Star Jones' ex-husband Al Reynolds is telling his truth.
Reynolds, who was married to the former The View co-host from 2004-2008, came out as bisexual in 2017, and has recently shared that each of his former partners were aware of his sexuality.
While on the latest installment of Fox Soul's Tea-G-I-F, Reynolds, his co-host Claudia Jordan and guest co-host, comedian Luenell, opined about whether someone who is transgender should share their gender identity on the first date.
Luenell then pointed out Reynolds' previous marriage to Jones, 62, and asked him about his sexuality. "Did you come out and expose yourself to Star when you first got married?"
"Oh my goodness, I have never been not truthful with anybody that I've dated," Reynolds replied.
(America's Next Diva? Fox, get right on it! It's your next reality hit!)
But Jones never understood what makes a diva. It takes more than screaming hissy fits (in front of too many audiences). It takes more than being opinated.
Diva like behavior has to be grounded with the audience's understanding that you're genuinely a nice person. The cackle didn't help. Nor when it was utilized. The obvious tension with Debbie Matenopoulos didn't help. The outright hostility to any opinion Lisa Ling voiced only made it worse.
But she might have managed to pull off plus-size diva if December 1999 had never happened.
That's what Star Jones could never live down.
Who loves a diva? A lot of straight women, a lot of gay men. Most of the straight women are comfortable with gay men.
So imagine everyone's shock, having embraced the weight struggles of Star Jones, having laughed as she couldn't keep her hands off male guests (Michael Douglas was all but raped on air by Star Jones), when suddenly Star needs to prove that, hey, she's got deep thoughts too.
She votes God when she squeezes into a voting box. That's what she explained in December of 1999. That's why she can't support same-sex marriage (did she really make the "Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve" joke?), why she won't support candidates who support it.
It didn't go over well with the studio audience, it didn't go over well with ABC's poor switchboard operators having to address the call ins. It didn't go over well on the show's message boards (which crashed during the show due to being overwhelmed with users).
Star Jones was encouraged to pen a statement that could be snail mailed and e-mailed to all the viewers complaining. (The View never received as much mail, e-mail or calls, up to that point, as they did when Star outed her inner homophobe.)
The laughable statement became the most circulated item in entertainment circles. For those who missed it . . . Not everyone watches The View and not everyone gets the laugh of the week forwarded to them by others in the entertainment industry, C.I. offered to dust it off last weekend but there was no need. On Monday, as rumors began spreading about something happening with People magazine, the 'response' was e-mailed and faxed like it was 1999 all over again. It's dated December 21, 1999, FYI.
Some say to prohibiting same-sex marriages is a violation of the right to privacy. I disagree: In my opinion, who you have a right to love is private, who you have a right to marry is a matter of public policy.
Translation, second-class citizens is all you same-sex peoples deserve in the Tubby World of Star. While the world was expansive in girth, it was small in mind. Translation, hop back into the closests, losers. Jones (and others) worked harder on this response than on her "book" which is why it surprised many to see "Some say to prohibiting same-sex marriages is . . ." as opposed to "Some say prohibiting same-sex marriages is . . ." so early on in the letter. She was a lawyer, right?
I see marriage as a sacred union between a man and a woman that is blessed by God.
The 'response' goes up in full if the rumors (we didn't start them) about her own husband end up being true. (If they're true, he'll be bailing shortly.)
In all honesty, this is not an issue that will make me go out and campaign against it, but if I'm asked my opinion...I'm going to tell the truth.
Some might respond, "Tell the truth about the weight loss." Considering that Jones stated on the air (what prompted the response) was that she votes 'her God' and that she couldn't support those who supported same-sex marriage, that was campaigning against it. (What? She thinks we really believe she could have survived even two houses on a block walk?)
My only goal in this regard is to go to bed every night, wake up every morning and look at myself in the face, knowing that I have not betrayed what I believe in.
Well she certainly has more than enough time now to stare at herself in the mirror. Maybe she'll be able to grasp how freakish she looks to so many?
There was a huge fallout over this. There was a fallout from guests, who didn't take to making cheery talk with the homophobe, and from the audience. There was a huge drop in her positives (which were never all that) because her core, such as it was, was made up of those who bought into the "Diva" myth.
A diva can be a real bitch to her assistants, but she's expected to have love for the world as a whole. She can rip apart room service, but when it comes to the people who are scapegoated, she's supposed to be welcoming. She rolled over and squashed any personal hopes of being a diva then and there.
