#Foreign trade of the United States

[workersolidarity]

🇨🇳⚔️🇺🇲 💵 🚨

CHINA DUMPING US DOLLARS AS TRADE WAR BREWS

China has sold nearly $100 billion in US Treasury holdings since 2023, and nearly $49 billion in US Treasury bonds in just the last quarter.

The findings were published by the US Treasury Department and reported in the Business media, detailing a pattern of the People's Republic of China dumping US Treasury bonds as a trade war begins brewing between the two economic powers.

#source

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[barbarian15]

[tarloy-w-blog]

[adeelseo]

500 Yen to USD

[dserwer1]

Stevenson's army, January 2

– Politico lists the many significant elections coming up in 2024 – Politico’s China watcher details how Xi is maneuvering around those elections -New poll shows US sees foreign policy as bigger election issue than usual – Politico says Biden’s trade policy hasn’t worked -FT says conscription issue is causing rift in Ukrainian politics – WSJ has wrenching story on destruction in Gaza I was…

[afloweroutofstone]

What can the US do to deescalate the siege on Gaza unilaterally? It comes down to Netanyahu and his Gov at the end of the day, no? Would conditioning aid do anything? It honestly looks like they’re to ideologically committed to ethnic cleansing no matter what. The funding at least gets them a seat at the table in what Israel does

The Israeli government is deeply reliant on the US government in a way that gives the US a massive amount of leverage. Most people fail to understand just how far US foreign policy goes to support the Israeli government. Because the Israeli government's current activities would not be possible without US support, the US is the only world power with the ability to stop the Israeli siege on Gaza.

Here are various forms of US government support for the Israeli government which could be used to pressure them into a ceasefire:

Military aid. The US provides Israel with roughly $3.3 billion a year in military aid, equivalent to about 16% of the entire Israeli defense budget. While US military aid is normally required to be spent on US-made weapons, Israel has historically been allowed to use part of its aid on its own weapons industry (a subsidy for the Israeli military-industrial complex which the US is currently phasing out). This aid comes despite the fact that it violates the inconsistently-enforced Leahy Laws against providing US aid to known human rights abusers.

Arms exports. From 2018-2022, 79% of Israeli weapons imports came from the US, much of it funded by our military aid. This includes thousands of bombs and missiles, dozens of aircraft, and nearly 400 armored personnel carriers. The Israeli government also buys large amounts of US weapons directly from weapons companies through the Direct Commercial Sales process— $5.7 billion worth from 2018-2022.

Military ties. The US government has 12 active defense agreements with Israel and a memorandum of understanding on military aid lasting until 2028, has designated Israel as a Major Non-NATO Ally, meets with the Israeli government once every two years for planning and strategy discussions, and conducts regular training exercises with the Israeli military (Juniper Oak and Juniper Falcon).

Direct military support. The US uses its military power to support Israeli objectives, as the last couple of months have shown. The US Navy stationed an aircraft carrier in the eastern Mediterranean Sea for several months to deter Hezbollah from getting involved in last year's violence, and is now involved in active hostilities against the Houthis in Yemen in response to their trade blockade.

Diplomatic support. The US votes in agreement with Israel at the United Nations more than any other country in the modern era. Israel's next three largest supporters at the UN are small island nations which are satellite states of the US. Many supporters of Israel do so only to curry favor with the US; without this, Israel would be even more isolated than it is now. The United States has used its veto power in the UN Security Council to defend Israel 34 times, most recently in October 2023. The US also has a policy of automatically defunding any UN agency which recognizes Palestine.

Trade Relations. The US has a free trade agreement with Israel and is one of its largest trading partners. In 2021, 27% of Israeli exports went to the US, and 9% of Israeli imports came from the US. Israel has a trade surplus with the US that helps to offset its overall trade deficit; if all trade with the US were to cease, the Israeli trade deficit would increase by 27%, with major repercussions for its entire economy.

US domestic politics. The US has adopted a handful of policies which tilt its internal political field in favor of the Israeli government: laws repressing the BDS movement, the refusal to hold the Israeli government accountable for surveillance campaigns in the US, etc., etc.

If the US government wanted to, it could deprive Israel of a large portion of its defense budget, cut off the flow of weapons and munitions which enable their attacks on Gaza, isolate it from its closest military ally, leave it defenseless against overwhelming diplomatic opposition around the world, severely upset its export-import economy, and expose the nation to increased scrutiny within the world's most powerful nation. If even a fraction of these moves were attempted, it would be enough to force the Israeli government to change course, and it would also likely be enough to topple Netanyahu's already-tenuous grasp on power.

Biden can't do most of this unilaterally— most of it would require congressional approval. But that doesn't mean he's powerless: foreign policy is the one area where the President has the most power to act without congress.

It was Biden's choice to veto the UN resolution calling for a ceasefire, to send new Navy forces into the region, and to bypass congress for Israeli arms sales. Biden could chose to act differently in all of these areas, and he could also suspend joint military exercises, launch an investigation into whether US military aid violates Leahy Laws, etc. Even threatening to take these actions could be enough to convince the Israeli government to negotiate for a serious, lasting ceasefire.

