rss

joined 4 months ago
MODERATOR OF
 

As Americans grow fed up with the rapid encroachment of artificial intelligence data centers into their communities, tech companies are embracing a novel solution to protect their energy-sucking behemoths from danger: Even more robots... robot dogs, to be exact.

According to a report from Business Insider on Monday:

As companies pour billions into sprawling industrial campuses for cloud and AI computing, some data center operators are experimenting with four-legged bots—about the size of large dogs—that can patrol fences, inspect equipment, and flag any issues before they turn into costly outages.

These robots, known as "quadrupeds," are being used to patrol the complexes, which can sometimes reach the size of multiple football fields.

According to Fortune, tech companies are already pouring nearly $700 billion into building data centers across the US and are now spending hundreds of thousands of dollars more to enlist mechanical canines as security forces.

One model from Boston Dynamics, known as "Spot," can cost anywhere from $175,000 to $300,000. And while the technology may seem futuristic, Spot and other quadrupeds like it have already been enlisted in law enforcement and public safety for years.

Another company—Ghost Robotics—advertises its quadrupeds for "reconnaissance, intelligence, and surveillance use by the military."

With more than 5,000 data centers now in the US and 800-1,000 new ones in the process of being built, Michael Subhan, the chief growth officer for Ghost Robotics, told Business Insider he expects boom times are ahead for his industry.

As data centers expand their reach at breakneck speed, there may be more interlopers for the programmable pooches to sniff out.

Due to skyrocketing energy costs and water shortages in places where large data centers have been built, the sites of proposed projects from Illinois to Minnesota to South Carolina have drawn crowds of dozens and even hundreds of demonstrators in recent weeks.


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday posted a video of himself showing off what he said was a list of kill targets to US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee.

In the video, Netanyahu informs Huckabee that he recently "erased" two names off the punch card, while noting that there are "many more to go."

Huckabee then expresses relief to Netanyahu that his name is not on the punch card, to which Netanyahu replies that the former Republican Arkansas governor was on a "list of the good, good guys."

Netanyahu then says that he's "proud to stand shoulder to shoulder" with the US military in "getting rid of these lunatics" that the two countries started bombing more than two weeks ago in Iran.

"We're wiping them out," the Israeli prime minister boasts.

"I love it," Huckabee responds. "Thank you, mister prime minister."

Crossing names off the list is good - doing it shoulder to shoulder with our American friends is even better.

Good to see Ambassador @GovMikeHuckabee. Always a pleasure.

🇮🇱🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/FZrZN03IZI
— Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) March 17, 2026

Journalist Noga Tarnopolsky expressed disgust at the two men being so jovial about matters of life and death.

"PM Netanyahu and US Ambassador Huckabee amuse themselves with a kill list," she wrote. "Yes, really."

Drop Site News reporter Julian Andreone expressed a similar sentiment.

"I’m extremely creeped out," Andreone wrote. "Just going to go ahead and say it."


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

 

On March 13, multiple Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in unmarked vehicles surrounded Mohommad Nazeer Paktyawal in front of his home in Texas as he prepared to drive his children to school. The 41-year-old father of six children, who had served alongside the 3rd Battalion of the U.S. Army Special Forces in Afghanistan, died in ICE custody the next day, leaving his family in shock…

Source


From Truthout via This RSS Feed.

 

This article originally appeared on Dean Baker’s Patreon. It is reprinted here with permission.

A bit less than 20 years ago, a nationwide housing bubble collapsed, giving us the Great Recession. Millions of homeowners had their houses foreclosed. We had high unemployment for the better part of a decade. And the subsequent falloff in construction created the basis for another extraordinary run-up in house prices during the pandemic. In other words, it was pretty bad news.

The current bubble in AI is laying the groundwork for another bad story. As was the case both before and after the collapse of the housing bubble, there is a tremendous premium in intellectual circles on making the problem more complicated than it is.

My latest poster child for this point is a column in the New York Times by Richard Bookstaber, a hedge fund manager who had predicted the financial crisis that followed the collapse of the housing bubble. His column notes the AI bubble, but then argues that the big problem is that we are also facing risks from the private credit market, as well as geopolitical risks, like the fact that China could cut off the supply of chips from Taiwan and also the price shock associated with the cutoff of the oil flow through the straits of Hormuz.

The collapse of the stock prices of the companies that are big factors in AI will then have huge spillover effects, devastating people’s 401(k)s, as well as whacking pension funds. This will lead to a huge fall in consumption, which would likely lead to a recession.

The warnings are well-taken, but the story is actually not complicated. Bookstaber tells us at the start of his piece:

“Yet they [the potential problems he notes] are different entry points into the same underlying structure — a complex and tightly coupled system where the specific source of stress matters less than how quickly that stress can spread.”

As was the case with the financial structure supporting the growth of the housing bubble in the first decade of this century, there are some complex issues. But the housing bubble itself was simple. House prices had grown hugely out of line with the fundamentals of the housing market. Nationwide, real house prices had grown by 70 percent between 1996 and 2006. This followed a century in which house prices on average had just kept pace with the overall rate of inflation.

The run-up in house prices took place despite a relatively high vacancy rate. There also was no corresponding growth in rents, which had largely kept pace with inflation.

The rise in house prices led to an unprecedented boom in residential construction, which peaked at 6.7% of GDP in the fourth quarter of 2005. After prices peaked and started to fall, construction plummeted, bottoming out at 2.4% of GDP in the third quarter of 2010.