Over ten years, she struck many viewers as getting nastier and nastier -- which made little sense to them because didn't she now have it all? She'd finally found a husband ("finally found" because she repeatedly and publicly made it her chief goal, year after year). There was a book out with her name on it, right? According to her, she had so much strength and determination that she was able to shed the pounds practically overnight. (Maybe she should have put her name to a book for the body as opposed to the soul?) Why was she still so nasty and unhappy?
And what was her problem with Joy Behar? Viewers couldn't stop wondering that?
They'd seen her dimiss Debbie (while Debbie was still speaking) and figured it was just an annoyance at a young blond. Then came Lisa and she was even more condescending and hostile to Lisa. For all the rumors of Rosie O'Donnell joining the show and the tension that would emerge on the first day, the truth was, there was already tension on the show. (Do you think Bill appreciated all the tantrums she threw? He didn't.)
You can get away with that behavior if you're popular. She wasn't. Beginning in 1999, she lost support and only continued to lose it. (Hold-out viewers, determined to see the best, were shocked to see her gimmie-gimmie attitude when she was to be married. Again, she's talked of nothing but a huband for years and years. Now it was all about the freebies and gifts?)
Mad TV and SNL's parodies of her (written by people who knew how vile she was) didn't help. SNL was seen by more but Mad TV hit harder spoofing her Payless commercials, portraying her as someone who needed food breaks to put on a pair of shoes, someone who couldn't see her own feets, and a slob who threw the remains wherever (leading to the hilarious moment where she finally steps into a shoe and on a sizeable roach inside it).
People thought it was funny. And it, and the tacky commercials they were based on, further hurt her.
Ava and C.I. are no fans of Barbara Walters (as they've established in features here before). They don't care for her. But they were the ones suggesting this feature because, though they don't like Walters, they couldn't believe the way Jones was attempting to Eve Harrington her. (All About Eve, a film starring Bette Davis, is about a backbiting, self-serving Eve trying to steal the spotlight from Davis' Margo Channing.)
They say, Walters didn't just carry her for the last eight months, she carried her for years. Walters was fully aware of how viewers had turned off to Star Jones. She was aware that it was unlikely Jones could or would recover from December 1999. But Walters was committed to keeping the group intact and giving Jones a chance to find her footing. ABC wanted Jones gone long before last year. When her negatives grew so high, only then did Walters agree. It had been six years of negatives at that point and Star Jones was no longer just harming Star Jones, she was now harming the show.
Walters didn't kick her to the curb. She carried her though several months (and Jones knew the end was near months ago). She did that out of a sense of loyalty and fairness. It wasn't a "business decision" (that would have required ejecting her immediately).
Walters' payback for months of kindess (and lots of easy money for Jones who was paid to attract an audience, not repel one)?
Jones initiated her own counter-plan. She'd go out this week. She did a hush-hush interview with People. One that, hush-hush or not, still made the rounds and one that Walters was aware of (but chose to believe Jones was taking the high road in it). Then, to promote the upcoming article and herself, Jones broke from the planned topics to announce on air that she was leaving. No dummy, People immediately published their story online to get credit for their scoop. (They'd planned to publish it in print on Friday.)
Jones didn't arrange the interviews that followed after she'd made her announcement. ABC and Walters began hearing rumblings immediately after the show airing her "I've decided to leave" announcement was off the air. (Jones never learned that the ones who kiss your ass the most are usually the first to rat you out). Within hours, those interviews were confirmed.
The response of Walters to being stabbed in the back by someone she'd given a job to (when no one else was lining up to make the woman a regular on a TV show) was perfectly natural. We honestly wish she'd be a little more vocal. (Ava and C.I. say she won't this year. They say it will come out in bits over the next few years.)
Now the homophobe who didn't burn up the publishing industry, who has no shot at Jenny Craig or Weight Watchers commercials because too many doubt her official story on the weight loss, the woman who had the worst TVQ some at ABC have ever seen, is out on the street. Is it really true that she's offered her services to Fox Friends or whatever that daytime talk show is? Is it really true that she offered one interviewer, off air, that she'd be happy to fill in for him? A bit of advice, take the Court TV offer. No, they aren't meeting her "demands," but it's only the concrete offer currently. She's also rumored to be attempting to interest the publishing industry in "My Side" (her potential tell all).