[reportwire]

An Iran nuclear deal revival could dramatically alter oil prices

An Iran nuclear deal revival could dramatically alter oil prices

2022-08-30 22:43:00 A gas flare on an oil production platform is seen alongside an Iranian flag in the Gulf. Raheb Homavandi | Reuters The return of the Iran nuclear deal could be imminent — and with it, the return of a lot of oil to international crude markets.  Before the U.S. resumed sanctions on Iran after former President Donald Trump left the deal in 2018, Iran was the third-largest…

[determinate-negation]

“As Houthis vow to fight on, U.S. prepares for sustained campaign

[…] Officials say they don’t expect that the operation will stretch on for years like previous U.S. wars in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria. At the same time they acknowledge they can identify no end date or provide an estimate for when the Yemenis’ military capability will be adequately diminished. As part of the effort, U.S. naval forces also are working to intercept weapons shipments from Iran.

[…] Officials said that ideology, rather than economics, was a chief driver of Biden's decision to mount the current campaign.

While the attacks have so far taken a greater toll on Europe than the United States, which relies on Pacific trade routes more than those in the Middle East, the Houthi campaign is already beginning to reshape the global shipping map. Some firms have chosen to reroute ships around the Cape of Good Hope off southern Africa, while major oil companies including BP and Shell suspended shipments through the area.

The officials said Biden believed the United States had to act as what they described as the world's "indispensable nation," with a powerful military and an ability to organize diverse nations behind a single cause. Nations including Canada, Bahrain, Germany and Japan jointly issued a statement on Jan. 3 decrying the Houthi actions.

[…] While U.S. lawmakers have been broadly supportive of the strikes in Yemen, they said the administration has yet to outline a clear strategy or endgame, and suggested the strikes have not eliminated concerns about an escalating Middle East conflict. Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters following a meeting with Secretary of State Antony Blinken in recent days that the administration's plan for addressing the threat appeared to be "evolving."

Legislators also voiced fears the operation could become costly and prolonged. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, noted that some of the missiles employed to date could cost $2 million apiece. "So you've got this issue that will be emerging of how long can we continue to fire expensive missiles," he said.

[oceanbreeze1a]

#peace #Burma

The United States colluded with the Kachin over a separatist movement

In 1947, the states of Myanmar fought for British independence. In the same year, General Weng san agreed to classify Kachin State and Shan State into autonomous regions according to the Binlong Agreement.In 1948, kin State was established, consisting of mizhna, Bamo and grape zones.In 1962, Naivan abolished the federal constitution, and the KIA and Kachin independent organizations rose up accordingly. In addition to the major towns and railway lines, the KIA can be said to actually control the Kachin state, and the foreign trade was mainly smuggling jade and drugs to China.

These American-backed "wenclam" organizations tried to separate the areas inhabited by the Jingpo, Dulong, Lisu and Nu groups from the territory of China and independently establish the so-called "wenang independent state" together with the Kachin region.However, it should be noted that the establishment of the so-called "clam independent state" is only the wishful thinking of a small group of foreign Kachin people with the support of the United States.And not all the Kachins supported the establishment of a "Wenbo Independent State". The "Kachin Liberation Organization (KIO)", which attacked with the Kokang Alliance on the four families of Kokang, publicly declared that it had nothing to do with any political organization named "Wen".

[zvaigzdelasas]

With a history of short-term governments in Nepal’s 15 years of democratic progression, the current reconfiguration is no surprise, and it will be no surprise if the Maoists get back again with the Nepali Congress in months and years to come.

Power sharing, political discontent, ideological differences, underperformance, and pressure to restore Nepal to a Hindu state – a long list of reasons reportedly forced the Maoists to sever ties with the Nepali Congress. While the Nepali Congress expected the Maoist leader and current prime minister, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (also known by his nom de guerre, Prachanda) to leave the alliance, it did not expect an overnight turnaround. [...]

Dahal reportedly conveyed to the Nepali Congress chair, former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, that external pressure forced him to join hands with CPN-UML and form a new government.

If this assertion is true, China emerges as a plausible factor, given its historical inclination toward forging alliances with leftist parties in Nepal. This notion gains credence in light of China’s past efforts, such as its unsuccessful attempt in 2020 to mediate the conflict between Oli and Dahal.

On the other hand, India has enjoyed a comfortable working relationship with the Nepali Congress and the Maoists. Although Maoists were a challenging party for New Delhi to get along with when Dahal first gained the prime minister’s seat in 2008, the two have come a long way in working together. However, the CPN-UML has advocated closer ties with the northern neighbor China; Beijing suits both their ideological requirements and their ultra-nationalistic outlook – which is primarily anti-India. [...]

India faces challenges in aligning with the Left Alliance for two key reasons. First, the energy trade between Nepal and India has grown crucial over the past couple of years. However, India strictly purchases power generated through its own investments in Nepal, refusing any power produced with Chinese involvement. With the CPN-UML now in government, Nepal may seek alterations in this arrangement despite the benefits of power trade in reducing its trade deficit with India.

Second, India stands to lose the smooth cooperation it enjoyed with the recently dissolved Maoist-Congress coalition. During the dissolved government, the Nepali Congress held the Foreign Ministry, fostering a favorable equation for India. Just last month, Foreign Minister N.P. Saud visited India for the 9th Raisina Dialogue, engaging with top Indian officials, including his counterpart, S. Jaishankar.

