News Releases

Anti-Immigrant Convoys at U.S.-Mexico Border — Interviews Available

Share

Convoys arrived in communities in Arizona, California and Texas early this month to rally for border security. In Eagle Pass, Texas, some community members and experts expressed concerns about the anti-immigrant rhetoric employed by the convoy there.

HEIDI BEIRICH; heidi@globalextremism.org, @heidibeirich, @globalextremism 
    Beirich is cofounder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE). 

America’s Voice held a press call with Beirich and several U.S. Representatives. They called the Take Our Border Back rallies part of an “escalating standoff between Texas and the federal government…fueling a dangerous climate of potential right-wing violence and vigilantism at the border.” 

Beirich told the Institute for Public Accuracy that the America’s Voice press call prompted important reporting––but she wished the coverage had been there already. “People should have been watching this. It’s a far-right movement that has gone under the radar, and it shouldn’t have, given [Texas Governor Greg] Abbott’s anti-immigrant rhetoric.” Beirich pointed to the convoy’s use of Great Replacement rhetoric, a “conspiracy theory directly connected to mass violence. [GPAHE] does monitoring of unregulated social media platforms like Gab and Telegram, and [saw] that Great Replacement rhetoric spiked to heights not seen in six months. They are radicalizing the MAGA movement into anti-immigrant rhetoric. Abbott is doing his part to demonize the immigrant situation. It’s dangerous––not just for migrants but for anyone [the far right] thinks might be an immigrant.” 

Beirich noted that the convoy was smaller than expected and “thankfully peaceable.” But an Eagle Pass migrant center was evacuated after militia groups involved in the Take Our Borders Back rally threatened the facility. Approximately 175 migrants were relocated to other facilities around Texas after a militia member “threatened to torch the Eagle Pass site.”

Beirich says the convoy is “riling up the far right.” 

GPAHE covers transnational hate movements––especially in countries that don’t get as much attention for their far-right movements, such as Portugal, Ireland and Australia––as well as U.S. groups that export hate to other countries, usually in the form of anti-LGBTQ and anti-women’s-rights thinking about bodily autonomy and abortion. Beirich told the Institute for Public Accuracy that “the American press hasn’t done a good enough job [covering] Christian nationalists or the [groups like] Alliance Defending Freedom” in particular. These organizations have “gotten a pass,” she said, “given that their angle is to transform this country––or, at a minimum, to pull back the civil rights of certain populations like LGBTQ [people] and women.” She also pointed to the need for more coverage of people living in the Eagle Pass community who have spoken out about the convoy. 

Biden Backing Israeli Assaults Again and Again

Share

MOHAMAD BAZZI, mohamad.bazzi@nyu.edu, @BazziNYU
Bazzi is director of the Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies, and is a journalism professor at New York University.

He recently wrote the piece “The Middle East conflict is spiraling. Biden must force Israel to end the war” for the Guardian: “Without a huge airlift of U.S. weapons since October, Israel would run out of bombs to drop on Gaza. But Biden has refused to use that leverage to force Netanyahu’s government to accept a ceasefire. In fact, the Biden administration has gone out of its way to hide the extent of U.S. arms shipments and other recent military aid to Israel — unlike the detailed breakdowns that Washington has provided of its billions of dollars in weapons shipments to Ukraine.

“Recent reports in the Israeli press make clear that because of a global shortage of ammunition that started with the Ukraine war, Israel would not be able to sustain its bombardment of Gaza without the U.S. resupplying the Israeli military.

“Biden has the power to restrain Israel — he has simply refused to use it. Biden is also aware of the responsibility that comes with providing an ally like Israel with a virtually unlimited pipeline of weapons to continue its war.

“On 30 January, reporters at the White House asked Biden whether he holds Iran responsible for the killing of three U.S. soldiers in Jordan. ‘I do hold them responsible in the sense that they’re supplying the weapons to the people who did it,’ Biden said.

