radiofree.asia

Category: Global

  • Trump unveils Russia-approved plan to undermine Europe

    In an effort to formalise the hostility which has been growing under Donald Trump, America has announced a plan to combat the “current trajectory” of Europe:

     

    Yankification

    People are taking the above to be a pretty direct attack on the existence of the European Union:

    Donald Trump is deep in bed with the tech oligarchs, who all attended his inauguration as guests of honour:

    Famously, these hyper nerds hate the EU because they keep introducing legislation to curb the worst excesses of Facebook, Google, and Amazon (while still doing nowhere near enough). This in part explains why America is increasingly hostile towards Europe, but there’s more than that too.

    At this point, the US has got about as much as they can out of Europe while still maintaining a veneer of democracy and liberalism. To bleed us dry, they’ll need to perform the shock doctrine on us; i.e. they want far-right authoritarians to take charge so they can syphon off the last of of our public wealth to American conglomerates.

    People are asking what links Reform have with Russia, but really the links we need to worry about are their links to the Americans.

    Trump means sovereignty

    The National Security Strategy also contains the following, suggesting that Reform are taking their direction from the states (reported by the BBC):

    In the document, the EU is blamed for blocking US efforts to end the conflict and says that the US must “re-establish strategic stability to Russia” which would “stabilise European economies”.

    It appears to endorse efforts to influence policy on the continent, noting that US policy should prioritise “resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations”.

    The new report also calls for the restoration of “Western identity”, and claims that Europe will be “unrecognisable in 20 years or less” and its economic issues are “eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of civilisational erasure”.

    “It is far from obvious whether certain European countries will have economies and militaries strong enough to remain reliable allies,” the document states.

    In stark contrast, the document celebrates the influence of “patriotic European parties” and says “America encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit”.

    Remember when Farage used to talk about sovereignty?

    Remember when he said we need to take back control from unelected foreign elites?

    We remember, but somehow we doubt Farage will stand up to the Yanks.

    Russia and America VS Europe

    In the following tweet, you’ll notice Elon Musk repeats the idea of ‘sovereign nations’ from the National Security Strategy. Musk is being a bit more blatant, giving the game away as to what his friends in the White House are scheming:

    Oh, and the guy agreeing with Musk is on the Security Council of Russia, by the way, so it’s a real who’s who of ‘who the fuck asked you?‘

    Russia has welcomed the National Security Strategy, saying:

    The adjustments we’re seeing… are largely consistent with our vision,

    They added:

    We consider this a positive step

    There’s been a debate between leftists and centrists as to which is worse: American imperialism or Russian imperialism. That debate may be over now, because they’re officially the same thing according to the US government.

    Featured image via European Union

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Is Lebanon heading towards normalisation or capitulation?

    Since the 2024 cease-fire, Lebanon has repeatedly affirmed its desire for stability and peace. Yet, the south of Lebanon in general, and border areas in particular, continue to suffer under Israeli strikes and land incursions — even after ‘the truce.’ If those incidents underscore anything, it’s that the reality on the ground remains tense, and citizens in Lebanon view normalisation proposals as hypocritical in light of ongoing violence.

    During a visit to Kfarkila and Aita al Shaab, two border towns close to Palestine (Israel), I saw nothing but rubble. Destroyed houses, lost dreams, and graffiti in Hebrew promising an Israeli return to take over the border towns. This statement on the wall was accompanied by other racist, colonial slurs against Lebanon, drawn on what remained of houses and shops, by the Israeli occupation forces during the 2024 war. The towns are now ‘protected’ by a small number of the Lebanese armed forces, with nothing but unarmored vehicles, an M-16, and a communication device they use to stay in contact with the command. These helpless soldiers are facing the Israeli military. One that’s equipped with the most technologically advanced weaponry, a thirst for occupation, and psychopathic urges that we’ve witnessed in Lebanon and Gaza in the past couple of years.

    Lebanon Lebanon

    Lebanon has ‘no choice but to negotiate’

    This week, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has publicly declared that Lebanon “has no choice but to negotiate,” framing diplomacy as the preferable path over the repeated cycles of war and destruction. Similarly, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam recently stated that a lasting peace with Israel could — in theory — pave the way for economic ties and normalisation. But he also stressed that “we are far from being there” as long as security conditions and mutual trust remain unmet.

    Earlier in 2025, U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus announced that Washington would mediate efforts between Lebanon and Israel to “resolve outstanding issues.” Among the discussed items: disputed border villages along the Blue Line such as the Shebaa Farms and Kfarshouba hills, release of Lebanese detainees, and the fate of Israeli positions still held in southern Lebanon. This U.S.-led format — civilian delegations, ceasefire committees, economic cooperation — signals a push not just to halt conflict, but to institutionalise contact and possibly pave the way for normalisation under the guise of a ‘technical’ or ‘post-war reconstruction’ diplomacy.

    Since the ceasefire, Israel and the United States have adopted a strategy of ‘coercive diplomacy.’ This means the use of force, or the threat of it, to pressure Lebanon to back down or accept certain conditions without the need to wage a full-scale war. In practice, the United States and Israel employ a functional division of roles to achieve this principle:

    1. The Israeli part (kinetic pressure): Continuing military operations, exerting pressure on the ground, and threatening all-out war to create a reality that forces concessions.

    2. The American part (strategic strangulation): Using economic, political, and diplomatic tools to pressure Lebanon, aiming to force it to accept Israeli conditions as a “less costly” option than continuing the war.

    Lebanese official position is not treason because…

    Despite these diplomatic moves, there is no public sign that Israel is ready to reciprocate Lebanese advances with meaningful steps toward peace. Israel continues to maintain military positions in southern Lebanon, carries out regular strikes, and has not provided any guarantees for withdrawal or long-term ceasefire compliance. As this article is being written, Israeli spy drones are flying over several Lebanese southern towns, as well as Beirut, while the warplanes have conducted two strikes, on a house and a resort, in the towns of Jbeih and Mahrouna. Nevertheless, the shift to civilian-led talks, rather than full peace negotiations, underscores that Israel appears more interested in managing tensions than resolving the underlying conflict.

    By acting as the mediator and guarantor of the ceasefire, on the one hand the United States essentially facilitates the framework through which Lebanon engages Israel. On the other hand, Israel continues its violations with a clear green light from America — coupled with military, financial, and political support. The new ceasefire-monitoring committee, co-chaired by U.S. and UN envoys, includes Lebanese and Israeli civilian representatives. This dynamic raises the concern that Lebanon is entrusting its security and sovereignty to a process overseen (and heavily influenced) by a ‘third party’ that has historically backed Israeli military operations, and most recently in the Israeli genocide in Gaza and the war on Lebanon in the past two years.

    No one in Lebanon should have weapons — except for Israel

    The Lebanese government, backed by U.S. diplomatic pressure, is pushing for a state monopoly on weapons — in other words, disarmament of Hezbollah. In August 2025, a proposal was floated to convince Hezbollah to disarm in exchange for vague economic aid and security assurances. Yet, critics warn that Lebanon is moving toward disarming even though the Israeli threat remains. There is still no guarantee that Israel will respect the border, stop military strikes, or relinquish occupied areas. In effect, Lebanon may be disarming without receiving any credible proof of Israel’s good intentions, leaving the country defenceless should Israel resume attacks. This reminds us of what happened back in May 1983, when Israel was already occupying Lebanon and direct negotiations where on-going back then between both sides, which was followed a year later by an uprising that ended the security deal with Israel.

    If things go the same as they did 42 years ago, it won’t be a surprise that Israel would directly demand the Lebanese military to search the south of Lebanon house by house — the Israeli narrative, after all, claims that southerners are hiding ballistic missiles in their houses. The Israeli military, or Mossad, could ask the Lebanese military intelligence to apprehend civilians under the accusation of being members of Hezbollah, similar to what used to happen during the time Israel occupied the south of Lebanon (1982-2000).

    If 1983 is repeated, it is possible that there would be a repetition of 1984. Especially now that the Lebanese, particularly the southerners, have just gotten out of a horrific war and have a long bloody history with the Israeli occupational forces. As the Lebanese proverb goes: “the blood does not become water”.

    Featured image provided by the author

    By Mohamad Kleit

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Confusion as White House announces ‘zero releases in November’

    On the sixth day of Christmas, the White House said to me:

    On the seventh day of Christmas, I and many others asked:

    White House ZERO (releases)?

    Before we get to what the White House was actually announcing, we’ll go over some of the top theories.

    First up, the month between October and December is the time of year when ‘No Nut November’ takes place. This is an internet challenge in which (mostly) men abstain from ejaculating. While this started off as a joke, it gained popularity after content creators began preaching that abstaining from masturbation can have borderline magical effects on a person’s mental faculties.

    Anyway, with that in mind, let’s look at the White House tweet again:

    Wow, he really made it all the way through, huh?

    The only problem with this theory is that:

    • It would mean Trump’s No Nut November began in May.
    • His concentration clearly hasn’t improved over the past few months.

    Another theory is that they’re bragging about not releasing the Epstein files:

    Others have speculated the White House is running some sort of psyop to drive people to distraction:

    So what’s the reality of what we’re looking at? According to Homeland Security:

    For the seventh consecutive month, U.S. Border Patrol released zero illegal aliens into the United States. Every individual apprehended was processed according to law – a milestone unmatched in modern border history.

    Okay, so they’re saying they’ve stopped accidentally releasing people during the processing phase. I think? It doesn’t say ‘accidental’, after all, so this is still somewhat vague.

    While this seems like the sort of thing the Trump admin would brag about, they’re obviously not referencing the concept of ‘releases’ enough for people to recognise what they’re talking about.

    Data

    Homeland Security highlighted other statistics related to Trump’s aggressive border policy in addition to the ‘no releases’ stuff. What they didn’t highlight were stats like the following from the American Immigration Council:

    • Mass deportation would separate millions of U.S. citizen children from their family. Some 4.1 million U.S. citizen children live with an undocumented parent.
    • Undocumented immigrants are essential contributors to the economy. In 2023, undocumented immigrant households paid $89.8 billion in federal, state, and local taxes and held $299 billion in spending power. In total, immigrant (both legal and undocumented) households paid nearly $16.80 in every $100 tax dollars collected by federal, state, and local governments, funding a wide range of social services that benefit all Americans.
    • Immigrants inject trillions of dollars of housing wealth in the United States. The vast majority of immigrants are not dependent on state governments to guarantee them with housing; in reality, they are putting back vast sums of money into the housing market and revitalizing neighborhoods. In 2023, immigrant households paid over $167 billion in rent in the housing market, and held over $6.6 trillion in housing wealth.
    • Immigrants help ease key labor shortages, and are driving innovation and business creation. Almost 1 in 4 entrepreneurs in the country are immigrants. About 46 percent of the Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children. Elsewhere, immigrants are helping ease the labor shortage in the healthcare industry, where nearly 16 percent of nurses and about 28 percent of health aides were immigrants in 2023.

    We agree that the case for migration shouldn’t focus first and foremost on the economic contribution that people can make. What we’re pointing out here is that the US has shaped its economic model around migration, and the Trump admin have replaced that model with — *DRUM ROLL* — chaos and nonsense.

    As we’ve reported, the US economy is in dire straits, and on the edge of some sort of financial crisis. When America tips over the edge, the right’s drive to oppress the non-white population will be a big part of why every American suffers.

    Featured image via the Twitter

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Mo Salah says his next Liverpool game could be his last before the Arab Cup

    In a shock interview, Mo Salah has said his next Liverpool game may be his last ever, as he prepares to depart for the Arab Cup. The striker has been left on the bench for three games in a row, and now has unexpectedly revealed deep rifts at the club.

    Salah told waiting reporters:

    It seems like the club has thrown me under the bus. That is how I am feeling. I think it is very clear that someone wanted me to get all of the blame.