This was the story of the Great Recession, not the financial crisis. We have no easy mechanism, apart from massive government stimulus, to replace the 4.3 percentage points of lost demand that resulted from the ending of the construction boom. This would be equivalent to $1.3 trillion in annual demand in today’s economy. In addition, the loss of trillions of dollars in housing wealth by homeowners led to a further reduction in annual demand of 1-2 percentage points of GDP, an additional $320-$640 billion in today’s economy.

The financial crisis provided good entertainment, as we watched leading politicians from both parties insist that we couldn’t let the Wall Street bankers be ruined by the free market and their own incompetence, but this was a sidebar. The collapsed bubble was the story of the Great Recession: full stop.

To be clear, the flood of fraudulent loans that the industry greedily issued and securitized allowed the bubble to grow much larger than would otherwise have been the case, but the key issue was house prices. If they had not grown so out of line with fundamentals a wave of defaults, which would have been far smaller, would have had a limited impact on the economy.

It is the same story now with the AI bubble. The problem we have is a grossly inflated stock market driven by the AI bubble. The various problems identified by Bookstaber would not be a big deal if this was not the case.

A freeze-up in private credit would not matter much to the economy if it was not the fuel source for the AI bubble. Furthermore, if Ai was not in a bubble, the loss of one specific source of credit would not have huge impact. Other lenders would be happy to make loans to the sector. But because it is a bubble, there are no alternative sources to fill the gap, just as the fuel for the housing bubble’s expansion disappeared after the subprime mortgage market froze up.

In addition to Bookstaber’s risks to the AI bubble, let me add my current favorite, Chinese AI. Chinese AI companies have been rapidly expanding market share, focusing on easy use and low cost. According to some accounts, they had already captured 30 percent of the world market by December. Given the rapid growth of Chinese AI (it likely would have been less than 10% a year earlier), their share would almost certainly be considerably higher today.

As the U.S. frontrunners focus on massive computing power, the Chinese AI leaders are developing low-cost practical applications. I can’t claim any great expertise on the specifics of AI, but on the surface, the Chinese route would seem to be the better long-term or even near-term path. If China’s AI leaders manage to capture a large share of the market and drive down the prices charged by U.S. competitors, the massive profits stock investors are banking on will never be there.

In this context, it’s probably worth mentioning that Trump’s war in Iran is not going to make potential AI users around the world more inclined to turn to the American AI industry. No one is going to want to be dependent on important systems from a country where the president can shut off access any time he gets angry or has his feelings hurt.

At the end of the day, the exact reason the AI bubble will burst is impossible to predict, but the key point is that the existence of a huge bubble driving the economy is a real problem, not the specific cause of its bursting. Our elites like to make things complicated so that they can appear like great intellects when they unravel the mystery, but that’s just a myth.

The web of financing that supported the housing bubble was quite complicated, but the housing bubble itself was very simple. It’s the same story with the AI bubble.


From The Real News Network via This RSS Feed.

 

Caracas, March 17, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Trump administration has opposed a motion from Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores for the dismissal of US criminal charges on the grounds of the US Treasury blocking their legal defense funds.

In a court filing, US Justice Department prosecutors argued that “the defendants and their former regime” have been sanctioned by the US government for several years and that regulations from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) “expressly prohibit” that funds from a “sanctioned entity” be used to pay a “sanctioned person’s” legal expenses.

“OFAC’s denial of that request does not mean the [US] government violated the defendants’ due process rights. The motions to dismiss should be denied,” the statement read.

Last month, Maduro and Flores’ legal teams urged Judge Alvin Hellerstein to throw out the cases over the US government’s interference with their “ability to retain counsel.” Defense attorney for the Venezuelan president, Barry Pollack, argued that Washington’s actions violated Maduro’s Sixth Amendment rights.

In a sworn statement handed to the court, Maduro declared that under Venezuelan law he is “entitled” to have his legal expenses covered by Caracas and confirmed that Pollack is his “counsel of choice.”

Pollack further added that, on January 9, OFAC issued permission for the Venezuelan government to cover Maduro and Flores’ legal fees, only to withdraw it hours later. The high-profile attorney has announced plans to invoke Maduro’s immunity as a sitting president as part of his legal strategy.

US prosecutors have claimed that the defendants are allowed to use “personal funds” to pay their attorneys’ fees. However, both Maduro and Flores, as well as multiple immediate relatives, are under OFAC sanctions, making it illegal for US persons and entities to engage in financial transactions with them.

The Venezuelan Communications Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Venezuelan officials, including Acting President Delcy Rodríguez, have yet to weigh in on the Trump administration’s efforts to hamper Maduro and Flores’ defense efforts.

President Maduro and his wife, who is also a National Assembly deputy, were kidnapped by US Special forces on January 3 amid a bombing campaign against Caracas and nearby areas. Rodríguez, as sitting vice president, assumed the presidency on an acting basis after the Venezuelan Supreme Court decreed that Maduro’s abduction constituted a “temporary absence.”

Maduro was indicted on charges of “narcoterrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machineguns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machineguns and destructive devices against the United States.” Flores faces the latter three counts. Both pleaded not guilty in their arraignment hearing on January 5. The next hearing is scheduled for March 26.

Despite reiterated “narcoterrorism” accusations, US officials have not presented evidence tying Maduro and other high-ranking officials to narcotics activities. Specialized reports have likewise found Venezuela to play a marginal role in global drug trafficking.

