invent – Radio Free https://www.radiofree.org Independent Media for People, Not Profits. Sat, 15 Feb 2025 13:38:04 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://www.radiofree.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/cropped-Radio-Free-Social-Icon-2-32x32.png invent – Radio Free https://www.radiofree.org 32 32 141331581 Trump Didn’t Invent the Gaza Ethnic Cleansing Plan https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/15/trump-didnt-invent-the-gaza-ethnic-cleansing-plan/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/15/trump-didnt-invent-the-gaza-ethnic-cleansing-plan/#respond Sat, 15 Feb 2025 13:38:04 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=155978 Trump’s innovation is not the threat to ‘clean out’ Gaza. It is dropping a long-standing aim to dress up Palestinian expulsion as a peace plan Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s intention from day one of his “revenge” attack on Gaza, launched 16 months ago, was either ethnic cleansing or genocide in Gaza. His ally in […]

The post Trump Didn’t Invent the Gaza Ethnic Cleansing Plan first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]>

Trump’s innovation is not the threat to ‘clean out’ Gaza. It is dropping a long-standing aim to dress up Palestinian expulsion as a peace plan

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s intention from day one of his “revenge” attack on Gaza, launched 16 months ago, was either ethnic cleansing or genocide in Gaza.

His ally in genocide for the next 15 months was former US President Joe Biden. His ally in ethnic cleansing is current US President Donald Trump.

Biden provided the 2,000lb bombs for the genocide. Trump is reportedly providing an even larger munition – the 11-ton MOAB, or massive ordnance air blast bomb, with a mile-wide radius – to further incentivise the population’s exodus.

Biden claimed that Israel was helping the people of Gaza by “carpet bombing” the enclave – in his words – to “eradicate” Hamas. Trump claims he is helping the people of Gaza by “cleaning them out” – in his words – from the resulting “demolition site”.

Biden called the destruction of 70 percent of Gaza’s buildings “self defence”. Trump calls the imminent destruction of the remaining 30 percent “all hell breaking loose”.

Biden claimed to be “working tirelessly for a ceasefire” while encouraging Israel to continue the murder of children month after month.

Trump claims to have negotiated a ceasefire, even as he has turned a blind eye to Israel violating the terms of that ceasefire: by continuing to fire on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank; by refusing entry into Gaza of vital aid trucks; by allowing in almost none of the promised tents or mobile homes; by denying many hundreds of maimed Palestinians treatment abroad; by blocking the return of Palestinians to their homes in northern Gaza; and by failing to engage with the second phase of the ceasefire negotiations.

Those Israeli violations, although widely reported by the media as Hamas “claims”, were confirmed to the New York Times by three Israeli officials and two mediators.

In other words, Israel has broken the agreement on every count – and Trump has stood foursquare behind this most favoured client state every bit as much as Biden did before him.

‘Hell breaking loose’

As Israel knew only too well in breaching the ceasefire, Hamas only ever had one point of leverage to try to enforce the agreement: to refuse to release more hostages. Which is precisely what the Palestinian group announced last Monday it would do until Israel began honouring the agreement.

In a familiar double act, Israel and Washington then put on a show of mock outrage.

Trump lost no time escalating the stakes dramatically. He gave Israel – or maybe the US, he was unclear – the green light to “let hell break out”, presumably meaning the resumption of the genocide.

This will happen not only if Hamas refuses to free the three scheduled hostages by the deadline of noon this Saturday. Trump has insisted that Hamas is now expected to release all of the hostages.

The US president said he would no longer accept “dribs and drabs” being released over the course of the six-week, first phase of the ceasefire. In other words, Trump is violating the very terms of the initial ceasefire his own team negotiated.

Clearly, neither Netanyahu nor Trump have been trying to save the agreement. They are working tirelessly to blow it up.

Israel’s Haaretz newspaper reported as much last weekend. Israeli sources revealed that Netanyahu’s goal was to “derail” the ceasefire before it could reach the second stage when Israeli troops are supposed to fully withdraw from the enclave and reconstruction begin.

“Once Hamas realizes there won’t be a second stage, they may not complete the first,” a source told the paper.

Hamas insisted on a gradual release of hostages precisely to buy time, knowing that Israel would be keen to restart the slaughter as soon as it got the hostages home.

The Palestinians of Gaza are back to square one.

Either accept that they will be ethnically cleansed so that Trump and his billionaire friends can cash in on reinventing the enclave as the “Riviera of the Middle East”, paid for by stealing the revenues from Gaza’s gas fields, or face a return to the genocide.

Quiet part out loud

As should have been clear, Netanyahu only agreed to Washington’s “ceasefire” because it was never real. It was a pause so the US could recalibrate from a Biden genocide narrative rooted in the language of “humanitarianism” and “security” to Trump’s far more straightforward tough-guy act.

Now it’s all about the “art of the deal” and real-estate development opportunities.

But of course Trump’s plan to “own” Gaza and then “clean it out” has left his allies in Europe – in truth, his satraps – squirming in their seats.

As ever, Trump has a disturbing habit of saying the quiet part out loud. Of tearing away the already-battered veneer of western respectability. Of making everyone look bad.

The truth is that over 15 months Israel failed to achieve either of its stated objectives in Gaza – eradicating Hamas and securing the return of the hostages – because neither was ever really the goal.

Even Biden’s secretary of state, Antony Blinken, had to concede that Israel’s mass slaughter had served only to recruit as many fighters to Hamas as it had killed.