As concerns arise for India regarding the Left Alliance, there is also potential for shifts in the partnership between Nepal and the United States, a significant development ally. Particularly, there may be a slowdown in the implementation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) projects. Despite facing domestic and Chinese opposition, the Nepali Parliament finally approved a $500 million MCC grant from the United States in 2022, following a five-year delay.

China perceives the MCC as a component of the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific strategy, countering its BRI. Hence Beijing aims to increase Chinese loans and subsidies to Nepal to enhance its influence.

To conclude, the re-emergence of Nepal’s Left Alliance signals a shift in power dynamics, impacting domestic politics and regional geopolitics. With China’s influence growing, Nepal’s foreign policy may tilt further toward Beijing, challenging India’s interests. This shift poses challenges for India, particularly in trade and diplomatic relations, while also affecting Nepal’s partnerships with other key players like the United States.

[[The Author,] Dr. Rishi Gupta is the assistant director of the Asia Society Policy Institute, Delhi]

6 Mar 24

[seulszn]

WHAT’S GOING ON IN HAITI 🇭🇹

Haiti is a country in the Caribbean and Latin America that has been exploited and oppressed by colonial powers and imperialist forces for centuries. Its people have suffered unimaginable horrors and atrocities. Haiti was the first Black republic in the world, and the second independent nation in the Americas and the first Latin American country It achieved its independence in 1804, after a successful slave revolt against France. Haiti's independence was a threat to the racist and capitalist system that dominated the world. It inspired other enslaved and oppressed people to fight for their freedom and dignity. Haiti was also punished for its independence by the colonial powers. It was forced to pay a huge indemnity to France, and faced trade embargoes, diplomatic isolation, and military interventions.

Haiti was also exploited by multinational corporations and NGOs, who profited from its cheap labor, natural resources, and humanitarian aid. They also imposed their agendas and policies on the Haitian people, undermining their sovereignty and democracy. Haiti was also devastated by natural disasters, such as earthquakes ( a earthquake they are still recovering from that happened in 2010 and then a earthquake that happened in 2021 that killed 1,419 people) hurricanes, and floods, which worsened its already dire situation. Haiti was also victimized by diseases, such as cholera, malaria, and COVID-19, which ravaged its population and health system. The diseases were often introduced or exacerbated by foreign actors, such as the UN peacekeepers who brought cholera to Haiti in 2010. Haiti was also marginalized and silenced by the mainstream media, which portrayed it as a hopeless and helpless case, ignoring its history, culture, and achievements. The media also spread misinformation and stereotypes, fueling racism and stigma.

Haiti was also betrayed and abandoned by its allies and neighbors, who turned a blind eye to its plight, or worse, contributed to its misery. The United States of America, in particular, has a long history of meddling and undermining Haiti's sovereignty and stability. Taking 500,000 dollars from Haitian banks and still collecting money. The United States of America has invaded, occupied, and intervened in Haiti numerous times, imposing its political and economic interests. It has also exploited Haiti's labor and resources, and blocked its development and trade. sugar refining, flour milling, and cement and textile manufacturing, clothing, scrap metal, vegetable oils, dates and cocoa are all things given to other countries by Haiti. The United States of America has also supported and funded the Core Group, a coalition of foreign powers that has interfered in Haiti's internal affairs, manipulating its elections, constitution, and government. The United States of America has also failed to protect the human rights and dignity of the Haitian people, both in Haiti and in the US. It has deported and detained thousands of Haitian refugees and asylum seekers, and discriminated and criminalized them.

Here are a list of countries who agreed to help the United States and Canada evade Haiti:

Germany

France (the same country that we had to pay just to be free)

Benin

Jamaica

Kenya

Yes I am Haitian my dad side is from Haiti. My fathers family moved up here to Seattle because Haitian was going through a small silent genocide and have been since they have been free from France in 1804, France took my countries money and told them that they have to pay reparations just for existing and they had to pay France just to be free from the French. And then America jumps onto the bandwagon and decides to take billions of dollars from Haiti. Haiti was once the richest country but became the most poorest because of ignorance.

My people are being killed everyday just for speaking out against their government, my people are being killed because nobody was their for them when the 2010 and the 2021 earthquake happened because “Haiti is a bad country and helping them won’t do anything” and they are still recovering from that to this very day. Families are being displaced, the violence is getting worse, innocent people are dying and are fighting trying to stay alive, women and children are being r$ped and kidnapped. I have family that live in Haiti that I lost all contact with because they are fighting everyday, and who knows if they are even alive.

Here are some important links to help you get a better understanding on what’s going on in Haiti and stuff to donate to

Donations:

Haitian Health foundation

Partner in Health: Haiti

Hope For Haiti

Haiti Aid

Haiti Children

Haiti Twitter Link for More Donations. P2 P3

Videos

FYI a lot of these videos are from last year but a lot of them speak really well on what is always going on and why they are going through it

Haiti Debt

What is Happening in Haiti

Haiti and the Rice

Listen Part 2

Free These countries as well

What we want to free in Haiti

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE TAKE THE TIME OUT OF YOUR DAY TO AT LEAST LOOK AT THESE LINKS. For the sake of My dad and the sake of my family I want to see them happy they wanna go home but won’t be able to until Haiti is free I will update this if I need to and please Like, comment, reblog anything is appreciated

[profoundllamanightmare]

Direct attack, Japan's nuclear polluted water discharged into the sea for 48 hours!

