk and identified radon as the greatest threat to residents’ health. Still, the cleanup target date continued shifting, to 2017, then 2022. Rather than finish the cleanup, Homestake’s current owner, the Toronto-based mining giant Barrick Gold, is now preparing to ask the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the independent federal agency that oversees the cleanup of uranium mills, for permission to demolish its groundwater treatment systems and hand the site and remaining waste over to the U.S. Department of Energy to monitor and maintain forever. Before it can transfer the site to the Department of Energy, Homestake must prove that the contamination, which exceeds federal safety levels, won’t pose a risk to nearby residents [...].

Part of Homestake’s strategy: buy out nearby residents and demolish their homes. [...] Property records reveal the company had, by the end of 2021, purchased 574 parcels covering 14,425 acres around the mill site. This April, Homestake staff indicated they had 123 properties left to buy. One resident said the area was quickly becoming a “ghost town.”

---

Even after the community is gone, more than 15,000 people who live nearby, many of them Indigenous, will continue to rely on water threatened by Homestake’s pollution. [...]

At the state level, New Mexico regulators waited until 2009, 49 years after first finding water pollution, to issue a formal warning that groundwater included substances that cause cancer and birth defects. [...] Other uranium mines and mills polluted the area’s main drinking water aquifer upstream of Homestake. [...]

More than 500 abandoned uranium mines pockmark the Navajo Nation [...].

Leaders of communities downstream from Homestake, including the Pueblo of Acoma, fear that wishful thinking could allow pollution from the waste to taint their water. The Acoma reservation, about 20 miles from Homestake’s tailings, has been continuously inhabited since before 1200. Its residents use groundwater for drinking and surface water for irrigating alfalfa and corn, but Donna Martinez, program coordinator for the pueblo’s Environment Department, said the pueblo government can’t afford to do as much air and water monitoring as staff would like. [...]

Most days, Billiman contemplates this “poison” and whether she and Boomer might move away from it [...]. “Then, we just say ‘hózho náhásdlii, hózho náhásdlii’ four times.” “All will be beautiful again,” Boomer roughly translated. [...] Now, as a registered nurse tending to former uranium miners, Langford knows too much about the dangers. When it’s inhaled, radon breaks down in the lungs, releasing bursts of radiation that can damage tissue and cause cancer. Her patients have respiratory issues as well as lung cancer. They lose their breath simply lifting themselves out of a chair.

---

Text by Mark Olalde and Maya Miller. “A Uranium Ghost Town in the Making.” ProPublica. 8 August 2022. [Some paragraph breaks and contractions added by me.]

85 notes · View notes

workersolidarity · 5 months

Text

🇨🇳🇺🇲 🚨 CHINA WARNS U.S. TO STOP INTERFERING IN TAIWAN'S ELECTIONS

Speaking at a Press Conference Wednesday, December 13th, the spokeswoman for the Chinese State Council Office for Taiwan Affairs, Zhu Fenglian, warned the U.S. the upcoming election of Taiwan's Chief Executive in January is China's internal affair, and the United States should stop interfering.

Elections for Taiwan's Chief Executive are scheduled for January 13th, 2024.

The current incumbent for the Chief Executive's Office is Tsai Ingwen, who is finishing her second term and is no longer eligible for re-election due to term limits.

"Taiwan's elections are China's internal affairs and interference by outside forces is unacceptable," Zhu Fenglian said.

Fenglian noted that the recent U.S.-China Summit, the United States made commitments to China on the Taiwan issue, with U.S. President Joe Biden clearly stating in front of reporters that he does not support "Taiwan Independence."

"The United States must keep its promises, stop sending false signals to pro-Taiwan independence forces, and stop interfering in Taiwanese elections,” a department spokeswoman said.

#source

@WorkerSolidarityNews

17 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 1 day

Text

Exclusive: Some US officials say in internal memo Israel may be violating international law in Gaza | Reuters

Some senior U.S. officials have advised Secretary of State Antony Blinken that they do not find "credible or reliable" Israel's assurances that it is using U.S.-supplied weapons in accordance with international humanitarian law, according to an internal State Department memo reviewed by Reuters.

Other officials upheld support for Israel's representation.

Under a National Security Memorandum (NSM) issued by President Joe Biden in February, Blinken must report to Congress by May 8 whether he finds credible Israel's assurances that its use of U.S. weapons does not violate U.S. or international law.