And Israeli military whistleblowers revealed to the website +972 last week that Israel had killed many of its hostages by using indiscriminate US-supplied bunker-buster bombs.

These bombs had not only generated huge blast areas but also served effectively as chemical weapons, flooding Hamas’ tunnels with carbon monoxide, asphyxiating the hostages.

The indifference of the Israeli leadership to the hostages’ fate was confirmed by Israel’s former defence minister, Yoav Gallant, in an interview with Israeli TV Channel 12.

He admitted that the army had invoked the so-called Hannibal directive during Hamas’ breakout of Gaza on 7 October 2023, allowing soldiers to kill Israelis rather than risk letting them be taken hostage by the Palestinian group.

These matters, which throw a different light on Israel’s actions in Gaza, have, of course, been almost completely blanked out by the western establishment media.

Damage limitation

Israel’s plan from the outset was the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. And now Trump is making that explicit.

So explicit, in fact, that the media have been forced to go into frenzied damage-limitation mode, employing one of the most intense psy-ops against their own publics on record.

Every euphemism under the sun has been resorted to to avoid making clear that Trump and Israel are preparing to ethnically cleanse whoever’s left of the 2.3 million Palestinians living in Gaza.

The BBC speaks of “resettling“, “relocating” and “moving away” the population of Gaza.

In other reports, Palestinians are inexplicably on the brink of “leaving”.

The New York Times refers to ethnic cleansing positively as Trump’s “development plan”, while Reuters indifferently calls it “moving out” Gaza’s population.

Western capitals and their compliant media have been put in this uncomfortable position because Washington’s client states in the Middle East have refused to play ball with Israel and Trump’s ethnic cleansing plan.

Despite the ever-mounting slaughter, Egypt has refused to open its short border with Gaza to let the bombed, starved population pour into neighbouring Sinai.

There was, of course, never any question of Israel being expected to allow Gaza’s families to return to the lands from which they were originally expelled, at gunpoint, in 1948 in order to create a self-declared Jewish state.

Then, as now, the western powers colluded in Israel’s ethnic cleansing operations. This is the historical context western media prefer to gloss over – even on the rare occasions when they concede that there is any relevant background other than a presumed Palestinian barbarism. Instead the media resort to evasive terminology about “cycles of violence” and “historic enmities”.

Backed into a corner by Trump’s outbursts of the past few days, western politicians and the media have preferred to suggest that his administration’s “development plan” for Gaza is actually an innovation.

In truth, however, the president isn’t advancing anything new in demanding that Gaza’s Palestinians be ethnically cleansed. What’s different is that he is being unusually – and inadvisably – open about a long-standing policy.

Israel has always harboured plans to expel Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and from the West Bank to Jordan.

But more to the point, as was noted by Middle East Eye a decade ago, Washington has been fully on board with the Gaza half of the expulsion project since the latter stages of George W Bush’s second presidency, in 2007. For anyone struggling with maths, that was 18 years ago.

Every US president, including Barack Obama, has leant on Egypt’s leader of the time to allow Israel to drive Gaza’s population into Sinai – and each one has been rebuffed.

Open secret

This open secret is not widely known for exactly the same reason that every western pundit and politician is now pretending to be appalled that Trump is actually advancing it.

Why? Because it looks bad – all the more so couched in Trump’s vulgar real-estate sales pitch in the middle of a supposed ceasefire.

Western leaders had hoped to bring about the ethnic cleansing of Gaza with more decorum – in a “humanitarian” way that would have been more effective in duping western publics and maintaining the West’s claim to be upholding civilised values against a supposed Palestinian barbarity.

Since 2007 Washington and Israel’s joint ethnic cleansing project has been known as the “Greater Gaza Plan.”

Israel’s siege of the tiny enclave, which began in late 2006, was designed to create so much misery and poverty that the people there would clamour to be allowed out.

This was when Israel began formulating a so-called “starvation diet” for the people of Gaza, counting the calories to keep them alive but only barely.

Israel’s conception of Gaza was that it was like a tube of toothpaste that could be squeezed. As soon as Egypt relented and opened the border, the population would flood into Sinai out of desperation.

Every Egyptian president was bullied and bribed to give in: Hosni Mubarak, Mohamed Morsi, and General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. They all refused.

Egypt was under no illusions about what was at stake after 7 October 2023. It fully understood that Israel’s levelling of Gaza was designed to squeeze the tube so hard the top would be forced off.

Pressure on Egypt

From the outset, officials like mage limitation Israel’s former national security adviser, stated publicly that the goal was to make Gaza “a place where no human being can exist”.

Just a week into Israel’s slaughter, in October 2023, military spokesperson Amir Avivi told the BBC that Israel could not ensure the safety of civilians in Gaza. He added: “They need to move south, out to the Sinai Peninsula.”

The next day, Danny Ayalon, a Netanyahu confidant and former Israeli ambassador to the US, amplified the point: “There is almost endless space in the Sinai Desert… We and the international community will prepare the infrastructure for tent cities.”

He concluded: “Egypt will have to play ball.”

Israel’s thinking was divulged in a leaked policy draft from its intelligence ministry. It proposed that, after their expulsion, Gaza’s population would initially be housed in tent cities, before permanent communities could be built in the north of Sinai.

At the same time, the Financial Times reported that Netanyahu was lobbying the European Union on the idea of driving the enclave’s Palestinians into Sinai under cover of war.

