Fact-Check For Falastin

[cosmonaut775]

Hey do y’all remember when Boeing fucking killed a guy last year. And we all said “huh I guess Boeing fucking killed a guy” and then went on with our lives. And everybody knew that Boeing had fully just fucking executed a guy and nothing came of it. Like there was no police investigation no justice no nothing. Like literally EVERYBODY knew that Boeing had full on murdered a guy to silence him and there wasn’t any consequences for them. Kinda crazy.

[flamiemoonfox]

and there was even less talk when openai did the exact same thing more recently

[flamiemoonfox]

So for those who are, very understandably uninitiated on this story:

On 23 October last year (2024) the New York Times published an interview with former OpenAI researcher Suchir Balaji who worked on organising and gathering data for OpenAI until 2022 when he begun thinking about the morality of it. He eventually came to the conclusion that what OpenAI is doing blatantly violates copyright law and decided to leave the company altogether in August 2024.

After he came out with this accusation he was set to appear in court to testify against OpenAI’s data-gathering practices, something which had the potential of being a complete disaster for the company and the generative AI industry as a whole.

That was until 26 November, just days before he was due to appear in court, when he suddenly and mysteriously was found dead inside his own apartment. Investigators concluded that the death was self-inflicted, something which his family has disputed.

There was also “sign of struggle in the bathroom and looks like someone hit him in the bathroom based on blood spots”, and his apartment showed signs of having been ransacked for evidence: “The pin drive is missing. His computer was messed up.”.

Overall it feels pretty clear-cut what happened, that is to say that OpenAI had him killed because he was a legitimate threat to their business, indicating that they are fully aware that the way they’re gathering data is completely illegal.

Sources:

Alys Davies, 14.12.2024, OpenAI whistleblower found dead in San Francisco apartment. BBC News

Barney Davis, 16.1.2025, Suchir Balaji’s family demand outside investigation into OpenAI whistleblower’s death. The Independent

Cade Metz, 23.11.2024, Former OpenAI Researcher Says the Company Broke Copyright Law. The New York Times

[narcoleptic-insomniac-tgirl-dea]

im sorry what?

[monochromaticchime]

Oh for fucks sake do tumblr idiots really believe that corporations just have hitmen teams for whistleblowers that somehow no one has caught. Even putting aside that they literally died after giving whistleblower testimony whereas it would have made more sense to kill whistleblowers who hadn’t testified yet, even putting aside that this means they would have to pay off the coroners who concluded these deaths were suicides and that also has not been proven, there is genuinely no evidence that the companies were involved in their deaths, people just saw that they died and that they were whistleblowers and assumed they had to be connected together. This is conspiracy theory bullshit. It’s not ok when the right does it and it’s not ok when the left dies it either

[fakenewsfactcheck]

I thought OP had put a pretty good case together here. But I also have seen how blatantly and wholly wrong things can turn out to be, even when they sounded airtight before I learned anything.

So I looked at "reblogs with comments" before deciding.

And then this counterargument sounded solid.

And then I was like, wait. Okay, "they literally died after giving whistleblower testimony" instead of before. But could there have been further testimony they were going to give, or--

So I scrolled back up. And it explicitly says this guy died "just days before he was due to appear in court" to testify against OpenAI.

And: if someone did kill this guy to prevent him from testifying, it doesn't necessarily mean that OpenAI has a hitman team for whistleblowers. Or that that's normal corporate practice that somehow no one has caught.

It could mean that one person he worked with felt like some aspect of his testimony put them at risk.

It could have been a coworker or higher-up who was at risk of losing their job. Either because of something that would be in this guy's testimony, or because his testimony was likely to get their department shut down.

It could have even been something incredibly irrelevant. Maybe some story in the testimony was likely to end up with, "The way I figured that out was, my coworker was cheating on his wife with someone in this other department, and--"

Maybe they were already under extreme financial/personal stress, and it seemed like a good idea to knock this guy out and fuck up anything that might hold evidence. And they didn't realize that there's a really fine line between "hit someone hard enough to knock them out" and "hit hard enough to kill."

In fact, I'm just gonna see if there's any news more recent than this thread....

The dark conspiracy that OpenAI can’t shake

Skeptics believe a whistleblower was murdered. New revelations call their claims into question.

There was an investigation. His death was ruled a suicide. His mom insisted that his pen drive was missing, that his apartment had been ransacked, and that his computer had been on for three days.

(I'm not sure how you can tell how long a computer has been on. Or whether she just couldn't find his pen drive. Or whether he'd ransacked his own apartment, trying to find his pen drive.)

The city investigated and ruled that it was a suicide.

She says she paid for a second, private autopsy. And that the second autopsy said he had so much GHB in his system, he couldn't possibly have shot himself.

But she's also said that he was shot at an angle that shows somebody else had to have shot him.

And she's also said that when his attacker failed to kill him by hitting him, they electrocuted him.

According to the San Francisco Standard:

Interviews with Balaji’s mother and nearly two dozen friends, coworkers, and people who have investigated the case, along with reams of new documents and footage obtained exclusively by The Standard, show that what Ramarao and other skeptics have characterized as proof of foul play is not what it seems.

Claims that there were obvious signs of a struggle and blood throughout the apartment are not supported by police body-camera footage.

Claims that a secondary autopsy found definitive evidence of murder are not reflected in documents provided by Balaji’s family.

...Ramarao has declined to share a copy of that autopsy; however, Joe Goethals, the family’s former attorney, told The Standard in January 2025 that he “would not characterize it as conclusively proving murder.”

...Another report, by a Michigan firearms consultant, claimed that a lack of soot on Balaji’s forehead meant he was shot from at least two feet away. (The official autopsy said soot “may be obscured by changes of postmortem decomposition.”) A third report, by an Alabama toxicologist, concluded that Balaji “more likely than not” took the drug GHB before his death, which Ramarao has interpreted to mean he was sedated by an attacker. (The San Francisco medical examiner said the low levels of the drug in his system were likely due to a natural decomposition process; the Alabama toxicologist acknowledged that could also be the case.)

There's a lot more in that article, linked above.

The bottom line is: there seems to be absolutely zero evidence that he was killed by an attacker, much less one from OpenAI.

So let's look at Boeing.

The comments on here are about evenly scattered between "I KNOW RIGHT" and "They did what?" I didn't know about any of this, either.

But googling "Did Boeing kill whistleblowers" immediately turns up this NPR story that opens with:

The family of John Barnett, the Boeing whistleblower who died a year ago as he pursued a lawsuit against his former employer, is suing the airplane maker, saying that Barnett's "PTSD, depression, anxiety, and panic attacks, all caused by Boeing's wrongful conduct, caused him to take his own life."

It says that Barnett was "near the end of several days of depositions in his whistleblower retaliation case against Boeing."

So, he HAD already finished all the whistle-blowing. And he had experienced retaliation from Boeing.

And in fact,

High-profile safety issues with Boeing's planes triggered a congressional hearing last June, where then-Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun acknowledged that Boeing employees have been fired for retaliating against whistleblowers.

But literally no one involved - not this guy, not his family, no one - implies that Boeing employees (or the company itself) retailed by killing them.

That was in March. In May, another Boeing whistleblower, Joshua Dean, died.

Of a MRSA infection.

According to his mom, he got sick and had trouble breathing. He went to the hospital where he tested positive for both influenza B and MRSA. They had to intubate him, which led (as it frequently does) to him also developing pneumonia. And he died.

He too had said Boeing retaliated against him: by firing him for whistleblowing.

Other whistleblowers, including Barnett, said they were retaliated against by being reassigned to a worse position; being threatened with firing; being given bad performance reviews; and being prevented from even documenting anything.

And there actually was a police investigation into Barnett's death. They investigated for more than two months, ruled it a suicide, and released the suicide note they had found on the passenger seat in the car where he had killed himself.

That's it. That's literally the entire story.

Two Boeing whistleblowers died, long after finishing their whistle-blowing. Boeing didn't kill them. They are survived by many more.

[run-of-the-milf]

I highly recommend watching this testimony from Aliya Rahman, the disabled woman who was dragged out of her car and kidnapped by ICE on her way to a doctor appointment in Minneapolis a few weeks ago.