    When asked if he thought Liverpool’s next game at Brighton could be his last, he said:

    In football you never know. I don’t accept this situation. I have done so much for this club.

    He continued:

    I can’t believe … I’m sitting on the bench for 90 minutes…I’m very, very disappointed. I have done so much for this club down the years and especially last season. Now I’m sitting on the bench and I don’t know why.

    Arab Cup on the horizon

    Matters are further complicated by Salah departing to play in the Arab Cup after that Brighton game. Alarmingly, Salah appeared unsure how much of a future he has at Liverpool, with the January transfer window opening shortly after the Arab Cup concludes:

    This club, I always support it. My kids will always support it. I love the club so much I will always do. I called my mum yesterday – you guys [journalists] didn’t know if I would start or not, but I knew. Yesterday I said [to my mum]: ‘Come to the Brighton game. I don’t know if I am going to play or not but I am going to enjoy it.’

    Salah said he wanted to ensure he soaked in what could be his final game:

    In my head, I’m going to enjoy that game because I don’t know what is going to happen now. I will be in Anfield to say goodbye to the fans and go the Africa Cup. I don’t know what is going to happen when I am there.

    The striker has been exceptional for Liverpool throughout his career at the Merseyside club. However, a recent nosedive in Liverpool’s form has also seen a more subdued Salah. And, he revealed that his relationship with manager Arne Slot has deteriorated:

    I said many times before that I had a good relationship with the manager and all of a sudden, we don’t have any relationship. I don’t know why, but it seems to me, how I see it, that someone doesn’t want me in the club.

    Thrown under the bus

    Salah is beloved by fans at Anfield, and many were both relieved and delighted as he signed a contract over the summer that would likely see him finish his illustrious career at the club. However, Salah made it clear that he feels as though he has been made a scapegoat for Liverpool’s woes:

    It is not acceptable for me. I don’t know why this is happening to me. I don’t get it. I think if this was somewhere else, every club would protect its player. How I see it now is like: ‘You throw Mo under the bus because he is the problem in the team now.’ But I don’t think I am the problem. I have done so much for this club.

    And, he rightly pointed out that after a stunning season, being dropped to the bench was rare for a player of his calibre:

    After what I have done for the club it really hurts. You can imagine, really.

    Salah continued:

    I have been at this club, scoring more than anyone in this generation, since I came to the Premier League. If I was somewhere else, everybody would go to the media and defend the players. I am the only one in this situation. Can I give an example?

    “It’s silly but I am sorry. I remember a while ago, Harry Kane was not scoring for 10 games, and everyone in the media was like: ‘Oh, Harry will score for sure.’ When it comes to Mo everyone is like: ‘He needs to be on the bench.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Maryam Jameela

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The countdown to the FIFA Intercontinental Cup Qatar 2025 has begun.

    With the FIFA Intercontinental Cup finals fast approaching, Flamengo will face Cruz Azul in the tournament’s opening match. So, the countdown has begun.

    FIFA Intercontinental Cup finals are nearly here

    Brazilian club Flamengo, recently crowned Copa Libertadores champions, will kick off their campaign against Mexican side Cruz Azul in the Americas Derby on 10 December in Doha.

    This eagerly anticipated match marks the official start of the three final matches of the FIFA Intercontinental Cup, which Qatar is hosting during the break in the FIFA Arab Cup, reaffirming the country’s exceptional organisational capabilities and the high level of confidence it enjoys on the international stage in hosting global tournaments.

    • FIFA Qatar 2025 Americas Derby – Wednesday, 10 December 2025 | 8 p.m. Doha time: Cruz Azul (Mexico) vs. CONMEBOL Libertadores Cup 2025 champions Ahmed bin Ali Stadium

    • FIFA Qatar Challenge Cup 2025 Saturday, 13 December 2025 | 8 p.m. Doha time: FIFA Americas Derby Qatar 2025 champions vs Pyramids (Egypt) Ahmed bin Ali Stadium

    • FIFA Club World Cup Qatar 2025 Final – Wednesday 17 December 2025 | 8pm Doha time: Paris Saint-Germain (France) vs FIFA Challenge Cup Qatar 2025 Champions Ahmed bin Ali Stadium

    Qatar hosted the first edition of the new format FIFA Intercontinental Cup last year in 2024, which saw Real Madrid crowned champions at the iconic Lusail Stadium, which seats 80,000 fans and hosted the historic FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 final.

    The FIFA Intercontinental Cup matches will be played during the rest days of the FIFA Arab Cup, highlighting Qatar’s exceptional capabilities in hosting more than one major tournament at the same time.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Alaa Shamali

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Abu Jazar: qualification is the primary objective for the Palestinian team in the Arab Cup

    The technical director of the Palestinian national team, Ihab Abu Jazar, confirmed his team’s readiness to face Syria in the final round of the group stage of the 2025 Arab Cup, noting that the main objective is to secure qualification.

    Palestine national team: only qualification will do in the Arab Cup

    The Palestinian Fedayeen defeated Qatar 1-0 in the opening match and snatched a dramatic 2-2 draw from Tunisia to top Group A with four points, alongside Syria, which defeated Tunisia 1-0 and drew 1-1 with Qatar.

    ‘We are ready to face Syria, and our goal is clear: to qualify for the next round,’ Abu Jazar said during the press conference. He added that the team is aware of its opponent’s strength, explaining that Syria has players with high individual and collective abilities and is good at playing on transitions, which makes the match tactically complex.

    He pointed out that there is a clear similarity in style between the two teams, which increases the difficulty of the match, before confirming that the team has overcome fatigue after the previous two matches against Qatar and Tunisia, and that all players are fully ready without any absences.

    For his part, national team player Ahmed Taha stressed the importance of the match, saying that the focus is entirely on facing Syria, which he described as ‘strong and important.’ He explained that the team is seeking to deliver the same performance it showed in the matches against Qatar and Tunisia, and to achieve a result that matches its ambitions and ensures its passage to the next stage.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Alaa Shamali

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • US Treasury Department brags about recession indicator

    As we’ve reported, things aren’t looking too hot for the US potential for recession. To make matters worse, the US Treasury Department doesn’t seem to understand its own charts:

    Oh, and in case they delete the tweet, here’s a screengrab:

    US Treasury looking away from potential recession

    Now, there’s every chance you’re not understanding what you’re looking at here. Even if that’s true, you’ve probably noted that the last ‘good’ year in the graph is 2020. If you were conscious in 2020, you’ll remember that:

    • There was some sort of illness going around.
    • It nuked the global economy.

    As such, 2020 obviously isn’t a good point of comparison, as people explained:

    The ‘Fear & Greed Index’ is the system which monitors what’s driving the stock market. Given that fear and greed are among the worst human impulses, it doesn’t say much for how we’ve organised our society, does it?

    The shadow economy

    On 25 November, we reported that the Trump administration has hidden or cancelled multiple financial reports, including the:

    • 3rd quarter GDP Advance Estimate.
    • Monthly jobs report for October.
    • Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Report.

    Despite Trump’s best efforts, though, data continues to get out from alternative sources:

    We also noted that America is experiencing:

    The worry now is that when the shit hits the fan, the Treasury Department may not even know that recessions are bad.

    Featured image via Roman Boed (Wikimedia)

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Trump may have accidentally pardoned the pipe bomber already

    It’s been quite the week for Donald Trump and his top law enforcement officials. First, FBI head Kash Patel was roundly mocked for his incompetence. Then, Patel and the attorney general excitedly announced that they’d caught the Washington pipe bomber. Now, it turns out Trump may have already pardoned the guy:

    Trump pipe bomber — Law and disorder

    Kash Patel is Trump’s head of the FBI; he’s also a conspiracist who wrote children’s books based on the president:

    Although he targets his literary works at children, his policing is actually less well thought-out than that. As reported by the Guardian:

    According to the assessment, on 11 September, the day after conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Patel arrived in Provo, Utah, but refused to leave the FBI jet without an appropriate raid jacket. A described “highly respected” source in the report explained that agents working the Kirk investigation had to stop their work to find a medium-sized jacket for Patel. When a female agent’s jacket was delivered, Patel complained about missing Velcro patches on the sleeves and refused to disembark until Swat team members removed patches from their own uniforms and attached them to the borrowed jacket.

    The same source confirmed media reports that Patel “yelled” at the special agent-in-charge and directed “an expletive-laden tirade” over “perceived blunders” in the case. Dan Bongino, the deputy director, later telephoned to apologize, “saying that never should have happened”.

    Patel has also allegedly been using the FBI to facilitate his romantic entanglements:

     

    So why does Trump keep Patel around when he’s reportedly so incompetent?

    We don’t know, man, but here’s a totally unrelated video:

    Bringing us to Patel’s bounceback, the following clip was from the pipe bomber announcement (we’d advise you don’t watch the full video at work, because it’s a hardcore 30 minutes of Trump officials sucking each other off):

    The suspected pipe bomber is one Brian Cole Jr., who placed bombs outside the Democratic and Republican party headquarters the day before the January 6th insurrection-attempt. According to NBC:

    The man charged with planting two pipe bombs near the Democratic and Republican party headquarters on the eve of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol told the FBI he believed conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, according to two people familiar with the matter.

    They add:

    Trump’s claims about the 2020 election were part of former Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into his efforts to overturn the results. In his final report on the investigation, Smith said that Trump “inspired his supporters to commit acts of physical violence” by spreading “demonstrably and, in many cases, obviously false” claims about the 2020 election. Trump has publicly maintained that he believed he won the election.

    Trump infamously pardoned the January 6th failed-insurrectionists (many of whom have since been re-arrested for other offences).

    Now, it’s speculated the pardon is vague enough that it could mean Cole walks free:

     

    Will a clever lawyer be able to argue that the pardon covers Cole’s actions? We’ll have to wait and see.

    Featured image via NBC

     

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Björk supports Iceland boycotting Eurovision over Israel

    Following Eurovision’s decision to include Israel in the 2026 contest, four countries have pulled out. Ultimately, these may not be the only countries to do so, with Iceland set to make their decision on Wednesday 10 December.

    Israel in Eurovision now others must ‘Withdraw’

    As summarised by the Björk fan account ‘My Name Isobel’:

    Björk shared on her social media today an appeal from Icelandic singer Pall Oskar urging the state broadcaster RUV to withdraw Iceland’s particiaption from the upcoming Eurovision, due to Israel being allowed to compete. The call comes after Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, and Slovenia also announced their boycott.

    “The fact that Israel can participate now, after everything that has happened, shows that the EBU is a coward, unable to set limits. We must not be cowards: boycotting is the best way to set boundaries for war criminals,” Pall Oskar stated.

    The Icelandic broadcaster is expected to make a decision next Wednesday. In the meantime, RUV’s chairman, Stefan Jon Hafstein, expressed disappointment over the EBU’s decision to include Israel in the competition. In Iceland, representatives for Eurovision are selected through the Songvakeppnin singing contest, usually held in Spring.

    Björk posted her support for boycotting the event in Icelandic, which you can translate if you click on the tweet below and select ‘Translate’:

    Björk has previously expressed her support for the Palestinians, noting that Iceland have been progressive on this issue:

     

    View this post on Instagram

     

    A post shared by Björk (@bjork)

    Reporting on the four nations who have already pulled out, Charlie Jaay wrote for the Canary:

    Russia was expelled immediately after invading Ukraine in 2022, and the EBU removed Belarus in 2021. This came after the union said it had been “monitoring the suppression of media freedom” in the country. Yet when faced with the Israeli regime the EBU has opted for inclusion. This is despite an illegal occupation, and the killing of more than 70,000 Palestinians in Gaza. 257 of these are journalists, as of December 2, 2025. These double standards are deeply unfair- a sign that the lives of Palestinians are less worthy of action than those of Ukrainians.