Some EU members, including the Czech Republic and Austria, were said to have been receptive and floated the idea at a meeting of member states. An unnamed European diplomat told the FT: “Now is the time to put increased pressure on the Egyptians to agree.”

Meanwhile, the Biden administration supplied the bombs to maintain the pressure.

Sisi was only too aware of what Egypt was up against: a concerted western plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza. None of it had anything to do with Trump, who was more than a year away from being elected president.

In mid-October 2023, days into the slaughter, Sisi responded in a press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz: “What is happening now in Gaza is an attempt to force civilian residents to take refuge and migrate to Egypt, which should not be accepted.”

That was precisely why he dedicated so much effort to shoring up the short border shared between Gaza and Sinai both before and after Israel’s genocide began.

Peace sales pitch

Part of what makes Trump’s sales pitch so surreal is that he is half-heartedly sticking to the original script: trying to make the plan sound vaguely humanitarian.

At the same time as re-arming Israel and warning of “all hell breaking loose”, he has spoken of finding “parcels of land” in Egypt and Jordan where the people of Gaza “can live very happily and very safely”.

He has contrasted that with their current plight: “They are being killed there at levels that nobody’s ever seen. No place in the world is as dangerous as the Gaza Strip… They are living in hell.”

That seems to be Trump’s all-too-revealing way of describing the genocide Israel denies it is carrying out and the one the US denies it is arming.

But the talk of helping Gaza’s population is just the rhetorical leftovers from the old sales pitch when previous US administrations were preparing to sell ethnic cleansing as integral to a new stage of the fabled “peace process”.

As Middle East Eye noted back in 2015, Washington had been recruited to the Greater Gaza Plan in 2007. Then the proposal was that Egypt would give 1,600 sq km area in Sinai – five times the size of Gaza – to the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank, headed by Mahmoud Abbas.

Palestinians from Gaza would be “encouraged” – that is, pressured through the siege and aid blockade, as well as intermittent episodes of carpet bombing known as “mowing the lawn”– to flee there.

In return, Abbas would have to forgo a Palestinian state in historic Palestine, undermine the right of return of Palestinian refugees enshrined in international law, and pass the burden of responsibility for repressing the Palestinians on to Egypt and the wider Arab world.

Israel advanced the Sinai plan between 2007 and 2018 in the hope of sabotaging Abbas’ campaign at the United Nations seeking recognition of Palestinian statehood.

Notably, Israel’s large-scale military assaults on Gaza – in the winter of 2008, 2012 and again in 2014 – coincided with reported Israeli and US efforts to turn the screws on successive Egyptian leaders to concede parts of Sinai.

‘Waterfront property’

Trump is already deeply familiar with the Greater Gaza Plan from his first presidency. Reports from 2018 suggest he hoped to include it in his “deal of the century” plan to bring about normalisation between Israel and the Arab world.

In March that year the White House hosted 19 countries in a conference to consider new ideas for dealing with Gaza’s mounting, entirely Israeli-made crisis.

As well as Israel, the participants included representatives from Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman and the United Arab Emirates. The Palestinians boycotted the meeting.

A few months later, in the summer of 2018, Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and architect of his Middle East plan, visited Egypt. A short time later Hamas sent a delegation to Cairo to learn about what was being proposed.

Then, as seemingly now, Trump was offering a purpose-built zone in Sinai with solar-power grid, desalination plant, seaport and airport, as well as a free trade zone with five industrial areas, financed by the oil-rich Gulf states.

Revealingly, a veteran Israeli journalist, Ron Ben-Yishai, reported at the time that Israel was threatening to invade and bisect Gaza into separate northern and southern sectors to force Hamas’ compliance. That is exactly the strategy Israel prioritised last year during its invasion and then set about emptying north Gaza of its residents.

Trump also sought to deepen the crisis in Gaza by withholding payments to the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA). That same policy was actively pursued by Israel and the Biden administration during the current genocide.

Since Trump took office, Israel has banned UNRWA activities anywhere in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Trump’s team revived their own interest in the ethnic cleansing plan the moment Israel launched its genocide – long before Trump knew whether he would win the November 2024 election.

In March last year, nearly a year ago, Kushner used exactly the same language Trump does now. He observed that “there’s not much of Gaza left at this point”, that the priority was to “clean it up”, and that it was a “valuable waterfront property”. He insisted the people of Gaza would have to be “moved out”.

Rabbit in the headlights

If Trump refuses to relent, the direction things head next for the people of Gaza hangs chiefly on neighbouring Egypt and Jordan: they must either accept the ethnic cleansing plan, or Israel will resume the extermination of Gaza’s population.

Should they demur, Trump has threatened to cut US aid – effectively decades-old bribes to each not to come to the Palestinians’ aid while Israel brutalises them.

King Abdullah of Jordan, during a visit to the White House this week, looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights.

He dared not anger Trump by rejecting the plan to his face. Instead he suggested waiting to see how Egypt – a larger, more powerful Arab state – responded.

But privately, as MEE has reported, Abdullah is so fearful of the destabilising effects of Jordan colluding in Gaza’s ethnic cleansing – which he regards as an “existential issue” for his regime – that he is threatening war on Israel to stop it.

Similarly, Egypt has shown its displeasure. In the wake of Abdullah’s humiliating visit, Sisi has reportedly postponed his own meeting next week with Trump – in a clear rebuff – until the ethnic cleansing plan is off the table.

