Monday, October 30, 2023
Speaking of Which
Note: It got too late Sunday night before I completed my rounds,
much less checked spelling and formatting and did the other bits of
housekeeping I need to do before posting, so let this sit overnight.
I changed the date to Monday, but didn't make another round. I did
add the bits from Twitter, and one more link on the UAW strike,
since that not only really matters but wraps up the trifecta.
Music Week will be delayed until Tuesday. The extra day has so
far been good for two more A- records (surprises at that).
By the way, if anyone wants to try reformulating the introduction
plan into an op-ed or a more serious proposal, please go ahead and
do so (no citation required, but if you want to talk about it, feel
free to reach out). I have no standing in mainstream media (or for
that matter in solidly left-wing and/or antiwar media), and I have
no appetite for throwing myself at their feet.
And yes, I understand why the plan as sketched out will be hard
for lots of well-meaning folks to swallow. I'm sorry that in politics
people hardly ever pay for their crimes. I was 18 when Richard Nixon
was elected president, and no one in my lifetime ever deserved to pay
more. (Well, maybe Winston Churchill, but he died when I was 14, or
Joseph Stalin, who died when I was 2.) But that almost never happens,
and even when some measure of justice is meted out, it's never enough.
Nixon was granted a pardon, and retired not even to obscurity, but at
least out of harm's way.
The proposed scheme simply splits off one part of the conflict
and arranges it so the sides stop hurting each other. It's urgent
to do so because it's turned into a self-destruction pact, as sore
to Israel as it is fatal to Gaza. It leaves the rest of the conflict
in place, in hopes that Israel will, in good time, recognize that
they cannot forever deny Palestinians their dignity. I'm not very
optimistic that they will come to their senses, but the odds are
better than now, in the fevered heat of war.
The key points here are these: you cannot force Israel to do
anything they're unwilling to do; you have to give Israel an option
that they can choose that doesn't require that they change their
fundamental political beliefs; you cannot appeal to the conscience
of Israel's leaders, because they don't have a functioning one;
you don't have to solve any problem but the immediate one in Gaza;
you don't have to deal with Palestine's leaders, because none of
them are legitimate; you do have to provide a path where the people
of Gaza can live normal lives, in peace and dignity, where they
have no practical need to lash out at Israel or anyone else. It is
in the interest of the whole world to end this conflict, so it is
worthwhile to put some effort into making it work. But for now the
only piece you have to solve is Gaza, because that's the one that's
spun out of control.
From early grade school, my favorite subject was "social studies,"
with geography and history key dimensions. But I also had aptitude
for science, at least until an especially boorish teacher turned me
off completely. I dropped out of high school, but not finding myself
with any other competency, I tested my way into college, where my
main studies were in sociology and philosophy. I turned my back on
academic studies, but never stopped adding to my store of knowledge --
if anything, I redoubled my efforts after 2000.
When microcomputers started appearing around 1979, I bought one,
and taught myself to program. Then I discovered that my real skill
was engineering -- the practical application of my mindset.
Politics turned out to be mostly rhetoric: people were measure
by how good they sounded, not by anything they actually did. Sure,
social scientists measured things, but mostly their own prejudiced
assumptions. But engineers didn't waste their time railing about
the injustices of gravity and entropy. Engineers fixed things. And
better than that, engineers designed and built things to not break --
or, at least, to serve a useful life before they wore out.
So, when I encounter a political problem, I tend to think about
it as an engineer would (or should), in terms of function and the
forces working against it. I can't be value-neutral in this, nor can
anyone, though I'm better at most at recognizing my own prejudices,
and at suspending judgment on those of others. A big part of my kit
is what Robert Wright calls "cognitive empathy": the ability to
imagine someone else's view. This is a skill that is sorely needed,
and way too often lacking, in diplomats. (You're most likely to
find it in sales, where one is measured on deals made, rather than
on political rhetoric that precludes agreement.)
So when I encounter a political problem, my instinct is to come
up with a solution: an approach that will reduce the conflict in a
way that will lead to prolonged stability. It's always tempting to
come up with a universal solution based on first principles, but
history offers few examples of conflicted sides finding such common
ground. That means for most acute conflicts we have to come up with
short-range, partial fixes.
Over the last twenty years, I've come up with a lot of partial
and a few comprehensive solutions to the Israel/Palestine conflict.
They've never been taken seriously, by either side, or even by
potentially influential third parties. The basic reason is that
politically powerful Israelis are unwilling to grant concessions
to Palestinians, even a small territory they have no settlement
interest in (Gaza), basic human rights, and/or any real measure
of economic freedom. There are various reasons and/or excuses for
this, but the most important one is that no outside nation nor
any possible internal force (nonviolent or not) has anything
close to enough power to persuade Israel to change course. So
the first rule is you have to give Israel something they would
prefer to the course they have charted, which is to lay waste
to Gaza, making it uninhabitable to the people who manage to
survive their assault.
The first lesson Israeli leaders should draw from their war
is that while it's easy to kill enough Palestinians to make you
look monstrous, it's really hard to kill enough to make any real
demographic difference. As long as Palestinians survive and hang
onto what's left of their land, they remain to challenge and defy
Israeli colonialism, sacrificing their bodies and appealing to
international conscience. And while people of good will, many
sympathetic to the Palestinian plight, were quick to condemn the
violent outbreak, its main effect was to shock Israel into showing
their true colors: that domination is based on overwhelming power,
and the willingness to use it savagely when provoked.
Hence, Israel's response to the uprising -- the deadliest single
day in Israel's history -- was first to threaten the total demolition
of Gaza and the deaths of everyone who lived there (offering a mass
exodus through Egypt as the only path to safety), then a systematic
military campaign, starting with massive bombardment and leading to
a ground invasion. With over two million people in Gaza, that could
amount to the largest genocide since WWII. Israel's one-sided war
on Gaza has slogged on for three weeks, with some of the heaviest
bombing in recent history, destroying infrastructure, driving more
than a million people from their homes, and theatening starvation.