    She added:

    Many believe that by allowing Israel to take part, music is being:

    “used as a tool to whitewash crimes against humanity.”

    Their inclusion in Eurovision normalises Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians. For years, the presence of Israel as a apartheid, genocidal state in Eurovision has been met with widespread public anger across Europe. This anger reflects deep unease over ‘Israel’s’ unquestioned acceptance into such a high-profile cultural event.

    While Israel and Gaza have officially signed up to a ceasefire, Israel continues to violate it, recently murdering two young boys:

    Ceasefire aside, Israel has subjected the Palestinians to apartheid conditions for decades, and it remains unclear that this will change even if they stop committing genocide.

    Featured image via Freakmighty

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Trump calls for an end to ‘American football’

    Speaking at the FIFA World Cup draw, Donald Trump has finally come out against the travesty that is American ‘football’:

    It’s about time.

    And if the Yanks are taking suggestions, we propose they change the name to ‘Power Rangers Rugby’, because that’s what these clowns look like.

    Trump — Mr Peace

    The 2026 World Cup will be hosted across North America by the US, Canada, and Mexico. Reflecting on the chaotic nature of the Americans, the draw proved to be something of a confusing event:

    The other big happening at the World Cup draw was that FIFA — an organisation with a history of corruption scandals — gave a Peace Award to Donald Trump — a man with a history of corruption scandals and war crimes.

    So that’s definitely legitimate.

    As people have noted, it seems to be an effort on FIFA’s part to appeal to Trump’s childlike nature:

    His political opponents are mocking him as a result:

    European supporters, meanwhile, had this to say:

    This account was actually more incensed if anything:

    Even some Fox News hosts understand this shit is embarrassing:

    Not all of them, however; some are doubling down on the humiliation:

    Trump himself seemed somewhat vacant, although that’s increasingly the norm for the 79-year-old president:

    The president of peace?

    Honestly, it would have been less embarrassing for FIFA if they’d declared Trump their ‘Player of the Year’. Despite his claims to the contrary, Trump seems to actively be pushing for an illegal war in Venezuela, as Joe Glenton reported for the Canary:

    Cartel De Los Soles, the ‘cartel of the suns’, is now on the US foreign terror organisation (FTO) list. The problem is that this cartel – which the US claims is run by senior Venezuela politicians – may not even exist. It was already subject to lesser sanctions. As one thinktanker explained:

    “There is no such thing, so Maduro can hardly be its boss.”

    There are other alarm bells too. Despite how forcefully this (possibly fictional) cartel is spoken about by US leaders, the organisation wasn’t even mentioned in the US’s latest major drug report released in January 2025.

    The US claims to be fighting a war against ‘narcoterrorists’. Since September, that war has claimed at least 82 lives in at-sea air strikes. Evidence to support the strikes is scarce. And even US military judges insist there is an extremely thin legal basis for them. One even said:

    “there is no world where this is legal.”

    Not even banning American Football could make up for this.

    Featured image via KeithJJ

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Disarm Bristol blockade Israeli weapons factory Elbit Systems

    On 5 December, 70 people from Bristol anti-war and Palestine solidarity groups demonstrated outside of an Elbit Systems weapons factory in Filton.

    The facility, which anti-war activists have targeted numerous times in the last two years, manufactures drones that the Israeli state uses in the ongoing genocide in Gaza.

    Protest with a message

    The protest was loud and energetic, featuring a sound system, drumming, chanting, Palestinian flags and large banners proclaiming ‘Stop arming genocide’ and ‘Disarm Bristol’.

    Protestors read testimonies of Palestinians enduring the horrors of living under Israeli attack.

    They also read messages from the hunger strikers currently incarcerated awaiting trial for alleged direct actions against Elbit and the Brize Norton RAF base.

    Elbit ‘battle-testing’ weapons in Gaza

    One demonstrator said:

    We take this action against Elbit for the Palestinians and those on hunger strike in British jails. Despite the UK government claiming to have suspended arms licenses to Israel and thousands of people demonstrating in the streets, weapons continue to flow from Bristol. We take this collective action today because Elbit Systems, as Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer, is directly participating in Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people. Elbit’s stocks have soared whilst they boast their military drones are ‘battled-tested‘ in Gaza. Yet we know from eye-witness accounts of doctors in Gaza that these weapons are targeting and killing children. Bristolians will not sit idly by as Elbit stains our beloved city by linking us directly to the genocide.

    Prisoners of conscience

    There are currently at least 33 people in British jails for allegedly taking part in pro-Palestine direct action. Some of them have now been in detention for almost eighteen months awaiting trial. Six of these have been on hunger strike since early November. Their health is deteriorating dangerously as two (Amu Gib and Qesser Zuhrah) are now on their 34th day without food. There is very little in the press about their fight.

    The hunger strikers have five demands:

    1. End censorship and to be able to send and receive communications without restriction, surveillance, or interference from the prison administration.

    2. Immediate bail now. Many of the hunger strikers have been held on remand for almost 2 years in an unprecedented abuse of the legal system.

    3. Right to a fair trial. All relevant documents related to the hunger strikers’ cases must be released in full. This includes all meetings between British and Israeli state officials, the British police, the attorney general and Elbit Systems representatives.

    4. De-proscribe Palestine Action. The government’s use of counter-terror laws to target those engaged in protest and direct action is unjustified and unprecedented, and must be stopped.

    5. Shut Elbit Down. Elbit’s factories on UK soil directly link our Government, our taxes and us to the Genocide.

    Another protestor stated:

    Since 7 Oct 2023, cautious estimates of the number of Palestinians killed at Israel’s hand run into the hundreds of thousands.

    We can’t stay silent as Israel commits war crimes by starving the entire population. This is a community-led response to the ongoing horror.

    For the last two years, we have used our bodies to block workers and deliveries and disrupt business as usual for arms companies profiting from genocide.

    As each day passes the genocide takes a higher toll.

    Closer to home, the hunger strikers are literally wasting away as the media, the political class and polite society remain silent.

    Today’s action in part amplifies the words of hunger striker Teuta Hoxha:

    Our demands are simple and I want it stated for the record that our collective strike should only be interpreted as a will to live, using nothing but our hunger to resist the imperial war machine.

    We are prepared to push to the very end for these rights. Any harm we sustain lies at the door of the government. Please act.

    Featured image via Carry On Screening / Instagram

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Four countries join boycott of Eurovision after Israel cleared to compete

    Eurovision, once a feel-good festival of unity and diversity, is now facing one of the deepest political crises in its 70 year history. Its organisers – the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) – disgracefully confirmed that Israel would be allowed to compete in the next iteration of the competition. Four of the tournament’s biggest competitors – Ireland, Spain, Slovenia, and the Netherlands – promptly announced they’d be boycotting , Dec 4, ‘Israeli’ broadcaster KAN will be allowed to participate in the 2026 contest in Vienna. There was an immediate backlash.

    Four main Eurovision backers already boycotting Eurovision 2025-more to follow

    The decision to allow a country committing war crimes and crimes against humanity to compete raises serious questions – to say the least. By allowing Israel to compete the EBU have raised serious questions over their moral integrity, and their approach to human rights.

    Now, four of Europe’s biggest public broadcasters have announced they will boycott next year’s event – with more boycotts inevitable.

    Ireland national broadcaster, RTÉ, said it will neither participate in nor broadcast Eurovision 2026. It said:

    participation remains unconscionable given the appalling loss of lives in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis there.

    According to Spanish state broadcaster RTVE:

    Israel’s presence is untenable…we are talking about a genocide in Gaza.

    Dutch broadcaster AVROTROS announced that participation is no longer:

    compatible with the responsibility we bear as a public broadcaster.

    And, they also drew attention to concerns over press freedom, political interference, and the human rights abuses in Gaza.

    A fourth broadcaster, from Slovenia, RTVSLO, has also confirmed withdrawal. Officials said their decision is a response to public demands:

    The public has been demanding that we say no to the cooperation of any country that is attacking another country. We must follow European standards for peace and understanding.

    Herzog: ‘Israel deserves to be represented on every stage around the world’

    The Israeli occupation’s president, Isaac Herzog, personally lobbied international partners to oppose a vote on ‘Israel’s’ removal. After the EBU’s decision, he posted on X:

    Many believe that by allowing Israel to take part, music is being:

    used as a tool to whitewash crimes against humanity.

    Their inclusion in Eurovision normalises Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians. For years, the presence of Israel as a apartheid, genocidal state in Eurovision has been met with widespread public anger across Europe. This anger reflects deep unease over ‘Israel’s’ unquestioned acceptance into such a high-profile cultural event.

    In 2019 when Tel Aviv hosted the Eurovision Song Contest there were large, pro-Palestine protests outside the venue. Activists called for a boycott of the event to draw attention to ‘Israel’s’ human rights abuses in the occupied Palestinian territories. During that 2019 final, the Icelandic entrants Hatari publicly displayed scarves with Palestinian flag as their televote points were announced. The Icelandic broadcaster RÚV was fined by the EBU.

    Malmö in 2024 saw one of the largest Eurovision-related protests ever recorded. Thousands of anti-Zionist protesters marched through the city demanding ‘Israel’ be excluded. Israeli entries were met with booing, and the contest’s organisers forced a change of lyrics for ‘Israel’s’ submitted song. This was because it was deemed inappropriate for breaching competition rules against political content.

    Protests occurred again in Basel in 2025, where Israeli participation led to mass demonstrations and heavy police presence. Israel’s 2025 entry topped the public vote, finishing second overall, amid allegations that political campaigning had influenced televoting.

    Vote on whether to allow ‘Israel’s’ participation scrapped, changes to rules instead

    On December 4, the EBU scrapped a vote that had been planned around whether ‘Israel’ should be allowed to compete. Instead, it introduced changes to Eurovision rules, which are set to be applied in next year’s contest. This change, clearly aimed at Israel, is a ban on government agencies backing advertising campaigns. This occurred last year, in the case of Israel. The decision to allow the Zionist regime to participate has happened despite systematic violations of international law and a multitude of war crimes. This has drawn accusations of hypocrisy and double standards – expulsion for Europe’s enemies, and tolerance for its allies.

    Russia was expelled immediately after invading Ukraine in 2022, and the EBU removed Belarus in 2021. This came after the union said it had been “monitoring the suppression of media freedom” in the country. Yet when faced with the Israeli regime the EBU has opted for inclusion. This is despite an illegal occupation, and the killing of more than 70,000 Palestinians in Gaza. 257 of these are journalists, as of December 2, 2025. These double standards are deeply unfair- a sign that the lives of Palestinians are less worthy of action than those of Ukrainians.

    Pressure is also mounting on the BBC, with the Green Party demanding the corporation withdraw from Eurovision. It argues that it would be incompatible with the UK’s human-rights obligations and with public service ethics for the BBC to broadcast the event while Israel participates. The BBC’s refusal to take a stand cannot be justified, as it claims to reflect the UK’s “culture and values to the world”. Campaigners have now launched a petition calling for the corporation to boycott the contest.

    Total isolation of ‘Israel’ necessary on world stage

    But, according to the EBU, members:

    will be asked to consider this package of measures and safeguards and decide if they are sufficient to meet their concerns around participation without having a vote on the topic.

    The EBU has confirmed to Swedish broadcaster SVT:

    Only if they believe that the measures are not sufficient will there be a vote on who is allowed to compete”

    Spain’s RTVE has already publicly stated that it does not believe the rule changes for the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 go far enough.

    As the Israeli occupation continues its starvation campaign and genocide in Gaza, forcibly displaces whole communities in the West Bank, targets and kills journalists, the idea that Europe can sing its way through a genocide is impossible to justify.