Cairo is said to be preparing its own proposal for how Gaza can be reconstructed. Even Washington’s oil-rich ally Saudi Arabia is in revolt.

It is rare to see Arab states show so much backbone to any US president, let alone one as vain and strategically unhinged as Trump.

Which may explain why the US president’s resolve appears to be weakening. On Wednesday his press secretary Karoline Leavitt suggested that Trump was now seeking from “our Arab partners in the region” a counter-proposal, a “peace plan to present to the president”.

And in another sign that Trump may be hesitating, Netanyahu walked back his threat to resume the genocide unless all the hostages were freed on Saturday. He is now demanding only the three that were originally scheduled.

Reports from Gaza are that Israel has also significantly stepped up its aid deliveries.

All of which is welcome news. It may buy the people of Gaza a little more time.

But we should not lose sight of the bigger picture. Israel and the US are still committed to “cleaning out” Gaza, one way or another, as they have been for the past 18 years. They are simply looking for a more propitious moment to resume.

That could be this weekend, or it could be in a month or two. But at least Biden and Trump have achieved one thing. They have made sure no one can ever again mistake the crushing of Gaza for a peace plan.

The post Trump Didn’t Invent the Gaza Ethnic Cleansing Plan first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Jonathan Cook.

]]>
https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/15/trump-didnt-invent-the-gaza-ethnic-cleansing-plan/feed/ 0 513970
‘Bhola’, ‘Shankar’ were aliases used by IC 814 hijackers; web-series maker Anubhav Sinha did not invent them https://www.radiofree.org/2024/09/02/bhola-shankar-were-aliases-used-by-ic-814-hijackers-web-series-maker-anubhav-sinha-did-not-invent-them/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/09/02/bhola-shankar-were-aliases-used-by-ic-814-hijackers-web-series-maker-anubhav-sinha-did-not-invent-them/#respond Mon, 02 Sep 2024 06:42:57 +0000 https://www.altnews.in/?p=289668 Anubhav Sinha, one of the creators of the web series ‘IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack’ has come under severe criticism from the Right Wing on social media for using ‘Bhola’...

The post ‘Bhola’, ‘Shankar’ were aliases used by IC 814 hijackers; web-series maker Anubhav Sinha did not invent them appeared first on Alt News.

]]>
Anubhav Sinha, one of the creators of the web series ‘IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack’ has come under severe criticism from the Right Wing on social media for using ‘Bhola’ and ‘Shankar’ as code names for two of the hijackers shown in the series.

Indian Airlines flight IC 814 from Kathmandu to Delhi with 176 passengers on board was hijacked by five Pakistani men on December 24, 1999, and was flown to multiple locations before landing in Kandahar, Afghanistan. The siege ended seven days later when the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government partially conceded the demands of the hijackers and released three jailed terrorists — Maulana Masood Azhar, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh and Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar – in exchange for the passengers. The Netflix series is based on these events.

Right-wing influencer Rishi Bagree claimed on X (formerly Twitter) that naming hijackers Bhola and Shankar in Anubhav Sinha’s web series amounted to cinematic ‘whitewashing’. At the time of this report being written, Bagree’s tweet has been viewed over 16 Lakh times and reshared over 16,000 times.

Supreme Court lawyer Shahshank Sekhar Jha shared a poster of the web series on X and wrote: How to whitewash Islamist terrorism?! Hijackers of IC 814: Ibrahim Akhtar Shahid Akhtar Sayeed Sunny Ahmed Qazi Zahoor Mistry Shakir Hijackers of I C 814 as per @anubhavsinha: Bhola Shankar Burger Doctor.

Over 7,000 X users retweeted Jha’s tweet, including Jha himself.

Right-wing infuencer Raushan Sinha, who runs the X handle @MrSinha_, wrote in a tweet, “… Commie clown @anubhavsinha made a movie based on it & named the terrorists as Bhola & Shankar. Both after Lord Mahadev, purposely to defame Hinduism.”

The same claim — that the makers of the web series and Anubhav Sinha in particular had named the hijackers Bhola and Shankar —  were made by several other users on X. Some of the users took sarcastic digs at the Sinha. Among them are Arun Pudur (@arunpudur), Kedar (@shintre_kedar), Kashmiri Hindu (@BattaKashmiri), The Jaipur Dialogues (@JaipurDialogues), Sameer (@BesuraTaansane), kaushik (@imkhimansh23), Rashmi Samant (@RashmiDVS), Aarohi Tripathi (@aarohi_vns), Rohith (@_rohithverse) and others.

Several of these tweets received 5000+ retweets making the claim go viral. ‘#BoycottNetflixIndia’ and#BoycottNetflix’ started trending on X.

Some media outlets, too, reported that the makers of the web series were being slammed for ‘naming’ hijackers ‘Bhola’ and ‘Shankar’. Among them are Free press Journal, Mid-day and The Times of India. Republic claimed in an article that the identity of the terrorists had been changed and swapped in the web series. (Archive)

Fact Check

We checked news reports on Google about the IC 814 hijack and found several articles that mentioned that two of the hijackers had used the code named Bhola and Shankar. A TOI report about a couple from Bhopal who were on the ill-fated flight (21 yrs on, Kandahar hijack still haunts Bhopal couple, published on December 24, 2020) starts, “Burger, Doctor, Chief, Bhola and Shankar… The names still bring nightmares to Durgesh and Renu Goel.”

