Thursday, December 26, 2024
■ Today's Top News
"These figures are evidence of a profound failure of rescue and protection systems," said one campaigner.
By Brett Wilkins
More than 10,000 migrants died while trying to reach Spain this year—a more than 50% increase from 2023—according to a Spanish advocacy group's annual report published this week.
The NGO Caminando Fronteras (Walking Borders) said in its Monitoring the Right to Life—2024 report that 10,457 migrants died en route to Spain via the Atlantic Ocean or the Mediterranean Sea this year. Victims included 1,538 children and adolescents and 421 women. Victims hailed from 28 mostly African nations, with some coming from as far afield as Iraq and Pakistan.
"These figures are evidence of a profound failure of rescue and protection systems," the group's founder, Helena Maleno, said in a statement. "More than 10,400 people dead or missing in a single year is an unacceptable tragedy."
Walking Borders said its report "documents the deadliest period on record, with devastating figures averaging 30 deaths a day," up from an average of 18 deaths per day in 2023.
According to the report:
The Atlantic route, with 9,757 deaths, remains the deadliest in the world. Tragedies have increased, especially on the Mauritanian route, consolidating this country as the main departure point to the Canary Islands. The Algerian route, in the Mediterranean, is the second deadliest according to our records, with 517 victims. The Strait of Gibraltar has taken up to 110 lives, and another 73 have been lost on the Alboran route. In addition, 131 vessels were lost, with all persons on board.
Spain's Interior Ministry said earlier this month that, as of December 15, 57,738 migrants successfully reached the country this year by sea, an all-time high.
Walking Borders denounced what it called "the main causes of this increase in shipwrecks and victims," including "the omission of the duty to rescue, the prioritization of migration control over the right to life, the externalization of borders in countries without adequate resources, the inaction and arbitrariness in rescues, [and] the criminalization of social organizations and families."
The group also noted "the situations of extreme vulnerability" that push migrants "to throw themselves into the sea in very precarious conditions."
These include "violence, discrimination, racism, deportations, and sexual violence," as well as "being forced to survive in extreme conditions" prior to departure.
"The number of victims continues to grow and the act of documenting deaths or preserving the victims' memory carries the threat of persecution and stigmatization," the publication states, adding that the dead migrants' voices "can be heard in this report, crying out at their disappearance and death and questioning their fate. They call for justice and an end to impunity."
State media reports at least four people were killed and 21 others injured.
By Jessica Corbett
As part of Israel's assault on various countries across the Middle East, Israeli fighter jets on Thursday bombed multiple sites in Yemen, including Sanaa International Airport, killing multiple people and threatening the life of a leading United Nations official.
World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and colleagues were at the airport, wrapping up a trip "to negotiate the release of U.N. staff detainees and to assess the health and humanitarian situation in Yemen," when the attack occurred, the agency leader said on social media. "We continue to call for the detainees' immediate release."
"As we were about to board our flight from Sanaa, about two hours ago, the airport came under aerial bombardment. One of our plane's crew members was injured," Tedros explained, noting the reported deaths. "The air traffic control tower, the departure lounge—just a few meters from where we were—and the runway were damaged. We will need to wait for the damage to the airport to be repaired before we can leave. My U.N. and WHO colleagues and I are safe. Our heartfelt condolences to the families whose loved ones lost their lives in the attack."
According toThe New York Times: "At least four people were killed and 21 others injured in the attack on Thursday after Israel struck the international airport in Sana and the city of al Hodeida, the Saba state news agency said, citing Yemen's Health Ministry. The report could not be independently verified."
A spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, told the Times that Israel had no prior knowledge that the WHO leader would be at the airport during the attack. "We didn't know," he said. "We wish him well."
The IDF said in a statement posted on social media that "fighter jets conducted intelligence-based strikes" with approval from Chief of the General Staff Herzi Halevi, Defense Minister Israel Katz, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"The targets that were struck by the IDF include military infrastructure used by the Houthi terrorist regime for its military activities in both the Sanaa International Airport and the Hezyaz and Ras Kanatib power stations," the military continued. "In addition, the IDF struck military infrastructure in the al Hodeida, Salif, and Ras Kanatib ports on the western coast. These military targets were used by the Houthi terrorist regime to smuggle Iranian weapons into the region and for the entry of senior Iranian officials."
Since the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, the U.S.-armed IDF has not only decimated the Gaza Strip and killed over 45,000 Palestinians there but also ramped up strikes on other groups tied to Iran, including the Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Additionally, Israel has exploited the recent collapse of Syrian former President Bashar al-Assad's government, seizing more territory in that country.