Following the January 3 attacks and presidential kidnapping, Rodríguez has fast-tracked a diplomatic rapprochement with the Trump administration. The acting president has hosted several US officials in Caracas while promoting a pro-business overhaul of the country’s oil and mining laws aimed at courting  Western corporations.

Caracas and Washington reestablished diplomatic ties on March 5 following a seven-year hiatus, with the White House formally recognizing Rodríguez as Venezuela’s “sole leader” last week.

Since January 3, Venezuelan government supporters have staged multiple demonstrations to condemn the US attacks and demand the immediate release of the Venezuelan president and first lady.

US-based solidarity movements have also organized rallies in support of Maduro and Flores, including outside the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn where they are detained.

Edited by Lucas Koerner in Fusagasugá, Colombia.

The post Venezuela: US Defends Blocking Funding of Maduro and Flores Legal Defense appeared first on Venezuelanalysis.


From Venezuelanalysis via This RSS Feed.

 

As Cuba works to restore electricity to millions of people plunged into darkness across the fuel-starved island, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Tuesday blamed Cuba's socialist government for the nation's economic crisis—a crisis largely caused by 65 years of US economic embargo and exacerbated by President Donald Trump's tightened fuel blockade.

"Suffice it to say that the embargo is tied to political change on the island," Rubio told reporters at the White House. "The law is codified, but the bottom line is, their economy doesn’t work. It’s a nonfunctional economy."

"That revolution—it's not even a revolution, that thing they have—has survived on subsidies," he added. "They don’t get subsidies anymore, so they’re in a lot of trouble, and the people in charge, they don’t know how to fix it, so they have to get new people in charge."

Rubio—whose parents fled the island during the rule of pro-US dictator Fulgencio Batista—dismissed Cuba's proposed economic reforms, including opening the country to investment from Cubans living abroad.

“Cuba has an economy that doesn’t work in a political and governmental system that can’t fix it. So they have to change dramatically," he said. "What they announced yesterday is not dramatic enough. It’s not going to fix it. So they’ve got some big decisions to make over there."

Rubio added that although the Trump administration is currently focused on its war of choice in Iran—one of 10 countries attacked during the two terms of the self-proclaimed "president of peace"—the US would "be doing something with Cuba very soon."

The US has been doing something with Cuba since the 19th century, when it invaded and seized the island from Spain. In the 20th century, it supported successive dictatorships and, after the Fidel Castro-led revolution ousted Batista, imposed an economic embargo on the island that has been perennially condemned by an overwhelming majority of United Nations member states for 33 years.

In addition to the embargo—which Cuba's government says has cost the nation's economy more than $200 billion in inflation-adjusted losses—the US tried to assassinate Castro many times and supported the militant Cuban exiles who launched the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. Other Cuban exiles carried out numerous terror attacks targeting Cuba's economy—and sometimes innocent civilians.

In language reminiscent of the US imperialists who conquered the island in 1898, Trump told reporters Monday, “I do believe... I’ll be having the honor of taking Cuba.”

President Donald Trump's talk of "taking Cuba" harkens back to the most aggressively imperialist period in US history.

This, after Trump said last month ahead of talks with Cuban officials that he might launch what he called a "friendly takeover" of the island. The president has also boasted about the tremendous economic suffering caused by his illegal embargo and fuel blockade, which is widely unpopular and has been called a form of "economic warfare."

“Officials in the US must be feeling very happy by the harm caused to every Cuban family,” Cuban Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossío said Monday.

In Havana, residents hardened by decades of privation carried on the best they could without power. Some struggled in the dark.

“The power outages are driving me crazy,” 48-year-old Dalba Obiedo told The Associated Press. “Last night I fell down a 27-step staircase. Now I have to have surgery on my jaw. I fell because the lights went out.”

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel last week acknowledged that high-level talks with US representatives were underway. Recent reporting by Drop Site News cited an unnamed White House official who accused Rubio—a longtime advocate for regime change in Cuba—of trying to sabotage the talks.

Some observers believe that Trump wants Díaz-Canel to face a similar fate as Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro—who was kidnapped in January during a US invasion and is now jailed in the United States—while others warn that the United States cannot be trusted in talks, pointing to recent accusations by Oman's foreign minister, who said American negotiators duplicitously scuppered an Iran peace deal that "was within our reach."

However, instead of regime change, Trump may be seeking what some observers are calling regime compliance, which is likely why he did not move to oust Maduro's subordinates. Unlike Venezuela, Cuba has no oil, but it was once was a magnet for US investment—both legal and otherwise.

Last week, a trio of Democratic US senators introduced a war powers resolution to stop Trump from attacking Cuba without the legally required authorization from Congress. Numerous war powers resolutions concerning Iran, Venezuela, and the dozens of boats Trump claims—without providing evidence—were transporting drugs from South America have all failed to pass the Republican-controlled Congress.


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

 

With Cuba’s electric grid collapsing this week, the inhumane results of the Trump administration’s oil blockade continue to pile up and strangle Cuba and its people. In this urgent episode of The Marc Steiner Show, Marc speaks with American activist and co-founder of CODEPINK Medea Benjamin about her latest trip to Cuba, the extent of the devastation caused by the US-imposed blockade, and the twisted motivations behind it.

Medea Benjamin will be sailing to bring humanitarian aid to Cuba with the Nuestra América Flotilla on March 21, 2026**.