Truly my worst nightmare.

[liitohauki]

Transcript of Aliya Rahman's speech:

Thank you members, for taking the time to be here today, and thank you staff for making this happen.

My name is Aliya Rahman, and I am a resident of South Minneapolis. I am a Bangladeshi American born in Northern Wisconsin. And I’m a disabled person with autism and a traumatic brain injury.

Not all autistic brains do this, but mine fixates on sounds, numbers, and patterns. And while what the world saw happen to me exactly three weeks ago today on video was a terrible violation it is still nothing compared to the horrific practices I saw inside the Whipple center.

So I am here today with a duty to the people who have not had the privilege of coming home, and I offer this data because these practices must end now.

On January 13th on the way to my 39th appointment at Hennepin County’s traumatic brain injury center, I encountered a traffic jam caused by ICE vehicles and no signs indicating how to get around it. I had not wanted to pull in to a blocked, chaotic intersection, but verbally agreed to do so and rolled down my window after an agent yelled, “Move! I will break your f-ing window!”

His first instruction.

Agents on all sides of my vehicle yelled conflicting threats and instructions that I could not process while watching for pedestrians.

Then, the glass of the passenger side window flew across my face.

I yelled, “I’m disabled!” at the hands grabbing at me and an agent said, “Too late.”

I felt immersed in a pattern, and I thought of Jenoah Donald, an autistic black man killed by the police during a traffic stop in 2021.

I remembered mister Silverio Villegas González, who was killed by ICE in his vehicle last year.

An agent pulled a large combat knife in front of my face, which I thought was for cutting me, and later learned was used to cut off my seat belt. Shooting pain went through my head, neck, and wrists when I hit the ground face first and people leaned on my back.

I felt the pattern, and I thought of mister George Floyd, who was killed four blocks away.

I was carried face down through the street by my cuffed arms and legs while yelling that I had a brain injury and was disabled. I now cannot lift my arms normally.

I was never asked for ID.

Never told I was under arrest.

Never read my rights.

And never charged with a crime.

Approaching the Whipple center, I saw black and brown bodies shackled together, chained together, being marched by yelling agents outdoors. I continued to hear the word “bodies”, because that is how agents referred to us:

“We’re bringing in a body.”

“They’re bringing in bodies 7, 8 at a time, where do I put ‘em?”

“We can’t use that room, there’s already a body in there.”

You have no reason to believe you will make it out alive if you’re already being called a body.

Agents repeatedly had to stop and ask how to do tasks. I received no medical screening, phone call, or access to a lawyer. I was denied a communication navigator when my speech began to slur. Agents laughed as I tried to immobilize my own neck. I asked for my cane and was told no, pulled up by my arms and prodded forward in leg irons by agents laughing and saying, “Walk! You can do it, walk.”

Agents did not know if the facility had a wheelchair.

When I was finally placed in one to be taken to interrogation an agent taunted, “You were driving, right? So your legs do work.”

I pleaded for emergency medical care for over an hour after my vision had become blurry, my heart rate went through the roof, and the pain in my neck and head became unbearable.

It was denied.

When I became unable to speak my cellmate pleaded for me.

The last sounds I remember before I blacked out on the cell floor were my cellmate banging on the door, pleading for a medic, and a voice outside saying, “We don’t wanna step on ICE’s toes.”

When I opened my eyes at Hennepin County’s emergency room, I learned I was brought there to be treated for assault.

The impacts of DHS detention on my physical, mental and financial well-being and safety have been very severe, but I do not deserve more humane treatment than anyone else, US citizen or not. And I am here today with a strong spirit and a duty to the many people who haven’t had the privilege to tell their stories or see their loved ones come home. I am extremely distressed by the pattern that violence from law enforcement has been happening to black and indigenous communities for centuries, and to DHS survivors for over 20 years.

We call ourselves a civilized nation, but we lack rules and accountability around what a person claiming to be law enforcement is permitted to do to another human being.

I am not afraid, and I’m not afraid to keep working on this problem even after ICE is gone. Thank you for your time.

[mariacallous]

[flintandpyrite]

Here are the 2024 vaccine recommendation schedules. They’ve already been wiped from the cdc site. Save them and share widely, especially to your friends with kids.

[teaboot]

Hi!!! One of my parents got meningitis when I was a kid.

They were in the hospital for nearly a month, the rest of us were all placed in medical quarantine, there were several points we thought they were gonna die, and even though they survived, it was a SUPER close call and they lost about two years of memories from the ensuing brain damage.

Like… a two-uear-long cookie-cutter pocket of thoughts and memories went missing right out of their brain. It’s an inflammation of the brain that cooks it alive.

I DIDN’T EVEN KNOW THERE WAS A VACCINE.

I WILL BE GETTING IT.

[creativeandwittyname]

a friend contracted meningitis a few years back & it was horrific. he literally wouldn’t have lived if his wife wasn’t like “mm this doesn’t seem like your normal symptoms—let’s go in just to be safe.” his care became significantly more complex (and expensive) afterwards—not to mention he had to relearn how to walk.

the fact that kids (and adults) will suffer & die needlessly because a whole generation of parents are being intentionally denied adequate or accurate vaccine info is so mindblowingly evil. fuck.

[sweetladyjustice]

It’s not being “dropped” entirely at this time. It’s moved from universal recommendation to shared clinical decision making (SCDM). Insurance and Medicaid will still cover it. Your PCP will very likely still recommend it and if they don’t, get a new PCP. If they don’t mention it, ask. There are no requirements for SCDM. It can be a 30 second conversation. You can even SCDM with a pharmacist if you choose to get it at a pharmacy.

People need to stop saying things like “dropped”. Because that causes the type of confusion that RFK Jr and his ilk want. They want you to think it’s hard to get or unavailable and not bother.

There’s concern that HHS will eventually say vaccines under SDCM will no longer fall under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, opening up manufacturers to lawsuits. Eventually, pharmaceutical companies may lose money settling and stop making the vaccine, thus making it scarce or disappear from the market entirely. However, that has not happened yet.

AAP and AAFP and ACOG are your current best sources for vaccine recommendations and schedules. Share their 2025-2026 schedules and not old CDC ones. Some state public health departments, particularly those in blue states, are recommending following AAP and AAFP schedules and not CDC.

AAP schedule (<19 years old, yes if you are 18 you are still pediatric in vaccine land)

AAFP schedule (adult)

ACOG vaccines during pregnancy

[freegazafromhamas]

[prismatic-bell]

IT'S CLOSING?????? Baruch HaShem, and may He stretch a hand of protection over the Miccosukee and all our indigenous siblings, to protect them from retaliation and pain in the coming days.

[allore]

Couple articles about it

‘Alligator Alcatraz’ may be shut down before Halloween. Florida already has a backup plan | CNN

Nearly two months after the hasty and controversial birth of “Alligator Alcatraz,” a federal judge has slammed the brakes on the operation,

Florida appeals against judge’s order to close ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ immigration jail

Judge ordered Everglades camp to close in 60 days, finding state and federal authorities broke environmental laws

[fakenewsfactcheck]

Alligator Alcatraz is still open. Why? | Opinion

Alligator Alcatraz is still open and keeping detainees in its caged facilities

Alligator Alcatraz is still open and keeping detainees in its caged facilities.  Most people we talk to do not know that an appeals court overturned the lower judge’s order to close the camp. Our national and state disgrace continues.... The descriptions of the system of ICE and CBP detention centers throughout the U.S. are frighteningly similar to what Solzhenitsyn described before the fall of the Soviet Union. The system there occurred within a society of enforced oppression. That is not our society, our country, or our values. This detention archipelago continues to exist because of the general public’s lack of knowledge, and sometimes, indifference.

The appeals court didn't stop the legal battle over Alligator Alcatraz, though. It just allowed the damn thing to continue operating while the appeals process continued.

DHS Says ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ Doesn’t Need Environmental Review

The Department of Homeland Security argued in a brief filed to a federal appeals court that the temporary detention facility in the Florida

The current situation is, the Department of Homeland Security is arguing that it doesn't control state decisions on where its facilities are or how big they'll be. And it claims that the Supreme Court says federal agencies don't have to consider the actions of other entities outside their authority.