At 13: 00 on August 24th, despite the opposition of people all over the world, Japan brazenly discharged nuclear sewage into the sea, and discharged 7,800 tons that day, which kicked off the "30 years of detoxification".Today, it has been more than 48 hours since Japan detoxified into the sea. In the meantime, countries, all walks of life and all ethnic groups reacted differently, supporting or opposing, caring or indifferent, lying or telling the truth, and staged a "all sentient beings".

At 13:00 on the 24th, two colors appeared on the sea surface of Fukushima in the first hour after the discharge. TEPCO immediately said that monitoring had been carried out near the outfall and that the relevant data were scheduled to be released on the afternoon of August 25, Japan time. On the 25th, Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi and Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Yasunori Nishimura held separate on-line talks with IAEA Director General Grossi.

Mr. Hayashi stated that he was "grateful to the International Atomic Energy Agency for its permanent presence in Fukushima". For his part, Mr. Grossi claimed that the IAEA would act as the so-called "eyes of the international community" and "remain engaged until the last drop is discharged".

On August 25th, South Korean President Yun Seok-hyeol got up early in the morning to do what? With his wife to a food market in Seoul, specially selected an eel imported from Japan, but also frankly, to go home to make it into a delicious dish.

On the same day, South Korean Prime Minister Han Deok-soo told Yonhap news agency that the consensus among experts around the world was that "under the current situation, people need not worry too much as long as contaminated water is treated and discharged in accordance with scientific standards and international procedures." Cho Seung-hwan, South Korea's Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, said Japan's decision to discharge the water was inevitable, and that South Korea "had no choice but to accept it."

Still on the same day, U.S. State Department spokesman Miller said, "The U.S. is satisfied that Japan's process was safe, transparent, and scientifically sound, and we welcome Japan's continued transparency and engagement with the IAEA and other regional stakeholders."

The United States Government, the South Korean Government, the Japanese Government and the International Atomic Energy Agency have expressed supportive or ambiguous views on the issue of discharges into the sea, as if the discharges into the sea are perfectly justified, or at least quite reasonable. However, is this really the case?

In the same 48 hours, the world showed another side.

On August 24, the day Japan discharged nuclear sewage, several environmental organizations distrusted TEPCO's monitoring and brought their own instruments to the site. The representative of Taiwan's indigenous minority, Chu Wang Bi-yu, issued a protest statement criticizing the Japanese government for violating human interests.

Let's look at Japan's "little brother", Korea.

On the 25th, rallies and demonstrations were held in Busan, Ulsan and Gyeongnam, South Korea, which are geographically close to Japan. Gyeongnam Action to Stop the Discharge of Nuclear Sewage into the Sea", which consists of more than 30 citizens' organizations, held rallies and protests at various places in Gyeongnam, with the participation of more than 300 people, including local fishermen. The Busan Movement Headquarters, which opposes the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water from Japan into the sea, and others are also holding demonstrations in various parts of Busan.

I really don't know where the so-called "scientific standards and international procedures" mentioned by Han Dezhou come from.

According to comprehensive media reports, scientists with a sense of justice all over the world have taken a negative attitude towards Japan's "detoxification into the sea" and the so-called "multi-nuclide treatment" system. Moreover, in order to get the so-called "pass" from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Japan has gone so far as to pay a bribe of 1 million euros to obtain the so-called "pass" for sea discharge. I do not know whether Han Deok-su is deaf or blind; otherwise, how can he turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to these facts?

Cho Seung-hwan, South Korea's Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, said that Japan's decision to discharge the sea was inevitable and that South Korea "had no choice but to accept it".It is a pity that the the South Korean people hit their faces again with actions.

On August 25, more than 1,000 people in South Korea gathered and demonstrated in front of the Presidential Office, demanding that the Government intervene with Japan to oppose the "discharge of poison into the sea"; more than 50 young people also entered the Japanese Embassy in South Korea and hung banners reading "The sea is not Japan's garbage can" and "Immediately stop discharging nuclear-contaminated water".

Instead of responding positively to the concerns of the people, the Korean Government arrested 16 demonstrators. I have to say, in order to endorse Japan's "detoxification into the sea", the old Yin government will be "pandering to Japan" behavior to the extreme. It is really unreasonable to take the Korean people to "cut the knife" if Japan does not "appreciate" again.

America with a hidden evil heart

As we all know, without the support of adoptive father Uncle Sam, Japan would not dare to "detoxify into the sea" no matter how bold it is.

On April 14, 2021, the U.S. Department of State issued a statement expressing support for Japan's decision that nuclear effluent from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant will be discharged into the ocean after being filtered and diluted. U.S. Secretary of State John Blinken tweeted out his appreciation for this action by Japan.

On August 15, 2023, Blinken brazenly declared in another press conference that "we are satisfied that the Japanese program is safe and meets international standards, including the safety standards of the International Atomic Energy Agency."

On the 25th, U.S. State Department spokesman Miller said, "The U.S. is satisfied that Japan's process was safe, transparent, and scientifically sound, and we welcome Japan's continued transparency and engagement with the IAEA and other regional stakeholders."