The longer this continues, the more world opinion will shift against
Israel's brutality, until what little good will remains dissipates
At some point, Israeli leaders are bound to realize three things:
that continuing the killing hurts them more than it helps; that large
numbers of Palestinians will stay in Gaza no matter what; and that as
long as there are Palestinians in Gaza, the land is of no practical
use to Israel. The only viable solution to this is for Israel to cut
Gaza loose. The simplest way to do this is to return the mandate to
the UN. This doesn't require any negotiations with Palestinians, so
it doesn't resolve any issues with Palestinians within Israel, the
occupied territories, or refugees elsewhere. Israel simply sets its
conditions for the transfer. If the UN accepts, Israel withdraws its
troops, and ceases all engagement with Gaza. Given the humanitarian
catastrophe unfolding, the UN will have little choice, but everyone
would be best served with some minimal understandings. I think the
following would be reasonable:
Israel removes any ground forces it has in Gaza, and seals
the border. Israel unilaterally ceases fire, except in retaliation
for attacks (e.g., rockets) from Gaza. Israel reserves the right to
retaliate for each attack, one munition (shell, bomb, rocket, etc.,
but probably larger) for each munition used against Israel, but only
within 24 hours of the incident.
Israel is responsible for its land border with Gaza. Israel
retains the right to continue patrolling the airspace and sea front
until other arrangements are negotiated with the UN and/or future
Gaza government. If Israel abuses these rights, there should be
some court or referee to nonviolently resolve these disputes (but
it's pretty unlikely Israel will agree to that).
The UN will organize a provisional, representative government
in Gaza, and will eventually organize elections (e.g., within one
year of handover). The UN may dictate a constitution and a basic legal
framework, which may be democratically amended or rewritten after a
fixed period of time (e.g., 5 years). The UN will organize donors to
provide aid in reconstruction, and may attach conditions to its aid
(e.g., a court to police against corruption). The UN will issue passports
to residents/citizens of Gaza, allowing them to leave if they wish, and
to return at any future point they may desire.
Israel and Gaza will be granted amnesty against possible charges
under international law up to the date of ceasefire and transfer, and
not limited to interactions between Israel and Gaza. All individuals
within Gaza will also receive amnesty for their role in the revolt or
other incidents that occurred up to the date of transfer. All political
organizations in Gaza will be banned, and their property will be
expropriated. New organizations may be formed from scratch, but
none may reused the names of banned parties. Past membership in a
banned political party will not be penalized.
UNHCR-registered refugees in Gaza will enjoy full rights as
citizens of Gaza, and will no longer be considered refugees from
Israel. This doesn't affect the rights of refugees resident elsewhere.
As a condition of its independence, Gaza may not call itself Palestine,
and may not make any claims to land and/or people not presently contained
Other items not specified are subject to negotiation, which I
imagine will be easier once the break is made, peace is established,
and some degree of normalcy returns. Two things I haven't stressed
are the desire to disarm Gaza, and the question of inspecting imports
to keep weapons from entering Gaza. These things should be implemented
voluntarily by Gaza itself. More weapons invites retaliation, which
is inevitably collective punishment. As long as Israel retains that
right, weapons shouldn't matter to them.
Another thing I didn't bother with is the hostage situation. I
assume that the hostages will be released, even without negotiation,
before amnesty kicks in. Of course, if Hamas is as bloodthirsty as
Israel wants you to believe, they could also be executed before
amnesty, in which case maybe some negotiation and exchange should
take place first. I didn't want to make it more complicated than
it had to be. As for the hostages Israel has taken prisoner, that
call is up to Israel. Some sort of mass release, especially of
prisoners who could be repatriated to Gaza, would be a welcome
gesture, but need not be immediate: I hardly think Gaza really
needs an influx of radicalized militants, which is the main produce
of Israeli jails.
Israel gets several major wins here: they gain viable long-term
security from threats emanating from Gaza; they give up responsibility
for the welfare of Gaza, which they've shown no serious interest in or
aptitude for; they get an internationally-recognized clean slate,
immediately after committing an especially egregious crime against
humanity (they're still liable for future acts against Palestinians,
but they get a chance to reset that relationship); they break the
link between Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and they tilt
the demographic balance in the area Israel controls back to a strong
Jewish majority; they get a partial solution to the refugee; and
they will have already shown the world how hard they strike back,
without having to go complete "final solution."
But the biggest concession to Israel is that they get to control
the timing, simply because no one can let alone will move to stop
them. They can bomb until they run out, which isn't very likely
given that the US is already resupplying them. They can kill, maim,
destroy, until they run out of targets or simply wear themselves
out. Or until they develop a conscience and/or a sense of shame
over how world opinion and history will view them. Or until their
friends take pity and urge restraint. Or until they start losing
more soldiers than they're willing to risk -- the least likely of
all, given that nobody is rushing to resupply Gaza with the arms
they desperately need to defend themselves (as the US and Europe
did for Ukraine).
The point -- probably but not certainly short of extermination --
is that eventually Israel will tire of the killing, but still need
to dispose of the rubble and the corpses. That's when this framework
comes into play. Sooner would be better for everyone, but later is
the dominant mindset in Israel today, and one that is unfortunately
reinforced by America.
What Israel gives up is an endless series of wars and other
depredations which make them look like arrogant warmongers, and make
them seem malign to most of the people in most of the countries in
the world. (Even in the US, even with virtually every politician of
both parties in their pockets, their reputation is currently in
Few Palestinian politicians will welcome this proposal, especially
as it isn't even up to them. It's hard to argue that they've served
their people well over the years, even if one recognizes that they've
been dealt an especially weak hand in face of Israeli ruthlessness.
But for the people of Gaza, this offers survival, freedom, and a
measure of dignity. And for the world, and especially for the UN,
this offers a chance to actually fix something that got broke on
the UN's watch 75 years ago and has been an open sore ever since.
But sure, this leaves many more problems to be worked on. There
are border issues with Lebanon and Syria. There is apartheid, loss
of rights, harassment, even pogroms within Israel -- all of which
offer reasons to continue BDS campaigns. At some point, Israel could
decide to cut off more land to reduce its Palestinian population, but
they could also reduce tensions by moving toward equal rights, secure
in the expectation of a strong Jewish majority. That might spell the
end of the extreme right-wing parties, at least the leverage they've
recently held over Netanyahu, and for that matter the end of Netanyahu,
who's done nothing but drive Israel over the brink.
Meanwhile, all we can really do is to campaign for an immediate
ceasefire, both to arrest the genocidal destruction of Gaza and to
salvage Israelis from the ultimate shame of their political revenge.
The time for both-sidesing this is past. There is little point in
even mentioning Hamas any more. This isn't a war. This is a cold,
calculate massacre. History will not be kind to the people who laid
the foundations of this conflict, and will judge even more harshly
those who are carrying it to its ultimate ends.