BUT

The reason the Court of Appeals overturned the injunction 2-1, letting the place keep operating, was that they didn't think the case had a strong chance of winning.

The logic was that this wasn't a federal, DHS problem. Because Florida may have been told it MIGHT get federal reimbursement down the road. But it hadn't even applied for federal funds yet. Maybe it never even would! Then the National Environmental Protection Act would be totally irrelevant!

Except it totally had.

According to Earthjustice, “The Florida Division of Emergency Management wrongfully withheld the [DHS] grant application documents and the grant award. These documents are public records."

So everyone is now suing Florida to get the records.

Donald Trump vetoes plan to protect Miccosukee Tribe's Osceola Camp

The President alluded to the Tribe's fight against Alligator Alcatraz as he killed $14M in funding.

Meanwhile, Trump took revenge against the tribe today by vetoing a bipartisan bill that "would have amended the Miccosukee Reserved Area act to include the Osceola Camp, an inhabited tribal village located in the Everglades. As approved, the legislation would have directed the Interior Department to consult with the Miccosukee Tribe on the best ways to protect structures from flooding events."

The bill's sponsor, U.S. Rep. Carlos Giménez (a Miami-Dade County Republican, mind you), told the House of Representatives:

“The Osceola Camp is not only home to tribal members, but it is also a site of historical and cultural importance. Including this land in the reserved area will empower the tribe to protect their community, manage water flow into Everglades national park, and raise structures within the Camp to prevent catastrophic flooding,”

Trump claimed that "it is not the Federal Government’s responsibility to pay to fix problems in an area that the Tribe has never been authorized to occupy."

Which is a TRULY amazing statement, given that the Miccosukee never authorized his ass to be anywhere on this continent in the first place. Much less to build Mar-a-Lago a two-hour drive away from their homeland.

Also, I'm sorry, isn't the federal government supposed to fix problems in the Everglades NATIONAL Park anyway? He thinks it's the Miccosukee who will cause problems there, not Alligator Alcatraz?

Congress CAN override his veto. I don't know if it's going to try or not, but I hope it does.

How you can help:

Encourage Rep. Giménez to fight to override Trump's veto. You can call his Miami Office at 305-222-0160 or his Washington D.C. Office at 202-225-2778. In all likelihood, it'll just be a voicemail system set up to let you push buttons to give your opinion, or to leave a message for staffers to collect. You almost certainly won't have to talk to a human. You can also send a postcard or letter to one of his offices: 448 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515, or his Miami district office at 14221 SW 120th St., Suite 115, Miami, FL 33186, or his Key West office at 1100 Simonton St., Room 1-213, Key West, FL 33040. Or you can send an email through this form; but emails get the least attention.

Donate to Earthjustice, which is helping represent the environmental groups in this court battle. Earthjustice is a fucking fantastic nonprofit and I love it. I only know about it because one of my BFFs used to work there, so I volunteered for it a little bit. It fights for the environmental rights of marginalized groups. You can check for updates on this case from Earthjustice anytime. Their website offers lots of ways to Take Action: not just donating money, but signing up for text alerts where they tell you actions you can take on different issues. Or checking the list of actions on their website at that same link, which tells you if they're time-sensitive, and how long you have. They even have an Action Center that teaches you things like how to write a compelling letter to the editor or how to create an action plan.

Donate to the Miccosukee Education Fund That doesn't do a thing for this case, just to be clear. But it's the only way I've found to donate directly to support the tribe, which seems to be well-supported as far as this case goes.

Miccosukee Education Fund

The Miccosukee Education Fund supports the youth and community of the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida with the purchase of classroom

You can also learn more about the Miccosukee and how they're passing on their culture to the next generations here:

Inspiring the next generation of Miccosukee Tribe

After forced settlement in the region, The Miccosukee were recognized as a sovereign nation by The United States in 1962 and since, generati

And donate to a whole range of Native nonprofits around the United States here.

[the-forest-library]

Get rid of ring cameras unless you like partnering with ICE

Amazon's Ring to partner with Flock, a network of AI cameras used by ICE, feds, and police | TechCrunch

Agencies that use Flock can request that Ring doorbell users share footage to help with "evidence collection and investigative work."

On the same day that Ring announced this partnership, 404 Media reported that ICE, the Secret Service, and the Navy had access to Flock’s network of cameras. By partnering with Ring, Flock could potentially access footage from millions more cameras.

[spitegoblin]

[ash-and-art]

This was the inevitable outcome of these devices btw

[pandemobius]

I'm glad I never got one of these years ago. Now there are alternatives. Both Ubiquiti and Synology have camera/doorbell systems that keep your video on your local servers. They're more secure, don't snitch on you, and don't charge you a monthly fee.

The hardware costs more up front, and you need some networking knowledge, but not a lot. I'm sure the monthly fees will add up to the hardware cost pretty quickly, but even if it didn't the moral and security implications are enough to justify it for me.

[fakenewsfactcheck]

🎵 it's time for a quick fact check! 🎶

The TechCrunch article is so ambiguous. First it says,

Now agencies that use Flock can request that Ring doorbell users share footage to help with “evidence collection and investigative work.”

That seems like it would be a non-issue right now. You can decline the request to share your device's footage.

(In theory, I could imagine the Trump administration trying to force people to share it, or pressure the company to make it shared by default. In practice, I think the former would face a lot of pushback and legal challenges, and the latter would be the definitive time to switch away from Ring to one of its private alternatives.)

BUT the subsequent paragraph that's quoted above is very ambiguous.

Does Flock automatically give these government agencies access to all your device's data?

Or did 404 Media just clarify which agencies use Flock, and can therefore request your data?

Here's the de-paywalled 404 article:

ICE, Secret Service, Navy All Had Access to Flock's Nationwide Networ…

Flock’s cameras continuously scan the license plate, model, brand, color, and other identifying characteristics of all vehicles that pass them....

Individual police departments then enable Flock’s national lookup tool in their settings, which lets agencies from other states even on the other side of the country search cameras for specific vehicles. Police can only perform nationwide searches if they also provide access to their own data. Flock said in August 75 percent of its law enforcement customers were enrolled in the national lookup tool, according to Wyden’s letter.

Multiple federal agencies in turn had access to this national lookup tool, according to Senator Wyden’s letter. Flock officials “confirmed to my office in September that the company provided access to CBP, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the Secret Service, and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service [NCIS] as part of a pilot earlier this year,” it reads.

It goes on to say that NCIS evaluated the software, but decided not to use it.

This is not only an immigrant rights issue:

404 Media also revealed a law enforcement officer in Texas searched cameras nationwide for a woman who self-administered an abortion.

This month documents shared by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) with 404 Media showed authorities considering charging the woman with a crime.

...Since 404 Media first reported those cases, there has been a wave of local media coverage and actions taken by individual communities about their use of Flock, including suspending or stopping their use of the cameras.

Flock also made changes to its product, including removing multiple states from its national lookup tool. After meeting with Wyden staff, Flock also agreed to apply software filters to data collected by cameras in Oregon, the letter says. Eugene, Oregon, officially paused its use of Flock cameras on Tuesday.

There are a lot of good links to more information in that article.

But in conclusion, it sounds like Flock sells the ability to search all data from all Flock cameras to any government agency that wants it. And that Ring is only partnering with it to let those agencies request your device's data.

I also read information from Ring about requests from law enforcement. It really is separate. The partnership with Flock just lets Flock customers (law enforcement, ICE, etc) request your footage.

If you don't respond to the request, they do not get the footage.

Ring clarifies:

Verified agencies "can post a request in the Neighbors feed asking community members within a specific area to share Ring video footage or information that may help their investigation.

"Public safety and government users cannot access your Ring device, such as seeing your Ring device’s live video stream or otherwise controlling your Ring device.

"Account Privacy - Public safety and government users cannot see your name, contact information, location or whether you viewed a post unless you post that information to the Neighbors App.

"Video Privacy - Public safety and government users cannot view any of your Ring video recordings unless you post it to the Neighbors App.

"Public safety agencies cannot access private video feeds, user data, or devices. They only receive information that residents voluntarily provide in response to a Community Request or public post.