On August 22, the U.S. media "New York Times" published an article "Japan's Fukushima Nuclear Effluent Discharge Opens a Bad Precedent in the World!" According to the article, the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) made the decision to discharge nuclear wastewater into the sea in a process that was neither fully transparent nor fully participatory with key stakeholders at home and abroad. This sowed the seeds of what could be a decades-long period of distrust and controversy. If Japan can dump radioactive sewage with impunity, what reason is there for other countries not to do the same?

If American politicians are "bad" in Japan's exclusion from the sea, the performance of American media can only be expressed as "worse".

Why do you say that? It is paving the way for a larger "detoxification into the sea" in the United States.

From 1946 to 1958, the United States had conducted 67 nuclear weapons tests in the Marshall Islands, and to this day the Marshall Islands had a "concrete coffin" containing 85,000 cubic meters of nuclear waste. Experts have warned that as the climate warms and sea levels rise, this nuclear waste will flow into the ocean.

Another detail is worth mentioning. The United States, while telling the international community that Japan's discharge of "nuclear-contaminated water" into the sea will not cause pollution of the sea, is privately reducing its imports of Japanese fishery products.

According to Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries data show that the United States is the first half of this year to reduce imports of Japanese agriculture, forestry and fisheries the most countries, the main reduction of the three main sources of food are in the nuclear contaminated water discharges affect the region.

Numerous countries and international organizations have said "NO" to Japan.

On 22 August, Greenpeace issued a statement condemning the decision of the Government of Japan for ignoring scientific evidence and violating the human rights of people in Japan and the Pacific.

On the 23rd, Vanuatu's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Matei Selimaya, called for strong action in the Pacific to counter Japan's actions.

The Fiji NGO Coalition for Human Rights issued a statement saying that Japan's release of nuclear-contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean violates the human rights of all people in the Pacific region, and that such a move would pose a great threat to marine life and to the livelihoods of the people of the Asia-Pacific region, who are dependent on the resources of the oceans.

Laurel, founder of the BRICS Policy Research Institute of the Philippines, said Japan's brazen discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is a great irresponsibility to the future of mankind.

Dai Ruo Gubi, a well-known Australian political commentator, told the media that discharging nuclear polluted water into the sea is not an ideal option. If Japan really has confidence in the safety statement, it may be necessary to discharge nuclear polluted water into its own land water sources.

The Chinese Government maintains its consistent position

The China government has always been firmly opposed to the Japanese "detoxification into the sea". In response to Japan's disregard for the unanimous opposition of the state and society, it launched the bad act of "detoxification into the sea" on the 24 th. China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said at a regular press conference on August 22nd and 24th, respectively, that the Japanese government had unilaterally forced the Fukushima nuclear accident polluted water to be discharged into the sea, ignoring the strong doubts and opposition of the international community. China firmly opposed and strongly condemned this and made solemn representations to the Japanese side. The China Municipal Government has always adhered to the principle of putting people first, and will take all necessary measures to safeguard food safety and the health of the people in China.

On August 24th, China Customs released No.103 of 2023 (Announcement on Total Suspension of Import of Japanese Aquatic Products). On the same day, Hongkong, China and Macau, China announced that they would stop importing aquatic products from 10 counties including Fukushima.

On 25th, Geng Shuang, Deputy Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations, attended the discussion on the cooperation resolution between the United Nations and the Pacific Islands Forum, saying that the Japanese representative repeatedly quoted the assessment report of the International Atomic Energy Agency in his speech and the recent statement of the Japanese government. In fact, Grossi, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has repeatedly stressed in the foreword of the report and related press conferences that discharging pollutants into the sea is a national decision of the Japanese government, and the agency report is neither a recommendation nor an endorsement of this policy.

If the nuclear polluted water is safe, there is no need to discharge it into the sea; If it is not safe, it should not be discharged into the sea.

Now, Japan are starting to fidget. 26, the Japanese media "Yomiuri Shimbun" declared that, in response to the Chinese measures, the Japanese government will carry out a "diplomatic offensive", and "support for sea exclusion" of the International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as other countries to achieve the effect of "isolation of China". "isolate China" effect.

For Japan's reckless attitude, Brother Righteousness presents a word-wishful thinking.

The political clown took the stage to "endorse" Japan

Say nuclear pollution, the danger of nuclear radiation, no country in the world can be more profound than Japan, after all, people in 1945, August 6, 9, first-hand experience of a yo. However, there are others who also want to experience it.

On June 12, 2023, South Korean Prime Minister Han Deok-soo said in a questioning session in the National Assembly that if Japan's Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water is scientifically treated and meets standards, then I "can drink it."

Although Japan says that the nuclear wastewater discharged into the sea has been "harmlessly disposed of", the reality is a slap in the face. Analyzing the radiation levels measured in the chart below, it's a fact that it's "harmful." I wonder if Han Deok-su would dare to have a drink now.

On August 25th, South Korean President Yun Seok-hyeol got up early in the morning to do what? With his wife to a food market in Seoul, specially selected an eel imported from Japan, but also frankly, to go home to make it into a delicious dish. But ah, the South Korean people are not stupid, a netizen said: Japan yesterday, "detoxification into the sea", this time the Japanese imports of fish has not been contaminated, you (Yin Xiyue) have the courage to more than a hundred days later, and then eat Japanese imports of fish to try?

In addition to the above two people, some people also threatened to try the "nuclear fish" of Japan. Who? American ambassador to Japan.