    With withdrawals mounting and public pressure intensifying, the 2026 contest in Vienna risks becoming overshadowed by rubble, displacement, and those demanding accountability. Eurovision once prided itself on unity through music. It must now confront the possibility that, by allowing Israel to participate amid the devastation of Gaza, it may instead become a platform that helps sanitise atrocities.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Charlie Jaay

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Lebanon – Palestine: How Britain’s early decisions shaped the border

    For most readers in the United Kingdom, the line separating Lebanon from what was then Mandatory Palestine appears as a distant, static feature of ‘Middle Eastern’ geography. Yet this border—finalised in April 1924—was anything but inevitable. It emerged from eight turbulent years of diplomacy, rivalry, miscalculation, and competing national projects.
    What might seem like a minor administrative undertaking between France and Britain was, in reality, a complex struggle involving imperial strategists, Zionist leaders, and early Lebanese nationalists.

    Lebanon and Palestine—an accidental fault line: The legacy of Sykes–Picot

    The story begins in May 1916 with the Anglo-French exchange of notes that produced the Sykes–Picot Agreement. The arrangement partitioned the eastern Mediterranean into three spheres:

    • an “international zone”
    • a British coastal corridor encompassing Haifa and Acre
    • and a French zone stretching further north.

    The line separating the French and international areas happened—almost inadvertently—to slice through existing Jewish agricultural settlements. No one in London or Paris imagined that this detail would soon complicate every subsequent negotiation.

    Britain’s rising leverage and the Balfour factor

    What was still a theoretical map in 1916 became an urgent reality two years later. As the First World War progressed, Britain—not France—found itself bearing the military burden in the Levant. And with the Balfour Declaration of November 1917, Britain formalised a political alliance with an increasingly influential Zionist movement.

    When Allied forces established the Occupied Enemy Territory Administrations in September 1918, Britain expanded its control northwards to include the Safed region. France accepted this reluctantly, but it triggered a deeper Franco-British contest over what, exactly, “Palestine” should include.

    At that time, “Palestine” was not a political unit but an Ottoman geographic description referring to the districts of Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre. Britain nonetheless intended to create a new entity under its mandate—one that required clear northern limits.

    Where should Palestine end? Britain’s ambiguity vs. Zionist precision

    For Britain, the exact location of the northern boundary was of limited strategic importance. For Zionist leaders, however, it was existential. A viable future state, they argued, needed access to the water resources of the Upper Galilee, particularly the Litani River and the springs near Mount Hermon.

    In February 1919, the Zionist Organisation presented to the Paris Peace Conference a proposed border running south of Sidon, looping inland along the Litani, crossing into the Golan, and returning southward. Their justification was economic: water, not scripture.

    France rejected the proposal immediately, insisting on the original Sykes–Picot line as its baseline demand. Two incompatible claims—French and Zionist—were now firmly established.

    Lebanese nationalism enters the frame

    France strengthened its position by backing the ‘nascent Lebanese nationalism’ that it had secretly been nurturing. In August 1919, it sponsored a Maronite delegation led by Patriarch Elias al-Howayek, who argued in Paris for a larger, autonomous Lebanon under French mandate.
    France thus gained its own local partner—much as Britain had the Zionists—turning the border question into a three-way contest.

    The Deauville Proposal: When theology became geography

    Seeking compromise, Britain issued the Deauville Proposal in September 1919. For the first time, London adopted the formula that Palestine should stretch “from Dan to Beersheba”—a biblically inspired definition drawn from a historical atlas by Scottish theologian Adam Smith.

    Ironically, while British statesmen invoked scripture, Zionist leaders avoided it: they believed their case was stronger when framed around irrigation, agriculture, and economic viability.

    Yet this biblical reference would prove decisive. Because the British misidentified ancient “Dan” as the village of Banias, they unintentionally restricted their own negotiating flexibility. The Litani River lay far beyond this point, making its inclusion diplomatically—and scripturally—awkward.

    French hard lines: The Litani must remain Lebanese

    By February 1920, the French position was unambiguous: the Litani River, in its entirety, must remain within Lebanon.
    For the Zionist movement, this was a serious blow. Chaim Weizmann personally pressed both French and British officials, warning that Palestine without the Litani, the upper Jordan, and the Yarmouk “would not be an economically independent state.”

    But French resolve, combined with Britain’s biblical framing, left little room for manoeuvre.

    Tel Hai and the shift in territorial calculations

    A turning point came in March 1920 with the Tel Hai incident, which elevated Zionist security concerns in the Upper Galilee.
    Responding to this, France proposed in June a border that pushed slightly north from the coast at Ras al-Naqoura, then curved inland to include Metulla and the Hula Valley as a finger projecting into Lebanese territory.

    This compromise kept the Litani entirely within Lebanon while ensuring that Jewish settlements in the far north remained inside Palestine.

    The final push: Zionist appeals fall on deaf ears

    From summer to winter 1920, Zionist diplomacy intensified. Weizmann wrote impassioned letters to British leaders arguing that the Litani was “vital” for Palestine’s future and of marginal value to Lebanon. His pleas gained sympathy but no political traction.

    British officials charged with negotiating the final agreement found themselves boxed in. As one diplomat candidly wrote, discussions had been constrained by “the historical basis”—a euphemism for the biblical map that Britain itself had introduced.

    The 1920 agreement and Its aftermath

    On 23 December 1920, Britain and France reached a preliminary agreement, adopting the French proposal for the Lebanon–Palestine boundary. A joint commission finalised the demarcation in February 1922. The British Cabinet approved it the following year.

    The final treaty made only passing reference to water rights, focusing mostly on the Jordan and Yarmouk rivers. The Litani—whose inclusion Zionists had pursued relentlessly—was not mentioned at all.

    One small section of the border between Metulla and Banias was left open for potential adjustment, but the broader framework was settled. Britain and France had drawn a line that still shapes Middle Eastern politics today.

    A legacy still visible today

    What emerged between 1916 and 1924 was not merely a boundary but a political geography that continues to influence conflict dynamics in the Levant.

    The sections disputed today—such as the Shebaa Farms, the Golan edge, and the village of Ghajar—are direct outgrowths of compromises, cartographic misunderstandings, and imperial rivalries of that era.

    For Britain, this history is a reminder of how decisions made in distant conference rooms echoed across a century. For Lebanon, the Zionist entity, and Palestine, it remains a lived reality—one that demonstrates how borders drawn with indifference or ambition can become permanent lines of tension.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Mohammad Fakih

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Pete Hegseth caught in unlawful US aggression scandal far bigger than one strike

    It’s pleasing to see US war secretary Pete Hegseth panicking on TV — and so he should. Hegseth is one of the most buffoonish characters yet produced by the US political system and the War on Terror. This slicked-back fool with far-right tattoos is currently doing all manner of gymnastics. Basically, his killing of survivors of an early ‘narco-terrorist’ strike in the Caribbean has backfired. Now he’s being accused of war crimes — and it’s got him in a blind panic.

    For context, the US has been carrying out strikes on targets in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific since September. It claims it is fighting a ‘war’ against ‘narcoterrorists’. So far the US has killed over 80 people across 21 strikes. Legal experts (we’ll return to these shortly) and politicians, including Republicans, have cited the absence of evidence to support either the Trump narrative or the killings.

    Now, another group of lawyers has said the Hegseth/Trump narrative on Venezuela is bullshit — my words, not theirs.

    Pete Hegseth’s buck passing antics

    A lot of US rhetoric focuses on Venezuelan cartels. We note, not for the first time, that Venezuela produces very little fentanyl or cocaine, though it is a transit point for drugs being moved. Not that that means the US can attack Venezuela, because drugs are a criminal — not war-fighting — matter.

    Venezuela does have proven oil reserves bigger than those of Saudi Arabia. You can do the extremely complex equation on ‘why the US is interested’ at home. You could also factor in that Trump just pardoned a convicted large scale drug dealer (who is also, funnily enough, the former president of Honduras). Juan Orlando Hernández was serving a 45 year sentence for smuggling 400 tons of cocaine into the US. Until two days ago on 2 November 2025, that is. Such is Trump’s concern about drugs, he just let this guy go scot free.

    The current Hegseth row focuses on one strike on 2 September, after the first hit on a ‘narco’ boat Hegseth reportedly ordered survivors clinging to the boat to be killed with a follow-up strike. He now denies this. He has since claimed that US special operations admiral Frank Bradley ordered the strike. Some are saying that under pressure and fearful of legal charges, Pete Hegseth has changed his story and trying to pass the buck to Bradley.

    Here’s a funny video someone made about Hegseth’s antics:

    What a dweeb. But it’s also worth noting that the operation in question was carried out by the Joint Special Operations Command, known as JSOC. JSOC is a CIA-Special Forces juggernaut which is impervious to scrutiny and accountability. We won’t get all the details of these missions. But we can absorb the legal opinion.

    The bigger picture on Venezuela

    A hyper-focus on the legality — or not — of one single Trump administration strike, risks missing the point. Legal experts point to the bigger issue at stake: that the entire US build-up is unlawful. There have also been suggestions that the strike was a ‘war crime’. But that’s problematic too. Experts say what has happened can’t be a war crime: because there isn’t a war. Calling the spate of killings ‘war crimes’ may be giving the operation a ‘warrior’ legitimacy which Trump and Hegseth crave.

    Lawyers from the NGO Just Security have been very clear about the lawfulness of the strikes. But also the broader military build-up. Asked if strikes were justified, they were unequivocal:

    No. The United States is not in an armed conflict with any cartel or criminal gang. That means the law of armed conflict (LOAC), also known as international humanitarian law (IHL), does not apply to the military operations that began on Sept. 2.

    All the killings, they emphasised, have been “unlawful”:

    Domestic criminal law and international human rights law both prohibit these kinds of lethal strikes outside of armed conflict — such killings are known as murder and extrajudicial killings, respectively. All 21 strikes against suspected drug trafficking boats, killing 83 people to date, have been unlawful.

    Pete Hegseth killing shipwreck survivors

    Just Security also cleared up the questions about whether it was lawful to kill people clinging to a bombed boat. In case that was confusing for anyone… it’s not.

    They said:

    Killing shipwrecked survivors is clearly illegal and as unlawful as targeting those individuals with lethal force in the first place. If the United States were in an armed conflict (it is not), it would be illegal to target shipwrecked survivors at sea.

    They also pointed out the killings were not ‘war crimes’, because there is not war underway:

    …war crimes are committed only during an armed conflict, and the United States was not (and is not today) in an armed conflict with the reportedly targeted group.

    Killing the two shipwrecked survivors should be considered an extrajudicial killing under international human rights law, or murder under U.S. domestic law. An order to kill them would be unlawful whether in armed conflict or not.

    The crime of aggression

    It’s not exactly wrong to question the lawfulness of that one ‘double tap’ strike on 2 September. But it can lead to myopia. The big picture is about unlawful aggression against Venezuela. And that context is vital. Asked if the buildup of U.S. forces and threats to attack were lawful, Just Security said: “No”.

    Now bear with me for some turgid Legalese:

    Shows of force, such as exercises, are legal if designed to show resolve, as in the case of demonstrating a willingness to defend against an unlawful armed attack. But Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and customary law prohibit States from even threatening to use force unlawfully if the threats are communicated to the threatened State, coercive, and capable of being carried out.

    Senior U.S. officials, including the President, have openly and coercively suggested the forces could be used against Venezuela, and the U.S. military is obviously capable of mounting a large-scale attack against that State.

    Since the United States has no legal basis for using force against Venezuela or any drug cartels operating there (see above), the build-up with the accompanying threats is unlawful.

