Summary provided by https://notegpt.io/pdf-summary

Summary

The International Court of Justice has found that Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, violate international law. The Court determined that Israel’s actions, such as its settlement policy, acts of annexation, and discriminatory legislation and measures, constitute a breach of international law, including the prohibition on the use of force and the non-acquisition of territory by force. Israel’s presence in the territory is deemed unlawful, and the Court has called for an end to settlement activities, evacuation of settlers, reparations for damages caused, and non-recognition of the illegal situation by states and international organizations.

Key Insights

• The International Court of Justice has determined that Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, violates international law.
• Israel’s settlement policy, acts of annexation, discriminatory legislation, and measures were found to be in breach of international law.
• The Court has called for an end to settlement activities, evacuation of settlers, reparations for damages, and non-recognition of the illegal situation.
• The General Assembly and Security Council of the United Nations are tasked with considering further action to end Israel’s presence in the territory.
• The Court emphasizes the importance of achieving a just and lasting peace in the region for the benefit of all parties involved.

Frequently Asked Questions

Question

What actions were deemed unlawful by the International Court of Justice in the Occupied Palestinian Territory?

Answer

The Court found Israel’s settlement policy, acts of annexation, discriminatory legislation, and measures to be in violation of international law.

Question

What measures did the Court call for to address Israel’s presence in the territory?

Answer

The Court called for an end to settlement activities, evacuation of settlers, reparations for damages caused, and non-recognition of the illegal situation.

Question

Which international organizations are obligated not to recognize the illegal situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory? Answer All states and international organizations are obligated not to recognize the illegal situation in the territory.

Question

What role do the General Assembly and Security Council of the United Nations play in addressing Israel’s presence in the territory?

Answer

The General Assembly and Security Council are tasked with considering further action to end Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

archive.org link

In a historic ruling the International Court of Justice has found multiple and serious international law violations by Israel towards Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including, for the first time, finding Israel responsible for apartheid. The court has placed responsibility with all states and the United Nations to end these violations of international law. The ruling should be yet another wake up call for the United States to end its egregious policy of defending Israel’s oppression of Palestinians and prompt a thorough reassessment in other countries as well.

archive.org link

Decarbonization of the energy, transportation and industrial sectors by 2050 is a formidable challenge, and getting there will require significant use of nuclear power. But whether nuclear power figures into a country’s future energy mix or not, rigorous planning is needed to determine the clean energy composition that will work best depending on country-specific factors.

The publication, entitled ‘From Knowledge to Action: IAEA Toolkit for Sustainable Energy Planning’, was presented during a side event held on the margins of a meeting of the G20’s Energy Transitions Working Group in Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

archive.org link

The Southern Transitional Council (STC) de facto authorities must reverse their unlawful takeover of the Aden-based Yemeni Women Union centre, an independent civil society organization, and ensure women and children residing in the centre’s shelter for survivors of gender-based violence are protected, said Amnesty International today.

On 26 May, a group of armed men accompanying women from the STC-supported Southern Women Union, took over the Yemeni Women Union centre building in Sira district in Aden governorate by force. They broke in, changed the locks to the centre’s entrance and main rooms, destroyed security cameras, and expelled the centre’s guard replacing him with a new STC affiliated armed guard. They also denied access to staff of the Yemeni Women Union and to women seeking protective services.

“Instead of guaranteeing the safety of women fleeing violence and strengthening the work of civil society organizations providing protective services, STC authorities have exposed them to further violence,” said Diala Haidar, Yemen researcher at Amnesty International.

archive.org link

"More and more people are waking up to realize, we do not want private insurance companies to be in control of our healthcare system," said one advocate who attended the latest Sanders Institute Gathering.

archive.org link

This is the Center’s eighth political typology since 1987, but it differs from earlier such studies in several important ways. It is the first typology conducted on Pew Research Center’s nationally representative American Trends Panel, which provides the benefit of a large sample size and the ability to include a wealth of other political data for the analysis, including the Center’s validated voter study.

The four Democratic-oriented typology groups highlight the party’s racial and ethnic diversity, as well as the unwieldy nature of the current Democratic coalition. (For complete descriptions of all nine typology groups see Chapters 3-11; for profiles of the Democratic and Republican coalitions see Chapters 1 and 2 of this report.)