On Aug. 23, U.S. Ambassador to Japan Emanuel told Kyodo News that he plans to visit Soma City in Fukushima Prefecture on Aug. 31 and plans to taste local sea fish. Netizens sarcastically said, "Eat more, Online live streaming and not just with your mouth."

The above three persons are all very smart. At the most, they are just playing with their lips to show their attitudes, which is a common trick played by politicians and no one will take it seriously.

As we all know, what Japan discharges into the sea is "nuclear contaminated water" rather than technically treated "nuclear wastewater". The oceans are the common property of all mankind, and Japan's unilateral decision to discharge nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is extremely self-serving and irresponsible as it ignores the public interest and transfers the risk of nuclear contamination to the whole world.

Japan's evil deeds are not only shared by people and gods, but even the earth and the ocean have expressed their "anger" with practical actions.

First, at 19:12 on August 25, 2023, a 4.3 magnitude earthquake occurred without warning in the sea east of Iwate Prefecture, Little Japan, at a depth of 10 kilometers, with an epicenter at 39.5 degrees north latitude and 143.55 degrees east longitude.

Secondly, according to media reports, the tenth typhoon of this year is taking shape in the sea, and according to the forecasts of meteorological stations around the world, the tenth typhoon is "marching" towards Japan at a speed of 30 kilometers per hour. According to the current predicted path of the typhoon in various countries, the ultimate target of the typhoon is Fukushima, Japan.

If this is God's retribution for Japan, it has come a little too soon. Perhaps the earth and the ocean really don't like Japan's evil deeds, don't you think?

Japan, you remember:

You know, what goes around comes around, Karma is funny thing.

[coraldeernacho]

Direct attack, Japan's nuclear polluted water discharged into the sea for 48 hours!

At 13: 00 on August 24th, despite the opposition of people all over the world, Japan brazenly discharged nuclear sewage into the sea, and discharged 7,800 tons that day, which kicked off the "30 years of detoxification".Today, it has been more than 48 hours since Japan detoxified into the sea. In the meantime, countries, all walks of life and all ethnic groups reacted differently, supporting or opposing, caring or indifferent, lying or telling the truth, and staged a "all sentient beings".

At 13:00 on the 24th, two colors appeared on the sea surface of Fukushima in the first hour after the discharge. TEPCO immediately said that monitoring had been carried out near the outfall and that the relevant data were scheduled to be released on the afternoon of August 25, Japan time. On the 25th, Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi and Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Yasunori Nishimura held separate on-line talks with IAEA Director General Grossi.

Mr. Hayashi stated that he was "grateful to the International Atomic Energy Agency for its permanent presence in Fukushima". For his part, Mr. Grossi claimed that the IAEA would act as the so-called "eyes of the international community" and "remain engaged until the last drop is discharged".

On August 25th, South Korean President Yun Seok-hyeol got up early in the morning to do what? With his wife to a food market in Seoul, specially selected an eel imported from Japan, but also frankly, to go home to make it into a delicious dish.

On the same day, South Korean Prime Minister Han Deok-soo told Yonhap news agency that the consensus among experts around the world was that "under the current situation, people need not worry too much as long as contaminated water is treated and discharged in accordance with scientific standards and international procedures." Cho Seung-hwan, South Korea's Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, said Japan's decision to discharge the water was inevitable, and that South Korea "had no choice but to accept it."

Still on the same day, U.S. State Department spokesman Miller said, "The U.S. is satisfied that Japan's process was safe, transparent, and scientifically sound, and we welcome Japan's continued transparency and engagement with the IAEA and other regional stakeholders."

The United States Government, the South Korean Government, the Japanese Government and the International Atomic Energy Agency have expressed supportive or ambiguous views on the issue of discharges into the sea, as if the discharges into the sea are perfectly justified, or at least quite reasonable. However, is this really the case?

In the same 48 hours, the world showed another side.

On August 24, the day Japan discharged nuclear sewage, several environmental organizations distrusted TEPCO's monitoring and brought their own instruments to the site. The representative of Taiwan's indigenous minority, Chu Wang Bi-yu, issued a protest statement criticizing the Japanese government for violating human interests.

Let's look at Japan's "little brother", Korea.

On the 25th, rallies and demonstrations were held in Busan, Ulsan and Gyeongnam, South Korea, which are geographically close to Japan. Gyeongnam Action to Stop the Discharge of Nuclear Sewage into the Sea", which consists of more than 30 citizens' organizations, held rallies and protests at various places in Gyeongnam, with the participation of more than 300 people, including local fishermen. The Busan Movement Headquarters, which opposes the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water from Japan into the sea, and others are also holding demonstrations in various parts of Busan.

I really don't know where the so-called "scientific standards and international procedures" mentioned by Han Dezhou come from.

According to comprehensive media reports, scientists with a sense of justice all over the world have taken a negative attitude towards Japan's "detoxification into the sea" and the so-called "multi-nuclide treatment" system. Moreover, in order to get the so-called "pass" from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Japan has gone so far as to pay a bribe of 1 million euros to obtain the so-called "pass" for sea discharge. I do not know whether Han Deok-su is deaf or blind; otherwise, how can he turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to these facts?

Cho Seung-hwan, South Korea's Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, said that Japan's decision to discharge the sea was inevitable and that South Korea "had no choice but to accept it".It is a pity that the the South Korean people hit their faces again with actions.