The report further states, “Narrating the horror, Goel said, “Bhola and Burger used to hit passengers, while Doctor and Chief used to to talk with the authorities.”

Another report in the Nepal Times (Remembering IC814, published on December 31, 2019) quotes one of the passengers, Sanjay Dhital, as stating, “The five hijackers all had code names: Manager, Shankar, Bhola, Burger and Doctor.”

We found a report in the Financial Express (IC 814 hijack: How Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar’s brother planned Indian Airlines hijack in 1999, published on March 6, 2019) which specifically mentioned that each of the hijackers used a code name during the operation. According to the report, the names and code names of four of the hijackers were as follows:

The fifth hijacker was Ibrahim Athar.

The use of code names has been corroborated by flight engineer Anil K Jaggia of IC 814, who in 2021 co-authored a book recounting his experience during the entire episode: IC 814 Hijacked: The Inside Story. See excerpt  below:

A keyword search also revealed a statement released by the Union home minister a week after the siege ended. It states that interrogation of four arrested Harkat-ul-Ansar operatives revealed the names of the hijackers. It then adds,

“The hijackers named by these operatives are:

Ibrahim Athar, Bahawalpur
Shahid Akhtar Sayed, Gulshan Iqbal, Karachi
Sunny Ahmed Qazi, Defence Area, Karachi
Mistri Zahoor Ibrahim, Akhtar Colony, Karachi
Shakir, Sukkur city

To the passengers of the hijacked place these hijackers came to be known respectively as (1) Chief, (2) Doctor, (3) Burger, (4) Bhola and (5) Shankar, the names by which the hijackers invariably addressed one another.

  1. Sunny Ahmed Qazi
  2. Shakir a.k.a Rajesh Gopal Verma
  3. Mistri Zahoor Ibrahim
  4. Shahid Akhtar Sayed
  5. Ibrahim Athar”

When was the Real Identity of the Hijackers Officially Revealed?

On January 6, 2020. That is the day when the Union home ministry issued the above statement. It starts, “The security forces pursuing the trail of Pakistan’s Operation Hijack have made a significant breakthrough. Working in tandem with central intelligence agencies, the Mumbai Police has nabbed four ISI operatives based in Mumbai, who comprised the support cell for the five hijackers of the Indian Airlines Plane.

The Four HuA operatives arrested are: Mohammed Rehan, Mohammed Iqbal, Yasuf Nepali, Abdul Latif…. Interrogation of these four operatives has confirmed that the IAC Hijack was an ISI operation executed with the assistance of Harkat-ul-Ansar and further that all the five hijackers are Pakistanis.”

The Tribune reported on the same day (January 6), “The Union Home Minister, Mr L.K. Advani, said today that the identity of the five hijackers, including the brother of freed militant Maulana Masood Azhar, had been established…”

It further stated, “In his first press conference after the hijack crisis, Mr Advani said the five hijackers were identified as Ibrahim Akhtar, alias Athar from Bahawalpur, Shahid Akhtar Sayeed, a resident of Gulshan Iqbal, Karachi, Sunny Ahmed Qazi, a resident of Defence Area, Karachi, Mistri Zahoor Ibrahim, Akhtar Colony, Karachi and Shaqir from Sukkur city. Ibrahim, identified as brother of Maulana Azhar, was known as “Chief”, Sayeed as “Doctor”, Qazi as “Burger”, Ibrahim as “Bhola” and Shaqir as “Shanker”, the names the hijackers used to addres each other on the aircraft.”

Brigadier Sameer Bhattacharya’s 2014 book Nothing But! corroborates this. See excerpt below:

The readers should note the web series covers developments only till the release of the hostages on December 31.

To sum up, the code names ‘Bhola’ and ‘Shankar’ were indeed used by the IC 814 hijackers and these were not invented by the creators of the web series. The claim by the Right Wing that the Hindu names were used by the makers to whitewash the crime, therefore, does not stand.

Consequently, the news headlines which state the makers of the web series named the hijackers ‘Bhola’ and ‘Shankar’ are misleading. And the Republic article, which goes one step further to state that the hijackers’ identities were swapped in the series is entirely false.

The post ‘Bhola’, ‘Shankar’ were aliases used by IC 814 hijackers; web-series maker Anubhav Sinha did not invent them appeared first on Alt News.


This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Indradeep Bhattacharyya.

]]>
https://www.radiofree.org/2024/09/02/bhola-shankar-were-aliases-used-by-ic-814-hijackers-web-series-maker-anubhav-sinha-did-not-invent-them/feed/ 0 491514
Pentagon tries to dodge PFAS lawsuits over a product it helped invent https://grist.org/health/pentagon-tries-to-dodge-pfas-lawsuits-over-a-product-it-helped-invent/ https://grist.org/health/pentagon-tries-to-dodge-pfas-lawsuits-over-a-product-it-helped-invent/#respond Tue, 12 Mar 2024 08:45:00 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=632893 The United States government said it is immune to 27 lawsuits filed by local and state governments, businesses, and property owners over the military’s role in contaminating the country with deadly PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals.” The lawsuits are a small fraction of the thousands of cases brought by plaintiffs all over the country against a slew of entities that manufactured, sold, and used a product called aqueous film-forming foam, or AFFF — an ultra-effective fire suppressant that leached into drinking water supplies and soil across the U.S. over the course of decades.