"The targeting of Sanaa International Airport and other civilian infrastructure is a Zionist crime against the entire Yemeni people," a Houthi spokesperson, Mohammed Abdulsalam, said in a statement. "If the Zionist enemy thinks that its crimes will deter Yemen from supporting Gaza, it is delusional."
The strikes on Yemen came a day after Netanyahu said that "the Houthis, too, will learn what Hamas, Hezbollah, the Assad regime, and others have learned, and even if it takes time, this lesson will be understood across the Middle East."
Israel's ongoing destruction of Gaza has led to a genocide case at the International Court of Justice and International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, as well as a Hamas leader.
"The billions begin to add up. This is, more or less, how the states slowly and then quite rapidly took down the tobacco industry," said climate leader Bill McKibben.
By Julia Conley
Climate advocates in New York on Thursday celebrated a "massive win" for working people, youth, and the climate as Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul made the state the second to pass a law to make fossil fuel giants financially responsible for the environmental damages they cause.
Hochul signed the Climate Change Superfund Act into law after years of advocacy, delivering what Blair Horner, executive director of the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG), called "a welcome holiday gift for New York taxpayers."
The law is modeled on the 1980 State and Federal Superfund law, which requires corporations to fund the cleanup of toxic waste that they cause, and will require the largest fossil fuel companies, which are responsible for a majority of carbon emissions since the beginning of this century, to pay about $3 billion per year for 25 years.
The money—which otherwise would have to be paid by taxpayers, many of whom are already suffering from the extreme weather caused by fossil fuel emissions—will be used to restore and safeguard wetlands, upgrade public infrastructure, improve storm water drainage systems, and pay for climate disaster recovery efforts.
The law will "reinvest $75 billion into the communities most impacted by toxic air pollution, record-breaking storms, and dangerous heatwaves," said Theodore Moore, executive director of the Alliance for a Greater New York.
Lee Wasserman, director of the Rockefeller Family Fund, which lobbied for the new law, told The New York Times that "nothing could be fairer than making climate polluters pay."
New York state Sen. Liz Krueger (D-28), who sponsored the legislation, told the Times that repairs from extreme weather disasters and climate adaptation is projected to cost half a trillion dollars in New York by 2050.
"That's over $65,000 per household, and that's on top of the disruption, injury, and death that the climate crisis is causing in every corner of our state," Krueger said.
State Rep. Phara Souffrant Forrest (D-57) said the new law adopts a "they broke it, they bought it" approach for climate disasters and fossil fuel emissions.
New York taxpayers learned in 2024 that they would be funding $2.2 billion in climate-related infrastructure repairs and upgrades, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimates $52 billion would be needed to protect New York Harbor.
"On top of that, we’ll need $75-100 billion to protect Long Island, and $55 billion for climate costs across the rest of the state," said NYPIRG. "The state comptroller has predicted that more than half of local governments' costs will be attributable to the climate crisis."
Looking at the industry and its $1 trillion in profits over the last four years, one would never know that the emissions of the world's largest polluting corporations have helped rack up $5.4 trillion in climate damages over the last 26 years.
"Our future is on fire, New York is on fire, and meanwhile the fossil fuel industry is bringing in trillions of dollars in profit year after year," said Keanu Arpels-Josiah, organizer for Fridays for Future NYC. "It's high time for them to pay their fair share in New York. The signing of the full Climate Superfund Act, as youth across the state have advocated for year after year, is a critical step toward that—let this be the beginning of a shift on climate from this governor."
NYPIRG emphasized that the costs will not fall back on consumers.
"According to experts, because Big Oil's payments would reflect past contributions to greenhouse gas emissions, oil companies would have to treat their payments as one-time fixed costs," said the group.
New York is the second state to pass a law ensuring big polluters will play for climate damages. Vermont passed a similar law over the summer—a year after a federal emergency was declared across the state after a storm dumped two months' worth of rain in just two days, causing historic and devastating flooding.
Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media, said the Climate Change Superfund Act "kicks open the door for more states to follow."
Similar legislation has been proposed in states including Maryland and New Jersey.
Krueger told The Wall Street Journal earlier this year that she would "prefer this all be done at the federal level," but as author and 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben wrote Thursday, Hochul's signing of the Climate Change Superfund Act answers the question: "How do we proceed with the most important fight in the world, when the most important office in the world is about to be filled by a climate denier, and when there's a Congress with no hope of advancing serious legislation?"
"One important answer is: We go state by state, and city by city, making gains everywhere we still can," said McKibben, less than a month before President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration.