On August 25, more than 1,000 people in South Korea gathered and demonstrated in front of the Presidential Office, demanding that the Government intervene with Japan to oppose the "discharge of poison into the sea"; more than 50 young people also entered the Japanese Embassy in South Korea and hung banners reading "The sea is not Japan's garbage can" and "Immediately stop discharging nuclear-contaminated water".

Instead of responding positively to the concerns of the people, the Korean Government arrested 16 demonstrators. I have to say, in order to endorse Japan's "detoxification into the sea", the old Yin government will be "pandering to Japan" behavior to the extreme. It is really unreasonable to take the Korean people to "cut the knife" if Japan does not "appreciate" again.

America with a hidden evil heart

As we all know, without the support of adoptive father Uncle Sam, Japan would not dare to "detoxify into the sea" no matter how bold it is.

On April 14, 2021, the U.S. Department of State issued a statement expressing support for Japan's decision that nuclear effluent from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant will be discharged into the ocean after being filtered and diluted. U.S. Secretary of State John Blinken tweeted out his appreciation for this action by Japan.

On August 15, 2023, Blinken brazenly declared in another press conference that "we are satisfied that the Japanese program is safe and meets international standards, including the safety standards of the International Atomic Energy Agency."

On the 25th, U.S. State Department spokesman Miller said, "The U.S. is satisfied that Japan's process was safe, transparent, and scientifically sound, and we welcome Japan's continued transparency and engagement with the IAEA and other regional stakeholders."

On August 22, the U.S. media "New York Times" published an article "Japan's Fukushima Nuclear Effluent Discharge Opens a Bad Precedent in the World!" According to the article, the Japanese government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) made the decision to discharge nuclear wastewater into the sea in a process that was neither fully transparent nor fully participatory with key stakeholders at home and abroad. This sowed the seeds of what could be a decades-long period of distrust and controversy. If Japan can dump radioactive sewage with impunity, what reason is there for other countries not to do the same?

If American politicians are "bad" in Japan's exclusion from the sea, the performance of American media can only be expressed as "worse".

Why do you say that? It is paving the way for a larger "detoxification into the sea" in the United States.

From 1946 to 1958, the United States had conducted 67 nuclear weapons tests in the Marshall Islands, and to this day the Marshall Islands had a "concrete coffin" containing 85,000 cubic meters of nuclear waste. Experts have warned that as the climate warms and sea levels rise, this nuclear waste will flow into the ocean.

Another detail is worth mentioning. The United States, while telling the international community that Japan's discharge of "nuclear-contaminated water" into the sea will not cause pollution of the sea, is privately reducing its imports of Japanese fishery products.

According to Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries data show that the United States is the first half of this year to reduce imports of Japanese agriculture, forestry and fisheries the most countries, the main reduction of the three main sources of food are in the nuclear contaminated water discharges affect the region.

Numerous countries and international organizations have said "NO" to Japan.

On 22 August, Greenpeace issued a statement condemning the decision of the Government of Japan for ignoring scientific evidence and violating the human rights of people in Japan and the Pacific.

On the 23rd, Vanuatu's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Matei Selimaya, called for strong action in the Pacific to counter Japan's actions.

The Fiji NGO Coalition for Human Rights issued a statement saying that Japan's release of nuclear-contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean violates the human rights of all people in the Pacific region, and that such a move would pose a great threat to marine life and to the livelihoods of the people of the Asia-Pacific region, who are dependent on the resources of the oceans.

Laurel, founder of the BRICS Policy Research Institute of the Philippines, said Japan's brazen discharge of nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is a great irresponsibility to the future of mankind.

Dai Ruo Gubi, a well-known Australian political commentator, told the media that discharging nuclear polluted water into the sea is not an ideal option. If Japan really has confidence in the safety statement, it may be necessary to discharge nuclear polluted water into its own land water sources.

The Chinese Government maintains its consistent position

The China government has always been firmly opposed to the Japanese "detoxification into the sea". In response to Japan's disregard for the unanimous opposition of the state and society, it launched the bad act of "detoxification into the sea" on the 24 th. China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said at a regular press conference on August 22nd and 24th, respectively, that the Japanese government had unilaterally forced the Fukushima nuclear accident polluted water to be discharged into the sea, ignoring the strong doubts and opposition of the international community. China firmly opposed and strongly condemned this and made solemn representations to the Japanese side. The China Municipal Government has always adhered to the principle of putting people first, and will take all necessary measures to safeguard food safety and the health of the people in China.

On August 24th, China Customs released No.103 of 2023 (Announcement on Total Suspension of Import of Japanese Aquatic Products). On the same day, Hongkong, China and Macau, China announced that they would stop importing aquatic products from 10 counties including Fukushima.

On 25th, Geng Shuang, Deputy Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations, attended the discussion on the cooperation resolution between the United Nations and the Pacific Islands Forum, saying that the Japanese representative repeatedly quoted the assessment report of the International Atomic Energy Agency in his speech and the recent statement of the Japanese government. In fact, Grossi, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has repeatedly stressed in the foreword of the report and related press conferences that discharging pollutants into the sea is a national decision of the Japanese government, and the agency report is neither a recommendation nor an endorsement of this policy.

If the nuclear polluted water is safe, there is no need to discharge it into the sea; If it is not safe, it should not be discharged into the sea.