Guests:

Additional links/info:

Credits:

  • Producer: Rosette Sewali
  • Studio Production: David Hebden
  • Audio Post-Production: Stephen Frank

Transcript

The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. A proofread version will be made available as soon as possible.

Marc Steiner:

Welcome to the Marc Steiner Show here in The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. It’s great to have you all with us. Cuba is under attack from the United States. Relations between our countries have been intense since the revolution of 1960, when they overthrew that fascist government of Batista. Under the right-wing nationalist government of Trump, tensions have risen with Trump promising to overthrow the Cuban government, impose trade sanctions, and threaten the very survival of the Cuban people. These economic and political crises have spurred on rest and migration. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for instance, the Islands tourism sector cratered, prompting mass exivists, as many as too million people left, which is more than 10% of its entire population. Now, I’ve been to Cuba numerous times since 1967. And our guest today, Medea Benjamin, has been active as an anti-war activist and one of the co-founders of Code Pink, Women for Peace.

She spent decades finding the American military complex, organizing protests against the invasion of Iraq in the early 2000s, and interrupting the speeches of both Barack Obama and Donald Trump. She’s a co-author with David Swanson of NATO, which you need to know and has returned from Cuba recently. And welcome, Adirt, to see you again and welcome to the show.

Medea Benjamin:

Thank you. Good to be with you, Marc.

Marc Steiner:

So when was the last trip you made to Cuba?

Medea Benjamin:

I’ve been there quite a lot. I was there just a month ago, and in the last two years, I’ve been going every couple of months. We’ve been taking powdered milk to all of the children’s hospitals in the different provinces. And we’ve also been taking food products. So I’ve been traveling all over the country and just seeing the effects of this economic squeeze.

Marc Steiner:

So I want to take a step back for a minute and just get your commentary and analysis on what is happening and why. I mean, throughout all the decades, United States is opposed Cuba, sanctions and more, but this is more of an all- out onslaught and warfare against Cuban its people. What do you think the dynamic of the moment is?

Medea Benjamin:

I think there are a couple of different things going on. One is that we have Marco Rubio as Secretary of State, who is Cuban American, who grew up in Southern Florida, surrounded by people who hate the Cuban government, feel that they’ve lost their properties, their businesses, their connection to the island because of the revolution. And they are also an important voting block in a swing state. And they’re an important lobby group. They have taken their lessons from the Israel lobby AIPAC and become a very powerful force in our government. So it’s not just Marco Rubio. There are other Cuban Americans in Congress now like María Elvira Salazar, like Carlos Jimenez, Díaz-Balart. They’re all part of that group that has really made their career out of opposing the government in Cuba. And then you look at the national strategy document that the US put out recently, and you see that the focus is Latin America.

It’s to say openly without disguise that the Monroe doctrine, which was originally in 1832, designed to say to Europe, “Hey, don’t you interfere here?” This is our hemisphere has now morphed into something, partly saying to China, “Watch out for your influence,” but it’s kind of too late for that since China is a major trading partner of a lot of the countries in Latin America. But to say that the US should have a Gemini over Latin America. We saw the threats to Panama around the Panama Canal. We see the blowing up of the boats that are supposedly narco traffickers, but these tiny little boats that even if they are taking drugs, there is no right to just blow them up with any kind of due process. But the US says that we can do that. There was just a meeting of the right wing Latin American heads of states in Miami as part of a new grouping that Trump is putting together, separate from the organizations of Latin America states that already exist, including the OAS, to say that we’re all going to work together against drugs, but in general, really to say that we’re going to try to get rid of leftist governments throughout the hemisphere.

And so we’re seeing that, whether it’s the strong relationship that Trump has with the President Milei of Argentina or the head of El Salvador, we know that we’ve been using El Salvador to send immigrants to the terrible detention centers there, to the interference of the US in elections that are happening these days in various Latin American countries. So this is part of a broader policy to bring all of Latin America under the hegemony of the United States and Cuba is the key. They feel that invading Venezuela, capturing the head of state there and his wife, imposing US will in terms of the policies around oil and gold, that’s part of the strategy as well. So this is happening region wise, but Cuba is really where all eyes are focused now.

Marc Steiner:

So I do want to focus on Cuba, but one of the things I thought about as you were describing politically what’s happening at the moment is that what’s happening in our hemisphere in Latin America reminds me of the early 20th century United States of America, reminds me of Teddy Roosevelt, reminds me of the 1920s and 30s where the US was imposing its will across Latin America and fueling dictators to cease power and control the economics of Latin America for the US. It really does feel like it’s a throwback to the era, but even more dangerous because of the era that we live in.

Medea Benjamin:

Well, yes, it’s good you bring that up. And then we could go further to go into the 1950s, the overthrow of the Hakoboarban’s government in Guatemala in 1954. You could look at 1973, the overthrow of Salvador Allende and Chile. So you’re right, this is nothing new in terms of the US wanting to impose its will on what it calls its backyard, but now it’s with more ferocity, more intentionality and really with a grouping of heads of state in Latin America in the ’90s there was what was called the pink tide and there was a wave of progressive governments coming to power. You had Ubo Chavez in Venezuela, who was really a charismatic figure and had a vision, the Bolivarian vision of United Latin America and Caribbean. You had Evo Morales and Bolivia, an indigenous leader who really had a very socialist kind of view. You had Raphael Correa in Ecuador who closed down the US bases in that country.