She's under the impression that she has an audience among viewers (the lack of "We're with you, Star!" response should have corrected that impression) and among the entertainment industry (her shameless self-promotion and back stabbing ensured that was not the case).
We'll close this by correcting some impressions. Rosie O'Donnell is not "replacing" Star. She's been brought in to fill Meredith's spot. Who will "replace" Star?
ABC hoped it would be Patricia Heaton. They signed a generous contract with Heaton and have had to face the fact that there's no sitcom that can be shaped around her limited talents (short of starring her in My Wife, The Shrew). As reality sunk in that nagging isn't what most look to in a lead character, they hoped to save the contract by sliding her over to The View. But she's doesn't test well with women.
As a reader once pointed out, Heaton took to the airwaves to slam Michael Schiavo and repeat lies about Terry Schiavo's health status. That doesn't help her test results. It also doesn't help that women didn't love Raymond as much as men did. Heaton played the male idea of the wife from hell (never wants sex, always battles with your mother openly, nags you, go down the list -- while Ray was Peter Pan and 'loveable').
Star Jones never understood The View audience. Her homphobia would have played well on Pat Robertson's show. It didn't play well on The View where the audience was a little less rabid and a great deal more educated. Some at ABC have realized that putting Heaton on the show is asking women to embrace self-hatred (for her positions and for the character that made her semi-famous) and be back in the Star Jones trap. They're also starting to get concerned about how potential guests would respond to the addition. (Not well. Her remarks to Jay Leno were the kind of self-immolation that helped kill Sean Young's career.) They thought they had a "common sense" type (a la Meredith -- that's how they saw her) and now they're starting to grasp all the baggage Heaton brings with her.
It's an interesting time for The View. Changes will occur this fall. If Star Jones had shown even the basic sense of decency (if not appreciation), it could be an interesting time for Jones too. Instead, most people think it's "sad" -- when they're not busy laughing that she got what she'd long deserved.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Fighting “human animals.” Making Gaza a “slaughterhouse.” “Erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth.”
Such inflammatory rhetoric is a key component of South Africa’s case accusing Israel of genocide at the U.N. world court, a charge that Israel denies. South Africa says the language — in comments by Israeli leaders, soldiers and entertainers about Palestinians in Gaza since Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack sparked war — is proof of Israel’s intent to commit genocide.
“We are getting very few positive responses to our requests for aid delivery and permits to move around Gaza,” said Tamara Alrifai, the director of external relations for Unrwa.
Alrifai said the organisation maintained contact with Cogat, the Israeli body that oversees the Palestinian territories and coordinates with aid groups, but “this contact doesn’t always bring positive results – as we can see, from the obstructions to delivery, to our ability to receive [aid] trucks”.
Thousands of starving Palestinian children in southern Gaza are at risk of “dying before their families’ eyes,” according to the United Nations — a stark warning as Israel’s continued assault on Rafah cuts off access to the region’s health care facilities and life-saving treatment for malnutrition.
The nearly 3,000 affected children make up about three-quarters of the Palestinian youth in southern Gaza who were estimated to have been receiving care for moderate to severe acute malnutrition before Israel expanded its military offensive into Rafah, according to reporting from nutrition partners working with the United Nations Children’s Fund, or UNICEF.
Over the Memorial Day weekend, Israel bombed starving Gazan refugees crowded in tents in Rafah, where Israel had told them to go. As Jeffrey St. Clair (CounterPunch, 5/31/24) wrote, leaflets dropped in Rafah a few days before told them to go to “Tel al-Sultan through Beach Road,” an area set up by the UNRWA refugee agency and designated a UN humanitarian safe zone. The leaflet added, “Don’t blame us after we warned you.”
Nevertheless, without warning, Israel hit the camp with at least eight missiles spreading fire though the encampment of plastic tents (Quds News, 5/26/24). Some refugees burned to death, mostly women and children, leaving them dismembered and charred.
The world saw the terror of the massacre on international and social media. Images showed the area of the strike engulfed in flames as Palestinians screamed, cried, ran for safety and sought to help the injured. “They told people to move there then killed them,” Richard Medhurst (5/28/24) posted.
A boy cries in horror and fear as he watches his father’s tent burn with him inside. A man holds up the body of his charred, now-headless baby, wandering around, not knowing what to do or where to go. An injured, starving child convulses in pain as a medic struggles to find a vein for an IV in her emaciated arm (Al Jazeera, 5/27/24).