    In short, the entire mission, which Hegseth has named Operation Southern Spear, centres on an unlawful act of aggression. Drugs may be bad, Maduro may be bad, narco-terrorists may be a real thing in some sense: but none of that gives the US a licence in law to threaten, cajole, airstrike or invade anywhere — ever.

    I don’t expect to see Pete Hegseth in court soon.

    We may never know the full details of Trump’s dirty war in the Caribbean. As US reporter Ken Klippenstein has pointed out this week, we are dealing with the unaccountable CIA/Special Forces killing machine built during the War on Terror. But we can know the lawfulness of the strikes and the build-up. So let’s get those right, shall we?

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Oh good, computer chips are set to explode in price again

    If you’ve bought a computer in the past few years, you may have noticed that RAM chips are much more expensive. Unfortunately, this situation looks set to worsen:

    Computer chips got RAMmed

    As we reported, generative AI has failed to live up to its promise. It’s also clearly in the late stages of a speculative bubble which looks primed to burst. Additionally, the world recently discovered that seemingly:

    • AI services cost a lot more to run than we thought.
    • AI services make a lot less money than we thought.
    • Modern data centres may not be financially viable because they have to replace their chips so often.

    This makes it the strangest time for a company to abandon its profitable and useful business. Unless Micron knows something we don’t, it’s like they’re boarding the Titanic just as everyone else runs for the lifeboats.

    Here’s what Micron are saying:

    The AI-driven growth in the data center has led to a surge in demand for memory and storage.

    Micron has made the difficult decision to exit the Crucial consumer business in order to improve supply and support for our larger, strategic customers in faster-growing segments.

    And here’s what commentators are saying:

    It’s going to affect the console market too, by the way:

    Inflation

    The last thing the world needs right now is for another product class to massively inflate in price, and yet here we are.

    Let’s hope the AI bubble bursts before Micron are able to go through with this.

    Featured image via pexels

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Company ‘Kalshi’ admits plot to capitalise from division

    If you’ve not heard of ‘Kalshi’ before, it’s what’s known as a ‘prediction market’.

    If you’ve not heard of prediction markets, hold on to that feeling, because you won’t enjoy your enlightenment:

    The cost of living

    Yahoo Finance describe betting markets as follows:

    Prediction markets are exchanges where people can bet on event outcomes. The bets are usually made by purchasing binary contracts that pay out if the event unfolds the way you expect. In this context, binary means there are only two outcomes — often yes or no — and your contract bets on one of them.

    So basically they’re like sports betting except you can bet on pretty much anything. They’re also more annoying than sports betting, because they use nerd words like ‘binary’ and have the whiff of crypto about them.

    Prediction markets aren’t exactly like betting, of course, as CCN explain:

    Prediction markets might sound confusing, but their core concept is actually quite simple: you trade “tiny” stocks in real-life events. Oftentimes, each stock pays $1 if something happens and $0 if it doesn’t. The price between those numbers tells you the crowd’s odds.

    For example, a prediction market might ask: “Will Bitcoin be above $100,000 on December 31?”

    If the “Yes” share trades at $0.70, the market indicates there’s about a 70% chance it will happen. The price fluctuates as new information becomes available, such as the announcement of a new Bitcoin ETF.

    . …

    In other words, think of them like a stock market for questions, rather than companies.

    Much like cryptocurrency, this stuff seems more complicated than it is because you can’t figure out what possible benefit it presents to society.

    Eventually, you accept the purpose is simply to give the rich a new means to extract wealth from us.

    Kalshi—’Financialise everything’

    In the video at the top, they ask co-founder Tarek Mansour how he plans to follow through on his plan to make prediction markets bigger than the stock market. The interesting part of his response was this:

    The long-term vision is to financialize everything and create a tradable asset out of any difference in opinion.

    He also says:

    we are living in a world where like, we have an abundance of information, but there’s a lot of noise. And like, we don’t really understand what’s real from what’s not. And prediction markets are an antidote to that.

    They do a very, very good job at distilling information and surfacing truth to people. And you’re seeing this sort of massive shift where people are using them whenever they think about questions about the future, whenever they’re debating about anything.

    And I think that trajectory is going to keep going.

    That’s a new consumer habit that I don’t think is going to be undone.

    Are you confused about what’s going on in the world?

    Well don’t worry, because you can financialise your confusion, and that will clear things up somehow.

    Jesus christ.

    It’s no wonder people are responding like this:

    Oh, and major news outlets are planning to embed this into their operations by the way:

     

    Dystopia

    Prediction markets aren’t just predicting world events; they’re also shaping them.

    When you attach a financial incentive to something happening, you give people a reason to make it so. This is why losers kept turning up at women’s basketball games and hurling dildos at the court, injuring at least two children in the process (you can learn more about that in the following video):

    We don’t know how long it will take before UK politicians start pushing this shit on us, but we do know Reform took a £9m donation from a crypto guy, so it can’t be too long before the Kalshi come sniffing around them.

    In other words, don’t bet on the UK escaping this fresh hell.

    Featured image via EU Civil Protection / Citadel Securities

     

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • “Holidays are coming” in association with Coca-Cola but so is the truth

    “Holidays are coming”, in association with Coca-Cola. But this year an awkward truth is chasing them all the way.

    Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) is currently tailing the annual Coca Cola Christmas truck tour across the UK, in a bid to persuade shoppers to boycott Coca-Cola this festive season.

    An ad-van branded as part of PSC’s Don’t Buy Apartheid campaign is joining local PSC activists who are staging protests at truck-stop locations.

    Coca-Cola and land theft

    PSC says its own van’s presence aims to counter the soft-drink giant’s high-profile seasonal advertising. And it’s exposing the truth about Coke’s role in helping Israel sustain its theft and military occupation of Palestinian land.

    Coca-Cola’s exclusive franchisee in Israel, the Central Bottling Company, operates a regional distribution centre and cooling houses in the Atarot Settlement Industrial Zone. This is an illegal Israeli settlement in occupied Jerusalem.

    In July 2024 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion which found that Israel’s decades-long military occupation of the Palestinian territory was unlawful. Also that its “near-complete separation” of people in the occupied West Bank breached international laws concerning racial segregation and apartheid.

    Corporations that are enabling these violations of international law must be held accountable.

    PSC argues that through its operations in the Atatrot Settlement Industrial Zone, Coca-Cola is providing the economic underpinning for Israel’s control of Palestinian land, and fuelling Israel’s escalating violence across the West Bank.

    Seeing past the branding

    Ben Jamal, PSC Director said:

    The Coca-Cola truck purports to symbolise Christmas cheer but behind the festive lights and expensive advertising lies the company’s very real involvement in Israel’s land theft and military occupation.

    By operating facilities in an illegal Israeli settlement in occupied Jerusalem, Coke is giving the green light to Israel’s ongoing military assaults and ethnic cleansing across the West Bank.

    This Christmas, we’re urging the public to look beyond holiday branding and consider the real-world impact of what they buy.

    By boycotting Coca-Cola, we can hit the corporation’s profits and ensure it faces real consequences for enabling Israel’s crimes.

    Choosing apartheid-free options is a simple but powerful act of solidarity with Palestinians.

    PSC’s action and call for a boycott follows criticism already facing Coca-Cola’s 2025 Christmas campaign. This includes recent media coverage of the public backlash against the brand’s AI-generated holiday advert.

    PSC states it hopes to ensure this year’s conversation also includes scrutiny of the human rights impacts of Coca-Cola’s business operations.

    PSC’s Don’t Buy Apartheid Campaign highlights corporate complicity

    PSC is calling on shops, cafés and venues across Britain to stop stocking two product categories:

    Firstly, Israeli agricultural produce, including avocados, peppers, herbs and dates. These commonly come from Israeli settlements that are illegal under international law.

    All of Israel’s settlements have been judged to be unlawful by the world court – the International Court of Justice. They sit on land forcibly taken from Palestinians and rely on resources unlawfully extracted from occupied territory.

    Secondly, Coca-Cola products. Coca-Cola’s exclusive franchisee in Israel operates facilities in an Israeli settlement in occupied Jerusalem.

    This corporate presence contributes to entrenching settlement infrastructure and therefore forms part of Israel’s system of military occupation and apartheid.

    PSC’s call comes amid Israel’s ongoing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, and escalating military assaults, land grabs and settler violence across the occupied West Bank.

    In 2025 alone, Israeli forces have killed over 220 Palestinians in the West Bank. Meanwhile 1,500 Palestinian homes and structures have been demolished to make way for Israel’s expanding illegal settlements.

    The organisation is urging retailers to instead stock what it calls “apartheid-free alternatives”. These include locally sourced or ethically certified soft drinks such as Gaza Cola.

    PSC argues that such boycotts offer people in the UK a meaningful way to support human rights and push global brands like Coca-Cola to act in line with international law.

    Featured image via Palestine Solidarity Campaign

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Palestinian film-maker tells us about “the power of silent protest”

    Palestinian journalist and film-maker Juman Quneis will be speaking at the Leeds Palestinian Film Festival tonight. And ahead of the event, she told us why she’s come all the way from the occupied West Bank to speak about her film The Loud Silence.

    Juman Quneis: “they chose a different way”

    Juman Quneis was studying in Leeds in 2023 when Israel’s genocide in Gaza escalated, and she chose to make a film about the local Women in Black group – “a loose international network of women calling for peace”. The 29-minute documentary, the festival explains, looks at:

    both the power of silent protest, and the many factors influencing the women involved. They talk very movingly of their varied religious beliefs, the impact of other struggles for justice, and deep personal grief and loss.

    As Quneis told the Canary, the film looks at how Leeds Women in Black gather:

    in the city centre in Leeds every Tuesday, wearing black and standing in silence, holding black cards and signs, reading ‘stop genocide against Gaza’, ‘stop killing children’, ‘stop killing women’.

    Quneis explained the women’s motivation, saying:

    They chose to express their hope and their willing to stop genocide, to stop killing children and women. They chose a different way to say that, to express the grief, the sadness, the sorrow towards victims of war.

    She added:

    They felt like it’s human to take a stance towards what’s going on. And they are trying to do something. They describe it as a small thing, as a few things, towards what’s going on in Palestine. But I feel like it’s a big thing, and it’s an important thing. So I would like that people who watch this film, they believe, as women in black believe, they could do any small thing, but it matters. It has an impact.

    When the women hand leaflets out to the public, Juman Quneis pointed out:

    it educates people about Palestine with very trusted information, taken from international organisations that verify that these figures are right and true.

    ‘Under occupation, nothing is normal’

    Jumam Quneis also highlighted the ongoing horrific situation people are living through in occupied Gaza:

    The situation in Gaza is, I can’t describe it, because people don’t live normally. They don’t have houses, they don’t have streets, they don’t have infrastructure, they don’t have schools, they don’t have hospitals… They live with the minimum of basic needs in their life. Still, now, lots of people are looking for… clean water to drink, and spaces to live in.

    And she added that, while Israel’s occupation of the West Bank is different, it’s also a massive challenge:

    In the West Bank, which is the second part of Palestine, where I live, where I came from, in Ramallah, for example, we have a different challenge. We have the challenge of settlers who are occupying our land, who are depriving us from movement between our cities, from collecting olives, from reaching out to our universities and schools, and also who take over the resources of water and who take the land also.

    So it’s a different challenge, but still, we are, as I told you, under occupation. Nothing is good, nothing is nice, nothing is normal.

    Despite the ongoing suffering of Palestinians under Israeli occupation, however, Juman Quneis’s film is a reminder that any action people around the world can take in solidarity with the Palestinian people matters.

    By Ed Sykes

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Campaigners disrupt Oil Executive awards dinner in London

    To highlight damage caused by the oil and gas industry, campaigners from Fossil Free London interrupted the World Energy Council Assembly’s dinner at the Hilton in Mayfair on 3 December.