So you had a grouping of very strong leaders. And of course, there was Fidel Castro and Cuba, we can’t forget him. No. And so this created a very tight grouping in Latin America, and then several countries in the Caribbean as well, who were posing an alternative to the voracious capitalist model. And for quite a while, the US was so consumed with what was happening in the Middle East and the wars in Iraq, in Afghanistan, Israel, that it really left Latin America to the side. And that was a good thing in the sense that these countries could develop themselves, have freer ability to try out different models, but now the US is so focused on Latin America, it is indeed a different era.

Marc Steiner:

What you’re describing is something that poses a real danger for the future of independent countries, especially progressive or left countries, and what this portends. And what it portends for Cuba could be even greater danger. I mean, because Cuba’s … Go ahead. I’m sorry.

Medea Benjamin:

I was going to say before we get into that, to look at this gathering of 17 heads of state that Trump had in Florida recently, sounds like a lot, and indeed it is a lot, but missing were the most important countries in the region, which is Mexico not invited and wouldn’t have come, Brazil as well, and Colombia. We don’t know with the elections coming up in Columbia, there is hope that a progressive will win those elections, but those are three major countries that didn’t participate. And Brazil has been with a progressive government for quite a long time. Lula, the head of that is not as outspoken a leftist as he was when he came into power. And those countries, including Mexico, have been fearful of the retaliation from the United States. And so they’ve had to modify some of their policies, especially with all the threats of tariffs, even though it’s illegal.

And also Trump has been threatening to send the US military in to deal with the drug cartels in places like Mexico, Columbia. They just had a joint action with Ecuador. So yes, the US involvement is under the pretext now of the narco trafficking, but we see it in the much larger context. And there is still a bloc of countries in the region that are not going along with Trump, and those are important countries.

Marc Steiner:

So in terms of Cuba and what’s going on there now, I mean, a country has been devastated economically, as you’ve pointed out in some of your writing. And I just want to talk about what the state is in Cuba now, given all the times you’ve gone and how it’s deteriorated because of the embargo, because of the attacks by the United States, and what you think the future is.

Medea Benjamin:

It’s a very dire situation in Cuba right now. We hear the threats from Marco Rubio, from Trump. It’s about to fall, and that is because on top of the sanctions that have existed since 1960, stronger, certainly under Trump, and with a bit of a reprieve like under Obama when there was an opening and diplomatic relations reestablished, and you saw flowering. It’s quite ironic because the reason the US says that it’s against Cuba is that it has a state run economy and that’s communist and that’s so terrible. But you saw under Obama how there was a flowering of private enterprise and that there was a lot of excitement and improvement in the economic situations, but Trump has just torn that all up. He’s made every aspect of life in Cuba much more difficult. If you look at the different ways that the Cuban government has been bringing in foreign currency, the US has systematically attacked every single one of them.

You know, Mark, that in the countries of the global South, many of them live on or have a great portion of their foreign revenue is coming from what we call remittances, money sent back from their citizens that are living in other countries, living in richer countries and sending back money to their families. The US has now made it extremely hard for Cuban Americans to even send money back to their families. If you look at tourism, the US government has put restrictions. You can still go to Cuba and we’ll get into that, Mark, right? But has said, “You can’t stay in these hotels. You can’t go as a tourist and go to the beaches.” And said to our friends in Europe, “If you go to Cuba, you can’t automatically get the visa to the United States that you would’ve gotten otherwise.” They are making it very difficult for tourism to flourish in Cuba.

Another area that really pains me tremendously is the one of medical missions that the Cubans were sending overseas, which is such a win-win situation because they help people all over the world, whether it’s poor countries in Africa where I first met many Cubans or helping richer countries like Italy during the pandemic and continuing today, the US has attacked those. They’ve strong armed countries and said to them, “Don’t let the Cuban missions continue. Send them back home. We won’t give you any aid if you continue to use Cuban doctors.” They’ve even said, “You can’t send your medical students to Cuba to study medicine for free,” which Cuba has been providing this service. For

Marc Steiner:

Decades.

Medea Benjamin:

Decades and decades. But here you have a poor country that found out that it could train after a great literacy program so that everybody knew how to read and write and was educated, train doctors and send them around the world. And it became an important source of income. The US has gone after every single mission that it can, calling these doctors saying that they’re modern day slaves, because the Cuban government takes a portion of the salaries to put back into the free Cuban healthcare system. They’re saying that this is modern day slavery. Anyway, it’s an example of how they go after everything they can to stop Cuba from getting revenue. And then on top of that, this issue about the oil, they were getting the oil from Venezuela. US said to Venezuela, “You can’t send any shipments to Cuba.” And they were getting oil from Mexico, and the US said, “Can’t send it from Mexico.” So Trump in January said, “Not one drop of oil to the “island.”

Marc Steiner:

The animosity that our government has had towards Cuba is intensified under Trump as you’ve been describing. And I think that there’s a political question that’s important to explore is why this government, why, especially the right wing part of this country, now in power in Washington DC, sees Cuba as such a threat, why they want to destroy it. I mean, this tiny island that was key to many revolutions around the world killed illiteracy, fed all its people, built the country. Why do you think it’s such a threat, A and B, what is the organizing you can do around it to confront that threat?