“It was a remarkable admission by the U.S. president, and it poses a basic follow-up question: does Biden think the same about the more than 27,000 deaths in Gaza enabled by a steady supply of U.S. weapons he has provided to Israel?”

 

Pro-Israel Jewish Organizations Had Recognized the Dangers of Zionism

Share

ABBA SOLOMON, abbasolomon@gmail.com, www.threads.net/@abba.a.solomon
Solomon just wrote the piece “Many Jews and Jewish Organizations Recognized the Dangers of Zionism. They Were Right,” which states: “The pernicious results of insisting on forcing Jewish sovereignty over Palestine — and necessarily disrupting Arab life there — was well understood within the Jewish organizations and in the general press.”

Solomon examines the American Jewish Committee in particular, but also highlights positions of noted Jewish leaders: “In November 1939, Louis D. Brandeis objected to a planned visit to the United States by Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann. … In a public letter, Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt, and others stated that in the years up to statehood, Jewish terrorists ‘inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and widespread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.’ …

“Mainstream Jewish organizations knew endless violence and oppression would result from imposing a Jewish state in Palestine against the stated wishes of its non-Jewish inhabitants. This has proved accurate, most recently in Israel’s methodical destruction of the means of life for millions in Gaza, and increasing state and settler terror against residents of the occupied West Bank.”

Solomon is author of two books on Zionism, The Speech, and Its Context: Jacob Blaustein’s Speech “The Meaning of Palestine Partition to American Jews” and The Miasma of Unity: Jews and Israel.

A recent review of Solomon’s second book in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs states: “It’s amazing — and frightening — to find from Solomon’s research that the AJC” back in January 1948, castigated “a Zionist state as a ‘monstrous idol,’ a state set to act as a ‘complete master not only over its own immediate subjects but also over every living Jewish body and soul the world over, beyond any consideration of good or evil.'”

UK Channel 4 Finds Israeli Documents “Provide No Evidence” in Charges Against UNRWA

Share

British Channel 4 has examined “confidential Israeli documents” regarding Israel’s claim that UNRWA staff were involved in the Oct. 7 attacks.

The network reports Israel has “provided no evidence” in its charges against UNRWA personnel.

CHRISTOPHER GUNNESS, cgunness@outlook.com
Gunness is former spokesperson for UNRWA and is featured in the Channel 4 report. He calls the halting of funding to UNRWA, which provides food, education and other forms of relief for Palestinian refugees “utterly shocking” and a “violation of international law” and a “violation of the orders by the International Court of Justice.”

In the suit brought by South Africa, The ICJ on Jan. 26 ordered: “Israel must take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”

Hours later, Israel made its charges regarding UNRWA and the U.S. government and other donors then halted funding.

See in-depth interview with Gunness on the Electronic Intifada.

The Electronic Intifada reports: “The Israeli allegations appear to be based off of confessions made by Palestinian detainees, likely under conditions of torture.”

The noted Norwegian doctor Mads Gilbert asked: “Why is Israel not being investigated for the killing of 154 UNRWA employees in Gaza?”

See: “International Coalition to Stop Genocide in Palestine Demands Full Funding of UNRWA.”

See from Ryan Grim of The Intercept: “What Are We Doing?? By cutting funding from UNRWA, the U.S. moves Israel closer to its goal” and “Republicans Move to One-Up Biden and Permanently Defund UNRWA.”

Also see from Jonathan Cook: “In waging war on the UN refugee agency, the West is openly siding with Israeli genocide,” which notes among other things: “UNRWA is separate from the UN’s main refugee agency, the UNHCR, and deals only with Palestinian refugees. Although Israel does not want you to know it, the reason for there being two UN refugee agencies is because Israel and its western backers insisted on the division back in 1948. Why? Because Israel was afraid of the Palestinians falling under the responsibility of the UNHCR’s forerunner, the International Refugee Organisation. The IRO was established in the immediate wake of the Second World War in large part to cope with the millions of European Jews fleeing Nazi atrocities. Israel did not want the two cases treated as comparable, because it was pushing hard for Jewish refugees to be settled on lands from which it had just expelled Palestinians.”