I'll end this intro with something I wrote back on
October 9, a mere two days into this "war" (which I initially
described as a "prison break and crime spree," before moving on
to a comparison to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1944 -- it's not
exactly ironic how often Palestinian suffering echoes calamities
in Jewish history):
Anyone who condemns Hamas for the violence without also condemning
Israel for its violence, and indeed for the violence and injustice
it has inflicted on Palestinians for many decades now, is not only
an enemy of peace and social justice, but under the circumstances
is promoting genocide.
Bold in the original, and still valid here. And three weeks later,
you know who you are.
Top story threads:
Israel: See introduction above. Just scattered links below,
one that caught my interest and/or pissed me off. For more newsy
stuff, see the "live updates" from
Washington Post. There are also "daily reports" at
Ellen Ioanes/Jonathan Guyer/Zack Beauchamp: [10-28]
Israeli troops are in Gaza: 7 big questions about the war, answered.
This is a fairly generic intro. I don't put much stock into arguments
that the reason Hamas attacked when they did had much to do with topical
or even strategic concerns like the Saudi Arabia alliance or the latest
Al-Aqsa Mosque outrages. Rather, as Israel keeps lurching to the right,
and as America becomes more servile to the Israeli right, the sense of
desperation has increased. In such times, violence at least seems like
the one free thing one can do, a way to spread the pain and get the
world's attention. I've often pointed out that the attraction of rockets
is that the walls can't stop them. They're the one way people in Gaza
have of making their presence felt to their tormentors, of reminding
the world of their suffering. Of course, every time they do that,
Israel strikes back, massively, reminding the world that their hold
over Gaza is based on murderous force -- that that's the kind of
people Palestinians are struggling to free themselves from. It
doesn't work, in America at least, because we're so conditioned
to love Israel and hate its enemies.
Rania Abouzeid: [10-21]
The simmering Lebanese front in Israel's war.
Paula Aceves: [10-27]
The corporate and cultural fallout from the Israel-Hamas war.
I don't have time to sift through this long list just to feel
outraged, but will remind you that the first casualties of every
war are anyone who doubts the necessity of the war and the virtues
of the warriors (the ones who presume to represent you; the others,
of course, are evil inhuman ogres, and anyone who can't see that
is a naïve simp or far worse). I'll also note that one of the fired
was pursed for sharing a link to an Onion title, "Dying Gazans
Criticized For Not Using Last Words To Condemn Hamas." I missed
that piece, but did take note of two other Onion headlines:
U.S. warns a Gaza ceasefire would only benefit humanity; and
Biden Expresses Doubts That Enough Palestinians Have Died.
Michael Arria: [10-28]
We are witnessing the largest U.S. anti-war protests in 20 years.
Not just the US: See Philip Weiss: [10-29]
The world is seeing, and rising.
Ronen Bergman/Mark Mazzetti/Maria Abi-Habib: [10-29]
How years of Israeli failures on Hamas led to a devastating attack:
"Israeli officials completely underestimated the magnitude of the Oct.
7 attacks by Hamas, shattering the country's once invincible sense of
Paola Caridi: [10-26]
Does the US really know the Arab world at all? You would think
that for all those years of risking American lives, they would have
developed some expertise, but both the political and military career
paths mostly favored the advancement of facilitators of established
prejudice, and certainly not critics, or even people with cognitive
empathy. Author has a recent book: Hamas: From Resistance to
Regime. I have zero confidence that anyone else I've read in
recent months has any real insight into Hamas.
Isaac Chotiner: [10-25]
Is this the end of the Netanyahu era? Interview with Netanyahu
biographer Anshel Pfeffer, a columnist at Haaretz.
Jessica Corbet: [10-29]
30 Israeli groups urge global community to help stop surging West Bank
settler violence: "Unfortunately, the Israeli government is supportive
of these attacks and does nothing to stop the violence."
Richard Falk: [10-24]
The West's refusal to call for a ceasefire is a green light to Israel's
Thomas Friedman: [10-29]
The Israeli officials I speak with tell me they know two things for
sure. Friedman's such a reliable mouthpiece for those "Israeli
officials" that he's rarely worth reading, but his counsel today,
that sometimes it's better to do nothing when provoked, is sound,
and compared to the hysteria of most of his cohort, refreshing. An
earlier version of this op-ed took the last line as a title: "Please,
Israel, don't get lost in those tunnels." That sums up his concern:
he couldn't care less what happens to Palestinians, but he realizes
that what Netanyahu's gang is doing is ultimately very bad for the
Israeli people he so treasures.
Neta Golan: [10-28]
Israeli attacks on Gaza's healthcare sector are a form of genocide.
Israeli state terrorism over the years.
The lights are off. Here's what we know about life and death inside
Gaza: Interview with Maram Al-Dada. Also:
Inside a Gaza village: "All of us will die, but we don't know when".
Jonathan Guyer: [10-27]
The Biden administration needs to update its old thinking on
Israel-Palestine: "A viral essay by Biden's foreign policy adviser
shows why Israel is more of a liability to the US than anyone's ready
to admit." The official is national security adviser Jake Sullivan,
and the piece is classic self-delusion, something shockingly common
among Washington think-tankers, with their blind faith in throwing
their power around, with little care for whoever gets hurt in the
process. Guyer contrasts Sullivan's piece(s) with a recent one by
Ben Rhodes: [10-18]
Gaza: The cost of escalation. Behind a paywall, so let's at least
quote a bit:
The immediate comparisons to the September 11 attacks felt apt to me
not only because of the shock of violence on such a scale but also
because of the emotional response that followed. . . .
But imagine if you were told on September 12, 2001, about the
unintended consequences of our fearful and vengeful reaction. That we
would launch an illogical war in Iraq that would kill hundreds of
thousands of people, fuel sectarian hatred in the Middle East, empower
Iran, and discredit American leadership and democracy itself. That we
would find ourselves facing an ever-shifting threat from new
iterations of al-Qaeda and from groups, like ISIS, that on September
11 did not yet exist. That we would squander our moment of global
predominance fighting a war on terror rather than focusing on the
climate's tipping point, a revanchist Russia under Vladimir Putin, or
the destabilizing effects of rampant inequality and unregulated
technologies. That our commitment to global norms and international
law would be cast aside in ways that would be expropriated by all
manner of autocrats who claimed that they, too, were fighting
terror. That a war in Afghanistan, which seemed so justified at the
outset, would end in the chaotic evacuation of desperate Afghans,
including women and girls who believed the story we told them about
securing their future.