By March 24, at least seven State Department bureaus had sent in their contributions to an initial "options memo" to Blinken. Parts of the memo, which has not been previously reported, were classified.

The submissions to the memo provide the most extensive picture to date of the divisions inside the State Department over whether Israel might be violating international humanitarian law in Gaza.

"Some components in the department favored accepting Israel's assurances, some favored rejecting them and some took no position," a U.S. official said.

A joint submission from four bureaus - Democracy Human Rights & Labor; Population, Refugees and Migration; Global Criminal Justice and International Organization Affairs – raised "serious concern over non-compliance" with international humanitarian law during Israel's prosecution of the Gaza war.

The assessment from the four bureaus said Israel's assurances were "neither credible nor reliable." It cited eight examples of Israeli military actions that the officials said raise "serious questions" about potential violations of international humanitarian law.

These included repeatedly striking protected sites and civilian infrastructure; "unconscionably high levels of civilian harm to military advantage"; taking little action to investigate violations or to hold to account those responsible for significant civilian harm and "killing humanitarian workers and journalists at an unprecedented rate."

The assessment from the four bureaus also cited 11 instances of Israeli military actions the officials said "arbitrarily restrict humanitarian aid," including rejecting entire trucks of aid due to a single "dual-use" item, "artificial" limitations on inspections as well as repeated attacks on humanitarian sites that should not be hit.

Another submission to the memo reviewed by Reuters, from the bureau of Political and Military Affairs, which deals with U.S. military assistance and arms transfers, warned Blinken that suspending U.S. weapons would limit Israel's ability to meet potential threats outside its airspace and require Washington to re-evaluate "all ongoing and future sales to other countries in the region."

Any suspension of U.S. arms sales would invite "provocations" by Iran and aligned militias, the bureau said in its submission, illustrating the push-and-pull inside the department as it prepares to report to Congress.

The submission did not directly address Israel's assurances.

Inputs to the memo from the Office of the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism and U.S. ambassador to Israel Jack Lew said they assessed Israel's assurances as credible and reliable, a second U.S. official told Reuters.

The State Department's legal bureau, known as the Office of the Legal Adviser, "did not take a substantive position" on the credibility of Israel's assurances, a source familiar with the matter said.

State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said the agency doesn't comment on leaked documents.

"On complex issues, the Secretary often hears a diverse range of views from within the Department, and he takes all of those views into consideration," Miller said.

MAY 8 REPORT TO CONGRESS

When asked about the memo, an Israeli official said: "Israel is fully committed to its commitments and their implementation, among them the assurances given to the U.S. government."

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Biden administration officials repeatedly have said they have not found Israel in violation of international law.

Blinken has seen all of the bureau assessments about Israel's pledges, the second U.S. official said.

Matthew Miller on March 25 said the department received the pledges. However, the State Department is not expected to render its complete assessment of credibility until the May 8 report to Congress.

Further deliberations between the department's bureaus are underway ahead of the report's deadline, the U.S. official said.

USAID also provided input to the memo. "The killing of nearly 32,000 people, of which the GOI (Government of Israel) itself assesses roughly two-thirds are civilian, may well amount to a violation of the international humanitarian law requirement," USAID officials wrote in the submission.

USAID does not comment on leaked documents, a USAID spokesperson said.

The warnings about Israel's possible breaches of international humanitarian law made by some senior State Department officials come as Israel is vowing to launch a military offensive into Rafah, the southern-most pocket of the Gaza Strip that is home to over a million people displaced by the war, despite repeated warnings from Washington not to do so.

Israel's military conduct has come under increasing scrutiny as its forces have killed 34,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to the enclave's health authorities, most of them women and children.

Israel's assault was launched in response to the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, in which Israel says 1,200 people were killed and 250 others taken hostage.

The National Security Memorandum was issued in early February after Democratic lawmakers began questioning whether Israel was abiding by international law.

The memorandum imposed no new legal requirements but asked the State Department to demand written assurances from countries receiving U.S.-funded weapons that they are not violating international humanitarian law or blocking U.S. humanitarian assistance.

It also required the administration to submit an annual report to Congress to assess whether countries are adhering to international law and not impeding the flow of humanitarian aid.

If Israel's assurances are called into question, Biden would have the option to "remediate" the situation through actions ranging from seeking fresh assurances to suspending further U.S. weapons transfers, according to the memorandum.

Biden can suspend or put conditions on U.S. weapons transfers at any time.

He has so far resisted calls from rights groups, left-leaning Democrats and Arab American groups to do so.