In 2021, AP reported: “A confidential Israeli dossier detailing alleged links between Palestinian human rights groups and an internationally designated terrorist organization contains little concrete evidence and failed to convince European countries to stop funding the groups.” And in 2022: “Dutch stop funding Palestinian NGO, question Israeli charges.”

Why Does the U.S. Have Troops in Syria and Iraq?

Share

Reuters reports: “U.S. launches strikes in Iraq, Syria, nearly 40 reported killed.”

JOSHUA M. LANDIS, landis@ou.edu, @joshua_landis
Director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, Landis just wrote the piece “U.S. Troops Should Have Left Syria and Iraq Long Ago” for Responsible Statecraft.

He writes that recent events, including the killing of three U.S. soldiers “should prompt the United States to speed up its exit from Syria and Iraq, something policy makers have been contemplating for some time….

“Hawks in Washington insist that by striking Iran directly and hard, the U.S. can bring security to its troops, the danger will subside because Iran understands force. But this analysis misunderstands the region and minimizes the dangers arrayed against U.S. troops.”

Landis writes that the Syrian government is “determined to drive Americans from its soil. It accuses Washington of illegally occupying 30 percent of its territory and stealing its oil to subsidize the quasi-independent territory the U.S. has established in northeast Syria. As a consequence, the majority of Syrians languish in poverty and must survive with only a few hours of electricity per day, while the economy remains paralyzed by U.S. sanctions. They want the U.S. out.

“The Iraqi government is also demanding that U.S. troops leave. It was provoked into doing so by Washington’s January 4 assassination of Mushtaq al-Jawari, a leader of Harakat al-Nujaba, one of the Shi’a militias that belongs to the popular mobilization forces. Washington targeted him in retribution for an earlier attack on a U.S. base. Did this show of force cow the Harakat al-Nujaba or the popular mobilization forces? No. On the contrary, it led to an escalating drumbeat of missile and drone attacks on American bases.”

Also see from Responsible Statecraft: “Unreal: White House still denies Mideast turmoil linked to Gaza.”

The Evolution of Trump’s Fascistic Politics

Share

Since 2016, critics have become more comfortable labeling Trump––and Trumpism––as fascist. 

JEFF SHARLET; jeffrey.sharlet@dartmouth.edu, @JeffSharlet
    Sharlet is a journalist and author, and an expert on the far right. His books include The Undertow: Scenes from a Slow Civil War. 

In an interview on Democracy Now! after Donald Trump won the New Hampshire primary, Sharlet asserted that “fascism is on the ballot.” 

Sharlet told the Institute for Public Accuracy: “Until 2016 or 2017, I was rejecting the term fascism in application to the U.S. There have been moments of fascism in American history. It’s not just Italy and Germany; there have been fascist movements all over the world, and most have not succeeded. [Until now,] there hasn’t been a full cult of personality or the celebration of violence, which are two key facets of fascism. [But] Trump has achieved a blurring of the line between divinity and person. [And] there has been a normalization of violence.

“Trumpism has gotten more fascistic in the last four years. It’s been a long time since Trump led his movement––but he does follow it. He tries to keep up. Trumpism has gotten more fascistic, so Trump has too. He has osmosed some of [the] conspiratorial thinking” and the antisemitism and xenophobia of the far right. 

Sharlet argued that even as Trump has made antisemitic and fascistic comments––toward special prosecutor Jack Smith, toward immigrants––that have echoed language straight from Adolf Hitler, the press has not been direct enough. “The press needs to say ‘Trump is quoting Hitler.’” 