They include two very different groups of liberal Democrats: Progressive Left and Establishment Liberals. Progressive Left, the only majority White, non-Hispanic group of Democrats, have very liberal views on virtually every issue and support far-reaching changes to address racial injustice and expand the social safety net. Establishment Liberals, while just as liberal in many ways as Progressive Left, are far less persuaded of the need for sweeping change.

Two other Democratic-aligned groups could not be more different from each other, both demographically and in their relationship to the party. Democratic Mainstays, the largest Democratic-oriented group, as well as the oldest on average, are unshakeable Democratic loyalists and have a moderate tilt on some issues. Outsider Left, the youngest typology group, voted overwhelmingly for Joe Biden a year ago and are very liberal in most of their views, but they are deeply frustrated with the political system – including the Democratic Party and its leaders.

The four Republican-oriented groups include three groups of conservatives: Faith and Flag Conservatives are intensely conservative in all realms; they are far more likely than all other typology groups to say government policies should support religious values and that compromise in politics is just “selling out on what you believe in.” Committed Conservatives also express conservative views across the board, but with a somewhat softer edge, particularly on issues of immigration and America’s place in the world. Populist Right, who have less formal education than most other typology groups and are among the most likely to live in rural areas, are highly critical of both immigrants and major U.S. corporations.

Ambivalent Right, the youngest and least conservative GOP-aligned group, hold conservative views about the size of government, the economic system and issues of race and gender. But they are the only group on the political right in which majorities favor legal abortion and say marijuana should be legal for recreational and medical use. They are also distinct in their views about Donald Trump – while a majority voted for him in 2020, most say they would prefer he not continue to be a major political figure.

The only typology group without a clear partisan orientation – Stressed Sideliners – also is the group with the lowest level of political engagement. Stressed Sideliners, who make up 15% of the public but constituted just 10% of voters in 2020, have a mix of conservative and liberal views but are largely defined by their minimal interest in politics.

archive.org link

Take our quiz to find out which one of our nine political typology groups is your best match, compared with a nationally representative survey of more than 10,000 U.S. adults by Pew Research Center. You may find some of these questions are difficult to answer. That’s OK. In those cases, pick the answer that comes closest to your view, even if it isn’t exactly right.

archive.org link

Social Model of Disability

The social model of disability views the social, civic, political, and economic environments as the disabling entity, not an individual's impairment. A social model perspective does not deny the reality of impairment nor its impact on the individual. However, it does challenge the physical, attitudinal, communication and social environment to accommodate impairment as an expected incident of human diversity. The social model frames “disability” as the result of the interaction between people living with impairments and an environment filled with physical, attitudinal, communication and social barriers.

Disabled people are not “objects” of charity, medical treatment, and social protection but “subjects” with rights, capable of claiming those rights, able to make decisions for their own lives based on their free and informed consent and be active members of society. The emphasis is on the physical, attitudinal, communication and social environment to change to enable people living with impairments to participate in society on an equal basis with others.

In line with the social model, we use the term “disabled person” throughout this article. We acknowledge that the CRPD and some others use the term of people or persons with disabilities.

archive.org link

Nine witnesses in the criminal cases against former President Donald Trump have received significant financial benefits, including large raises from his campaign, severance packages, new jobs, and a grant of shares and cash from Trump’s media company.

The benefits have flowed from Trump’s businesses and campaign committees, according to a ProPublica analysis of public disclosures, court records and securities filings. One campaign aide had his average monthly pay double, from $26,000 to $53,500. Another employee got a $2 million severance package barring him from voluntarily cooperating with law enforcement. And one of the campaign’s top officials had her daughter hired onto the campaign staff, where she is now the fourth-highest-paid employee.

archive.org link

However, none of this is stemming the stream of 988 callers who receive unasked for, unwanted, or unexpected visits from police and emergency medical services (EMS)—and then get taken, with or without consent, to hospitals or crisis centers for mental health evaluations. Some report having been further subjected to forced stripping, solitary confinement, prolonged detentions, and even involuntary treatments.