This accounting does not begin to encompass the effects of
America's renewed militarized nationalism, jingoism, and xenophobia on
our own society after September 11, which ultimately turned
inward. While it is far from the only factor, the US response to
September 11 bears a large share of the blame for the dismal and
divisive state of our politics, and the collapse of Americans'
confidence in our own institutions and one another. If someone painted
that picture for you on September 12, wouldn't you have thought twice
about what we were about to do?
I can't look up exactly what I was thinking on 9/11/2001 because
I was in Brooklyn, away from the computer where I had started keeping
my pre-blog online notebook, but my memory is pretty clear. I knew in
an instant that the crashed planes were blowback from past imperial
misadventures, that the political caste in Washington would take them
not as tragic crimes but as an insult to American hyperpowerdom, that
their arrogance would strike back arrogantly, that the consequences
would be impossible to predict, but would certainly create more enemies
than they could possibly vanquish. I probably could have figured out
that the war madness would poison our domestic politics, much as the
Cold War played such a large role in crippling our labor unions. Even
before 9/11, Netanyahu and Barak and Sharon had conspired to wreck the
Oslo Accords and trigger an Intifada they would use to permanently
disable the Palestinian Authority, figuring they'd rather fight with
Hamas than negotiate with Arafat.
Benjamin Hart: [10-26]
Why Ehud Barak thinks Israel must invade Gaza: He's a big part of
the problem in Israel over the last 30 years, even as he's tried to
position himself as the smarter/tougher alternative to Netanyahu.
I mean, he is, but not much, especially not much of an alternative,
but he is much clearer and much less of a liar, so you can learn
things listening to him.
David Hearst: [10-23]
Israel-Palestine war: Starmer's Gaza betrayal shows he is failing as
a leader: UK Labour Party leader Keir Starmer, who saved the party
for neoliberalism by ousting actual leftist Jeremy Corbyn, and who is
likely to become Prime Minister next time voters get a chance to choose
one. "This is the first time Britain has been complicit in a direct
Israeli military action since the Suez Crisis in 1956."
Ellen Ioanes: [10-24]
Israelis feel abandoned by Netanyahu after October 7.
Jake Johnson: [10-26]
Eight progressives vote against House Israel Resolution that ignores
Palestinian suffering. This was the first act of the House after
electing Mike Johnson speaker. The vote was 412-10, with one Republican
and one non-CPC Democrat dissenting, six Democrats registering as
"present." The Senate passed a similar resolution unanimously --
More than 300 former Sanders staffers urge him to lead cease-fire resolution
Jimmy Johnson: [10-28]
Genocide has been catching up to Israelis ever since Zionism's
inception. "Israelis now perpetrate small-scale pogroms like
the one Issacharoff reported on such a regular basis that they
are barely considered newsworthy."
Fred Kaplan: [10-24]
How George W. Bush helped Hamas come to power. The history is
basically accurate, but I have a different take on it. Israel never
wanted a "partner for peace," so they never wanted a Palestinian
leadership that enjoyed strong popular support. In Arafat, and later
in Abbas, they thought they had a pawn they could manipulate, but
they never wanted either to be popular, so they never really offered
them much, ultimately sabotaging their authority and sending the
Palestinians searching for an alternative who would stand up for
them. That could have been Hamas, but Israel sabotaged them too --
with America's support, as it was easy to convince Bush that Hamas
were hopeless terrorists. So the title rings true, but what really
happened was that in denying Fatah any chance to serve Palestinians,
they created a vacuum that Hamas tried to fill, then kept them from
any effective power, driving them back to terrorism.
Isabel Kershner: [10-29]
Netanyahu finds himself at war in Gaza and at home: "Israel's
prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, apologized for accusing military
and security officials of lapses that led to the Hamas massacre but
declined to accept responsibility himself."
Whizzy Kim: [10-28]
The boycott movement against Israel, explained: It's often said
that nobody gives up power without a fight, but it's hard to fight
injustice without complicating it. Hence the search for nonviolent
resistance and pressure, which have had modest successes, especially
in countries where public opinion holds some sway, both locally and
among higher powers. BDS played a large role in convincing South
Africa to abolish apartheid, so it seemed like an ideal strategy
for pressuring Israel into ending its own system of apartheid. We're
still in the stage where Israel is pulling out all the stops to keep
people in America and Europe from even discussing the prospect. Gag
laws, of course, have been tried before, most notoriously in the US
to prevent abolitionists from petitioning Congress about slavery.
We should understand that had BDS been more successful, Israel may
not have blundered its way into the present war.
Menachem Klein: [10-26]
Israel's war cabinet has learned nothing from its failures:
"The leaders who oversaw Israel's Gaza policy for 15 years are
incapable of abandoning the erroneous ideas that collapsed on
Will Leitch: [10-27]
Banning Palestinian flags is just the beginning.
Eric Levitz: [10-27]
The suppression of Israel's critics bolsters the case for free speech:
Someone get this guy a thesaurus. Bolster: "support or strengthen; prop
up." I think I get what he's saying, but I can't figure out a way to
rephrase his title. The weak link is "the case," as no way suppression
of anything "bolsters free speech." "The case" turns a real argument
about who's allowed to say what into an abstract right, where liberals
have to defend the rights of assholes to spew hate and lies in order
to justify their own right to say something sensible and helpful.
Richard Luscombe: [10-27]
Ron DeSantis's claim he sent military equipment to Israel unravels.
Well, it's the thought that counts. On the other hand, Edward Helmore:
Ron DeSantis defends call to ban pro-Palestinian groups from Florida
colleges is totally on-brand.
Ian S Lustick: [10-13]
Vengeance is not a policy: "Emotionally driven reactions from
Washington won't prevent future violence. Dismantling the Gaza
Eldar Mamedov: [10-25]
EU's vaunted unity is disintegrating over Gaza crisis.
Neil MacFarquhar: [10-23]
Developing world sees double standard in West's actions in Gaza and
Ruth Margalit: [10-19]
The devastation of Be'eri: "In one day, Hamas militants massacred,
tortured, and abducted residents of a kibbutz, leaving their homes
charred and their community in ruins." This doesn't excuse that, or
is excused by any of the chain of outrages that came before, as far
Deir Yassin (1948) or
Qibya (1953) or, in Gaza itself, in
Khan Yunis and
Rafah (1956). But one shouldn't look away, because, regardless
of the perpetrators and victims, this is what it looks like.