Medea Benjamin:

The US or under Trump has put Cuba on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, which is absolutely ridiculous. It’s ridiculous. Yeah, Cuba is not a state sponsor of terrorism on the contrary, but I don’t think that there is anything about a threat. It used to be in the heyday of Cuba, the threat of a good example, and the international networks that Cuba had developed over the years that were not just with these progressive countries in Latin America, but also Africa, Asia, all over the place, but that doesn’t exist to a large extent anymore. And so really it would be the crown jewel in Marco Rubio’s career if he were able to overthrow this government, let the capitalist Cuban Americans in Miami flow back into Cuba, take over property they had 60 years ago and buy up all the rest of the property, wonderful quote, beachfront territory, as Jared Kushner would say.

And really just it’s vendetta for what happened 60 years ago, over 60 years ago. And really there’s nothing that you could say anymore that represents a threat, even a threat of a good example because what was the good example, the education program, the literacy campaigns, the healthcare system have been decimated by this constant squeezing. The levels of the squeezing are so layered. I tried to send $200 to a friend yesterday who was printing up t-shirts for us that said, “You can’t blockade the sun and had Cuba in there.” And I wrote in the memo, Cuba T-shirts, the bank wouldn’t let it go through. Wow. I mean, that’s just one tiny example, but you can’t send … It’s everything like that. So the international banking system will not let you send anything that is destined for anything related to Cuba, even a T-shirt. I was

Marc Steiner:

Going to say it’s unbelievable, but at this point, it’s not unbelievable at all. I wonder if you could describe for us in a time we have left in your latest trips to Cuba, what’s it like for the Cuban people at this moment, what they’re facing, what their deadly lives are like? I mean, everything … I ask that because we know with the times I’ve been there, food was flowing, people had access to anything they needed and wanted, nobody was homeless. So what has been the effect of this on the Cuban people?

Medea Benjamin:

There are scarcities of everything. Just to give you some examples, there’s garbage piled up in the streets, which you didn’t see before. Never. Very clean country. Garbage piled up in the streets because they don’t have the fuel for the garbage trucks, which means that mosquitoes proliferate, which means during the hot summer months, there were three different mosquito-borne diseases that affected a lot of the population, and then they didn’t have the medicines for that. Just imagine if you only have electricity for three to six hours a day. Just imagine if you don’t have gasoline to fuel your car, your motorbike, if you don’t have electricity so that your refrigerator isn’t working. You don’t have the power you need to pump the water into your apartment building. You don’t have the transportation, the buses to get you to work in the morning. And if you got to work, you wouldn’t have the electricity to be able to function.

Every single aspect of people’s daily lives is affected by this. It’s hard to even explain. Even the healthcare system where the energy that they have is dedicated to the hospitals, you still don’t have basic things like syringes. There are shortages of all kinds of medicines. You go into the pharmacy, you cannot find the medicine that you want. Even something like aspirin is hard to find. So it’s hard to describe, Marc, but you can just even imagine on the one level not having the electricity and all the things in our lives that then flow from that.

Marc Steiner:

So I know we’re running out of time, so there’s something I really want to get your thoughts after all you said. You’ve been in this struggle in this country for a long, long time to build a just society and fight against war. And I wonder where you think we are at this moment, the dangers that we face here and how what our policies towards Cuba reflect that in a deepening way that should give us a warning about what we face in the future.

Medea Benjamin:

Well, on the hopeful side, I think that we are in a period of tremendous overreach of this empire, and that is really manifested right now in this disastrous invasion of Iran that we don’t know where it’s going, but we certainly know it’s affecting the entire region, the price of oil. We know that we have overreach in terms of a war economy where we’re spending now over a trillion dollars on war and now Congress is going to be asked for another 50 billion just for this unprovoked illegal invasion of in Iran. You’re getting more and more people hating the United States around the world. I mean, I am hoping that this imperial overreach will mean at some point, I don’t know if it’s in our lifetimes, Mark, but we will see a collapse of this empire. Empires throughout history have come and gone, and that it would be a good thing for the people in the United States if indeed we were not trying to act like we were the hegemons of the entire world if we had a relationship with China that was a cooperative one that worked together on issues like the climate crisis and poverty and all kinds of things.

So I think we just have to keep building an anti-war movement, building a social justice movement, connecting all these issues of ICE terrorism here at home and the terrorism that the US is inflicting, whether it’s overt wars like in Gaza or in Iran, or its economic warfare like we are doing in Cuba and other places with our sanctions, that we will be able to turn around our government. I don’t think these next elections are going to be good for the Republican Party. I don’t put all of my eggs in the electoral arena, but-

Marc Steiner:

Really?

Medea Benjamin:

We have to see some major changes in that as well. And then if we can get Democrats back in, we have to show them that we don’t want them to be even more hawkish than the Republicans are, because sometimes they are, that we are people who are sick and tired of these wars, of the interference with countries around the world. Let’s solve our problems here at home.

Marc Steiner:

Well, Madea Benjamin, it’s always a pleasure to talk with you. I look forward to many more conversations and I want to thank you here for the work you do and always being out in front, in many ways, fearlessly out in front. So thank you and it’s a pleasure to see you again and thanks for the conversation and we’ll stay in touch.

Medea Benjamin:

Great. Wonderful talking to you, Mark.

Marc Steiner:

Always. Once again, let me thank Midia Benjamin for joining us today and for the work that she does. We’ll be linking to her work. You can Google www.codepink.org to see just what they do and the work they do across the globe. And thanks to David Hedman for running our program today. Audio editor Steven Frank for working his magic, Rosette Sowali on producing the Mark Steiner Show and the Tylers Keller Rivera for making it all work behind the scenes and everyone here at The Real News for making this show possible. So please let me know what you thought about what you heard today, what you’d like us to cover. Just write to me at mss@therealnews.com and I’ll write you right back. Once again, thank you to Mindia Benjamin for joining us today and for doing the work she does in the face of all that power.