The Department of Justice asked a U.S. district judge in South Carolina to dismiss the lawsuits last month, arguing that the government can’t be held liable for PFAS contamination. Lawyers for the plaintiffs called the move “misguided” and said that dismissing the lawsuits would extend an ongoing environmental catastrophe the Pentagon helped create. 

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known by the acronym PFAS (pronounced PEA’-fass), were invented by the chemical giant DuPont in the 1940s. DuPont trademarked the chemical as “Teflon,” which many Americans came to know and love for its use in nonstick cookware in the back half of the 20th century. 3M, another industry behemoth, quickly surpassed DuPont as the world’s largest manufacturer of PFAS, which have also been used in makeup, food packaging, clothing, and many industrial applications such as plastics, lubricants, and coolants. 

Unfortunately, PFAS cause a host of health problems. PFAS have been linked to testicular, kidney and thyroid cancers; cardiovascular disease; and immune deficiencies.

The Department of Defense became involved in PFAS development in the 1960s. In response to a number of deadly infernos on military ship decks, the Navy’s research arm, the Naval Research Laboratory, collaborated with 3M on a new kind of firefighting foam that could put out high-temperature fires. The foam’s active ingredient was “fluorinated surfactant,” otherwise known as perfluorooctane sulfonic acid or PFOS — one of thousands of chemicals under the PFAS umbrella. Internal studies and memos show that 3M became aware that its PFAS products could be harmful to animal test subjects not long after the foam was patented.  

Starting in the 1970s, every Navy ship — and, soon, almost every U.S. military base, civilian airport, local fire training facility, and firefighting station — had AFFF on site in the event of a fire and to use for training. Year after year, the foam was dumped into the ocean and on the bare ground at these sites, where it contaminated the earth and migrated into nearby waterways. The chemicals, which do not break down naturally in the environment, are still there today. According to the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, there are 710 military sites with known or suspected PFAS contamination across the country, including Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

Absorbent booms used to contain aqueous film-forming foam near a scene of a fire in Pennsylvania in 2019. Bastiaan Slabbers / NurPhoto

The Department of Defense, or DOD, has been under growing pressure from states and Congress to clean up these contaminated sites. But it has been slow to do so, or even to acknowledge that PFAS, which has been found in the blood of thousands of military service members, pose a threat to human health. Instead, the DOD, which is required by Congress to phase out AFFF in some of its systems, doubled down on the usefulness of the chemicals as recently as 2023. “Losing access to PFAS due to overly broad regulations or severe market contractions would greatly impact national security and DOD’s ability to fulfill its mission,” defense officials wrote in a report to Congress last year. 

Meanwhile, people living near military bases — and members of the military — have been getting sick. The lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court in South Carolina, which were brought by farmers and several states, seek to make the government pay for the water and property contamination the DOD allegedly caused. 

Even if these lawsuits are allowed to proceed, experts told Grist they are not likely to be successful. That’s because they rely on the 1946 Federal Tort Claims Act, a law that allows individuals to sue the federal government for wrongful acts committed by people working on behalf of the U.S. if the government has breached specific, compulsory policies.

But the Federal Tort Claims Act has loopholes. One of these loopholes, called the “discretionary function” exemption, states that federal personnel using their own personal judgment to make decisions should not be held liable for harms caused. The U.S. government is arguing that members of the military were using their discretion when they began requiring the use of AFFF and that no “mandatory or specific” restrictions on the foam were violated. “For decades military policy encouraged — rather than prohibited — the use of AFFF,” the Department of Justice wrote in its motion to dismiss the cases. 

“Every decision has some discretion to it,” said Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School of Law, noting that the discretionary function exemption could be applied to virtually any decision made by a federal employee. “But I don’t think anyone, except maybe the manufacturers of PFAS, had much of an inkling that it was so harmful,” he said. 3M and DuPont did not reply to Grist’s requests for comment.

A maintanence worker at the Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs gives a thumbs up to crew on a C-130 aircraft.
A maintanence worker at the Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs gives a thumbs up to crew on a C-130 aircraft. Andy Cross / The Denver Post via Getty Images

In its motion to dismiss, the government made another argument that experts told Grist is likely to be successful. The Pentagon has the authority under the 1980 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act — better known as the Superfund Act — to clean up its own contaminated sites. The Environmental Protection Agency hasn’t classified PFAS contamination as “hazardous contamination” yet, but the DOD says it is already spending billions to investigate and control PFAS at some of its bases. Because the military is voluntarily exercising its cleanup authority under the Superfund Act, its lawyers said in the motion, it should not be held liable for PFAS contamination. 

Lawyers for the plaintiffs and the defendants declined requests for comment, citing the ongoing legal proceedings. 

The U.S. government is the only defendant involved in the PFAS lawsuits that is likely to enjoy immunity. Already, 3M, DuPont, and other chemical companies, faced with the threat of high-profile trials, have opted to pay out historic, multi-billion-dollar settlements to water providers that alleged the companies knowingly contaminated public drinking water supplies with forever chemicals. And the judge presiding over the enormous group of AFFF lawsuits has hundreds of other cases to get through that were not brought by water providers. These include personal injury and property damage cases, as well as those seeking to make PFAS manufacturers pay for medical monitoring for exposed populations. 

The scale of the litigation is a clear indication that communities around the U.S. are desperate to find the money to pay for PFAS cleanup — the full cost of which is not yet clear, but could be as much as $400 billion. “We can’t even imagine what it would cost,” Tobias said.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Pentagon tries to dodge PFAS lawsuits over a product it helped invent on Mar 12, 2024.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Zoya Teirstein.