Al Jazeera (cited by Quds News, 5/26/24) quoted a Civil Defense source: “We believe that the occupation army used internationally prohibited weapons to target the displaced in Rafah, judging by the size of the fires that erupted at the targeted site.”
US news media reported the tent massacre, some more truthfully than others. But most establishment media repeated Israel’s false claims that it was an accident, weaving disinformation messaging into toned-down descriptions of the scene. With confused syntax, they omitted words like “genocide,” “massacre” and “starvation.” Most left out the language of international law that is best able to explain the unprecedented crimes against humanity that Israel is committing. Corporate reporting left the tent massacre devoid of context and empathy, ignored actions that need to be taken, and ultimately facilitated the ongoing Israeli genocide of Palestinians.
When NBC News (5/28/24) reported from Gaza that “Israeli tanks reached the city center for the first time, according to NBC News‘ crew on the ground,” it failed to say that the NBC crew was embedded with Israel’s invading force.
The same sentence continued that Israel was “defying international pressure to halt an offensive that has sent nearly 1 million people fleeing Rafah.” But Israel was not just “defying…pressure”; it was in violation of a direct order from the International Court of Justice ICJ to halt its attack on Rafah. Yet NBC reporters rode into Rafah with an army that was ignoring international law to commit further genocide in Gaza.
Compare NBC’s words to those used by Ramy Abdu (5/26/24), chair of Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, who posted: “In the deadliest response to the International Court of Justice’s decision, the Israeli army targeted a group of displaced persons’ tents in Rafah, killing approximately 60 innocent civilians so far.”
In a post, Francesca Albanese (5/26/24), UN special rapporteur for human rights in Palestine, included International actions that needed to be implemented:
The #GazaGenocide will not easily end without external pressure: Israel must face sanctions, justice, suspension of agreements, trade, partnership and investments, as well as participation in int’l forums.
Such sanctions are rarely discussed in establishment media, but are becoming more urgent, given the New York Times report (5/29/24) that Israel intends to extend the genocide through the remainder of 2024. Though the Times reported on the global outrage and demonstrations against the Rafah massacre, the words “genocide” and “massacre” were not used, nor was there any mention of the possibility of sanctions against Israel.
AMY GOODMAN: An independent United Nations panel has concluded Israel and Hamas have committed war crimes since October 7th. In a new report, the U.N. Commission of Inquiry outlined a number of war crimes committed by Israel, including using starvation as a method of warfare and intentionally directing attacks against civilians. Part of the report details how Israel has also committed crimes against humanity for its, quote, “widespread or systematic attack directed against the civilian population in Gaza.” The report goes on to accuse Israel of committing numerous crimes against humanity, including, quote, “extermination; murder; gender persecution targeting Palestinian men and boys; forcible transfer; and torture,” unquote.
The U.N. commission accused Hamas of also committing numerous war crimes, including “intentionally directing attacks against civilians,” as well as torture and, quote, “indiscriminately firing projectiles towards populated areas in Israel,” unquote. The U.N. accused both sides of committing sexual violence.
The United Nations’ top human rights office also accused Israel of committing war crimes on Saturday, when Israeli forces killed at least 274 Palestinians in the Nuseirat refugee camp during an operation to free four Israeli hostages. This is Jeremy Laurence, spokesperson for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
JEREMY LAURENCE: We are profoundly shocked at the impact on civilians of the Israeli forces’ operation in al-Nuseirat at the weekend to secure the release of four hostages. Hundreds of Palestinians, many of them civilians, were reportedly killed and injured. The manner in which the raid was conducted in such a densely populated area seriously calls into question whether the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution, as set out under the laws of war, were respected by the Israeli forces.
AMY GOODMAN: The U.N.’s top human rights office also accused Palestinian armed groups of committing war crimes for holding hostages in densely populated areas.
This comes as Israel and Hamas are being urged to accept the three-phase ceasefire and hostage deal outlined by President Biden, endorsed by the U.N. Security Council. On Tuesday, Hamas submitted its response to mediators from Qatar. The U.S. claims Israel has already agreed to the plan, but numerous Israeli officials have publicly attacked the deal.
Israel is continuing to bombard Gaza, where the official death toll is 37,100, but that’s believed to be an undercount since thousands of bodies remain under the rubble.