Stephen Mihm: [10-26]
Many evangelicals see Israel-Hamas war as part of a prophecy:
If you weren't brought up on "Revelations," this seems like lunacy,
but if you were, you have damn little incentive to try to allay the
threat of war in the region.
Mahmoud Mushtaha: [10-24]
If we survive the bombs, what will remain of our lives?
Nicole Narea: [10-28]
Hezbollah, the Iran-backed Lebanese militant group, explained:
"Why would Hezbollah enter the fight against Israel?" People forget
that in 2006 Israel was attacking Gaza before Hezbollah started firing
rockets into North Israel, triggering the 2006 Israel-Lebanon War.
They succeeded in relieving Gaza, but Israel did an enormous amount
of bombing damage to Lebanon, then attempted a ground incursion to
rout out Hezbollah, and got beat back pretty bad. Since then, they've
had occasional skirmishes, especially over the disputed Bekaa Farms,
but neither side has wanted to reopen a full-scale war. Israel has,
however, bombed Hezbollah and/or Iranian troops in Syria quite a
few times, without reprisals from Lebanon or Iran, so there's an
itch they'd like to scratch.
AW Ohlheiser: [10-29]
Why some Palestinians believe social media companies are suppressing
their posts. I don't know much about this, but I do know that my
wife was threatened with a Facebook ban and responded by "algospeak"
(not her term). Hard for me to tell, as I rarely post anything but
links to my pieces, and occasional
food, but I've seen little evidence that my pieces are even read,
much less by people who hate them and try to ban me. But algorithms?
Wendy Pearlman: [10-30]
Collective punishment in Gaza will not bring Israel security:
"Scholarship suggests the overwhelming violence unleashed on the strip
is not just a violation of international law -- it is militarily
Vijay Prashad: [10-26]
The everyday violence of life in occupied Palestine. Prashad also
wrote, with Zoe Alexandra: [10-27]
When the journalists are gone, the stories will disappear.
Adam Rasgon/David D Kirkpatrick: [10-20]
Another hospital in Gaza is bleeding: Speaking with Dr Omar Al-Najjar:
"Gaza is the place we were born and raised. However much they try to
frighten and scare us, I agree with my family that I can't ever leave
David Remnick: [10-28]
In the cities of killing: Long report on the ground, with history,
but Not as much "what comes after" as advertised.
Richard E Rubenstein: [10-27]
Conflict resultion and the war in Gaza: Beyond the "bad actor"
Sigal Samuel: [10-27]
Palestinians fear they're being displaced permanently. Here's why
that's logical. He doesn't mention the Peel Commission (1937),
but they recommended partition of Palestine with forced transfer,
a policy which David Ben-Gurion applauded -- publicly for the first
time, although his adoption of the "Hebrew labor" doctrine made it
clear that an emerging Israel would do everything it could to drive
Palestinians away. That's what they did on a massive scale in 1948-50,
but after that it got more difficult. Ben-Gurion advised against war
in 1967 because he recognized that Palestinians wouldn't flee any
more: they would stay in place, and Israel would be stuck with them,
sinking the Jewish majority he had engineered by 1950. But the dream
and desire to expel was always there, with the settler movement on
the front lines, becoming ever more aggressive as they increased
Benzion Sanders: [10-28]
I fought for the I.D.F. in Gaza. It made me fight for peace.
"When my Israeli infantry unit arrived at the first village in Gaza,
in July 2014, we cleared houses by sending grenades through windows,
blowing doors open and firing bullets into rooms to avoid ambush and
booby traps." And: "All our casualties and the suffering brought on
Palestinians in Gaza accomplished nothing since our leaders refused
to work on creating a political reality in which more violence would
not be inevitable." Also see: Ariel Bernstein: [09-29]
I fought house to house in Gaza . . . I know force alone won't bring
Hamas attack provides "rare opportunity" to cleanse Gaza, Israeli think
Adam Shatz: [11-02]
Vengeful pathologies. This well-crafted essay stops short of
considering the pros and cons of genocide, which would push the
conflict into uncharted territory, but draws on the long history
of colonial conflict as well as recent Israel/Palestine, where
"its political class lacks the imagination and creativity -- not
to mention the sense of justice, of other people's dignity --
required to pursue a lasting agreement." A couple quotes:
One is reminded of Frantz Fanon's observation that 'the colonised person
is a persecuted person who constantly dreams of becoming the persecutor.'
On 7 October, this dream was realised for those who crossed over into
southern Israel: finally, the Israelis would feel the helplessness and
terror they had known all their lives. The spectacle of Palestinian
jubilation -- and the later denials that the killing of civilians had
occurred -- was troubling but hardly surprising. In colonial wars, Fanon
writes, 'good is quite simply what hurts them most.'
What hurt the Israelis nearly as much as the attack itself was the
fact that no one had seen it coming.
Shatz notes that "many analogies have been proposed for Al-Aqsa
Flood," then argues for the 1955 Philippeville uprising where:
Peasants armed with grenades, knives, clubs, axes and pitchforks killed --
and in many cases disembowelled -- 123 people, mostly Europeans but also
a number of Muslims. To the French, the violence seemed unprovoked, but
the perpetrators believed they were avenging the killing of tens of
thousands of Muslims by the French army, assisted by settler militias,
after the independence riots of 1945. In response to Philippeville,
France's liberal governor-general, Jacques Soustelle, whom the European
community considered an untrustworthy 'Arab lover', carried out a campaign
of repression in which more than ten thousand Algerians were killed. By
over-reacting, Soustelle fell into the FLN's trap: the army's brutality
drove Algerians into the arms of the rebels, just as Israel's ferocious
response is likely to strengthen Hamas at least temporarily, even among
Palestinians in Gaza who resent its authoritarian rule.
Already, the 10/7 attacks, unprecedented in scale as they were, have
been dwarfed by Israel's overreaction. And while demographics and modern
war technology won't allow a repeat of Algeria, Israel still has a lot
to lose in its quest for vengeance.
Raja Shehadeh: [10-26]
The uprooting of life in Gaza and the West Bank: A friendly reminder
that "Palestinians are determined not to be displace."