    Oil and gas executives had gathered to present and receive industry “achievement awards”. Award nominees and attendees included Shell, BP, and Ithaca Energy.

    Campaigners chanted “no awards for climate criminals”, as they were dragged out of the building by security.

    The protest comes after devastating flooding has killed at least 1,250 people across much of southeast Asia in recent days. Human-caused climate breakdown has increased the intensity of such extreme weather events.

    Oil damages

    A report recently found that oil and gas giants are responsible for €25 trillion in climate damages. Now, survivors of Super Typhoon Odette in the Philippines are suing Shell for damages, in a legal first for holding big oil accountable for its role in climate destruction.

    Robin Wells, Director of Fossil Free London said:

    Whilst executives drink champagne in tuxedos, the world floods outside. They pat themselves on the back for the ‘deal of the year’, whilst their projects sign death warrants for communities in the Global South and future generations everywhere.

    How can it be that business as usual awards the fossil fuel corporations that depend on the systematic destruction of our life support systems? The science is clear: every new oil field is an act of violence. We crashed their party to remind them that history will not give them an award; it will put them on trial.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Campaigners disrupt Oil Executive awards dinner in London

    To highlight damage caused by the oil and gas industry, campaigners from Fossil Free London interrupted the World Energy Council Assembly’s dinner at the Hilton in Mayfair on 3 December.

    Oil and gas executives had gathered to present and receive industry “achievement awards”. Award nominees and attendees included Shell, BP, and Ithaca Energy.

    Campaigners chanted “no awards for climate criminals”, as they were dragged out of the building by security.

    The protest comes after devastating flooding has killed at least 1,250 people across much of southeast Asia in recent days. Human-caused climate breakdown has increased the intensity of such extreme weather events.

    Oil damages

    A report recently found that oil and gas giants are responsible for €25 trillion in climate damages. Now, survivors of Super Typhoon Odette in the Philippines are suing Shell for damages, in a legal first for holding big oil accountable for its role in climate destruction.

    Robin Wells, Director of Fossil Free London said:

    Whilst executives drink champagne in tuxedos, the world floods outside. They pat themselves on the back for the ‘deal of the year’, whilst their projects sign death warrants for communities in the Global South and future generations everywhere.

    How can it be that business as usual awards the fossil fuel corporations that depend on the systematic destruction of our life support systems? The science is clear: every new oil field is an act of violence. We crashed their party to remind them that history will not give them an award; it will put them on trial.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Administrative detention: Israel hunts al-Balboul brothers again

    Mohammed and Mahmoud al-Balboul were again arrested, earlier this month, by Israeli occupation forces (IOF). Over the years, they have been repeatedly detained by the IOF. Although Mahmoud has now been released, his brother Mohammed remains in prison under administrative detention.

    Administrative detention—repeated arrests for the al-Balboul brothers

    On June 9, 2016, Israeli occupation soldiers raided the al-Balboul family home in Bethlehem late at night. They blew down the door and stormed into the house with dogs. They arrested Mohammed and Mahmoud, and detained them under administrative detention. This means the brothers were held without charge or trial, for renewable six-month periods, while the evidence against them was kept secret, even from their lawyers. Mohammed had previously endured 14 months of detention when he was 17. Two of these months were in solitary confinement. This time he received a six-month order, while Mahmoud was given five months.

    By July 4, 2016, the brothers launched an open hunger strike in Ofer and Ramon prisons. They consumed only water and refusing vitamins or salt. This came in solidarity with hungerstriker Bilal Kayed. Kayed had served 14 and a half years, and on the day he was supposed to be released he was sentenced to six months of administrative detention. He then went on hunger strike.

    Prison raids followed, with guards punishing strikers, but the al-Balbouls persisted despite deteriorating health. Mohammed suffered temporary blindness and massive weight loss, Mahmoud was nearly paralysed. The prison authorities denied their mother permission to visit, making their suffering even worse.

    Hunger strike

    The brothers were on hunger strike for more than two months, to protest their administrative detention. Both were eventually hospitalized amid coma risks. Israeli courts gave permission for hospital staff and Israeli occupying authorities to force-feed them, which is considered a form of torture, but the brothers rejected it. The Palestinian Prisoners Society warned of imminent death, highlighting administrative detention’s toll on thousands.​ The brothers’ actions drew solidarity strikes from more than 100 Palestinian prisoners detained in Israeli jails.

    On September 21, 2016 the brothers ended their strike after reaching an agreement that secured their release.

    A Palestinian family tormented by the Israeli occupation

    In 2008, undercover occupation forces, disguised as Palestinian civilians, assassinated their father, Ahmad al-Balboul. They ambushed a car carrying al-Balboul and three other Palestinians. The Israeli occupation forces opened fire without warning, killing all four men instantly. They had accused Ahmad of leading the Fateh-affiliated Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Bethlehem.

    The brothers’ 15-year-old sister Nuran served three months in Israeli occupation prisons, from April 2016, after she was stopped by the IOF at a checkpoint and accused of carrying a knife. Nuran claimed she had no knife, but was arrested after arguing with a female soldier whilst trying to visit Jerusalem with her Aunt.

    The al-Balboul brothers are just two of the many thousands of Palestinians that the occupation locks up in its prisons. No one is spared from this carceral regime, where youths, the elderly, sick and pregnant are imprisoned regardless. More than 450 children, and 53 women are currently detained. Almost 3580 detainees are administrative detainees, held indefinitely without trial. Thousands more have been abducted in Gaza. Neglect, malnutrition and torture of prisoners by Israeli prison authorities are systematic, as confirmed in a new report by Physicians for Human Rights. ‘Israel’ has killed at least 94 Palestinian detainees since October 7, 2023.

    Featured image supplied by author

    By Charlie Jaay

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Administrative detention: Israel hunts al-Balboul brothers again

    Mohammed and Mahmoud al-Balboul were again arrested, earlier this month, by Israeli occupation forces (IOF). Over the years, they have been repeatedly detained by the IOF. Although Mahmoud has now been released, his brother Mohammed remains in prison under administrative detention.

    Administrative detention—repeated arrests for the al-Balboul brothers

    On June 9, 2016, Israeli occupation soldiers raided the al-Balboul family home in Bethlehem late at night. They blew down the door and stormed into the house with dogs. They arrested Mohammed and Mahmoud, and detained them under administrative detention. This means the brothers were held without charge or trial, for renewable six-month periods, while the evidence against them was kept secret, even from their lawyers. Mohammed had previously endured 14 months of detention when he was 17. Two of these months were in solitary confinement. This time he received a six-month order, while Mahmoud was given five months.

    By July 4, 2016, the brothers launched an open hunger strike in Ofer and Ramon prisons. They consumed only water and refusing vitamins or salt. This came in solidarity with hungerstriker Bilal Kayed. Kayed had served 14 and a half years, and on the day he was supposed to be released he was sentenced to six months of administrative detention. He then went on hunger strike.

    Prison raids followed, with guards punishing strikers, but the al-Balbouls persisted despite deteriorating health. Mohammed suffered temporary blindness and massive weight loss, Mahmoud was nearly paralysed. The prison authorities denied their mother permission to visit, making their suffering even worse.

    Hunger strike

    The brothers were on hunger strike for more than two months, to protest their administrative detention. Both were eventually hospitalized amid coma risks. Israeli courts gave permission for hospital staff and Israeli occupying authorities to force-feed them, which is considered a form of torture, but the brothers rejected it. The Palestinian Prisoners Society warned of imminent death, highlighting administrative detention’s toll on thousands.​ The brothers’ actions drew solidarity strikes from more than 100 Palestinian prisoners detained in Israeli jails.

    On September 21, 2016 the brothers ended their strike after reaching an agreement that secured their release.

    A Palestinian family tormented by the Israeli occupation

    In 2008, undercover occupation forces, disguised as Palestinian civilians, assassinated their father, Ahmad al-Balboul. They ambushed a car carrying al-Balboul and three other Palestinians. The Israeli occupation forces opened fire without warning, killing all four men instantly. They had accused Ahmad of leading the Fateh-affiliated Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Bethlehem.

    The brothers’ 15-year-old sister Nuran served three months in Israeli occupation prisons, from April 2016, after she was stopped by the IOF at a checkpoint and accused of carrying a knife. Nuran claimed she had no knife, but was arrested after arguing with a female soldier whilst trying to visit Jerusalem with her Aunt.

    The al-Balboul brothers are just two of the many thousands of Palestinians that the occupation locks up in its prisons. No one is spared from this carceral regime, where youths, the elderly, sick and pregnant are imprisoned regardless. More than 450 children, and 53 women are currently detained. Almost 3580 detainees are administrative detainees, held indefinitely without trial. Thousands more have been abducted in Gaza. Neglect, malnutrition and torture of prisoners by Israeli prison authorities are systematic, as confirmed in a new report by Physicians for Human Rights. ‘Israel’ has killed at least 94 Palestinian detainees since October 7, 2023.

    Featured image supplied by author

    By Charlie Jaay

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Gaza amputees: Six thousand lives shattered by war

    On International Day of Persons with Disabilities, the Ministry of Health in Gaza reveals a painful reality that reflects the scale of the humanitarian disaster left behind by the war, with nearly six thousand cases of amputation recorded over the past two years of aggression, most of them direct injuries caused by continuous bombing. In Gaza, amputees are left to fend for themselves due to the lack of rehab centres and healthcare in general.

    The ministry emphasises that all amputees require complex rehabilitation programmes lasting several years, at a time when Gaza’s dilapidated health system is unable to meet the growing needs, amid the destruction of most specialised centres and equipment.

    In Gaza, amputees are everywhere

    Official figures show that a quarter of amputation cases are children; that is, one in four amputees lost a limb before reaching full adulthood. These young people, who were supposed to live their childhoods in schools and playgrounds, found themselves facing permanent disabilities and physical and psychological challenges beyond their age and capabilities.

    Their suffering does not stop at physical injury, as thousands of wounded people are living under severe psychological and social pressure. Fitting prosthetic limbs requires equipment that is not available, physical therapy requires centres that have either been destroyed or are completely out of service, and psychological support is, according to institutions, virtually non-existent despite the urgent need for it, especially for children who are dealing with the trauma of amputation and the loss of loved ones and homes.

    At the same time, health institutions are documenting thousands of ‘life-changing’ injuries that require long-term care, putting additional pressure on a medical system that is barely able to provide basic services.

    Physical therapy centres are desperately needed

    Health and humanitarian agencies emphasise that the rehabilitation sector in Gaza is in need of a comprehensive rescue plan that includes rebuilding physical therapy centres, providing prosthetic limbs and spare parts, training local staff in the latest rehabilitation techniques, and offering specialised programmes for children that take into account their motor, psychological and educational development.

    According to humanitarian organisations, this is one of the most pressing issues in Gaza today, as it is directly linked to the ability of thousands of wounded people to return to normal life, study, work and reintegrate into a society exhausted by war.

    While amputees face an uncertain future, the provision of rehabilitation and psychosocial support services remains a top priority, no less important than food and medicine, and indeed a fundamental pillar in rebuilding the people of Gaza after one of the most severe ordeals in its history.

    Featured image via UN News

    By Alaa Shamali

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Europe’s largest producer bans fur farming, pressuring UK government over imports

    Poland is Europe’s largest fur producer and the world’s second largest, behind China. But on 2 December, the president signed legislation banning fur farming, with an 8-year phase-out.

    Karol Nawrocki, President of Poland, said:

    Moments ago, I signed the Animal Protection Act, which introduces a ban on fur farming in Poland. This is a decision that Poles have awaited for many years. A decision that reflects our compassion, our civilizational maturity, and our respect for all living creatures.

    The lower house of parliament had previously voted overwhelmingly in favour of the ban, with MPs uniting across party lines in a rare show of cross-party consensus. Around 3 million foxes, raccoon dogs, chinchillas and minks currently live on Polish farms annually.