We’re joined right now by Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of DAWN, a group working to reform U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
Sarah, welcome back to Democracy Now! Sarah Leah, start off by responding to the ceasefire deal and where you think it stands. This is the one proposed by President Biden almost two weeks ago, the first time the U.S. didn’t veto a ceasefire deal at the U.N. Security Council but actually sponsored it.
SARAH LEAH WHITSON: Yeah, I mean, it’s a welcome proposal, if only eight months and 40,000 dead Palestinians too late. Absolutely nothing of value has been achieved in this eight months of carnage in Gaza. And the Biden administration is basically trying to pressure Israel into accepting a ceasefire proposal by pretending it’s an Israeli ceasefire proposal. While Hamas has accepted this, Israel has not yet accepted this ceasefire proposal, and, in fact, has communicated its unwillingness to abide by a ceasefire by continuing its heinous military incursions into Gaza.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, and this specific issue of whether Israel supported it or not, we’ve heard Secretary of State Blinken repeatedly say that they were just waiting for Hamas to respond. What do you sense is the situation here between the U.S. government and Israel on the ceasefire?
SARAH LEAH WHITSON: I think that the United States is trying to — has been trying to push Israel to halt its operations, begged Israel for several months not to make an incursion into Rafah, all of which Israel has repeatedly ignored. I don’t know whether the attack on the Nuseirat refugee camp, that was part of a so-called rescue operation, is something that the United States offered up its acquiescence and participation in, in exchange for Israel agreeing to a ceasefire. I imagine that the timing of this raid, certainly after the ceasefire proposal had been made, raises questions about that. But what we repeatedly hear from Israeli officials — not American officials purporting to speak on their behalf — is that they will not accept a ceasefire proposal until they achieve their mission of destroying all of Hamas.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And in relationship to this weekend raid, your perspective on the reports that the United States provided intelligence and logistics support to the operation?
SARAH LEAH WHITSON: Well, it has been widely reported, and confirmed by a number of U.S. government sources, that the United States has been involved in the planning of this raid for several months and specifically provided intelligence as well as logistical support for this operation, which, of course, resulted in the murder of over 270 Palestinians — entirely predictable, when you randomly drop bombs all over a refugee camp, that many, many people will die.
Not only is it a grotesque, indiscriminate attack on civilians, the Israelis deployed perfidy to carry it out. They dressed themselves up as civilians, in a broad daylight attack. They used an aid truck, that was videotaped approaching the area, as well as a civilian vehicle, pretending to be refugees fleeing with a mattress on their car, in order to trick Hamas forces and to allow the operation to go forward.
There’s also been a report by Hamas, which has not been verified, that the operation also resulted in Israel killing three other hostages, including a U.S. citizen, but we’ve not yet been able to confirm that.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go to a clip of Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser. He was on CNN, and he was being questioned by Dana Bash about what took place in al-Nuseirat. He was being questioned while in Paris.
JAKE SULLIVAN: The United States has been providing support to Israel for several months in its efforts to help identify the locations of hostages in Gaza and to support efforts to try to secure their rescue or recovery. I’m not going to get into the specific operational or intelligence-related matters associated with that, because we need to protect those. I can only just say that we have generally provided support to the IDF so that we can try to get all of the hostages home, including the American hostages who are still being held.
DANA BASH:* So, I understand that intelligence, U.S. intelligence, assisted. But will you say anything about U.S. personnel, U.S. weapons?
JAKE SULLIVAN: Well, the one thing I can say is that there were no U.S. forces, no U.S. boots on the ground involved in this operation. We did not participate militarily in this operation.
AMY GOODMAN: So, if you can talk about that distinction that he’s making, and then go on, Sarah Leah Whitson, to respond to these two U.N. reports?
SARAH LEAH WHITSON: Well, as I’m sure Jake Sullivan actually knows, military participation is not defined by boots on the ground. And his rebutting or refuting that there were American boots on the ground, and therefore America was not militarily participating in the attack, is absolutely false and wrong under international law. During the Yemen war, for example — and this is why Mr. Sullivan should know this — U.S. lawyers advised the White House that American intelligence and logistical support for the Saudi war in Yemen would make the United States and makes the United States a party to that war. Similarly, American logistical and intelligence support for an active military operation means that the United States has actively participated in the conflict and is a party to the war.