Sharlet also questioned why media outlets are not devoting coverage to the frenzy and undertow of violence that is taking place at Trump rallies. “We overlook the ecstasy and eroticism [of fascism]. You go to a Trump rally and it feels like a Deadhead show. You dance in the parking lot for hours. There is a violent festivity to it. It’s not just that Trump’s fans relish his rudeness. [Trump gives his supporters] permission to feel that level of anger. It’s really fun to give in if you have been resisting that anger and hate for a long time. That permission structure is incredibly empowering.” 

Sharlet added: Outlets like the New York Times tend to use the term “fascism” to describe other countries, but not the United States. “Calling Trump [labels like] ‘neo-fascist’ is a dodge and an evasion. The fascism of 2024 doesn’t look like the fascism of Germany in 1936––that’s a given. Fascism gets hardened and concretized into a static thing. But fascism is less an ideology than it is an aesthetics, and it evolves. It mutates

“There is an exceptionalism going on here. That’s where the mainstream press needs to catch up. Left media, meanwhile, needs a more sophisticated definition and understanding of white supremacy. They’re convinced that the only people at Trump rallies are white.” The left imagines fascism as an “other,” Sharlet said. “If fascists are this other, then you are immune and you don’t need to contend with its gravitational force. Because that force is not a sharply delineated ideology, [fascism] allows people to imagine their way into it from all different angles and identities.”

Imran Khan Sentenced to 10 Years for Revealing How the U.S. Pushed for His Removal

Share

MURTAZA HUSSAIN, murtaza.hussain@theintercept.com, @MazMHussain
Hussain is a reporter at The Intercept and co-wrote the piece “Secret Pakistan Document Undermines Espionage Case Against Imran Khan” last month, which reports: “The former prime minister is charged with compromising Pakistan’s secret communications, but a document leaked to The Intercept says that didn’t happen.”

Hussain said today: “Imran Khan has been sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges of mishandling a classified national security document revealing U.S. pressure in his removal from power in 2022. A copy of the same document was published by The Intercept last year after being leaked by an insider from Pakistan’s national security establishment. The document validated Khan’s claims that U.S. State Department officials had threatened Pakistan with consequences were he not removed from office, citing anger over Khan’s neutral stance on the Russian conflict in Ukraine.”

See prior IPA news releases.

Christian Zionism and the Middle East

Share

Critics say that American evangelical Christians’ support for Israel has been used as a political tool in the shaping of U.S. government policies. 

JONATHAN KUTTAB; jonathankuttab@gmail.com 
    Kuttab is an international human rights attorney, co-founder of the Palestinian human rights group Al-Haq, and co-founder of Nonviolence International. 

Kuttab told Al Jazeera that “in the evangelical Christian worldview, the 1948 creation of Israel was a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy”––making Palestinians the “enemies of God,” since they are the enemies of Israel. 

Kuttab, a Palestinian who grew up as a conservative evangelical Christian and continues to be a believer in the faith, told the Institute for Public Accuracy: The impact of Christian Zionism has been “very devastating, and it has been weaponized by Zionists. [Leaders] high up in the U.S. government have utilized Christian Zionist arguments to pass specific items of policy, such as moving the embassy to Jerusalem––which makes no sense politically, logically, or morally, but is a way to use the Bible to support Zionist positions. It has been used to send weapons to Israel and to blunt the U.S. opposition to settlements in the West Bank. 

“The argument is that the State of Israel and what it does, even in its most extreme right-wing manifestations, somehow has moral or biblical authority because this is the way God is manifesting himself in modern affairs. It’s an illogical argument, but it’s very powerful, because you’re not going to argue with God. [The argument] doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, but it’s not being scrutinized.”

Christian evangelicals “are a very powerful tool for whatever Israel wants to do right now. They are useful if Israel wants to commit genocide or kick all Palestinians out of Gaza; they’re useful if Israel wants to oppose or attack Iran.” 

Kuttab added that the Christian Zionist movement has grown and changed in recent years. “They talk less about the rapture, the End Times, or the second coming, but continue to be very aggressive [in their] political support for Zionism and the State of Israel.