    Co-drafted by the Polish branch of animal protection charity Open Cages, and MP Małgorzata Tracz, the key provisions include:

    Immediate ban on establishing new fur farms
    8-year transition period for existing operations
    Degressive compensation for breeders over the first 5 years (incentivising early exit)
    12 months’ severance pay and career transition support for farmworkers

    Tiny wire cages

    Connor Jackson is CEO of the UK animal protection charity Open Cages and director of an award-winning documentary on Polish fur farming. He said:

    Fur farming is the epitome of everything wrong with how we treat animals, so I’m absolutely delighted by Poland’s decision to ban it. The idea of keeping millions of foxes and minks in tiny wire cages all their lives until they go mad, all for a bit of fur on a coat that no one needs, beggars belief. But I’ve seen it with my own eyes.

    Open Cages is calling for a ban on the import of fur into the UK. Jackson added:

    We did the right thing by banning fur farming within our own shores in 2000, but as long as we import and sell fur in our stores, we are still supporting this industry.

    Fur typically comes from intensive farms with foxes, minks and raccoon dogs confined to small cages for their entire lives. The carnivorous minks commonly bite the skin off of each other when kept in cages in fur farms. Foxes routinely suffer from severe psychological stress and physical injury. Slaughter methods involve anal electrocution for foxes, and gas chambers for minks.

    The movement against fur has been building momentum for many decades, with the UK leading the way by banning fur farming in the UK in 2000 on ethical grounds.  Since then, 23 other countries have banned the practice.

    In 2012, members of Open Cages in Poland released the first footage from Polish fur farms, documenting shocking conditions across 52 farms owned by large producers.

    A double standard for the UK

    Despite the UK deeming that fur was too cruel to be farmed within its shores, it remains legal to import and sell fur from countries like Poland. A coalition of UK animal advocacy organisations called Fur Free Britain is calling for an import and sales ban. This year, a petition to ban imports was delivered to the Prime Minister with one and a half million signatures.

    Claire Bass, senior director of public affairs at Humane World for Animals UK, said:

    The fur farming ban in Poland demonstrates how the world is turning its back on fur. Banning fur farming here in the UK yet continuing to import fur from overseas is a double standard that millions of British people, and more than 200 cross-party politicians, want to see ended. The fur trade is cruel to animals, dangerous to public health and totally unnecessary. This move by Poland should be a wake-up call for Westminster. The Labour Government promised a huge boost to animal welfare and backing Ruth Jones’ Private Members’ bill is a crucial way to start delivering on that.

    Featured image via Open Cages

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Banks are driving “the biggest fossil fuel buildout of our lifetime”

    The world is facing an unprecedented fossil fuel boom based on Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) development. According to a new mapping project launched on 2 December, 279 new LNG projects are in the planning stage around the world.

    Banks pushing fossil fuel

    Backed by global banks, this is driving gas expansion and will add billions of tons of greenhouse gas emissions, destroying any hope of achieving global climate goals.

    It also threatens the health and wellbeing of local communities and impacts biodiversity. The organisations behind the new ExitLNG website are urging the banks involved to withdraw their support.

    A new online map identifies plans to build 279 new LNG projects, showing the extent of countries impacted by LNG expansion. The site also highlights the companies involved, the banks that finance them, and the risks for communities and biodiversity.

    US and China leading the charge

    It shows that the United States is dominating the boom in LNG exports, accounting for 40% of the increase in planned export capacities (38 projects), driven in part by US President Donald Trump’s fossil fuel agenda, followed by Russia (20%, 18 projects) and Qatar (8%, 3 projects).

    The highest number of planned import facilities are in the Asia Pacific region, with the most terminals in China (34% of the increase in planned import capacities, 49 projects), followed by India (8%, 11 projects) and Vietnam (7%, 14 projects).

    Final investment decisions for new export terminals have surged in 2025, adding to the expected wave in gas supply, according to the International Energy Agency. This is driving the development of new gas fields and threatening international targets to limit average global temperature rise to 1.5C.

    Overall, the new export facilities are estimated to generate more than 10bn tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions by 2030, comparable to the annual emissions of the United States and the European Union combined.

    Steering us towards disaster

    Justine Duclos-Gonda, Oil & Gas Campaigner at Reclaim Finance, says:

    The worldwide rush to build is steering us towards disaster – for the climate and for local communities, and we will all pay the price. It is no wonder that people are increasingly raising their voices against these projects, which threaten their health and livelihoods. But despite these concerns, banks keep pouring billions into LNG expansion, regardless of the social and climate costs.

    QatarEnergy and the US-based company Venture Global are the biggest export terminal developers, with their planned LNG export terminal projects that will result in emission of over 1.2bn tonnes of CO2e by 2030.

    The French major TotalEnergies ranks fifth, with projects estimated to result in over 300m tonnes of CO2e by 2030.

    We don’t need fossil fuel expansion

    Ruth Breech, LNG Campaign Manager at Rainforest Action Network, says:

    Communities are suffering from climate impacts and economic devastation. Liquefied gas is making things worse. The world does not need any fossil fuel expansion: not a single new frack field, pipeline, LNG tanker or terminal. Yet, the US government, fossil fuel companies, banks and insurance companies are pushing gas around the globe, creating the biggest fossil fuel buildout of our lifetime.

    Despite these impacts, global banks have continued to back LNG developers, funneling US$174bn into LNG expansion between 2021 and 2024.

    Three quarters of this support comes from just five countries: the United States, Japan, China, Canada and France, with three banks (Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Mizuho Financial Group and JPMorgan Chase) each contributing over US$10bn.

    European banks including Santander, ING, Société Générale, Crédit Agricole, and Groupe BPCE are also identified as among the top financiers of LNG expansion.

    The organisations are urging banks to recognise the impacts of LNG and adopt comprehensive policies to end all financial services for new LNG projects and the companies developing new LNG facilities.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Sabrina Carpenter calls White House video ‘evil and disgusting’

    Pop star Sabrina Carpenter has hit out at the White House using her music in a video promoting ICE — i.e. the American Gestapo:


    Squandered

    There was a moment after Donald Trump’s second election when the cowardly American media outlets kowtowed to Trump. Seemingly, they thought that Trump hadn’t just won the White House; he’d also won the culture:

    Now, after less than a year back in power, Trump has completely squandered the ill-deserved respect he had. As such, celebrities like Carpenter clearly see no down side to speaking out against him. And fair play to Sabrina, she didn’t hold back.


    To give you an idea of how bad things are for Trump:

    The video Carpenter took offence to was promoting the US Immigration and Customer Enforcement agency (ICE). When people describe ICE as a ‘Gestapo’, it’s because they run around in masks abducting people off the street and causing trouble:


    Oh, and the Tories’ Kemi Badenoch plans to emulate this in the UK because, of course, she does:

    Blonde VS blonde

    Given that Trump is a petty, vindictive narcissist who spends too much time on social media, he’ll no doubt respond to Sabrina at some point. As with everything he, it’ll only makes his polling worse…still…we can’t imagine that exchange going well for him.

    After all, this is the guy who’s currently trying to convince people who are feeling the pinch that the concept of ‘affordability’ is a “Democrat scam”:

    Featured image via Sabrina Carpenter

    By Willem Moore

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Palestinian para-cycling team launches merch collab with LA clothing company

    A Palestinian para-cycling team and a Los Angeles social justice apparel brand are joining forces. For Your Viewing Pleasure (FYVP), led by a Palestinian-Native American designer, has released a four piece collection with the Gaza Sunbirds.

    100% of the profits will go towards the Gaza Sunbirds’ aid and community projects in the strip as well as their international sporting missions.

    The cycling team’s story

    This collaboration tells the story of 20 athletes who refused to give up despite amputation, bombardment and famine.

    After six years of training under Israeli occupation, the Gaza Sunbirds aim to make history by sending Palestine’s first ever para-cyclists to the Paralympics and FYVP will bring them closer to this dream.

    A powerful part of the journey to the LA 2028 Games, working with the brand will build awareness of the cycling team’s mission in the US market.

    FYVP holds a prominent position in the LA community and the significance of this project is in its reflection of grassroots efforts between two Palestinian-led groups to support the future of Gaza on the ground and on the international sporting stage.

    The launch coincides with this year’s Giving Tuesday and its refocus on doing good following the frenzied spending of Black Friday and Cyber Monday, in order to encourage conscious consumerism.

    FYVP designs pieces that spark conversations around Palestinian liberation, refugee solidarity, and LGBTQIA+ equality.

    As a queer, female-owned brand committed to collective liberation, these values align deeply with the Gaza Sunbirds cycling team.

    It is this intersection between solidarity, advocacy, and fundraising that brings them together. And it portrays an extension to FYVP’s mission that “what you wear is a platform for your beliefs”.

    The collection

    Featuring both a short and long sleeved t-shirt ($52 & $65), sweatshirt ($75) and two tote bags ($42), the collection holds the story of the Gaza Sunbirds team at its heart.

    The designs embody the concept of resilience, the symbolism of the Palestinian flag, and the importance of amplifying the cause of mobility justice.

    In tandem with this concept, the Gaza Sunbirds and FYVP hope to bring forward conversations about intersectionality and connect the struggles of oppressed groups in order to amplify their respective missions.

    This shows in FYVP’s conviction in every step of the production process, where they work exclusively with immigrant-owned and run businesses in LA.

    FYVP co-founder Lara Salmon said:

    People of conscience around the world are now seeing the direct correlation between systems of oppression. I think social media and independent journalism has pulled back the veil on military and police brutality, from Palestine to the illegal ICE kidnappings unfolding across the U.S.

    For the Gaza Sunbirds and FYVP, there are three pillars to the sporting mission tied to this collaboration: representation, resistance and recognition.

    The impact of Israel’s occupation goes beyond permit refusals: the Israeli army has killed more than a thousand athletes during two years of attacks on Gaza.

    Representation

    Representation carries great significance, especially in the context of continued Israeli sportswashing such as the recent participation of the Israel Premier Tech cycling team at races across Europe this Summer.

    For Palestinians, the sporting arena is one of the only global settings where their country is widely and officially acknowledged.

    It is also a place where they can show their strength and resilience, inspiring the thousands of children in Gaza who have lost limbs and hope due to Israeli aggressions.

    Gaza Sunbirds cycling team co-founder Karim Ali said:

    The Gaza Sunbirds are showing the world that disability, bombardment, and a lack of resources will not hold them back and that they will continue to advocate for their community.

    From world class cycling competitions to garments worn proudly by a supportive international community, their flag will fly proudly and always carry hope.

    Featured image supplied

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • On final day of Palestine Action judicial review, an international solidarity statement on UK state repression

    It’s the final day of the Palestine Action judicial review. To mark it, 18 international organisations have signed the following solidarity statement on UK state repression.

    International solidarity statement on UK state repression – taking action to prevent a genocide is not terrorism

    On 5 July 2025, the UK government enforced the unprecedented decision to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.

    This is a dark time for democracy and a deeply oppressive moment for those of us who take action against the arms trade and against complicity in genocide and mass and structural violence.
    Prior to proscription, support for Palestine Action was widespread. It crossed movements, classes, ethnicities, and age groups.

    Direct action and civil disobedience that directly target the tools of war have a long-standing history in the transnational peace and anti-war movements. People who would not themselves climb on top of an arms factory roof, or attend marches or other campaigning events, have supported those who did. This support did not disappear overnight when hundreds of thousands woke up as potential ‘terrorist’ supporters on the morning of 5th July.

    Since the proscription, police have arrested 2710 people holding signs in support of Palestine Action, and Palestine solidarity groups that organise peaceful protests have been threatened with arrest or even had access to their funds cut off indefinitely.