"Ring does not disclose the locations of Ring cameras or users to agencies, either through Neighbors Verified or Axon Evidence."

For more information:

This Reddit thread has a lot of information about how privacy works with Ring.

Ring already has a service where police can get access to your doorbell videos, with Ring's consent instead of yours, for a specific window of time, in an emergency only.

As of this 2022 article, Amazon has provided Ring footage to 11 police requests over the past 7 months.

The author's take is basically "nobody trusts these guys tho."

Ring's take is that it "reserves the right to respond immediately to law enforcement requests for information in cases involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any person. Emergency disclosure requests must be accompanied by a completed emergency request form. Based on the information provided in the emergency request form and the circumstances described by the officer, Ring makes a good-faith determination whether the request meets the well-known standard, grounded in federal law, that there is imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any person requiring disclosure of information without delay."

Personal Opinion Time:

Frankly this would be more convincing with a real-life example, and a number for how many times they'd rejected requests.

But also, 11 is an absolutely tiny number, even just in terms of the number of 911 calls per day out there.

I've seen enough Life Alert bracelet commercials ("I've fallen and I can't get up!"), and been told enough times to crack the front door if possible when calling 911 at home alone for a medical emergency, to think that maybe I'm okay with Ring giving out information on whether I'm dead in there, ykwim?

This is, however, just My Personal Onion.

I would personally rather have privately-stored data that doesn't cost me a monthly fee anyway.

And I hope that Ring sees how bad Flock is, and backs out of this partnership.

[newsandstuffisee]

[puppygirllaika]

for anyone curious, as I was, about the source, it's this survey from 2022:

​​From millionaires to Muslims, small subgroups of the population seem much larger to many Americans | YouGov

When it comes to estimating the size of demographic groups, Americans rarely get it right. In two recent YouGov polls, we asked respondents

The whole thing is honestly worth a read, the estimated vs. real proportions of the population are wild. Americans also estimate that 20% of the population has a household income in excess of a million dollars, and basically all religious, racial, and gender/sexuality minority groups are vastly overestimated, with americans estimating that each group makes up anywhere from 20-40% of the total US population.

[mapofyourstars]

Magneto was Right, X-Men: The Last Stand

[dommewitchybitch]

This is where we're at right now. People are disappearing and anyone, even a US citizen can be a target. Regardless of race, citizenship, sexual orientation, whatever. They're killing and disappearing anyone they don't like.

[fakenewsfactcheck]

Is the US killing and disappearing citizens regardless of race, citizenship, sexual orientation, etc?

(Or, perhaps, because of those characteristics?)

Absolutely not.

Even undocumented people are not being killed and disappeared.

The reason people can get the sense that the government is targeting, killing, and disappearing people it doesn't like is that we DO know when it deports citizens. We know when it detains people with force. There's extensive reporting on these things.

The National Immigration Project has filed a lawsuit on behalf of two mothers who were deported to Honduras with their US citizen children, one of whom has stage 4 cancer.

Four children who were US citizens, including one getting treatment for a rare brain tumor, were deported to Mexico with their undocumented sibling and parents.

A 25-year-old disabled Army veteran says ICE pepper-sprayed and tear-gassed him, smashed his car window, and forcibly removed him from his vehicle at gunpoint — even though he was complying with orders and identifying himself as both a U.S. citizen and an employee of the cannabis farm they were raiding.

He was in custody for three days without being charged, without access to a phone call, and without legal representation. He said he was never told why he had been arrested and received no medical attention despite being “covered in tear gas and OC spray for days.”

A 19-year-old U.S. citizen, was wrongfully incarcerated by immigration authorities in Arizona, who claimed he was an undocumented immigrant. He was held for 10 days at Florence Correctional Center, a privately run immigration detention facility.

He told them he was a US citizen; the officer didn't believe him, and gave him paperwork to sign that said he was from Mexico. He signed it without knowing what it said, because he can't read.

We also DO know when people die in ICE custody.

Since 2019, 69 migrants have died while in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Since Donald Trump won the election in November 2024 alone, 14 people have died in ICE facilities, three of them Mexican.

ICE’s deadly tally: 14 migrants have died in custody in Trump’s first year

Since 2019, 69 people have passed away while in the custody of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement

And we DO know that ICE officers have, at least once, killed someone they hadn't detained. They killed a man two weeks ago after he hit an officer with his car, dragging him a significant distance.

(DHS policies, which also apply to ICE, state that “firearms shall not be discharged solely to disable moving vehicles."

The fact that the other officer could have feared for the life of the one being dragged might counteract that.

Nobody knows yet, because although ICE requires officers to wear and use body cameras, it hasn't distributed them to all officers yet. And it has not said yet whether these two, who were not wearing body cameras, had them.)

The article on the cannabis farm raid also says that the United Farm Workers Union says someone died during the raid.

We know a lot.

Because there are many, many people keeping their eyes on ICE. Including immigrants, news outlets, lawyers, politicians, and activist groups.

Opinion Time

There's a particularly American thing, I think, where we simultaneously have a lot of privilege, by virtue of being in a democracy with a fairly high standard of living and high expectations for our rights... and also, have a fairly high awareness of oppression. Historically, globally, and domestically.

We tend to hate our country and think it's absolutely in the trash. Regardless of our political positions.

(Although political positions certainly affect the REASONS we think it's in the trash. E.g. conservatives think "teachers are transing our kids," progressives think "the government is rounding us up.")

We've heard about governments disappearing people and killing people. We've heard of concentration camps and genocides. We've heard of apartheid and death marches.

But unless we've immigrated from elsewhere (or are 200 years old), we haven't experienced any of that. And most of us haven't learned the details of what these things involve. What they really look like.

So it's really easy for us to look at unjust situations, where people are suffering, and think that we're just exaggerating a touch for effect when we say that the government is disappearing anyone it doesn't like.

It's even easier to assume that if we've heard of this much, then much worse must be happening.

Especially when the government is targeting lots of groups it doesn't like, in all kinds of shitty ways.

But it's important to really learn about what these things look like and where they happen.

For example,

Victims of enforced disappearance are people who have literally disappeared; from their loved ones and their community. They go missing when state officials (or someone acting with state consent) grabs them from the street or from their homes and then deny it, or refuse to say where they are. Sometimes disappearances may be committed by armed non-state actors, like armed opposition groups. And it is always a crime under international law.

These people are often never released and their fate remains unknown. Victims are frequently tortured and many are killed, or live in constant fear of being killed. They know their families have no idea where they are and that there is little chance anyone is coming to help them. Even if they escape death and are eventually released, the physical and psychological scars stay with them.

There are three major modern examples of this:

Until Assad left last year, the Syrian government used forced disappearances and secret prisons heavily. For more than a decade.

Pinochet's dictatorship in Argentina disappeared more than 30,000 people from 1976-1983.

From 1979-2009, Sri Lanka systematically raped, disappeared, and/or killed more than 200,000 Tamil people and their supporters. At least 20 mass graves have been found so far, and the military has refused to release information about what happened. Instead, it targets, monitors, and harasses the families of the disappeared.

This is not happening here. Before it could happen here, the media would need to be publicly censored and controlled. And the government would need to have a lot more physical power.

Like, the military would need to have the right not just to block protests around federal buildings (as it did with the national guard in Los Angeles), but to attack and capture people off the street and from their homes.

It would, especially, have to be able to do this in large numbers without getting caught on camera. Governments have to be able to pretend they aren't doing this shit.

Anyway, that's just my onion.

Here's an August 8, 2025 statement from Congressmember Daniel Goldman (NY-10) with more information:

ICE policy makes clear that, “[a]s a matter of law, ICE cannot assert its civil immigration enforcement authority to arrest and/or detain a U.S. citizen.” However, in recent high-profile cases, ICE has erroneously arrested U.S. citizens, at times appearing to use violent physical force. ICE has also reportedly detained citizens in immigration detention facilities, sometimes for over a week.

ICE has even deported U.S. citizens: in multiple cases, ICE has deported U.S. citizen children along with their undocumented parents, reportedly against the families’ wishes. Particularly in Latino and Native American communities, Americans increasingly fear that their citizenship will not protect them from being swept up in DHS’s immigration enforcement activities.