Callers to 988 targeted by these practices describe feeling misled, betrayed, and ultimately battered by their experiences. And, contrary to 988 promoters’ promises of “getting police out of crisis care” and previous public assurances from SAMHSA and Vibrant about the low frequency of these police/EMS interventions, stunning new data show that the intervention rates have in fact skyrocketed—quadrupling in 988’s first year. And rates of police/EMS interventions on callers who discuss suicidal feelings appear to be even higher.

archive.org link

Communicating During Contentious Times: Dos and Don'ts to Rise Above the Noise

Community leaders can play a central role in reducing tensions, divisions, and the spread of misinformation that may accompany an election season. The below pointers highlight dos and don’ts for leaders to avoid inadvertently causing harm. Last, we provide simple steps for taking action to reduce likely harms before, during, and after voting occurs.

DOS

Model positive norms: Show that your community is overwhelmingly committed to ensuring free, fair, and peaceful elections.

Highlight stories of community members taking actions consistent with these norms. Emphasize your community’s unifying, local identity–which cuts across lines of division–and draw on local values and stories demonstrating cooperation. Define your community in terms of who it is, rather than who it is not, using its own words, narratives, and local sources.

Emphasize individuals’ agency and the many actions underway to ensure a free, fair, peaceful election.

Amid tensions and uncertainty, people can feel limited in whether and how to respond. Narratives may deliberately create a sense of chaos or cast violence as an inevitability. This can create pressure for people to remain silent or even go along with violence. Emphasizing the work underway to ensure a secure and peaceful election can counteract perceived powerlessness and a sense of chaos, and can offer concrete ways for people to get involved in ensuring a peaceful election. Highlighting this broader context–for instance, the many groups working to ensure communities can securely vote–can also prevent violence or intimidation from having a chilling effect on public engagement.

Where tensions, misinformation, and violence do emerge, consult with targeted communities to learn their needs and preferences for public statements before acting.

Communities targeted with violence and false information often have experience responding in high-threat moments and know best what their community members need. When you do speak out, model empathy toward targeted communities.

Offer a concrete, non-violent path forward for grievances, including clear channels and processes for addressing things in real-time.

Be specific in referring to tensions and/or violence.

Political violence, including harassment, and misinformation are tools to intimidate communities from engaging in public life. Precise, accurate, and accessible language can help ensure violence does not appear more widespread than it is. For example, naming specific districts or stating “at one street corner” rather than referencing full cities or states. Also, be precise about who was involved. For example, saying “there was violence at a protest” could be misleading if the violence was actually from a group of armed counter- protesters and only one or two protesters were involved. Speaking with clarity and precision can limit the ability of violence to intimidate communities from showing up to vote. Importantly, it can also guard against signaling that violence is the norm or expected for those associated with any groups.

DON'TS

Don't signal negative norms, including through depicting violence as widespread.

Don't speak about violence without condemning it and highlighting responses.

Highlighting the many efforts underway to ensure all community members can safely vote or peacefully protest help prevent violence from being used as a tool to intimidate and chill civic engagement. Likewise, avoid repeating calls to violence–even if to report on them–lest you provide a platform to vigilante or extremist groups, who may use past violence to further their notoriety and recruitment efforts.

Don’t use vague or speculative language which can engender mischaracterizations and fear-based responses (particularly if the language misconstrues violence as more widespread than it is). Using specific language eliminates room for assumptions and speculation.

Don’t use language that activates fear or anxiety, such as war and natural disaster metaphors (e.g., “protestors flooded the streets,” or “violence erupted”). This also reduces individuals’ sense of agency (personal empowerment) in responding. Relatedly, avoid repeating language that describes people as animals or as less than human (“dehumanizing language”), such as pests, deadly or wild animals, or diseases. This language drives people to act towards those described with less care or concern than they typically would other humans.

Don’t reference entire groups of people when discussing individual actions or viewpoints.

When an incident is the result of one or a few individuals, don’t attribute it to a general group, such as Republicans, Democrats, or protestors. This can engender an association between harmful actions with entire groups of people, furthering notions of collective blame and negative norm-signaling that all within a particular group or community should or do feel/act a particular way. However, when specific individuals or groups are acting in an explicitly unified way, such as illegal militias or institutions, naming them can highlight culpability.

Don’t repeat misinformation or rumors.