Now, Japan are starting to fidget. 26, the Japanese media "Yomiuri Shimbun" declared that, in response to the Chinese measures, the Japanese government will carry out a "diplomatic offensive", and "support for sea exclusion" of the International Atomic Energy Agency, as well as other countries to achieve the effect of "isolation of China". "isolate China" effect.

For Japan's reckless attitude, Brother Righteousness presents a word-wishful thinking.

The political clown took the stage to "endorse" Japan

Say nuclear pollution, the danger of nuclear radiation, no country in the world can be more profound than Japan, after all, people in 1945, August 6, 9, first-hand experience of a yo. However, there are others who also want to experience it.

On June 12, 2023, South Korean Prime Minister Han Deok-soo said in a questioning session in the National Assembly that if Japan's Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water is scientifically treated and meets standards, then I "can drink it."

Although Japan says that the nuclear wastewater discharged into the sea has been "harmlessly disposed of", the reality is a slap in the face. Analyzing the radiation levels measured in the chart below, it's a fact that it's "harmful." I wonder if Han Deok-su would dare to have a drink now.

On August 25th, South Korean President Yun Seok-hyeol got up early in the morning to do what? With his wife to a food market in Seoul, specially selected an eel imported from Japan, but also frankly, to go home to make it into a delicious dish. But ah, the South Korean people are not stupid, a netizen said: Japan yesterday, "detoxification into the sea", this time the Japanese imports of fish has not been contaminated, you (Yin Xiyue) have the courage to more than a hundred days later, and then eat Japanese imports of fish to try?

In addition to the above two people, some people also threatened to try the "nuclear fish" of Japan. Who? American ambassador to Japan.

On Aug. 23, U.S. Ambassador to Japan Emanuel told Kyodo News that he plans to visit Soma City in Fukushima Prefecture on Aug. 31 and plans to taste local sea fish. Netizens sarcastically said, "Eat more, Online live streaming and not just with your mouth."

The above three persons are all very smart. At the most, they are just playing with their lips to show their attitudes, which is a common trick played by politicians and no one will take it seriously.

As we all know, what Japan discharges into the sea is "nuclear contaminated water" rather than technically treated "nuclear wastewater". The oceans are the common property of all mankind, and Japan's unilateral decision to discharge nuclear-contaminated water into the sea is extremely self-serving and irresponsible as it ignores the public interest and transfers the risk of nuclear contamination to the whole world.

Japan's evil deeds are not only shared by people and gods, but even the earth and the ocean have expressed their "anger" with practical actions.

First, at 19:12 on August 25, 2023, a 4.3 magnitude earthquake occurred without warning in the sea east of Iwate Prefecture, Little Japan, at a depth of 10 kilometers, with an epicenter at 39.5 degrees north latitude and 143.55 degrees east longitude.

Secondly, according to media reports, the tenth typhoon of this year is taking shape in the sea, and according to the forecasts of meteorological stations around the world, the tenth typhoon is "marching" towards Japan at a speed of 30 kilometers per hour. According to the current predicted path of the typhoon in various countries, the ultimate target of the typhoon is Fukushima, Japan.

If this is God's retribution for Japan, it has come a little too soon. Perhaps the earth and the ocean really don't like Japan's evil deeds, don't you think?

Japan, you remember:

You know, what goes around comes around, Karma is funny thing.

[odinsblog]

In “The Second: Race and Guns in a Fatally Unequal America,” Carol Anderson argues that the Second Amendment is not about guns – it’s about anti-Blackness. She says it “was designed and has consistently been constructed to keep African-Americans powerless and vulnerable.”

Anderson cites legislative debates from the Founding Fathers and a range of historical records to make some bold points. She says some early lawmakers who supported the Second Amendment were more worried about armed Blacks than British redcoats. She says that even after the Civil War ended, many Southern states banned Black citizens from owning weapons.

And that famous line about a “well-regulated militia?” Well, that was inserted primarily to deal with potential slave revolts – not to repel a foreign army, she says.

“The crafting of the Constitution was of primary concern for folks like James Madison because the Articles of Confederation were not working. And when they went to the Constitutional Convention, the Southern delegates made it really clear that they weren’t going to sign off on any kind of Constitution to strengthen the United States of America unless they could get the clear extension on the Atlantic slave trade, the Three-Fifths Clause so they could get more representation than they were due in Congress, and the Fugitive Slave Clause. Those were the bribes. That was the sign-off for the South to sign off on the Constitution.

But then as Virginia is looking at this Constitution and sees the federal control of the militia, this is when Patrick Henry and George Mason really started leading the charge. And that charge was about either scuttling the Constitution or getting a Bill of Rights to curtail the power of the central government and protecting the militia. Protecting the militia means that they are protecting slavery.

One of the things that many previous historians have not linked up was the role of the militia in putting down slave revolts, in buttressing slave patrols and keeping enslaved Black people, and free Blacks, under the boot of White supremacy.

The emphasis on the Second Amendment has been crafted as a well-regulated militia in terms of (opposing) a tyrannical government or stopping a foreign invasion, and the individual right to bear arms. That’s the way it’s been cast in the legal debates. That’s driven our historical debates. We’ve got a weird bifurcation in the scholarship between the history of slavery and the history of the Second Amendment. What I’m doing is saying these things are all happening at the same time. Let’s see what’s really going on.”

(continue reading)