“As a believing Christian, [I believe that Christian evangelical political positions] run against the message of Jesus Christ and of the Bible. Though it uses religious language to justify itself, it is not a message of peace, reconciliation, justice, openness, or universal salvation offered to everyone. It is a very narrow, tribal, militaristic position that is very problematic––morally and ethically, as well as from a Christian point of view.

“Palestinian evangelical Christians are a small minority within a minority. Our numbers are very small, so our biggest challenge is to let people know we exist. People don’t know there are Palestinian Christians in Gaza, let alone evangelicals. We also have a role to speak to evangelicals in [the U.S.], for whom Christian Zionism is a default position. It is widespread, but it is based on ignorance. People don’t know the facts and they don’t know their Bible very well.” But Kuttab says that evangelicals are often receptive to his position if they are “approached in the right way. They can’t be approached with human rights, international law, or logic. That’s not convincing. You have to use the Bible and the Scriptures, and show them through the language they are used to. 

“People misunderstand evangelicals generally. Evangelicals tend to be decent, good-hearted people. They’re not necessarily vicious or nasty or uncaring. They have been manipulated and have been used by Christian Zionists to lend power to AIPAC and to Zionists, even those who are not religious at all. This is how politicians treat Christian Zionism. It is a theology that they don’t believe in, but they use it as a tool.”

World Court Cited UNRWA Against Israel, Now, U.S. Is Targeting It

Share

CRAIG MURRAY, craigmurray1710@btinternet.com, @CraigMurrayOrg
He was apparently the only print journalist observing oral arguments during South Africa v. Israel at the International Court of Justice and has written extensively on the issue. He just wrote the piece “Has International Law Survived, or Has the Western Political Class Killed It?

He notes that the ICJ, also known as the World Court, ordered that “The State of Israel shall … desist from … (a) the expulsion and forced displacement [of Palestinians] from their homes; (b) the deprivation of: (i) access to adequate food and water; (ii) access to humanitarian assistance, including access to adequate fuel, shelter, clothes, hygiene and sanitation; (iii) medical supplies and assistance; and (c) the destruction of Palestinian life in Gaza.”

Murray writes: “the immediate response to the ICJ ruling was a coordinated attack by Israel and the combined imperialist powers on UNRWA, designed to accelerate the genocide by stopping aid, to provide a propaganda counter-narrative to the ICJ judgment, and to reduce the credibility of UNRWA’s evidence before the court.”

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East is the main pillar of humanitarian relief and needs for Palestinians in Gaza. The ICJ cited UNRWA ten times in its Order to Israel.

The New York Times reports that Israel charges that 12 of UNRWA’s 30,000 workers were involved in helping the Oct. 7 attack on Israel (several have been fired); noting that this is the “latest episode of a decades-long friction between Israel and the group.” The U.S. and several European governments have now halted funding to UNRWA based on Israel’s charges.

UN whistleblower and human rights lawyer Craig Mokhiber said on the Katie Halper Show that Israel has been out to destroy UNRWA “because it’s a lifeline to the Palestinians in Gaza.”

Francis Boyle recently appeared on MSNBC and argued that the U.S. and other governments abruptly cutting off UNRWA funds are now not simply complicit in Israel’s genocidal actions, but are themselves now directly in violation of Article 2c of the Genocide Convention since they are: “Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”

AFP reports that the UN Security Council, at the request of Algeria, will meet on Wednesday regarding the ICJ orders.

Trump had cut off funding to UNRWA in 2018, some of which was restored by Biden in 2021.

The Intercept reports: “New York Times Puts ‘Daily’ Episode on Ice Amid Internal Firestorm Over Hamas Sexual Violence Article.”

See related IPA news releases.

World Court Orders Israel to Abide by Genocide Convention and Stop Killing

Share

The International Court of Justice on Friday morning ordered: “The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular: (a) killing members of the group. …” See full video and clip.