    In one case, three people were arrested for holding placards saying ‘Oppose Genocide. Ban Starmer not Palestine Action’. During the application for a Judicial Review challenging the proscription, government lawyer James Eadie stated these arrests were “police overreach” and that the placards are “lawful” under the legislative provision permitting campaigning for de-listing.

    In the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium and elsewhere, Palestine Action supporters and pro-Palestine activists have been increasingly surveilled, restricted and repressed.

    Palestine Action’s proscription also exposes the UK government’s routine instrumentalisation of counter-terrorism laws to persecute marginalised groups and individuals that challenge injustice and violence against civilians in ways that it does not approve—especially in this moment of heightened solidarity with the Palestine liberation movement.

    In this sense, the proscription starkly exposes this pernicious misuse of counter-terrorism laws against those who ideologically challenge the government by seeking to end arms supplies to a genocide.

    The UK government shared in a court hearing that its basis for proscription was that 3 out of almost 400 group actions reached the ‘terrorism’ threshold, and that Palestine Action had sought to influence the government, despite its main target being the arms companies and contractors that supply Israel.

    This draconian and indiscriminate response to the group’s actions is of course unsurprising given the ever-closer union between the UK government and the arms industry and the many ways in which the arms industry influence is tied-up with government in western arms producing countries.

    The far-reaching implications of these developments for our movements – and for the already limited tools at our disposal to challenge potentially illegal arms transfers – cannot be overstated.

    As organisations and groups that campaign, advocate and litigate against the arms trade, we will not stay silent while our governments are continuing to supply arms to Israel (such as parts for F-35 jets via the global programme) – especially when the legal pathways – through which the government claims we should be able to challenge transfers that clearly violate international law – are failing us.

    In many cases, governments have themselves admitted that there is a ‘clear risk’ that Israel will use them to commit serious international law violations, including war crimes and crimes against humanity, and that it is unequivocally clear that Israel is unwilling to comply with international law.

    Our governments are failing us. They manipulate to their benefit the application of arms trade regulatory frameworks at the international, regional and domestic levels. Instead of taking the only moral and law-compliant option available to them—the imposition of a full two-way arms embargo—they continue to supply arms to Israel.

    The UK government’s latest move to criminalise as ‘terrorists’ groups and individuals doing what they feel is necessary to stop an unfolding genocide, is the most repressive and dangerous response so far.

    It paves the way for other governments to do the same and gives governments and courts a green-light to dismiss legal challenges against the arms trade.

    So our message is clear.

    We denounce governments’ complicity in genocide and mass structural violence, and will continue to strongly condemn and repudiate government actions that enable the arms trade to Israel and other such contexts.

    While as organisations or individuals, some of us may not be organising, advocating for or taking part in direct action, we are adamant that such actions, as part of our solidarity with the Palestinian people’s freedom and liberation struggle, do not amount to acts of ‘terrorism’, and we will continue to support the legal challenge against proscription.

    We will resist the UK government’s repressive actions and will continue demanding that all governments and arms companies immediately impose and comply with a two-way embargo on all arms supplies to Israel.

    Signatories:

    Action Sécurité Ethique Républicaines (ASER)

    Alternativa Antimilitarista.MOC/ADNV

    Antimilitaristes-MOC València

    Bretxa Observatori

    Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)

    Campaign Against Arms Trade

    Centre Delàs d’Estudis per la Pau

    European Legal Support Center

    Grupo Antimilitarista de Carabanchel

    Internationale der Kriegsdienstgegner*innen (IDK)

    La Bacora Col·lectiu feminista de Catarroja

    Mujeres de Negro contra la Guerra – Madrid

    PAX (the Netherlands)

    Patxanguilles antifeixistes

    Sare Antifaxista (Antifasist Basque Country)

    Shadow World Investigations

    War Resisters’ International

    War Resisters’ League

    Featured image via the Canary

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • East African Crude Oil Pipeline case thrown out on procedural grounds

    Arusha, Tanzania – The East African Court of Justice (EACJ) Appellate Division has upheld a decision regarding the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). In November 2023, the First Instance Division of the EACJ dismissed a case that four East African civil society organisations filed in November 2020.

    This has disappointed the East African Crude Oil Pipeline-Project Affected Persons, who view the court as having shut the door of justice on them.

    “A heavy blow to justice”

    The Court ruled that the case filed by Natural Justice (Kenya), Africa Institute for Energy Governance Uganda, Center for Food and Adequate Living Uganda, and the Center for Strategic Litigation (Tanzania) fell outside the required filing period.

    The StopEACOP Coalition believes the judges have chosen to treat a profound question of people’s rights, environmental survival, and climate justice as a mere procedural file.

    In doing so, they have delivered a heavy blow to the promise of regional justice and cast a deep shadow over the Court’s own credibility as the body tasked with ensuring adherence to the East African Community Treaty.

    Zaki Mamdoo, StopEACOP Campaign Coordinator, said:

    We strongly condemn the ruling made by the East African Court of Justice, which has told millions of people across the region that technicalities matter more than their lives, their land, and their future. That is not neutrality nor objectivity. It is a choice in favour of oil companies and the governments that serve them.

    The StopEACOP Coalition maintains that the decision to dismiss the case on procedural grounds
    prevents examination of the substantive issues.

    These include land compensation disputes, transboundary impacts, and environmental impacts including impacts on water sources and protected areas.

    It also concerns the project’s overall alignment with the East African Community Treaty on its commitments to sustainable development, the protection of human rights, and the responsible and ethical management of transboundary resources.

    Mamdoo continued:

    In refusing to hear the harms of EACOP on a technical pretext the legitimacy of this Court now hangs by a thread, and history will have to decide whether it was a forum for justice or simply an office providing cover for corporate plunder.

    Negative impacts of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline

    Independent bodies and local and international civil society organisations have documented the negative impacts of the controversial East African Crude Oil Pipeline project.

    Problems include irregular land acquisition processes, potential risks to the Lake Victoria basin that over 40million people depend on, and human rights violations.

    Similar concerns have just been raised by civil society groups in the Democratic Republic of Congo following disastrous pollution recently observed by local communities. This was subsequently corroborated by a scientific report published by Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide, pertaining to cross-border oil developments in the region.

    To that end, civil society groups in DRC under the banner “Our Land Without Oil” have taken their government, the government of Uganda, and the Secretary General of the East African Community to the EACJ over an ecological disaster, disrupting the livelihoods of fisher communities in Lake Albert and Lake Edward as a result of lake asphyxiation and chemical contamination linked to oil activity in the region.

    While the StopEACOP Coalition holds out hope for this legal effort, the dismissal of yesterday’s case sends a chilling message to all those seeking regional remedies for regional harms: that even the highest court in the Community may refuse to hear evidence when powerful interests are at stake represents a gravely concerning injustice.

    Recheal Tugume, an East African Crude Oil Pipeline-impacted community member from Hoima, said:

    We must insist that the Court, and all regional institutions, do better. We will continue to demand that they live up to their mandates. But this ruling also shows us that we cannot afford the illusion that these institutions will save us.

    Our survival depends on continuing the struggle on every front and with every tool available to us, organising in our communities, confronting financiers and insurers, challenging governments, and building a renewable energy future for our communities.

    The StopEACOP Coalition is an alliance of local groups, communities, and African and global
    organisations.

    It has been calling for a stop to the proposed pipeline and associated oil fields at Tilenga and Kingfisher.

    The campaign is gathering momentum, building pressure on the remaining supporters and financiers of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline.

    To date, 43 banks and 30 (re) insurers have already ruled out support for EACOP.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A ‘forgotten hero’ against Imperial Japan, but the legacy of ‘Bintao’ Vinzons is being revived

    COMMENTARY: By David Robie

    Vinzons is a quiet coastal town in the eastern Philippines province of Camarines Norte in Bicol. With a spread out population of about 45,000. it is known for its rice production, crabs and surfing beaches in the Calaguas Islands.

    But the town is really famous for one of its sons — Wenceslao “Bintao” Vinzons, the youngest lawmaker in the Philippines before the Japanese invasion during the Second World War who then took up armed resistance.

    He was captured and executed along with his family in 1942.

    One of the most interesting assets of the municipality of Vinzons — named after the hero in 1946, the town previously being known as Indan — is his traditional family home, which has recently been refurbished as a local museum to tell his story of courage and inspiration.

    “He is something of a forgotten hero, student leader, resistance fighter, former journalist — a true hero,” says acting curator Roniel Espina.

    As well as a war hero, Vinzons is revered for his progressive politics and was known as the “father of student activism” in the Philippines. His political career began at the University of Philippines in the capital Manila where he co-founded the Young Philippines Party.

    The Vinzons Hall at UP-Diliman was named after him to honour his student leadership exploits.

    Student newspaper editor
    He was the editor-in-chief of the Philippine Collegian, the student newspaper founded in 1922.

    At 24, Vinzons became the youngest delegate to the 1935 Constitutional Convention and six years later at the age of 30 he was elected Governor of Camarine Norte in 1941 — the same year that Japan invaded.

    In fact, the invasion of the Philippines began on 8 December 1941 just 10 hours after the bombing of Pearl Harbour in Hawai’i.

    The invading forces tried to pressure Governor Vinzons in his provincial capital of Daet to collaborate. He absolutely refused. Instead, he took to the countryside and led one of the first Filipino guerilla resistance forces to rise up against the Japanese.

    His initial resistance was successful with the guerrilla forces carrying out sudden raids before liberating Daet. He was eventually captured and executed by the Japanese.

    The bust of "Bintao" outside the Vinzons Town Hall.
    The bust of “Bintao” outside the Vinzons Town Hall. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    The exact circumstances are still uncertain as his body was never recovered, but the museum does an incredible job in piecing together his life along with his family and their tragic sacrifice for the country.

    One plaque shows an image of Vinzons along with his father Gabino, wife Liwayway, sister Milagros, daughter Aurora and son Alexander (no photo of him was actually recovered).

    A family of Second World War martyrs
    A family of Second World War martyrs . . . their bodies were never recovered. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    According to the legend on the plaque:

    “Wenceslao Vinzons with his father disappeared mysteriously – and were never see again. The Japanese sent out posters in Camarines Norte expressing regret that on the way to Siain, Quezon, Vinzons was shot while attempting to escape. ‘So sorry please.’

    “The remains of the body of Vinzons, his father, wife, two chidren and sister have never been found.”

     

    The Japanese Empire as portrayed in the Vinzons Museum. Video: APR

    Imperial Japan showcase
    One room of the museum is dedicated as a showcase to Imperial Japan and its brutal invasion across a great swathe of Southeast Asia and the brave Filipino resistance in response.

    A special feature of the museum is how well it portrays typical Filipino lifestyle and social mores in a home of the political class in the 1930s.

    The author, Dr David Robie (red t-shirt) with acting curator Roniel Espina
    The tourist author, Dr David Robie (red t-shirt) with acting curator Roniel Espina (left), Tourism Officer Florence G Mago (second from right) and two museum guides. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    When I visited the museum and talked to staff and watched documentaries about “Bintao” Vinzons’ life, one question in particular intrigued me: “Why was he thought of as a ‘forgotten hero’?”

    According to acting curator Espina, “It’s partly because Camarines Norte is not as popular and well known as some other provinces. So some of the notable achievements of Vinzons do not have a high profile around in other parts of the country.”

    Based at the museum is the town’s principal Tourism Officer Florence G Mago. She is optimistic about how the Vinzons Museum can attract more visitors to the town.

    “We have put a lot of effort into developing this museum and we are proud of it. It is a jewel in the town.”

    The Vinzons family home
    The Vinzons family home . . . now refurbished as the town museum under the National Historical Institute umbrella. Image: Asia Pacific Report

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.