]]>
https://grist.org/health/pentagon-tries-to-dodge-pfas-lawsuits-over-a-product-it-helped-invent/feed/ 0 463504
Los Angeles Tries to Claw Back Public Records After Police Invent New Definition of “Undercover” https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/11/los-angeles-tries-to-claw-back-public-records-after-police-invent-new-definition-of-undercover/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/11/los-angeles-tries-to-claw-back-public-records-after-police-invent-new-definition-of-undercover/#respond Tue, 11 Apr 2023 21:30:45 +0000 https://theintercept.com/?p=425757

Last week, the city of Los Angeles filed a lawsuit against Ben Camacho, a local journalist, as well as the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, a community watchdog group that opposes police surveillance, in an attempt to censor a database of Los Angeles Police Department officer headshot photos. The lawsuit alleges that Camacho and the watchdog group are in “wrongful possession” of 9,310 headshots, which the city itself released to Camacho as part of a settlement in response to a public records lawsuit.

The city’s lawsuit was denounced as meritless by First Amendment experts. “Once the government gives you information in good faith, you have the right to publish it under the First Amendment,” David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, told The Intercept. “This is not even a close case.”

The Stop LAPD Spying Coalition launched a website called Watch the Watchers that includes the LAPD headshots. The dataset has also been published by Distributed Denial of Secrets, or DDoSecrets, using the censorship-resistant technology BitTorrent, and posted on the Internet Archive. Even if the court ruled in favor of the city, these public records have long since escaped the LAPD’s grasp.

“This lawsuit is a political stunt. It’s a desperation play,” Loy said. “And as a practical matter, there’s nothing a court can do. You cannot scrub the internet of everything.”

“This lawsuit is a political stunt. It’s a desperation play.”

Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, a private police union that lobbies on behalf of LAPD officers, has launched its own lawsuit against the city and the LAPD for releasing the records, and 321 allegedly undercover LAPD officers announced their intention to file a separate class-action suit seeking damages for negligence.

Camacho believes that the city is attempting to “save face on the other front that they’re fighting with the police union.” He told The Intercept that he sees the lawsuit against him as “intimidation and scapegoating.” In addition to demanding that he “give everything back and delete copies,” Camacho said, the lawsuit insisted that he “never, ever share these photos ever again. That’s huge violation of my First Amendment freedom of the press.”

LAPD’s media relations division declined to comment, citing ongoing litigation. The police union did not respond to a request for comment.

At its core, this case appears to be about the definition of the word “undercover.” The flash drive full of LAPD headshots that the city gave Camacho excluded undercover officers. But after the police union took note of the Watch the Watchers website, they argued for a vastly expanded definition of the word in an effort to claw back the public records.

According to an interview in the Los Angeles Times by the union’s legal counsel, Robert Rico, the expanded definition of “undercover” includes any officer who conducts surveillance (even if they wear normal police uniforms) and any officer who has worked undercover or at a sensitive assignment in the past. The union’s director, Jamie McBride, argued in a TV interview that it should also include any officer who may work undercover in the future.

To Shakeer Rahman, an attorney with the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, the implications are troubling. “They’re openly calling for a secret police force,” Rahman said.

California Public Records Act

Camacho is an LA-based journalist and filmmaker who writes for the local nonprofit newsroom Knock LA. Last year, he published a detailed investigation into a group of Santa Ana police officers who received numerous complaints without facing any discipline — and who all shared gang-like skull tattoos. In one incident, five off-duty members of this police gang allegedly harassed two 15-year-old girls at a restaurant, one of whom said she was sexually assaulted. Camacho’s reporting relied in part on Santa Ana police officer headshots, which he had obtained through a California Public Records Act request.

In October 2021, Camacho filed a similar request to the LAPD. According to the lawsuit Camacho later filed against Los Angeles, the city initially refused to hand over the headshots, claiming that the department did not have any responsive records. LAPD further claimed that it didn’t possess any headshots in digital format and that locating the “negatives” would be “unduly burdensome.”

Camacho’s Public Records Act lawsuit argued that LAPD’s response was “utterly implausible” because the police department regularly published headshots of its officers in its own promotional material. Camacho pointed to headshots of LAPD command staff on the department’s website and headshots of officers published on Facebook and Twitter.

In the resulting settlement, the city agreed to hand over photos of all LAPD officers except for those who worked undercover. The city’s attorney estimated that fewer than 100 officers were working undercover and would be excluded from the release, according to an email Camacho published on Twitter.

In September 2022, Los Angeles gave Camacho a flash drive containing 9,310 headshots of LAPD officers. It wasn’t until six months later that the city, the LAPD, and the police union all claimed that headshots of undercover officers were accidentally included on the drive.

LAPD publishes officer headshots on social media.

LAPD headshots the department posted on social media.

Screenshot: The Intercept. Source: Public Records Act lawsuit

Watching the Watchers

Last month, the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition launched Watch the Watchers, which allows the public to look up LAPD officers by name to see their headshots and includes information such as serial numbers, ranks, ethnicities, and email addresses — all public information that LAPD itself publishes. “This website is intended as a tool to empower community members engaged in copwatch and other countersurveillance practices,” the website states. “You can use it to identify officers who are causing harm in your community.”