Kevin Sieff/Noga Tarnopolsky/Miriam Berger/William Booth/David
In Israel, Macron proposes using anti-ISIS coalition against
Hamas. It's really mind-boggling that the leader of a country
which made such a complete and utter disaster of its colonialist
adventure in Algeria could want to come back for more. But even
if this isn't just some deep-seated muscle memory from the golden
age of European imperialism, even if it's just sheer opportunism
on Macron's part, how smart is it to want to be remembered for
aiding and abetting genocide? Lots of western politicians have
embarrassed themselves fawning over Israel lately, but this
takes the cake.
Norman Solomon: [10-30]
Biden is a genocide denier and the 'enabler in chief' for Israel's
ongoing war crimes. It kind of looks like that, doesn't it?
Israel's Gaza offensive stirs a wave of global protest: This is
the only really heartening thing to come out of this month. For many
years, Palestinians have been divided between factions (like Hamas)
set on fighting for their rights, and others appealing to nonviolent
change: to decent public opinion, international law, and the subtle
pressure of BDS. Israel has done everything possible to fight both,
especially by turning them against each other, and they've done a
pretty good job of locking up political elites in the US and Europe
with their campaign against "terrorism." But large numbers of people,
even in media markets saturated with Israeli talking points, still
see through that. And once their eyes open up, further genocide will
only further estrange Israel from what we'd like to think of as the
Israel says Hamas 'is ISIS.' But it's not.
The brutal logic of tying colorful pieces of string around children's
wrists in Gaza.
Nick Turse: [10-24]
Secret U.S. war in Lebanon is tinder for escalation of Israel-Gaza
conflict: "Billions in security aid to Lebanon, along with
off-the-books commandos, could embroil the U.S. in a regional
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos: [10-27]
'Tit-for-tat' after US retaliates against Iranian targets: "F-16s
struck what Pentagon said were IRGC-backed militias on Friday."
Bret Wilkins: [10-25]
40 faith leaders lead Gaza pray-in at House Minority Leader Jeffries'
DC office. I'd nominate this for Seth Meyers' "The Kind of Stories
We Need Now" segment. Wilkins also wrote:
Li Zhou: [10-25]
What unites the global protests for Palestinian rights: Given
the near unanimity of the US political caste in its fealty to Israel
(e.g., the Senate voted 97-0 to denounce a ceasefire), you may be
surprised by how many people all around the world demonstrating for
Palestinian rights, the most basic of which is not to be slaughtered
by Israeli bombers and left to starve in the rubble. The messages
and emphases vary, but the most basic one in the US, where Jewish
Voice for Peace and If Not Now have been especially active, is to
call for an immediate ceasefire.
Also on X (Twitter):
Peter Beinart: [Response to Yair Wallach: Last night, settlers
invaded the village of Susya (South Hebron hills) and ordered its
residents to leave within 24 hours -- otherwise they would all be
killed.] All year we've been screaming that this would happen. No
establishment American Jewish leader said a word. As far as I know,
they still haven't. [Link to Beinart's article: [04-13]
Could Israel carry out another Nakba? "Expulsionist sentiment
is common in Israeli society and politics. To ignore the warning
sign is to abdicate responsibility."]
Ryan Grim: Holy shit -- it looks like the Western media mistranslated
a doctor's guess that there were more than 500 killed or wounded by the
hospital bombing, and just went with killed.
Then the press found that fewer than 500 were killed and the president
of the United States told the world the numbers from the health ministry
can't be trusted.
Astounding combination of arrogance and ignorance all in the service
of unchecked slaughter.
[Continuing in comment] The error flowed, I think, from the Western
media's lack of interest in Palestinians as people. If one dies, we put
them in a spreadsheet, because we know on some level it's bad when
civilians are killed.
But if one is only wounded -- a leg blown off, a concussion, what
have you -- that's not interesting to us, and you very rarely see stats
for killed and wounded in the Western press -- only killed. Or "died,"
But people in Gaza, such as this doctor in question, do care about
the wounded as well as the killed. So he mentioned both, and we simply
didn't hear him, because it doesn't matter to us if a Palestinian
civilian is only hurt but not killed in a bombing.
Katie Halper: Jews pretending to be "afraid" of "antisemitic"
protests: They're protests against Israeli genocide. It's you genocidal
fascists who put us Jews in danger by conflating Jewishness &
zionism & perpetuating the antisemitic myth that all Jews support
Israel. You don't speak for us.
Tony Karon: Some mealy-mouthed efforts by the Biden Administration
to distance itself from Israel's war crimes in Gaza do nothing to alter
its culpability. The only credible way to prevent further mass slaughter
of civilians is to force a cease-fire. [Link to:
US says Israel must distinguish between Hamas targets and civilians.
Israel will just say Hamas is using "human shields," as if that's all
the excuse they need. They don't distinguish between targets and
civilians because they don't make the distinction.]
Tony Karon: Contra to @JoeBiden's ham-handed efforts to equate
Hamas with Russia, it is Israel that is following Putin's playbook.
In the second Chechnya war, he supervised Russian forces flattening
Grozny, and killing 18,000 people in the first weeks of his assault.
Tony Karon: Colonialism is deeply embedded in the BBC's DNA, which
is why every report on horrors being inflicted by Israel's 'pacification'
violence must be qualified by the colonizer's own spin. Clearly, @BBC
bosses believe the Israeli version. They would, though, wouldn't they?
[Robert Wright commented: Or it could be that, like many people, whoever
wrote this doesn't know the difference between "refute" and "rebut".]
Karon continued: Not really, because it's a pattern -- literally every
report on the horrors unfolding in Gaza on their web site is accompanied
by a disclaimer worthy of Walter Isaacson's 2001 instruction to his CNN
staff to downplay and spin civilian casualties in Afghanistan.
Arsen Ostrovsky: [Over aerial video of a massive protest in London]
This isn't a pro-Palestinian rally in London now, it's a pro-Hamas
Churchill is probably rolling in his grave.
Jon "Pumpkinhead" Schwarz commented: Churchill probably would be
upset about these demonstrations, given that he referred to Palestinians
as animals ("the dog in the manger") who had no right to be upset by
being replaced by "a higher grade race"
Nathan J Robinson: This is an important point. If the British had
responded to IRA attacks on civilians by launching relentless air strikes
on Irish civilian neighborhoods, it would have appeared obviously
psychopathic and deranged. Yet in Gaza this is considered a reasonable
response to terror.