Recent reporting has exposed dozens of cases where U.S. citizens, including children, cancer patients, and members of Native American and Latino communities, were unlawfully swept up in ICE raids and held for days or weeks without legal recourse. Some were physically assaulted or deported alongside undocumented family members, often without consent.

How is this happening?

...In multiple cases, ICE agents have reportedly not attempted to verify citizenship or ignored citizens’ offers to show proof of citizenship.

...Enforcement actions against U.S. citizens are not new. For decades, ICE has arrested, detained, and even deported U.S. citizens, a practice that the agency has acknowledged.

But under the second Trump administration, this rare practice is becoming more frequent. Experts warn that “citizens are becoming increasingly vulnerable in a system moving faster and operating with fewer safeguards.”

The full scope of the problem remains unclear, largely due to ICE’s poor record-keeping practices. As of February 2025, ICE has reminded field offices to update citizenship data in agency databases, but it is unclear whether agents are complying with that directive. When immigration agents arrest Americans without sufficient cause or simply because they are near an enforcement action, detain them without access to counsel, or ignore proof of citizenship, DHS fails in its core duty to protect the public and undermines trust in its operations.

Goldman, Warren, Padilla, Kelly and Correa Demand Investigations into ICE's Detention of U.S. Citizens

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Dan Goldman (NY-10) and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), along with Congressman Lou Correa (CA-46), Senator A

These five asked that "the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL), Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG), and Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman (OIDO) — investigate these encounters and determine whether DHS is violating Americans’ civil rights."

TL;DR:

So:

ICE has shitty record-keeping.

ICE has, at times, ignored people's offers to show citizenship; not tried to verify citizenship itself; killed people, and physically assaulted, detained, or deported citizens alongside their undocumented family members.

But:

These practices have not resulted in ICE killing American citizens.

ICE is not disappearing American citizens, or undocumented people for that matter. The reason there has been extensive reporting on this is that we DO know when people have been deported.

These practices do not impact all Americans, or all groups the current administration hates. They specifically impact undocumented immigrants from Central and South American countries.

[str-ngeloop]

THE FUCKING ICE REPORT AAAAAAAAAAA

[str-ngeloop]

https://americandragnet.org/

American Dragnet | Data-Driven Deportation in the 21st Century

One of two American adults is in a law enforcement face recognition database. An investigation.

https://americandragnet.org/

"When you think about government surveillance in the United States, you likely think of the National Security Agency or the FBI. You might even think of a powerful police agency, such as the New York Police Department. But unless you or someone you love has been targeted for deportation, you probably don’t immediately think of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

This report argues that you should. Our two-year investigation, including hundreds of Freedom of Information Act requests and a comprehensive review of ICE’s contracting and procurement records, reveals that ICE now operates as a domestic surveillance agency. Since its founding in 2003, ICE has not only been building its own capacity to use surveillance to carry out deportations but has also played a key role in the federal government’s larger push to amass as much information as possible about all of our lives. By reaching into the digital records of state and local governments and buying databases with billions of data points from private companies, ICE has created a surveillance infrastructure that enables it to pull detailed dossiers on nearly anyone, seemingly at any time. "

[str-ngeloop]

"Most Americans probably do not imagine that their information is captured by ICE’s surveillance networks. In fact, ICE has used face recognition technology to search through the driver’s license photographs of around 1 in 3 (32%) of all adults in the U.S. The agency has access to the driver’s license data of 3 in 4 (74%) adults and tracks the movements of cars in cities home to nearly 3 in 4 (70%) adults. When 3 in 4 (74%) adults in the U.S. connected the gas, electricity, phone or internet in a new home, ICE was able to automatically learn their new address. Almost all of that has been done warrantlessly and in secret."

[gpuzzle]

bro

nightmare nightmare nightmare

[no-sharks-on-the-sun]

at this point public buckets have become such a recurring problem that the cloud providers force you to pinkie promise that your shit absolutely needs to be public and that you aren't just being lazy and relying on security through obscurity instead of configuring sensible access controls. and still this bullshit happens on a regular basis

[self-loving-vampire]

This is pretty much an inevitability of strict user verification like what they want to implement to "protect minors".

Putting things like your ID and your face into a website to be allowed to access it will lead to those things getting stolen. It's a matter of when, not if.

Most pathetic part is that from what I can gather online this instance wasn't even a result of "hacking". They just left everyone's private information practically in public despite claiming that they only store it temporarily and immediately delete it.

Not the first time a company has lied about that either.

[i-add-sources]

A provocative dating app designed to let women anonymously ask or warn each other about men they'd encountered rocketed to the top spot on t

A data breach exposed photos and ID cards of women who signed up for a fast-growing app for women to share details of men they might date.

This is true

Gentle reminder from someone (me) in cybersecurity: If you upload something to a site/app it is not a question of if it will be leaked but when. They can have the best security in the world but if one of their software/hardware providers doesn't, there can still be a leak, and even if they too are theoretically impenetrable there is always a hacker smarter than you. Cybersecurity is a permanent, expensive, game of whack-a-mole. And a lot of companies don't want to spend that money, and bank on 'not being interesting', as evidenced by this incident.

[charlesoberonn]

America has a weird relationship with cults where they’re terrified of small cults (or organizations they think are cults) but completely normalized massive cults that hurt many more people (eg: LDS Church, Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Amish, Scientology, most Megachurches)

[charlesoberonn]

To anybody asking if the Amish are a cult, the answer is yes, very much so.

They’re a high control group that isolate you from society. The cult decides how you dress, how you behave, who you marry and how. They control what you know, blocking all information from the outside world. They control how you feel and what you’re allowed to think with threats of both social and supernatural harm. They’re a cult.

[charlesoberonn]

The best method to determine if a group is a cult, in my opinion, is Steven Hassan’s (cult expert and former cult member himself) BITE model.

BITE stands for Behavior Control, Information Control, Thought Control, and Emotional Control.

The more points a group “scores” on the model, the more of a cult it is.

I think this model is the best one for several reasons:

It’s more nuanced than “cult” or “not cult” and doesn’t make false equivalences between groups

It’s versatile, applying to groups big and small, and cults of all kinds, religious, political, financial, etc.

It focuses on what’s important, which is what the cult does to its members, and those members’ experiences, and not on irrelevant details like how uncommon their doctrines are or whether they have a charismatic leader

[charlesoberonn]

This is a great example of Thought Control used by cults whenever they’re confronted with criticism.

[saxifraga-x-urbium]

#you might notice that there are a lot of similarities between cult techniques and those of abusive partners#and that is an important thing to be aware of

yah that goes in the post

[charlesoberonn]

The creator of the BITE Model considers abusive relationships to be two-person cults.

[forgotn1]

It’s important to note that almost every sect of evangelical christianity in the US today fails the BITE Model.

This was the post that lead to breaking my JW mindset. Been a while since I seen it.

[charlesoberonn]

I’m glad I could help in your deconstruction, if only a little bit. I wish you all the luck in your journey moving forward.

[wokeleftistmob]

[ID 1: Four slides outlining and giving examples of the four methods of control in the BITE model, listed as follows:

Behavior Control

Promote dependence and obedience

Modify behavior with rewards and punishments

Dictate where and with whom you live

Restrict or control sexuality

Control clothing and hairstyle

Regulate what and how much you eat and drink

Deprive you of seven to nine hours of sleep

Exploit you financially

Restrict leisure time and activities

Require you to seek permission for major decisions

Information Control

Deliberately withhold and distort information

Forbid you from speaking with ex-members and critics

Discourage access to non-cult sources of information

Divide information into Insider vs. Outsider doctrine

Generate and use propaganda extensively

Use information gained in confession sessions against you

Gaslight to make you doubt your own memory

Require you to report thoughts, feelings, & activities to superiors

Encourage you to spy and report on others’ “misconduct”

Thought Control

Instill Black vs. White, Us vs. Them, & Good vs. Evil thinking

Change your identity, possibly even your name

Use loaded language and cliches to stop complex thought

Induce hypnotic or trance states to indoctrinate

Teach thought-stopping techniques to prevent critical thoughts

Allow only positive thoughts

Use excessive meditation, singing, prayer, & chanting to block thoughts

Reject rational analysis, critical thinking, & doubt

Emotional Control

Instill irrational fears (phobias) of questioning or leaving the group

Label some emotions as evil, worldly, sinful, or wrong

Teach emotion-stopping techniques to prevent anger, homesickness

Promote feelings of guilt, shame, & unworthiness

Shower you with praise and attention (“love bombing”)

Threaten your friends and family

Shun you if you disobey or disbelieve

Teach that there is no happiness or peace outside the group

ID 2: A reblogs which says “@ownerofidaho who is it that hurt you? No. I’m been serious, who was it that so deeply wounded you?”