Anticipate the types of misinformation and dangerous rhetoric that might circulate throughout the election and arm yourself with clear, specific corrections. Follow best practices in responding to misinformation (see below).****

It is time to ratify the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. Tell the supreme court that they have to account for a treaty in international human rights law.

archive.today link

Since the Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion two years ago, far-right conservatives have been trying to curtail birth-control access by sowing misinformation about how various methods work to prevent pregnancy, even as Republican leaders scramble to reassure voters they have no intention of restricting the right to contraception, which polls show the vast majority of Americans favor.

archive.org link

Roy Irvin alleges he was reprimanded as ‘insubordinate’ for flagging issues on 787 Dreamliner planes

archive.today link

From countering divisive rhetoric to enhancing community-centric safety skills, voters themselves are showing what it looks like to protect against election violence. Tackling divisive rhetoric, strengthening community-led safety skills and adeptly navigating the evolving landscape shaped by the 2024 election cycle is essential. We must invest time, energy and resources to reinforce nonviolent, civilian-led safety endeavors — rather than accepting violence and deepening securitization.

It is essential that this undertaking begins with community-based systems for safety, which means adopting a forward-thinking, constructive strategy rooted in relationships. By reinforcing the connections that bind us together, neighbors can come together to control rumors, provide protective presence, receive training in violence de-escalation, interrupt violence and more. This is not a new approach, and there is precedent. Creating pockets of safety during elections has been done from Nigeria to Myanmar to the United States.

Let's do things in a human rights based approach.

archive.today link

This publication contains the "Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework", which were developed by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. The Special Representative annexed the Guiding Principles to his final report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/17/31), which also includes an introduction to the Guiding Principles and an overview of the process that led to their development.

The Human Rights Council endorsed the Guiding Principles in its resolution 17/4 of 16 June 2011.

archive.today link

We know too little about Black lives in rural and small-town New England, and the places Black residents were able to carve out for themselves in these communities. With this project, we hoped to uncover names, details of their lives, and some small sense of how people of color survived in the Connecticut River Valley before and after the abolition of slavery in Massachusetts in 1783. At the kickoff event for the project, UMass Amherst professor Gretchen Holbrook Gerzina mentioned challenging the assumptions of others (sometimes called Gatekeepers) who “might be quick to discourage a researcher interested in Black History, reporting that they don’t have much…or not thinking about ways that records of white families might be useful to this research” Gerzina remarked that researchers, curators, and librarians should ”start from the perspective of presence.”

ghostarchive.org link

Now, I won’t claim that this system is perfect. Human nature being what it is, I expect power groups will form which might not agree with who else is guaranteed. This is where the fediseer being FOSS helps. If there’s a core disagreement between big groups of fediverse projects about who should be guaranteed in the first place, I expect other Fediseers to spawn with their own Chains of Trust which are more or less strict than other. An instance could very well be registered to multiple Overseers and thus be part of different whitelists. I am perfectly aware that I will not be able to satisfy everyone limits but I hope to provide a tool that can!

The main point here is to create the system which can start building Chains of Trust, which have a manual human control but are easy to adjust as the environment changes.

archive.org link

According to Reuters, he is accusing the company of discrimination, wrongful termination and showing a pattern of bias against Palestinians. Hamad said he noted procedural irregularities on how the company handled restrictions on content from Palestinian Instagram personalities, which prevented them from appearing in feeds and searches.

archive.today link

archive.org link

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/16422026

Not a surprise but man

archive.org link

Credible Web Community Group

archive.org link

Why would you want to delegate moderation:

Temporarily, while looking for new mods and admins. When an instance is under attack by trolls and the like, ask extra help When there is a large influx of new users

archive.org link

The field of social development has seen three major approaches to dealing with problems:

the Charity Model

the Needs-Based Approach

the Rights-Based Approach

For half a century, developing nations were arguing at the United Nations sessions for the need to recognize the right to development as a human right. With a growing globalization process and several political changes around the world, and with increasing pressure from developing nations, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Right to Development.

“The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realised.”

This declaration gave a strong boost to the Rights-Based Approach to development and marked a new era in social development.

archive.org link

Federated Moderation: Towards Delegated Moderation?

What would an ideal fediverse organization do?

Fediverse, NetCommons and the blueprint for P2P society?

RIPE NCC Community Fund 2023

United Software Development: A new paradigm?

Federated Moderation: Towards Delegated Moderation?

EC - NGI0 Liaison -- Webinars and Workshop April 2021

Important: We need Your Input on the Future of the SocialHub

Hospitality exchange community considers moving to the fediverse ;)

Proposal: New top-level forum section for Domains

Working and thinking on "native" #openweb aproches to governance

Organizing for SocialHub Community Empowerment

RIPE NCC Community Fund 2023