David Sheen: Israeli TV running a counter of fatalities in Gaza --
most of whom are civilians and many of whom are children --under the
heading "terrorists we eliminated". And for those too lazy to drive to
Sderot to watch the genocide, they've got you covered with a livestream
of the bombing.
Tikun Olam commented: Language betrays the immorality and
genocide. Here are a few other statistics: 8,000 Gaza dead -- 3,000
children. 45% of homes destroyed. 1.5-million refugees. 10 of 35
hospitals shut down due to lack of supplies & power.
Rabbi Alissa Wise: This is Netanyahu telling the world he plans
genocide. So even if 8000 dead and cutting off connection to the
rest of the world and access to food & water didnt convince
you, now you know. ACT NOW! [Refers to Netanyahu quote, video
included: "You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our
Elsewhere, Barnett R. Rubin explains Netanyahu's bible quote:
For those unfamiliar with the reference, here it is: I Samuel 15: 3-4:
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and
spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox
and sheep, camel and ass.
Tony Karon adds: Here, @POTUS, is your deranged partner in war
crime pledging to commit Biblically-inspired genocide. That Palestinian
death toll you don't want to hear about? Is that because you know you
could have prevented it?
Trump, and other Republicans: Big news this week, aside from
Trumps trials and fulminations, was the election of Mike Johnson (R-LA)
as Speaker of the House. So he's getting some press, raising the
question of why anyone who thought Jim Jordan was too toxic could
imagine that he'd be any more tolerable.
Kyle Anzalone: [10-27]
New House Speaker: Russia, China, and Iran are the new axis of evil.
Also: "Hamas and Hezbollah are proxies of Iran, and they're tied in now
with Russia and China." I guess that's good news for people worried
about keeping the government funded, as you can't fight WWIII during
a government shutdown.
David Badash: [10-30
Why did Mike Johnson scrub 69 podcasts from his website?
Devlin Barrett/Perry Stein: [10-29]
The Trump trials: Cannon fodder: "Welcome back to The Trump Trials,
our weekly effort to keep readers up to date on the many criminal --
and civil -- cases the 45th president is fighting in federal and
Noah Berlatsky: [10-30]
The Christofascism of Mike Johnson: "The new House speaker is an
opposition researcher's goldmine."
Andrea Bernstein/Andy Kroll: [10-27]
Trump's court whisperer had a state judicial strategy. Its full extent
only became clear years later. Leonard Leo.
Gabrielle Bluestone: [10-27]
Michael Cohen waited five years for this: He didn't just wait. He
did time in jail for Trump. Admittedly, not very hard time, but enough
to know that people should pay for their crimes.
Jonathan Chait: [10-26]
Republican 'moderates' caved. Wow, that never happens. "Except
Chas Danner: [10-28]
Mike Pence acknowledges reality: He "suspended" his presidential
campaign, after widespread reports of bankruptcy.
Norman Eisen/Amy Lee Copeland: [10-29]
Jenna Ellis could become a star witness against Trump. She became
the third of Trump's lawyers, after Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell,
to plead guilty to racketeering charges in Georgia.
Katelyn Fossett: [10-27]
'He seems to be saying his commitment is to minority rule':
Interview with Kristin Kobes Du Mez on "the Christian nationalist
ideas that shaped House Speaker Mike Johnson."
Rebecca Gordon: [10-24]
Trump's Schedule F (for "failed state"): "Republican contradictions:
Are they fascists or nihilists -- or both?"
Margaret Hartmann: [10-27]
15 not-fun facts about Speaker Mike Johnson. For a more comprehensive
accounting, see Anna Canizales/Michael Kruse: [10-26]
55 things you need to know about Mike Johnson.
Ben Jacobs: [10-29]
"Lord of the Flies": The House's chaotic next era, explained:
"New House Speaker Mike Johnson faces a long to-do list and a caucus
with short patience for compromise."
Sarah Jones: [10-28]
Mike Johnson's old-time religion.
Paul Krugman: [10-26]
The GOP goes full-on extremist: Meet Mike Johnson.
Meredith McGraw/Alex Isenstadt: [10-24]
'I killed him': How Trump torpedoes Tom Emmer's speaker bid.
Nia Prater: [10-25]
Trump takes the stand, gets fined again.
David Rothkopf: [10-26]
Here's why Mike Johnson is more dangerous than Donald Trump.
Greg Sargent: [10-27]
Mike Johnson's conspiracy theories about 'illegals' mark a new GOP
Laura Vozzella: [10-29]
Youngkin 'purge' removed nearly 3,400 legal Virginia voters from
Biden and/or the Democrats:
David French: [10-29]
Joe Biden knows what he's doing: Biden's "support among Democrats
has slipped 11 points in the past month to 75 percent, the lowest
of his presidency." Much of that has to do with his handling of Israel's
war against Gaza, where in public he's offered total support for Israeli
aggression, regardless of any reservations he may have communicated in
private. It's possible that he may eventually moderate Israel's lust for
vengeance, but it seems very unlikely to me that he "knows what he is
doing." That's because so very few Americans have any sort of objective
understanding of Israel, or for that matter of American power when it
is threatened or humbled. If you want examples, just look at the fine
print in French's piece, especially when he argues against a
Ed Kilgore: [10-27]
Biden's age is primary challenger Dean Phillips's only issue.
The Congressman (D-MN) decides to take a flyer, not over a political
disupte but doubts of Biden's "electability" (which isn't exactly
age, but close to it). Cites a profile by Tim Alberta in
The Atlantic, "timed to appear the day of his announcement."
Jennifer Rubin: [10-29]
Labor wins bolster Biden's strategy. For example, breakthroughs
in the auto workers strikes (although I'd give the UAW most of the
Jeanne Whalen/Lauren Kaori Gurley:
Legal matters and other crimes:
Climate and environment:
Umair Irfan/Benji Jones: [10-26]
How Hurricane Otis defied forecasts and exploded into a deadly storm
overnight. The Pacific hurricane intensified extraordinarily fast
to reach category 5, before hitting Acapulco.
Christopher Ketcham: [10-29]
When idiot savants do climate economics: "How an elite clique of
math-addled economists hijacked climate policy." Starts with William
Elizabeth Kolbert: [10-26]
Hurricane Otis and the world we live in now.
Ian Livingston: [10-24]
Earth's climate shatters heat records. These 5 charts show how.