ID 3: Text which reads: “Use loaded language and cliches to stop complex thought”

End ID]

[infiniteglitterfall]

There’s a YouTuber called Framing Logic who’s started doing videos breaking down and mapping out the logical fallacies that people are using to lie to you.

He has a whole chart of the specifically political fallacies on his Patreon.

Get more from Framing Logic on Patreon

creating videos on logic

And guess what? I see a whole bunch of them on this list!

I’m not just thinking about politicians. I’m thinking about political movements, activist movements, social media posts about all kinds of political issues. All of it.

The emotion-stopping/thought-stopping techniques.

Black and white, good and evil, us vs them thinking.

Which also leads to irrational fears of questioning or leaving a political group or “side,” because the other “side” has been thoroughly demonized.

Loaded, extreme language and cliches to stop thought.

Shunning people who disagree, especially those who leave the group.

Rejecting rational debate, logical analysis, and/or fact-checking. Often, rejecting people for doing any of those.

Dividing information into Insider vs Outsider doctrine. What this looks like politically is that often, one or both sides of a very charged topic will demonize the terms the other side uses. Or collect its terms and topics into a big group of, for example, Things That Are Obviously Wrong Bc Those Groomers/TERFs/Blue-Haired Pronoun-Users Say Them.

Yes, we’re all doing that one when it comes to arguing about trans rights.

Promoting shame/guilt/unworthiness.

Deliberately withholding and distorting information.

Generating and using propaganda excessively.

Propaganda is just lying about politics.

Forbid you from speaking with ex-members or critics: This one is a little less common, I think. But the number of times I saw people at campus encampments tell each other not to talk to some random outsider because “they’ll just tell you Zionist lies!” is… it’s so high. The number of times I’ve seen people blocked, unfriended, or broken up with because they “were a Zionist,” when in fact they were just Jewish, just opposed Hamas as well, etc… even higher.

All of these are techniques that anybody can use. Without even meaning to or thinking about it.

People can even use them if they’re objectively right about something. Just to forestall any argument. Just to add that extra power and strength that comes from pressuring or lying to people about some aspect of what’s going on.

[westasianblues]

you’re telling me this guy lives in Israel? of course he isn’t kosher… look at that face… that’s a friend…

[westasianblues]

this… this guy… is related to elephants and sea cows… Hashem truly works in mysterious ways…

[unsolicited-opinions]

Is Haaretz a "good" source to learn about I/P issues? What about Al Jazeera or the Times of Israel?

[meta question] How did you figure out how to answer the two above questions? I know that newspapers do make mistakes, but I'm willing to forgive them if they make mistakes in good-faith and not because their reporters and/or editorial have an ideology of hatred and bias (either towards or against Israel / Jews / Palestine / Muslims). And I know every news source has bias, I'm just trying to think for myself and ask questions.

This is a bigger question than I'm ready to tackle right now, Anon, but I may be able to offer a couple thoughts.

The first rule of reading the news is to trust no one source, read broadly.

I think Al Jazeera and Middle East Eye can teach you a lot about what Qatar wants Western leftists to think. Not at all reliable for factual reporting.

I have been reading and watching a little from Al Arabiya (Saudi) lately and have mostly been impressed, but I haven't delved into it deeply.

I think The Jerusalem Post can show you what the Israeli right wants the anglophonic world to believe. On any given day, you can see its biases clearly by browsing its headlines. As for newsgathering and reporting...? Mostly factual, but always slanted to the right.

I think that The Times of Israel does the best (imperfect) job in English of avoiding blatant biases. It seems pretty centrist to me, but I'm told others view it as center-left. Look through the headlines and you'll notice those headlines are not generally emotionally charged. The editors are making an effort to report the news in a value-neutral manner without loaded language. I really like that. I haven't had any serious complaints about factual reporting. I recommend you avoid The Blogs.

Haaretz can teach you a lot about what highly educated leftist ashkenaz elites in Israel think will gain the attention of Western progressives/leftists, and also sometimes has important information and actual journalism.

But instead of having me (an American who can only read any of these outfits in English) attempt to describe the cultural placement and significance of Haaretz, give Israeli analyst (for The Times of Israel) Haviv Rettig Gur six minutes and he'll do a much better job:

If you see the value in this, watch the whole podcast (below) to see Haviv delve into this week's big piece from Haaretz to explain the infuriating way it manages to lie with misleading, loaded headlines...while also doing important reporting:

The next obvious question should be: What about Haviv's biases?

He has 'em, of course. Everybody does.

I like how Haviv puts his biases out on the table in full view. He's a bleeding heart liberal on social issues, he's hawkish on defense, he's the son of a Rabbi and a proud Zionist who understands the insanity of the West well enough to explain to us what we're blind to. He does not flinch from criticizing the Israeli government or the IDF (as you'll see in this podcast episode).

I have not yet seen him attempt to dissemble. He's comfortable saying "I don't know." I have seen him in dialogue with others where he'll readily concede someone else's good point even when he doesn't like it...or extend enormous amounts of patience because he appreciates sincerity and intellectual honesty...especially from people with whom he disagrees.

Haviv isn't always right, but he's always knowledgeable, intellectually honest, and open about his biases.

That's about as good as it gets in today's media landscape.

[fakenewsfactcheck]

Ok, so: has Israel razed entire neighborhoods to the ground in order to take out Hamas leaders?

I don't know. I only know that almost every time I've tried to fact-check something about Israel mass slaughtering civilians, it has turned out to be disinformation.

But I want to find out!

TL;DR: No. (In fact, they've taken out a lot of Hamas leaders with the same degree of precision.)

Sources here are linked, but I'm going to tell you up front that they're mainly CNN, the BBC, Wikipedia, and the Times of Israel. I'm using the latter as a source because it has an international reputation for accuracy, as well as for blunt exposures of the Israeli government. You are prohibited from issuing any cries of, "it's in Israel, so it's Zionist propaganda," unless you're also calling Ilan Pappe or Omar Barghouti "Zionist propaganda" for writing in Israel.

* Ismail Haniyeh: Assassinated in Tehran, along with his bodyguard.

* Yahya Sinwar: Encountered alone on an IDF patrol in Rafah, and killed with gunfire and grenades.

* Muhammad Sinwar, who had taken over from his brother Yahya: Killed in bombings on the underground command center below the European Hospital, along with 9 as-yet-unidentified Hamas members. (It was initially reported here that it was 10 of his aides, but later reporting revealed that one of them was Mohammad Shabana and the rest were unknown.)

* Mohammad Shabana, senior commander, instrumental in building the tunnel network leading from Rafah to Israel: Killed in the same command center with Muhammad Sinwar.

This one didn't raze a neighborhood to the ground, or damage the hospital itself. But the underground bombings did damage the hospital courtyard. And in addition to the 11 Hamas members, the bombings killed 16 civilians in the courtyard (according to the generally honest Gaza Ministry of Health) or 28 (according to routinely dishonest Hamas leaders and several news outlets quoting them uncritically -- I'm looking at you, BBC Verify).

Sidebar: When I say routinely dishonest, I mean that the Hamas Media Office (which is what it sounds like - a propaganda office), and now the Gaza Civil Defense, have been extremely consistent in always giving what seems to be a rather arbitrarily inflated number, just as you see here.

It seems like at best, they give it their biggest ballpark estimate. And, occasionally, like they MUST purely be making shit up.

Even worse, I'm not sure any media outlets pay attention to the difference. It takes time to determine how many casualties there are and release that information, so the propaganda always gets out there first. It seems like most news outlets just take the first number at face value, and adjust it downward later if they hear the number from the Gaza Ministry of Health.