"And now those other states may join in too. The billions begin to add up. This is, more or less, how the states slowly and then quite rapidly took down the tobacco industry," he wrote. "So—many many thanks to the people who but their bodies on the line these past days, and those who have worked so hard for years to get us here. This may be what progress looks like in the Trump years."
"Decent people all over the world will hate this country... and they should," said one critic.
By Jessica Corbett
Adding to alarm over U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's immigration plans, his "border czar" told The Washington Post in an interview published Thursday that the administration plans to return to detaining migrant families with children.
Tom Homan, who served as acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement during Trump's first term, said that ICE "will look to hold parents with children in 'soft-sided' tent structures similar to those used by U.S. border officials to handle immigration surges," the Post summarized. "The government will not hesitate to deport parents who are in the country illegally, even if they have young U.S.-born children, he added, leaving it to those families to decide whether to exit together or be split up."
Since Trump beat Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris last month, migrant rights advocates have reiterated concerns about the Republican's first-term policies—such as forced separation of families—and his 2024 campaign pledges, from mass deportations to attempting to end birthright citizenship, despite the guarantees of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Homan—who oversaw the so-called "zero tolerance" policy that separated thousands of migrant kids from their parents—said: "Here's the issue... You knew you were in the country illegally and chose to have a child. So you put your family in that position."
Harris and President Joe Biden have come under fire for various immigration policies, but their administration did stop family detention—and when it was reported last year that the White House was weighing a revival of the practice, 383 groups urged the president to keep the pledge he made when he took office "to pursue just, compassionate, and humane immigration policies."
Under Biden, the government ended mass worksite immigration raids and—eventually—the "Remain in Mexico" policy that stopped asylum-seekers from entering the United States. Homan told the Post that the next Trump administration should bring them back.
Less than a month before Trump's inauguration, Biden is now facing pressure to "use the power of the pen to protect those seeking sanctuary from the coming deportation machine that will crush the human rights of our immigrant neighbors and those who have dreams of finding refuge here," as Amnesty International USA executive director Paul O'Brien put it earlier this month.
The Post reported that "of all the border hard-liners in the incoming administration, Homan is perhaps the most cognizant of the limits of the government's ability to deliver on promises of mass deportation—and the potential for a political backlash."
Those hard-liners include dog-killing Republican South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, Trump's pick to lead the Department of Homeland Security; family separation architect Stephen Miller, the president-elect's homeland security adviser and deputy chief of staff for policy; and Caleb Vitello, the next acting ICE director whom Miller previously tried to install at the Office of Refugee Resettlement.
"We're going to need to construct family facilities," Homan told the newspaper. However, he also said: "We need to show the American people we can do this and not be inhumane about it... We can't lose the faith of the American people."
Critics of the next administration have suggested that—although Trump won the Electoral College and the popular vote last month—pursuing the GOP immigration policies, including "concentration camps" for migrant families, will anger the public.
"Decent people all over the world will hate this country... and they should," media columnist and Brooklyn College professor Eric Alterman said on social media in response to the Post's reporting.
Author and New York University adjunct associate professor Helio Fred Garcia said: "Trump's next border czar previews performative cruelty. In the first term it included kidnapping of children from their parents and returning the parents to their home countries, with no record of which kids came from which parents. A crime against humanity."
Lee Gelernt, an ACLU attorney who has argued many major immigration cases, told the Post that "the incoming administration has refused to acknowledge the horrific damage it did to families and little children the first time around and seems determined to once again target families for gratuitous suffering."
"The public may have voted in the abstract for mass deportations," he added, referring to the November election, "but I don't think they voted for more family separation or unnecessary cruelty to children."
"If Congress wants to wash itself of conflicts of interest it can start by passing a stock trading ban."
By Brett Wilkins
Dozens of U.S. lawmakers and their families bought or sold up to $113 million worth of shares in top Pentagon contractors this year, an analysis published on Wednesday revealed.
The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft found that at least 37 members of Congress and their relatives traded between $24-113 million worth of stock in companies listed on Defense and Security Monitor's Top 100 Defense Contractors index.
As the Quincy Institute noted: "Eight of these members even simultaneously held positions on the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, the committees overseeing defense policy and foreign relations. Members of Congress that oversee the annual defense bill and are privy to intelligence briefings have an upper hand in predicting future stock prices."
The analysis found that one Democratic congressman accounted for the vast bulk of defense stock trading in 2024.
Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey traded at least $22 million and as much as $104 million worth of shares in companies on the index, including Microsoft, Northrop Grumman, and IBM. Gottheimer—who said his trades are handled by a third-party firm—sits on both the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the National Security subcommittee of the Committee on Financial Services.