But earlier this month he threatened for the first time to put conditions on the transfer of U.S. weapons to Israel, if it does not take concrete steps to improve the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza.

(This story has been refiled to remove an extraneous paragraph)

6 notes · View notes

simply-ivanka · 2 days

Text

Continued Failure of the Biden Administration

“I want to make clear that we are realistic and clear-eyed about the prospects of breakthroughs on any of these issues,” an unnamed State Department official said when briefing reporters last week on Blinken’s agenda. This is how State warns in advance that the secretary will be wasting his time and our money during his encounters in Shanghai and Beijing.

What is this if not an admission of our secretary of state’s diplomatic impotence? Or do I mean incompetence? Or both? This is the man, after all, who arrived in Israel five days after the events of last Oct. 7 to announce, “I come before you as a Jew.” Does this guy understand diplomacy or what?

The media followed the State Department’ lead, naturally, in advising us of the pointlessness of Blinken’s sojourn in China—this at both ends of the Pacific. CNBC: “Washington is realistic about its expectations on Blinken’s visit in resolving key issues.” Japan Times: “While crucial for keeping lines of communication open, the visit is unlikely to yield major breakthroughs.”

#Biden #Failure #Blinken #Waste #Russia #China #Israel #Gaza #Hamas #anthony blinken

5 notes · View notes

thatdiabolicalfeminist · 11 months

Text

By Steve Holland, Gram Slattery and Katharine Jackson

May 27, 20236:25 PM PDT

Updated a min ago

WASHINGTON, May 27 (Reuters) - U.S. President Joe Biden and top congressional Republican Kevin McCarthy have reached a tentative deal to raise the federal government's $31.4 trillion debt ceiling, ending a months-long stalemate.

However, the deal was described in terms that indicated it may not be absolute, and without any celebration -- an indication of the bitter tenor of the negotiations, and the difficult path it has to pass through Congress before the United States runs out of money to pay its debts in early June.

"I just got off the phone with the president a bit ago. After he wasted time and refused to negotiate for months, we've come to an agreement in principle that is worthy of the American people," McCarthy tweeted.

The deal would raise the debt limit for two years while capping spending over that time, and includes some extra work requirements for programs for the poor.

Biden and McCarthy held a 90-minute phone call earlier on Saturday evening to discuss the deal.

"We still have more work to do tonight to finish the writing of it," McCarthy told reporters on Capitol Hill. McCarthy said he expects to finish writing the bill Sunday, then speak to Biden and have a vote on the deal on Wednesday.

The deal will avert an economically destabilizing default, so long as they succeed in passing it through the narrowly divided Congress before the Treasury Department runs short of money to cover all its obligations, which it warned Friday will occur if the debt ceiling is not raised by June 5.

Republicans who control the House of Representatives have pushed for steep cuts to spending and other conditions, including new work requirements on some benefit programs for low-income Americans and for funds to be stripped from the Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. tax agency.

They said they want to slow the growth of the U.S. debt, which is now roughly equal to the annual output of the country's economy.

Negotiators have agreed to cap non-defense discretionary spending at 2023 levels for one year and increase it by 1% in 2025, sources said.

The two sides have to carefully thread the needle in finding a compromise that can clear the House, with a 222-213 Republican majority, and Senate, with a 51-49 Democratic majority.

One high-ranking member of the hardline House Freedom Caucus said they were in the process of gauging member sentiment, and unsure what the vote numbers might be.

The long standoff spooked financial markets, weighing on stocks and forcing the United States to pay record-high interest rates in some bond sales. A default would take a far heavier toll, economists say, likely pushing the nation into recession, shaking the world economy and leading to a spike in unemployment.

Biden for months refused to negotiate with McCarthy over future spending cuts, demanding that lawmakers first pass a "clean" debt-ceiling increase free of other conditions, and present a 2024 budget proposal to counter his issued in March. Two-way negotiations between Biden and McCarthy began in earnest on May 16.

Democrats accused Republicans of playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship with the economy. Republicans say recent increased government spending is fueling the growth of the U.S. debt, which is now roughly equal to the annual output of the economy.

The last time the nation got this close to default was in 2011, when Washington also had a Democratic president and Senate and a Republican-led House.

Congress eventually averted default, but the economy endured heavy shocks, including the first-ever downgrade of the United States' top-tier credit rating and a major stock sell-off.