And, as Hamas clearly knows, the big early number makes a very strong first impression. * Ahmed Al-Ghandour, senior Hamas military leader, and

* Wail Rajab, his deputy commander, and

* Ayman Siam, another senior Hamas military leader and the head of its rocket firing array, and

* Rafaat Salman, a senior military commander who helped plan the paragliders on Oct 7, and

* Farsen Khalifa, senior Hamas commander in the West Bank: All killed in an airstrike on tunnels in November 23, 2023, which indirectly kills three hostages, but no Palestinian civilians.

* Ibrahim Biari, senior commander directing October 7, who was directing the Hamas fighters in northern Gaza: Killed by IDF fighter jets on November 23, 2023. There are fairly detailed reports of the IDF carrying out 300 strikes and raids on Hamas infrastructure across the Gaza Strip on that day, but I haven't been able to find any news reports of neighborhoods being destroyed or civilians killed.

* Rawhi Mushtaha, de facto leader of Hamas in Gaza, and

* Sameh al-Siraj, and

* Sami Oudeh, both high-up security officials: Killed in airstrikes on tunnels; exact date not released, so I can't look for more details on this one.

* Osama Mazini, Hamas hostage negotiator who once managed to demand the release of 1,000 prisoners convicted for violent offenses in exchange for one kidnapped IDF member: Killed in an airstrike.

* Jehad Mheisen, high-level Hamas commander: Killed, along with his family, through an airstrike on his home in Gaza City.

* Jamila Abdallah Taha al-Shanti, founder of Hamas's women's movement, widow of Hamas co-founder, first woman to become a Hamas leader: killed in an airstrike on her home.

* Unnamed head of Hamas Intelligence: killed in a targeted strike in Khan Younis during the first week of the war. No neighborhoods razed.

* Wissam Khazem, Hamas leader in Jenin: Killed, along with two Hamas members, by gunfire and drone strikes.

No neighborhoods were razed, but over the course of ten days, many streets were dug up in search of explosive booby-traps.

* Ghazi Abu Tama’a, senior Hamas military commander responsible for all weapons in Gaza, and Marwan Issa, third in command overall: Killed in an air strike on a building in central Gaza, which reportedly killed a total of 5 people.

* Rafa’a Salameh, commander of the Khan Younis Brigade, and Mohammed Deif, top-level military commander, two of the main leaders behind October 7:

This one is interesting. The initial reports on it cited Hamas saying that Israel, targeting Deif, had killed 90 people in an airstrike on a tent encampment in the "safe zone" at Al-Mawasi. (Some even claim it was a tent encampment in Khan Younis.)

But later reports said that Israel had killed both Deif and Salameh, in an airstrike on a Hamas compound, killing dozens in Khan Younis. Which is not the safe zone; it's the city people left to go to the safe zone.

"Hamas has since claimed that the strike, carried out using large munitions, killed more than 90 people. Military sources have said dozens of Hamas gunmen were in the targeted area." Which makes sense if it's a military compound. An aerial photo of the explosion shows it destroying a large building, but definitely not a neighborhood. And definitely not tents.

* Ayman Nofal, yet another Hamas commander: Killed in an airstrike.

* Billal Al Kedra, Hamas commander who led the attack that razed Kibbutz Nerim: Killed by fighter jets.

* Raad Thabet, one of Hamas's top echelon and head of HR (of all things) and supplies: Shot inside al-Shifa Hospital, along with five other Hamas operatives.

* Ismail Barhoum, Hamas finance chief: Killed in airstrike at Nasser Hospital, along with his aide. Hospital is damaged and the damaged wing is evacuated. The strike evidently causes many injuries, but no other deaths are listed?

* Saleh al-Arouri: Killed in Lebanon, in a drone strike, along with two Hamas military commanders and four other Hamas members. (Personal opinion sidebar:

Hilariously, Israel's statement on that one was basically, "Nobody knows who did this! But it DEFINITELY wasn't intended as an attack on Lebanon. And hoo boy! whoever did it sure must have hated Hamas! Anyway, guess we'll never know."

Genuine cartoon dialogue right there. Seriously the worst country at PR ever.)

Wikipedia lists a handful of others, but I cannot do any more.

Social media is constantly lying to us. If people can't use what's actually happening instead, they need to just staaaahhhhhp before I lose my tiny autistic miiiiiiiiiind.

[porterdavis]

[iamnmbr3]

this bill will end democracy. It must be stopped

call your senators and keep calling every day. Tell them to vote no and tell them to do everything they can, including procedural actions and filibusters to stop it. Call over and over again with this message, whether your senator is red or blue. And get the word out to as many people as possible that they’ve gotta start calling too.

[tzikeh]

Actually do it. You have to call, write, email, whatever you can do. Don't just reblog this post.

Contact My Senator

Contact My Representative

[assortedinsanities]

I know it's never gonne happen, but this is the kind of bill you need to stop physically, if you can't do it any other way.

It's already through the House and will be decided about in the Senate, which has a Republican majority and is a physical building with an adress, that you can go inside of.

[fakenewsfactcheck]

Does a clause in the budget proposal forbid courts to charge government officials with contempt?

Currently, YES.

Why do I specify "currently?" Because Newsweek reports that the Senate could make changes to the bill.

In other words, this is not just a matter of yes or no for them. They also have the option of messing with it.

The Senate is back in session on June 2nd. We have at least until then to call their offices and demand they take this out.

Oppose Cuts to Contempt of Court Enforcement in the “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act - PASSED HOUSE (UPDATED 5/22) ⭑ 5 Calls

Updates May 22, 2025: With a 214-215 vote, the House narrowly passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill” Act, H.R. 1, with all Democrats and two Re

Newsweek gives the exact quote, plus a helpful explanation:

"No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued," the provision in the bill, which is more than 1,000 pages long, says.

The provision "would make most existing injunctions—in antitrust cases, police reform cases, school desegregation cases, and others—unenforceable," Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law, told Newsweek. "It serves no purpose but to weaken the power of the federal courts.

Why It Matters

The provision would prohibit courts from enforcing contempt citations for violations of injunctions or temporary restraining orders—the main types of rulings that have been used to rein in President Donald Trump's administration—unless the plaintiffs have paid a bond, something that rarely happens when someone sues the government.

What To Know

If enacted, it would be a "stunning" restriction on the power of federal courts, Chemerinsky wrote in an article for Just Security.

"The Supreme Court has long recognized that the contempt power is integral to the authority of the federal courts," he wrote. "Without the ability to enforce judicial orders, they are rendered mere advisory opinions which parties are free to disregard."

Chemerinsky wrote that federal courts rarely require a bond to be posted by "those who are restraining unconstitutional federal, state, or local government actions" as those seeking such orders "do not have the resources to post a bond, and insisting on it would immunize unconstitutional government conduct from judicial review."

Representative Joe Neguse, a Colorado Democrat, said in an interview that the provision was added because the Trump administration is "losing in virtually every court in the land."

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed since Trump returned to office, challenging his executive orders and actions taken by his administration. Judges have partially or fully blocked the president in at least 82 cases, according to a tally by The Associated Press.

The administration has been pushing back against court rulings it doesn't like, with the president lashing out at judges who rule against him and seeking an end to nationwide injunctions.

The Supreme Court earlier in May barred the administration from quickly resuming deportations of Venezuelans under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

Meanwhile, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis has expressed frustration that the administration has yet to provide information that adequately explained how it was complying with her order—which was upheld by the Supreme Court—to "facilitate" the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a man who was wrongly deported to El Salvador.

And last month, another federal judge said he found probable cause to hold the administration in criminal contempt after ignoring his order to turn around planes carrying deportees to El Salvador.

District Judge James E. Boasberg said he would initiate hearings and may refer the matter for prosecution if the administration does not act to remedy the violation. The administration has also removed immigrants against court orders in other cases.

The provision in the House bill "would make the court orders in these cases completely unenforceable," according to Chemerinsky.

Chemerinsky also wrote: "Without the contempt power, judicial orders are meaningless and can be ignored. There is no way to understand this except as a way to keep the Trump administration from being restrained when it violates the Constitution or otherwise breaks the law. The House and the Senate should reject this effort to limit judicial power."