Kasha Patel: [09-25]
Antarctica just hit a record low in sea ice -- by a lot.
Matt Stieb: [10-26]
Scenes of the destruction in Acapulco after Hurricane Otis.
Around the world:
Lautaro Grinspan: [10-23]
How young Argentines might put a far-right libertarian into power:
Javier Milei, who if elected would probably become the very worst
national president in the world today. He was the surprise leader
in the primary round, but fell to second place in last Sunday's
first-round election. (It's kind of a screwy system.)
Kelly Denton-Borhaug: [10-29]
The dehumanization of war (please don't kill the children):
Always two titles at this site, so I figured use both, for this
"meditation for Veterans Day," which I could have filed under
Israel or Ukraine or possibly elsewhere, but thought I'd let it
stand alone. Starts in Hiroshima, 1945 with what Stalin would
have called a "statistic," then focuses in on a 10-year-old
girl, whose mother was reduced to "an unrecognizable block of
ash," with only a single gold tooth to identify her. The author
has a book about American soldiers but the theme is universal:
And Then Your Soul Is Gone: Moral Injury and U.S.
Lloyd Green: [10-29]
Romney: A Reckoning review: must-read on Mitt and the rise of Trump:
"McKay Coppins and his subject do not hold back in a biography with
much to say about the collapse of Republican values."
Also on the Romney book:
John Herrman: [10-27]
What happens when ads generate themselves? I wish this was the
most important article of the week. This is a subject I could really
drill down hard on, not least because I think advertising is one of
the most intrinsically evil artifacts of our world. And because
"artificial intelligence" is a pretty sick oxymoron.
Bruce E Levine: [10-27]
Why failed psychiatry lives on: Seems like someone I would have
gained much from reading fifty years ago (although R.D. Laing, Thomas
Szasz, Paul Goodman, and Neil Postman worked for me).
Sophie Lloyd: [10-28]
Disney's 8 biggest mistakes in company's history: I wouldn't
normally bother with a piece like this, but as mistakes go, these
are pretty gross. I mean, after their treatment of slavery and
Indians, and their mistreatment of lemmings, number eight was an
omnibus "A long history of sexism."
James C Nelson: [10-27]
Just another day in NRA paradise: I suppose I have to note that
another crazy person with an assault rifle killed 18 and injured 13
more in Lewiston, Maine, last week. This article is as good a marker
as any. You know the drill. If you want an update: Kelly McClure:
Suspect in Maine mass shootings found dead.
Will Oremus/Elizabeth Dwoskin/Sarah Ellison/Jeremy B Merrill:
A year later, Musk's X is tilting right. And sinking.
Nathan J Robinson: I could have split these up all over
today's post, but want to point out the common source of so much
They're all "extremists": "The Republican Party has long been pushing
us toward an apocalyptic dystopian future. The differences between
individual Republicans are far less important than their similarities."
My only question is why the quotes? "Extremists" is plainly descriptive,
and hardly controversial.
How the occupation of Palestine shapes everyday life -- and what happens
now: Interview with Nathan Thrall, former director of the Arab-Israeli
Project at the International Crisis Group, and author of The Only
Language They Understand: Forcing Compromise in Israel and Palestine,
and most recently A Day in the Life of Abed Salama: Anatomy of a
Jerusalem Tragedy. Thrall lives in Jerusalem, but has recently
been trying to promote his book in the UK, noting:
I have never seen this degree of intolerance for any sort of nuance in
the discussion of Israel-Palestine, for any discussion of root causes,
even just expression of sympathy for Palestinians living under
occupation. We've seen events canceled in the UK and the US, hotels
refusing to host long planned Palestinian conferences. A concert in
London was shut down, and my own book event was shut down in London by
the UK police. And of course, what made headlines was the prize in
Germany that was going to be given to a Palestinian author. And you
saw that the UK Home Secretary had said -- the police, of course, are not
going to follow through on this -- but she recommended to the police to
arrest anyone, or to consider arresting anyone, with a Palestinian
flag. We saw in France that they were banning Palestinian protests.
It's really a very difficult moment to speak with any kind of
intelligence or nuance about this issue.
I've occasionally noted instances of repression emanating from
political and cultural elites in the US and Europe, clearly aimed
at shutting down any discussion, much less protest, against all
the violence in and around Gaza, but I haven't seriously tracked
it, because this assault on free speech and democracy seems like
the less urgent tragedy. But it's happening. And it reminds me
of 9/11: not the shocking initial event, but the chilling efforts
to keep anyone but the warmongers from speaking, allowing them
the illusion of cheering applause as they went ahead with their
ill-considered and ultimately self-destructive program.
"Libs of Tiktok" is Orwell's "two minutes hate": "The right-wing
social media account is viciopus and dehumanizing. Its revolting
toxicity shows us why empathy and solidarity are so important."
The wisdom of Edward Said has never been more relevant. Article
includes extensive quotes.
Jeffrey St Clair: [10-27]
Roaming Charges: That oceanic feeling. Lead section on climate
change (remember that?) and environment. I didn't realize that small
planes still burn leaded gasoline. Then the dirt on Mike Johnson. Then
a much longer list of criminal injustices. Plus other things, like a
Nikki Haley quote ("I'm tired of talking about a Department of Defense.
I want a Department of Offense.")
Evaggelos Vallianatos: [10-27]
Slauighter of the American buffalo: Article occasioned by the
Burns documentary, which may be an eye-opener if you don't
know the story, and adds details if you do. It is a classic case
of how insatiable world markets suck the life out of nature, and
how the infinite appetites of financiers, who've reduced everything
to the question of how much more money their money can make.
Richard D Wolff: [10-27]
Why capitalism cannot finally repress socialism. This assumes
that some measure of sanity must prevail. And yes, I know that's
a tautology, as socialism is the sanity that keeps capitalism from
tearing itself apart and dissolving into chaos.
Nothing from The New Republic this week, as they decided
I'm "out of free articles," even though I'm pretty sure we have a
valid subscription. Not much there that isn't elsewhere, although
I clicked on close to ten articles that looked interesting, before
giving up, including one called
Kyrsten Sinema's Delusional Exit Interview. AlterNet has a
similar article: Carl Gibson: [10-30]
'I don't care': Kyrsten Sinema plans to cash in on Senate infamy if
she loses reelection in 2024.
Ask a question, or send a comment.