South African foreign minister Naledi Pandor at the Hague said she would have wanted the ICJ (also known as the World Court) to explicitly call for a ceasefire, as South Africa asked for, but says the only way Israel can meet the order of the court is for there to be a ceasefire. See below for further analysis of this.

See news release: “International Coalition to Stop Genocide in Palestine Welcomes Today’s ICJ Order; Demands its Implementation,” which among other things, calls on an escalation of Boycott Divestment and Sanctions — modeled on activism against apartheid South Africa — against Israel.

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle@illinois.edu
Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. Boyle’s books include The Bosnian People Charge Genocide (1996) Palestine, Palestinians and International Law (2009) and World Politics, Human Rights and International Law (2021). He was featured on the news release “On Israel: Lawyer Who Applied Genocide Convention for Bosnia Recommends it Now for Palestinians.” See his recent interview with “Democracy Now.”

He said today: “This is a massive, overwhelming legal victory for the Republic of South Africa against Israel on behalf of the Palestinians. The UN General Assembly now can suspend Israel from participation in its activities as it did for South Africa and Yugoslavia. It can admit Palestine as a full member. And — especially since the International Criminal Court has been a farce — it can establish a tribunal to prosecute the highest level officials of the Israeli government, both civilian and military.”

CRAIG MOKHIBER, craigmokhiber@gmail.com, @CraigMokhiber
Mokhiber is an International human rights lawyer and former Director of the New York Office of the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, who stepped down from his post in 2023 and penned a now-viral letter on unfolding genocide and the UN’s failures.

He said today: “The ICJ has ruled on provisional measures in the Genocide case against Israel, which must immediately stop killing and harming people in Gaza and inflicting destructive conditions on them, punish incitement, allow all humanitarian aid, save evidence and report next month.

“Not a ceasefire exactly, but they are ordered to stop the acts that were complained about in the application — killing, harming, destruction, etc.

“This may be less than ideal because Israel will likely continue while claiming military necessity and lawful intent. The mandated report next month and the court’s response will therefore be crucial.

“But this is already an important victory. The court ruled that South Africa’s genocide claim is ‘plausible’ at this stage and ordered Israel to stop all related acts and allow relief to the people of Gaza.

“Senior officials in the U.S. and the West who argued — outrageously — that the case was completely baseless and without merit must now contend with a ruling by the World Court that the case is indeed plausible and requires immediate provisional measures. [See Thursday State Department briefing highlights from Decensored News.]

“Israel, accustomed to impunity, is unlikely to comply. Whether or not they report back to the court next month on measures, the Court will have to act again. And the Security Council can be called to act on non-compliance at any time. The complicit US will then likely veto action.

“The General Assembly would then be convened to act. A strong resolution there could call for specific legal, economic, political, diplomatic, consular, organizational and other measures. And individual states and regional orgs should act as well, as a matter of legal duty under the convention and under the Charter.

“In sum, while imperfect without a call for an unconditional ceasefire, the court’s order is a historic and powerful tool in the struggle against Israeli impunity, further empowering states, organizations and activists to step up pressure on the apartheid regime.

“Time now for all to act to turn the order into the change necessary to bring accountability for the perpetrators, redress for victims, and protection for the vulnerable.”

See from David Swanson: “International Court of Justice Rules That Israel Must Stop Killing Palestinians.”

Ali Abunimah commented: “The International Court of Justice ruled that accusation of genocide against Israel is credible, that Palestinians face urgent, catastrophic situation and that Israeli leaders express genocidal intent. It ordered Israel to immediately halt killing and all other prohibited acts under Genocide Convention. …. A ‘ceasefire’ is what you demand in an armed conflict. In a genocide you demand an immediate end to all genocidal acts and that is exactly what the ICJ ordered with immediate effect.”

Later today, the Center for Constitutional Rights genocide case against the Biden administration for enabling Israel proceeds. See interview on Intercepted.

« Previous PageNext Page »