Neguse said on X, formerly Twitter, that the provision "basically would attempt to try to stop federal courts or limit the ability of federal courts to enforce contempt orders. Why? Because they know that they are, the Trump administration, losing in virtually every court in the land, and as a result, in their effort, in terms of the campaign that they're waging against the judiciary and the Article Three branch of our government, they've decided that this would be the latest salvo in that effort. It's plainly unconstitutional, but they're going to go forward anyway."

@robertreich, a former Labor Secretary and a professor of public policy at the University of California Berkeley, wrote in a Substack post that the "hidden" provision "makes Trump King."

He wrote: "No congress and no court could stop him. Even if a future Congress were to try to stop him, it could not do so without the power of the courts to enforce their hearings, investigations, subpoenas, and laws. What can you do? To begin with, call your members of Congress and tell them not to pass Trump's One Big Ugly Bill."

What's Next

The House approved the bill in a 215-214 vote early Thursday. It now heads to the Senate, where it could face revisions before a final vote.

'Hidden' provision in Trump's big bill could disarm US Supreme Court

The provision would bar courts from enforcing contempt citations for violations of injunctions or temporary restraining orders unless a bond

Robert Reich's Substack has some excellent points about how to fight back:

That bill amounts to the largest redistribution in history from poor and working-class Americans to the wealthy and super-wealthy. It also contains a poison pill that would remove contempt authority from the courts.

To pass this monstrosity, Senate Republicans can afford to lose only 3 votes at most (with JD Vance acting as tie-breaker).

The following Republican senators are most persuadable because they’re up for reelection in 2026 if not before. They’re also most vulnerable.

[I'm omitting the part about using Memorial Day Weekend to track them down bc it's almost over - but feel free to track them down and show up at their public appearances!]

Collins (ME) - blue state, voted against April Senate budget resolution over Medicaid cuts.

Tillis (NC) - faces competitive reelection bid and has spurned Trump on U.S. attorney nomination.

Sullivan (AK) - race could become competitive because of Alaska’s ranked-choice system and the impact of Medicaid/SNAP cuts, and if former Rep. Mary Peltola runs.

Husted (OH) - replaced Vance, has to win a special election to finish term in 2026. Race could become highly competitive if Sherrod Brown runs.

Moody (FL) - replaced Rubio, has to win a special election to finish term in 2026. Same factors as Husted (though FL is a longer shot than OH).

Cornyn (TX) - facing a tough right-wing primary challenge from Ken Paxton, who could put the seat in play if he wins.

Ernst (IA) - race has the potential to be competitive in an anti-GOP cycle without Trump at the top of the ballot.

In another post, he lays out exactly what else the budget bill does:

Cuts Medicare by an estimated $500 billion

Which would mean at least 8,600,000 people losing Medicare coverage

People making between $17,000-$51,000 a year would have a net loss of $700 from all the tax changes

People making less than $17,000 would have a net loss of $1,000

The top 0.1% of earners would have a net gain of $390,000

Over the next decade, the bill would add $3.8 trillion to the federal debt

And here's an excellent guide to WHY and HOW you should call your representatives.

Republicans do it way more!

Every call adds to the pressure!

They really do track every single call on every topic!

You do not have to personally talk to your representative! You are leaving a message with a staff member or a machine!

Republicans have the smallest House majority they've had since 1931! They only passed this by one vote, and it's incredibly tight for them in the Senate too.

If your representative is already going to vote against this bill, look at all the representatives who might support it and think of a friend you can call in those states, to get them to call THEIR representative instead!

That very excellent and helpful Reddit post also explains why we should all be developing a habit of making 6 of these calls every single day. LIKE CRANKY OLD RETIRED CONSERVATIVES DO.

Go! Find your reps! You can do this! Reblog and talk about how it went! I believe in you!!!

5 Calls

Spend 5 minutes. Make 5 calls. Make your voice heard.

[robertreich]

The stock portfolios of more than two dozen members of Congress outperformed the market in 2024. This isn't due to luck or skill. Lawmakers can use privileged information to trade stocks while they’re supposed to be working for you.

[whitepeopletwitter]

[pseudodesigner]

[sameboot]

This is such an important and genuinely terrifying post. I could completely go off on the rise of anti-science, but for now I’ll just add: it isn’t just boomers that get deceived. This is a warning to all of us.

Pay ATTENTION to what you are being told. If you think you cannot be deceived, you leave yourself open to deception. Question, doubt, research research research. Learn about your personal biases, dig up any subconscious cognitive dissonance. Keep an eye on your mind.

[oldmanyellsatcloud]

It needs to be stressed that biases, not a lack of intelligence, is very much the issue here. Being aware of the need to fact check yourself is key: Intelligence won’t protect you from bad or unhealthy mental states, or keep you safe from cults of any sort. Intelligence will just make it easier for you to rationalize and attempt to justify the malformed tools you’ve taken/been given to yourself and others. You need to be wise enough to challenge yourself.

[gardenofroseandthorn]

As a cult survivor, this is lethally accurate.

[nandalorian]

As a librarian, I would also add that even more important than doing your research is understanding how to evaluate and check SOURCES. What terrifies me about the modern age is that many people consider watching YouTube or reading social media posts to be “research.” To them it is as good as reading peer-reviewed articles from trusted journals and publications. In reality, never trust someone who says they have done the research for you, especially if they are dodgy about listing sources by name. Fact-check everything, including the source of a fact. Never believe anything you hear on the internet unless it can be independently verified. Resources like Snopes and NewsGuard can help you check the veracity of reports and media sources. Other free options, like a library card, can give you access to hundreds of databases and trusted peer-reviewed journals if you ever want to fact-check something manually. Either way: there is no shortage of options out there for how to do your own homework. Laziness is no excuse for ignorance. 

[fakenewsfactcheck]

It has blown my mind, over the past year or so, to realize how many people don't know how to identify reliable information.

Not only that: a lot of people don't think it's POSSIBLE to identify reliable information.

And a LOT of those people therefore refuse to fact-check anything.

Mini case study:

I have a longtime friend who's a credentialed middle school history/social studies teacher with a master's degree. She had to do A LOT of demographic research to write her thesis. Her dad was a historian and archivist who also, obviously, did a LOT of research.

So I only realized recently that she's terrified of encountering propaganda. She sees propaganda as being something people will uncritically believe.

This means she won't read anything that contradicts her existing understanding of a situation.

And she automatically distrusts any person or source that does.

I don't think this is true of, say, historical eras she doesn't know much about. Or politics she doesn't know much about.

Which is probably what makes it seem like she ISN'T biased and DOES fact-check things.

It only becomes a problem when she has a lot of feelings about a current or historical wrong.

For others, it only becomes a problem when they have a lot of feelings about, say, doctors. Medical care. Shots.

Or when they have a deep level of trust in something or someone that's giving them false information.

Maybe that's the throughline, actually. My friend has a deep level of trust in her family, and she's a red diaper baby. She was raised communist, she will be a staunch socialist/communist her whole entire life.

She could no more question that than she could... I don't know... walk to the moon to snack on some moon rocks.

If anyone in her family has been involved in a particular political movement, or favors it, or has specific beliefs about anything, she's there for it. That's who she trusts.

Not facts. Not research.

Because from that perspective, facts and research can just be propaganda.

You can give her information from an independent journalist investigation by Reuters that explains why they think Russia killed 75,000 civilians in Mariupol alone.

But if it contradicts something else she's invested in believing (like that X ongoing war is actually the worst and has killed the most people ever), she will call it "cherry-picking ridiculous data and statistics."

Relatedly perhaps, she got a really crap science education in school.

My dad, conversely, was a scientist. I learned that the scientific method was a way of determining the truth of a matter. I stumbled into logic and reasoning classes early on, in a local community college's Philosophy department, and learned a lot about determining truth there too.

We need to teach people from an early age how to determine the truth, and how to separate it from the moral or human value of the source.

[socialistexan]

I hate when people say stuff like "oh if seatbelt laws or asbestos bans happened today, they would be controversial!"

Like. They were. There were a lot of people - influenced by multi-billion dollar campaigns - who were against it and thought it was sissy libturd shit.

Asbestos wasn't fully banned in the US until March of 2024