So for the crew here at the Real News, I’m Marc Steiner. Stay involved, keep listening and take care.


From The Real News Network via This RSS Feed.

 

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett brushed aside concerns about harm to consumers caused by the U.S. and Israel’s war on Iran on Tuesday, saying that the war would hurt consumers if it continues but that’s “the last of our concerns.” In an interview with CNBC, the Donald Trump appointee said that he believes the war will be over in a few weeks, and repeated the president’s…

Source


From Truthout via This RSS Feed.

 

Democratic Rep. Summer Lee introduced articles of impeachment against US Attorney General Pam Bondi on Tuesday and accused the nation's top prosecutor of “breaking the law to protect pedophiles” and prosecute President Donald Trump’s “political opponents.”

"We live in a country where we have one reality for everyday people and another for the rich, the well-connected, and the well-protected. And that cannot continue to be our reality," Lee (D-Pa.) said in a video posted to her social media on Tuesday announcing the articles.

Two of the five articles pertain to Bondi's conduct surrounding the Department of Justice's (DOJ) release of files related to the late billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which the DOJ has been accused of covering up to protect Trump.

One article accuses Bondi of obstruction of Congress for failing to comply with a subpoena in July 2025, which required the DOJ to release the full, unredacted files to the House Oversight Committee in August as part of a congressional inquiry.

"The Department of Justice refused to adhere to the subpoena and withheld substantial evidence; evidence logs indicate that amongst the withheld evidence are FBI interviews with a survivor who accused Trump of sexual abuse," the article reads.

In February, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee announced that they were investigating the DOJ's handling of an accusation made against Trump to the FBI in 2019. A woman accused the president of having sexually assaulted her at the age of 13 in the 1980s.

Another impeachment article accuses Bondi of violating the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), signed into law in November, which required the DOJ to release "all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials" pertaining to the Epstein case without redacting information to protect powerful figures from embarrassment.

The DOJ missed the December 19 deadline to release the files and has since released only about 3 million pages of documents as part of its "final" trove, while millions more remain unavailable.

The pages that have been released, the article says, "were heavily redacted" to scrub the names of Trump and other powerful figures, but sensitive information about many of Epstein's victims—including identifying details and nude photographs—was released, even though the law said redacting this information was permitted.

Meanwhile, it says the DOJ "continues to withhold documents," including FBI interviews with the Trump accuser.

Three of four memos detailing the interviews with the accuser were posted to the DOJ website in March. They include the victim's graphic claims that Trump hit her after she bit his penis when he attempted to force her to perform oral sex.

Trump has denied the allegations, and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has called the alleged victim "disturbed."

Approximately 37 pages of FBI records related to the accusation, including the fourth memo and pages of agent notes, remain unreleased to the public, according to Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).

"Pam Bondi is complicit in the most egregious cover-up in American history, hiding documents that reveal a young woman reported being sexually assaulted by Donald Trump when she was just a minor," said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), a cosponsor of Lee's impeachment articles. "Bondi’s actions are not only disgusting and wrong. They are also illegal."

Another article accuses Bondi of having "abused" the DOJ and FBI's powers in a partisan fashion—to target Trump's enemies and shield his friends from accountability. It also cites Bondi's attempts to criminalize protesters who express anti-Trump viewpoints by designating them as "domestic terrorism threats" and creating secretive lists of organizations and individuals to be targeted.

Bondi is also accused of misleading courts on several occasions—including in the cases against former FBI Director James Comey and the Salvadoran national Kilmar Ábrego García and says she presented "demonstrably false allegations in court to support baseless prosecutions against protesters."

She is also accused of perjury before Congress during her confirmation hearing, where she pledged not to politicize her office or target journalists. It also accused her of lying during last month's contentious hearing in which she claimed that there was "no evidence" in the Epstein files "that Donald Trump has committed a crime."

No US attorney general has ever been impeached by the US House, which requires a simple majority. Trump was impeached twice by a Democratic-controlled House during his first term of office, though neither resulted in a conviction in the Senate, which requires a two-thirds majority.

Outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had articles of impeachment filed against her in January by more than 80 cosponsors following the shooting of two US citizens by immigration agents.

Earlier this month, Noem became the highest-ranking Trump official to be fired in his second term, and earlier this week, Democrats on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees referred her to the DOJ for prosecution, also for perjury.

In addition to Ansari, Lee's impeachment articles against Bondi are cosponsored by Reps. Valerie Foushee (D-NC), Dave Min (D-Calif.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), and Maxine Dexter (D-Ore.). Previous articles of impeachment against Bondi have been introduced by Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) earlier this month.

Lee emphasized that while Bondi "deserves to be held accountable," this "is also about what we want our government to be, and who we want it to work for."

"This is our chance to get justice," Lee said, "to hold people accountable who, time and again, have gotten away with screwing us over."


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

 

US Rep. Ro Khanna on Tuesday hit back at Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt after he accused the California Democrat of enabling antisemitism.

As reported by Jewish Insider, Greenblatt accused Khanna (D-Calif.) of using an antisemitic dog whistle when he blamed "neoconservatives" for President Donald Trump's decision to launch an unprovoked military strike against Iran.