The work to raise the debt ceiling is far from done. McCarthy has vowed to give House members 72 hours to read the legislation before bringing it to the floor for a vote. That will test whether enough moderate members support the compromises in the bill to overcome opposition from both hard-right Republicans and progressive Democrats.

Then it will need to pass the Senate, where it will need at least nine Republican votes to succeed. There are multiple opportunities in each chamber along the way to slow down the process.

The two sides had struggled to find common ground on spending levels. Republicans had pushed for an 8% cut to discretionary spending in the next fiscal year, followed by annual increases of 1% for several years.

Biden had proposed keeping spending flat in the 2024 fiscal year, which starts Oct. 1, and raising it 1% the year after that. He also had called for closing some tax loopholes, which Republicans rejected.

#current events #debt ceiling #uspol #us politics

23 notes · View notes

usafphantom2 · 7 months

Text

IMAGES: F-15E land in the Middle East to confirm USAF's "enhanced" presence in support of Israel 🇮🇱

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 10/15/2023 - 11:52am Military, War Zones

The F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jets arrived in the Middle East on October 13, while the U.S. continued to strengthen its forces in the region, the U.S. Air Force announced.

The planes, which were deployed from the RAF Base in Lakenheath, in the United Kingdom, are part of a broader package of forces that were mobilized after Hamas' attack on Israel, including an increasing number of A-10 Thunderbolt II close air support aircraft and F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter jets.

youtube

TAP ARROW BUTTON TO VIEW☝️

"The aircraft's advanced systems and targeting capabilities allow U.S. forces to respond to any crisis or contingency and, if necessary, face and defeat opponents," the Air Force Central (AFCENT) said in a statement announcing the arrival of the F-15E.

The Pentagon did not say where the F-15E would be based. Its arrival comes a day after the Pentagon announced that A-10 Warthogs of the 354º Fighter Squadron of Davis-Monthan Air Base, Arizona, had arrived in the region, in addition to the Warthogs of the 75º Fighter Squadron already in the region.

U.S. officials said that U.S. Air Force F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters are among the additional capabilities that could be sent

“The U.S. military is committed to lasting security and protection throughout the Middle East,” said AFCENT commander Lieutenant General Alexus G. Grynkewich, in a statement of October 13. “By positioning advanced fighters and integrating joint and coalition forces, we are strengthening our partnerships and strengthening security in the region.”

U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, who arrived in Israel on October 13, met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and the newly formed Israeli war cabinet.

Austin highlighted the "enhanced" presence of the USAF in the Middle East and the deployment of the USS Gerard R. Ford in the Eastern Mediterranean, according to a reading of the Austin meetings provided by the Pentagon Press Secretary, Brig. General Patrick S. Ryder.

The new U.S. assets aim to discourage Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group, Iran or other groups from trying to escalate the conflict and show support for Israel, which had more than 1,300 citizens killed and other deeds held hostage and brought to Gaza. American citizens are among the dead and taken hostage by Hamas, says the U.S. government. The State Department announced plans to evacuate some American citizens from Israel.

“We have increased U.S. combat aircraft squads in the Middle East, and the U.S. Department of Defense is fully ready to deploy additional resources if necessary,” Austin said during a press conference in Israel on October 13.

In addition to the USAF fighters, the USS Ford also carries four squadrons of F/A-18 Super Hornet fighters, as well as electronic warfare and command and control aircraft. The aircraft carrier is also accompanied by warships carrying cruise missiles.

Ryder added that the U.S. was “accelerating security assistance to Israel, including precision guided ammunition and air defense ammunition.” Austin also "committed to deploy additional assets as needed".

The aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower was supposed to leave Norfolk, Virginia, on October 13, but its deployment was temporarily postponed, according to local media reports. The U.S. military did not say exactly where the Eisenhower and the warships accompanying him will arrive.

Israel responded to Hamas attacks with punitive air strikes in Gaza, and Israeli ground forces seem prepared to intervene, with a large number of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) positioning themselves near Israel's border with Gaza and issuing warnings to evacuate. Netanyahu promised to "s crush and destroy" Hamas.

During his visit, Austin signaled strong support for Israel.

“This is not the time for neutrality, or for false equivalences, or for excuses for the inforgible,” Austin said at a press conference on October 13. "Make no mistake: the United States will ensure that Israel has what it needs to defend itself, and Israel has the right to protect its people."

Tags: Military AviationF-15E Strike EagleUSAF - United States Air Force / U.S. Air ForceWar Zones - Middle East

Sharing

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has work published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. Uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.