“LAPD has always published full rosters of all of its officers,” Rahman said. “They had already published a roster of all of those names, identities, rank, positions, division. These aren’t secret identities. They’re very, very public.”

“These aren’t secret identities. They’re very, very public.”

The day after the website launched, Los Angeles Police Chief Michel Moore apologized in an email to LAPD personnel and announced an internal investigation into how the headshots got released. During a March 21 meeting of Los Angeles police commissioners, Commission President William Briggs characterized the lawfully obtained public records as “private data” and argued that Watch the Watchers would be used to harm officers and their families, aid foreign spies, and help cartels and other criminal organizations. At the same meeting, Moore emphasized that release of the LAPD headshots was “consistent with the California Public Records Act request and is a requirement as a public agency.”

“The Police Commission believes in transparency and we welcome the public’s interest and questions,” Briggs said in a statement to The Intercept. “However, the Commission is right to question the intent behind the availability of this disclosure and to be concerned about the safety and wellbeing of the officers and their families.”

The Stop LAPD Spying Coalition insists that access to the headshots is necessary because oversight bodies have routinely failed to keep police misconduct in check. “We’re not publishing their home addresses, we’re not publishing things that are outside their role as police officers,” Hamid Khan, a coordinator with Stop LAPD Spying, told the Los Angeles Times.

Things only heated up from there.

The police union launched a lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles and the police chief on March 28, claiming that the city had “perpetrated one of the worst security breaches in recent memory, releasing service photographs of undercover officers pursuant to California Public Records Act request,” and that undercover officers “now face potentially grave risks as a direct result of the City’s actions.” On April 4, 321 LAPD officers whose headshots were published on the Watch the Watchers site, who allegedly do undercover police work, announced their intention to file a class-action lawsuit against the city, the LAPD, and its leadership.

Changing the Rules

Two days after the police union filed suit, an attorney for the city sent Camacho a letter threatening legal action if he did not return the flash drive and “all digital copies of records obtained from that drive.”


The attorney argued that in the Public Records Act settlement, the city had agreed to exclude undercover officers but had accidentally included some anyway. Because of this, he argued that the dataset Camacho had was illegally obtained. He stated that the city could only give Camacho a copy of the headshots of high-ranking officers that are already published on the LAPD website and that it couldn’t release headshots for anyone else — otherwise, it would be possible to figure out who the undercover officers were based on which headshots were excluded. In other words, the attorney argued that the city didn’t need to comply with the settlement.

Loy, the legal director of First Amendment Coalition, said that the city initially did exactly what it agreed to do: It provided Camacho with photos of officers who weren’t undercover. But after other officers complained, “they tried to change the rules in the middle of the game” by redefining what “undercover” means after the fact. “This was not a genuinely inadvertent disclosure. This is a case where they made a choice. They just now want to take their choice back.”

On April 5, the city of Los Angeles filed a lawsuit against Camacho and the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, demanding that they immediately return the flash drive and all digital copies of the LAPD headshots. Notably, the complaint demanded the return of all these public records, not just those related to undercover officers.

The following day, DDoSecrets published the LAPD headshots both on its website as well as using BitTorrent. With BitTorrent, internet users around the world collectively host copies of the same files, making attempts at censoring those files nearly impossible so long as enough people are participating.

This isn’t the first time DDoSecrets has published law enforcement data. In 2020, during the height of the Black Lives Matter uprising sparked by the police murder of George Floyd, DDoSecrets published 270GB of documents from hundreds of law enforcement fusion center websites known collectively as BlueLeaks. Many newsrooms, including The Intercept, reported extensively on that dataset. At the request of the FBI, German authorities seized a server operated by DDoSecrets in order to suppress BlueLeaks. But since the BlueLeaks data was also shared on BitTorrent, that censorship effort failed. And unlike the BlueLeaks data, which was illegally obtained by a hacker, the LAPD headshots are lawfully obtained public records.

A copy of the LAPD headshots was also posted to the Internet Archive, an online digital library that has a strong history of fighting legal requests.

The LAPD headshots have already spread far beyond the reach of the LAPD. Considering that the Watch the Watchers website has been up for weeks and that Camacho also posted a raw copy of the dataset on Twitter, it should be clear to the city’s attorneys that they’re not going to be able to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

“The reason that they’re suing us is not because it’s practically feasible to bring the records down,” Rahman, the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition attorney, told The Intercept. “They’re working to appease the very powerful police union. … No matter how legally frivolous it is, it’s politically worth it for them for that reason. Hopefully, at some point, they wake up and realize that calculus is wrong and that suing community groups and journalists for publishing public records that they themselves made public is absolutely absurd.”


This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by Micah Lee.

]]>
https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/11/los-angeles-tries-to-claw-back-public-records-after-police-invent-new-definition-of-undercover/feed/ 0 386986
HBO’s DMZ Fails to Invent a Truly Revolutionary Society https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/20/hbos-dmz-fails-to-invent-a-truly-revolutionary-society/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/20/hbos-dmz-fails-to-invent-a-truly-revolutionary-society/#respond Fri, 20 May 2022 11:23:00 +0000 https://inthesetimes.com/article/revolution-televised-hbo-dmz-rosario-dawson-dystopia-miniseries-atlanta-socialism-dc-civil-war-tv-hollywood-celebrity
This content originally appeared on In These Times and was authored by Devyn Springer.

]]>
https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/20/hbos-dmz-fails-to-invent-a-truly-revolutionary-society/feed/ 0 300666