Why this is particularly bad, bad policymaking, is that not only does it make the United States liable and complicit for prosecution for war crimes, including the war crimes that took place in the attack on the refugee camp, but also opens up U.S. forces to reprisal attacks and counterattacks as a party to the conflict, as a legitimate military target. If the Biden administration has not sought a war powers resolution to enter the United States into such active participation in military operations, that is obviously a violation of our own Constitution and yet another example of the Biden administration entangling us in military conflicts in the Middle East without congressional approval and ratification.
With respect to the U.N. reports that have just been issued, they conclude what everybody else who is an expert in law and has observed, which is that the — number one, the attack on Nuseirat refugee camp was itself a war crime, and it involved deliberate targeting of civilians, as well as indiscriminate targeting of civilians. Sadly, this is just piling up on top of ceaseless, relentless war crimes and crimes against humanity that have been underway in Gaza for the past eight months. And that is the conclusion that the Commission of Inquiry’s report released today reveals. We now have mountains of U.N. reports, U.N. experts, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court shouting from the rafters that Israel is carrying out war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, and yet all of this is showing us, sadly, that Israel has no interest in international law, and the United States has no interest in demanding that Israel actually comply with the international law, besides rhetorical flourishes added in statements to the press in the United States. The continued military support to Israel is really not just a savage attack on the Palestinian people, it is a savage attack on international law itself. And it will come to haunt and hurt America for decades to come.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And I wanted to ask you, Sarah Leah Whitson, in a related issue in terms of the attacks on Gaza — on May 15th, your organization DAWN sent the State Department a dossier documenting how a group has been attempting to disrupt and prevent aid reaching the people of Palestine, the Palestinians in Gaza. Could you talk about that group and others that support it?
SARAH LEAH WHITSON: That’s right. The Israeli group — I don’t to mangle the pronunciation — Tzav 9 is an organized group of settlers in the West Bank that have deliberately and repeatedly attacked humanitarian aid convoys headed to Gaza. This has been an organized effort, coordinated on WhatsApp and other social media, to announce exactly when and where the attacks would take place.
We are urging the Biden administration to sanction this group, but not only to sanction this group, but to sanction the Israeli companies and NGOs, nonprofit organizations, that have been actively fundraising to pay for these attacks on humanitarian aid convoys. I mean, it just boggles the mind that we have vigilante groups who are deliberately attacking food and medicine trucks meant for civilians. I think it raises a tremendous concern and question about the psychology of Israelis who would do such a thing. But more significantly, we want the Biden administration to exercise its sanctions, that it has announced for violence in the West Bank, not only against these individuals, not only against this group. They are not just rogue, lone-wolf operators. They are supported by an infrastructure and network of companies and businesses and nonprofit organizations that are funding their efforts. It’s particularly appalling that an American NGO has been involved, as well, in fundraising for these really disgusting attacks on humanitarian aid convoys. And we think that the IRS should closely examine whether these contributions violate their rules under the IRS as charitable donations.
AMY GOODMAN: We spoke to an Israeli human rights lawyer who tried to interrupt the settlers who were trying to stop the aid convoys, that group, Tsav 9. “Tsav” in Hebrew means “command.” Sarah Leah Whitson, we want to thank you so much for being with us, executive director of DAWN, an organization working to reform U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
Next up, we turn to the conviction of President Biden’s son Hunter Biden on all three felonies in that gun trial for buying a gun at a time when he was using illegal drugs. Stay with us.