Greenblatt also slammed Khanna for appearing on the podcast of Hasan Piker, a critic of Israel whom the ADL chief described as "one of the most virulent, outspoken antisemitic influencers in the world."

ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt tells 2026 Never is Now conference that it's "anti-Semitic" to blame Israel for the war on Iran that Israel started.

He accuses Sen. Chris Van Hollen of anti-Semitism for blaming "AIPAC" and slams Rep. Ro Khanna for blaming "neocons" and saying he's… pic.twitter.com/3MpTxFiSwE
— Chris Menahan 🇺🇸 (@infolibnews) March 17, 2026

In addition to going after Khanna, Greenblatt attacked Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) for accusing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) of being "un-American" during an address at a conference hosted by J Street, a liberal Zionist organization that in the past has clashed with AIPAC.

In a social media post, Khanna accused Greenblatt of being a partisan shill with a history of overlooking antisemitism from his political allies in the Republican Party.

"Facts don't matter to Greenblatt," Khanna wrote. "He is a Trump apologist who attacked [former President Barack] Obama's nuclear deal, defends Elon [Musk], and is basically a shill for the Trump administration and [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu. Sad to see. He has zero respect among any House Democrats anymore."

Shortly after this, Khanna responded to a social media post from AIPAC and suggested that the group merge with Greenblatt's ADL.

"Greenblatt you've sucked up enough to Trump you can probably get the merger approved in this administration," Khanna wrote.

Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), took note of Khanna's defiant reaction to Greenblatt's attacks and argued it showed how much clout the ADL had lost in recent years under his leadership.

"There was a time when the head of the ADL saying this about two prominent Democrats would’ve mattered," he observed, "but Greenblatt has effectively marginalized himself with exactly this kind of reckless slander."

Drop Site News reporter Ryan Grim also argued that Greenblatt had made himself irrelevant by so aggressively hitting critics of Israel with charges of antisemitism.

"Has anyone been worse at his actual job than Jonathan Greenblatt?" he wrote. "If he wants to be an advocate for Likud in DC, he should just do that. Be direct. This thing where he weaponizes concerns about antisemitism to boost Likud is outrageous and also not working."


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

 

A campaign in the United Kingdom is demanding that the British government issue a formal apology for the 1919 Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, one of the most infamous atrocities of British colonial rule in India.

The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre 1919 Centenary Committee, a coalition of community groups and activists, has been campaigning for years for an official apology from the serving British prime minister and for the inclusion of colonial history in the UK national curriculum.

A colonial atrocity

On April 13, 1919, a tragic event unfolded at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar, Punjab, India. During a public gathering, British Indian Army troops, under the direct command of Brigadier General Reginald Dyer, fired upon a large crowd of unarmed, peaceful civilians. Estimates of the number of people killed vary, but official British reports recorded approximately 379 deaths, while other sources suggest the actual figure may have been far higher, in the order of 1500. Thousands more were injured.

General Dyer ordered his troops to fire into the densest part of the crowd without warning or instructions to disperse. Shooting continued until ammunition was exhausted, and afterward, Dyer withdrew without arranging medical aid or removal of the dead. A curfew in Amritsar prevented families from reaching those affected in the Bagh. The gathering at Jallianwala Bagh included people attending Vaisakhi, a major harvest festival, and others protesting the Rowlatt Act, legislation restricting civil liberties such as freedom of speech and assembly. Dyer showed no remorse for the massacre, regretting only his inability to bring in armored vehicles. He stated he would repeat his actions. In Britain, he received a hero’s welcome – awarded a “Saviour of India” sword and £26,000 (about £1.3 million today), while Indian victims’ families got £25 each. His actions sparked outrage in India but praise from many in Britain. 

More than a century later, the British Government has still not issued a formal responsibility. 

Grassroots campaigns and descendants of victims seek justice 100 years later

Nearing the Centenary of the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, in January 2016, the Indian Workers’ Association GB initiated a campaign to demand a formal apology by the serving British Prime Minister. The campaign describes itself as secular, and multi-ethnic, reflecting what organizers say was the spirit of unity among those gathered at Jallianwala Bagh to protest British colonial rule. The issue gained renewed attention around the centenary of the massacre in 2019. Three days before the 100th anniversary, April 10, 2019, the former leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, called on then-prime minister Theresa May, to deliver a “clear, unequivocal apology” for the killings. May expressed her “regret” but stopped short of issuing an apology.

The Labour Party later pledged in their 2019 election manifesto that it would deliver a formal apology if it came into power. However, activists say Prime Minister Keir Starmer has decided to withdraw his commitment. Campaigners argue that beyond a formal apology for the loss of life and humiliation that followed the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, what is necessary is teaching colonial history as an integral part of the National Curriculum. 

They are calling on supporters to attend events, spread awareness on social media, and pressure local representatives to support the demand for an apology.

“The campaign believes that learning from the past brightens the path to a better future.”

The post Campaign demands formal apology from Britain for 1919 Jallianwala Bagh Massacre in India appeared first on Peoples Dispatch.


From Peoples Dispatch via This RSS Feed.

 

Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, has commented on US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth invoking God and reading scripture during his press briefings on the US and Israeli war against Iran. During one briefing last week, Hegseth read from Psalm 144. “Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for […]


From News From Antiwar.com via This RSS Feed.

[–] rss@news.abolish.capital 2 points 1 month ago

Extra context added because this headline is wildly misleading.

[–] rss@news.abolish.capital 3 points 1 month ago

I've updated the URL. Try it now.

view more: next ›