(Image: Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft/Datawrapper)
Next on the list in distant second place is former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has defended stock trading by lawmakers, and according to Quincy, "sold over $1 million worth of Microsoft stock in late July."
"The timing of Pelosi's Microsoft trades in the past have garnered attention, too; in March 2021, she bought Microsoft call options less than two weeks before the Army announced a $22 billion contract with the software company to supply augmented reality headsets," the analysis states.
"Pelosi had the most profitable 2024 of any lawmaker, netting an estimated $38.6 million from all stock trading activity, according to Quiver Quantitative," the report adds.
Pelosi was followed by Reps. Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.), Scott Franklin (R-Fla.), and Thomas Keane Jr. (R-N.J.).
The Quincy Institute asserted: "If Congress wants to wash itself of conflicts of interest it can start by passing a stock trading ban. The Ending Trading and Holdings in Congressional Stocks Act, or ETHICS Act, would prohibit members of Congress from trading individual stocks."
The ETHICS Act was approved by the Democrat-controlled Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs in July. The full Senate—which will be GOP-controlled starting next month—has yet to vote on the bill.
Earlier this month, U.S. President Joe Biden was applauded by progressive lawmakers for backing a ban on congressional stock trading and asserting that "nobody in the Congress should be able to make money in the stock market while they're in the Congress."
On Monday, Biden signed the $895 billion Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025. As Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has highlighted, "Of that nearly $1 trillion dollars... about half will go to a handful of hugely profitable defense contractors."
Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) decried both the enormity of the military budget, as well as the fact that some of her colleagues have profited from investments in the military-industrial complex.
Tlaib has introduced the Stop Politicians Profiting from War Act, which would ban members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children from trading defense stocks or having financial interests in companies that do business with the U.S. Department of Defense.
In 2012, Congress passed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, legislation that has been panned as weak and ineffective.
The pharmaceutical industry's top U.S. lobbying group and Goldman Sachs are among the corporate donors to the president-elect's inaugural committee.
By Jake Johnson
Some of the largest, most powerful companies in the United States are racing to finance President-elect Donald Trump's inaugural fund as they attempt to court favor with the incoming administration, which has promised a further reduction of the corporate tax rate.
The Wall Street Journal earlier this week identified "at least 11 companies and trade associations that are backing the inauguration, which is on track to bring in a record fundraising haul, after earlier pledging to suspend or reconsider political-action committee donations after January 6, 2021."
The list includes the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the drug industry's top U.S. lobbying group, as well as Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Intuit, General Motors, and Toyota.
"Some donors are substantially boosting their inaugural donations from previous years," the Journal reported. "The telecom company Charter Communications, which gave $350,000 to [President Joe] Biden's fund and $250,000 to Trump's 2017 fund, is donating $1 million this time. Uber Technologies, which gave $1 million to Biden's, donated $1 million to the inauguration, in addition to another $1 million from Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi."
Additionally, according to the Journal, "corporate executives have been flocking to Mar-a-Lago, Trump's Florida resort, in the weeks since the election to meet with the president-elect and his team, in the hopes that building a relationship could make the incoming administration friendlier to their causes."
"Trump has met with the chief executives of Meta Platforms, Amazon, Google, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and others in recent weeks," the newspaper added. Meta, headed by billionaire Mark Zuckerberg, has donated $1 million to Trump's tax-exempt inaugural committee, which is not subject to contribution limits.
Amazon has vowed to pump $1 million into the inaugural fund, as has Ford—which is also reportedly supplying the event with a fleet of vehicles.
"EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE MY FRIEND!!!" Trump wrote in a Truth Social post earlier this month.
A prospectus obtained by Axios indicates that donors who give $1 million to the inaugural fund will receive tickets to the January 20 swearing-in ceremony as well as a "Cabinet reception," a "Make America Great Again rally," and other events. Only those who donate at least $100,000 will be allowed to attend a "One America, One Light Sunday Service" with Trump and his wife, Melania, according to the document.
Trump, whose proposed Cabinet is packed with billionaires with extensive ties to corporate America, is reportedly keeping track of the major companies that have not yet donated to his inaugural fund.
"In the past few weeks, Trump has at times asked close allies about how much major corporations have donated to the inaugural committee, and has sometimes inquired about specific companies by name," Rolling Stone reported Wednesday, citing an unnamed person with direct knowledge.
"Earlier this month, when the president-elect asked about one big-name corporation and was told it hadn't donated, Trump replied, 'Well, they better do it soon then,'" Rolling Stone added.