Gaza remains under assault. Day 251 of the assault in the wave that began in October. Binoy Kampmark (DISSIDENT VOICE) points out, "Bloodletting as form; murder as fashion. The ongoing campaign in Gaza by Israel’s Defence Forces continues without stalling and restriction. But the burgeoning number of corpses is starting to become a challenge for the propaganda outlets: How to justify it? Fortunately for Israel, the United States, its unqualified defender, is happy to provide cover for murder covered in the sheath of self-defence." CNN has explained, "The Gaza Strip is 'the most dangerous place' in the world to be a child, according to the executive director of the United Nations Children's Fund." ABC NEWS quotes UNICEF's December 9th statement, ""The Gaza Strip is the most dangerous place in the world to be a child. Scores of children are reportedly being killed and injured on a daily basis. Entire neighborhoods, where children used to play and go to school have been turned into stacks of rubble, with no life in them." NBC NEWS notes, "Strong majorities of all voters in the U.S. disapprove of President Joe Biden’s handling of foreign policy and the Israel-Hamas war, according to the latest national NBC News poll. The erosion is most pronounced among Democrats, a majority of whom believe Israel has gone too far in its military action in Gaza." The slaughter continues. It has displaced over 1 million people per the US Congressional Research Service. Jessica Corbett (COMMON DREAMS) points out, "Academics and legal experts around the world, including Holocaust scholars, have condemned the six-week Israeli assault of Gaza as genocide." The death toll of Palestinians in Gaza is grows higher and higher. United Nations Women noted, "More than 1.9 million people -- 85 per cent of the total population of Gaza -- have been displaced, including what UN Women estimates to be nearly 1 million women and girls. The entire population of Gaza -- roughly 2.2 million people -- are in crisis levels of acute food insecurity or worse." THE NATIONAL notes, "At least 37,232 Palestinians have been killed and 85,037 injured in the Israeli operation in Gaza since October 7, the enclave's Health Ministry said on Thursday. This includes 30 people killed and 150 injured in the past 24 hours, the ministry said.." Months ago, AP noted, "About 4,000 people are reported missing." February 7th, Jeremy Scahill explained on DEMOCRACY NOW! that "there’s an estimated 7,000 or 8,000 Palestinians missing, many of them in graves that are the rubble of their former home." February 5th, the United Nations' Phillipe Lazzarini Tweeted:
Iraq and Iran discussed on Thursday “dangerous signs” of Israel attacking Lebanon, Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein said after meeting with visiting Iranian Acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani.
“If there is an attack on southern Lebanon, God forbid, it will affect the whole region,” Mr Hussein said during a press conference in Baghdad.
He warned that “expanding the war is not only a danger to Lebanon but to the entire region".
For his part, Mr Bagheri Kani said: “The Zionists, due to their failure in Gaza, might make another mistake and expand their aggression”.
Both countries called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
Muslim civil rights group calls on Pentagon to ban U.S. soldiers from participating in Gaza genocide
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, called on the Biden administration to investigate reports that an American soldier is taking part in the far right Israeli government’s genocide in Gaza and reportedly posted an image of herself and a destroyed mosque defaced with insults targeting Islam’s Prophet Muhammad.
[NOTE: More than 23,000 American citizens currently serve in the Israeli military.]
Israel has slaughtered more than 37,000 people in Gaza, mostly women and children.
In a statement, CAIR National Deputy Director Edward Ahmed Mitchell said:
“These disgusting and despicable images of an American soldier in Rafah celebrating desecration of a mosque and the slandering of the Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him) are an example of why the Pentagon should not allow any U.S. servicemembers to serve in the Israeli military, much less participate in its Gaza genocide.
“We call on the Biden administration to investigate this incident, take appropriate action against this reported U.S. soldier, and ban all American servicemembers from taking part in the Israeli government’s war on the people of Gaza.”
Yesterday, CAIR called on the Biden administration to act after UNICEF reported that almost 3,000 children have been cut off from treatment for malnutrition in southern Gaza by Israel’s ongoing offensive, which President Biden previously called a “red line.”
Previously, welcomed a United Nations Security Council resolution supporting a ceasefire in Gaza. CAIR also commended Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) after he announced that he would not attend Netanyahu’s speech.
CAIR urged all Americans to use its click-and-send action alert to call on members of Congress to follow suit and boycott or protest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to a joint session of Congress on July 24th due to his openly racist views, genocidal war crimes, disrespect for the United States, and opposition to a Palestinian state.
TAKE ACTION: URGE CONGRESS TO BOYCOTT OR PROTEST WAR CRIMINAL NETANYAHU’S SPEECH TO CONGRESS
Over the weekend, CAIR condemned the “horrific massacre” of almost 300 Palestinians at the Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza.
CAIR’s mission is to protect civil rights, enhance understanding of Islam, promote justice, and empower American Muslims.
La misión de CAIR es proteger las libertades civiles, mejorar la comprensión del Islam, promover la justicia, y empoderar a los musulmanes en los Estados Unidos.
Become a Fan of CAIR on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/CAIRNational
Subscribe to CAIR’s Email List
Subscribe to CAIR’s Twitter Feed
http://twitter.com/cairnational
Subscribe to CAIR’s YouTube Channel
Follow CAIR on Instagram
Donate to CAIR
-
-
-
-
-
Talking movies with Ava and C.I.7 hours ago
-
-
-
-
-
Shady Menendez7 hours ago
-
-
One more time on Hunter7 hours ago
-
-
No comments:
Post a Comment