
Mimsy 😷|💚🌍🌱|⛸ ❄️|❤️🖤
65.4K posts

Mimsy 😷|💚🌍🌱|⛸ ❄️|❤️🖤
@Demimsy_
🔞 “resident Iesbian incubus” | they/them | 🏳️🌈 lesbian | 30+ | AuDHD | formerly a fandom account, now it’s mostly news & politics | anti imperialism


Keine Propaganda in Buchenwald x.com/i/broadcasts/1…

Did most researchers and clinicians really decide never to read any SarsCov2 research? In a pandemic? 🤷♀️

Netanyahu corruption trial testimony delayed due to 'security and political reasons' haaretz.com/israel-news/is…

🚨 Action! On April 21, EU foreign ministers will decide whether to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement — or delay again. What they do depends on pressure from us. #SanctionsNow Suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement NOW! action.eko.org/a/suspend-the-…

Vanessa Hudgens stuns for Toddler of the Year.


France is on the eve of voting one of the most shameful laws in its history: it would effectively outlaw criticism of Israel and criminalize any speech seen as even remotely sympathetic to whoever the French government chooses to designate a "terrorist group." In effect this law would turn France's foreign policy into unchallengeable dogma backed by prison time. You could literally be sent for 5 years in prison if you, for instance, call what France says are "terrorists" a "resistance group." Think for instance Nelson Mandela during the apartheid (the ANC was on every Western terrorist list) or, heck, France's own Résistance against Nazi Germany - designated as "terrorists" by the Vichy regime and the Nazi occupation. It's frankly absolutely insane. The new law is called "loi Yadan" after its author Caroline Yadan, a MP who represents French expatriates living in Israel. The U.S. has congressmen paid by AIPAC: France has cut out the middleman entirely, we have MPs whose constituency is literally in Israel. The law has already passed committee and heads to a full parliamentary vote on April 16th - 3 days from now - under a very unusual fast-track procedure. Seven of eleven parliamentary groups have said they'll vote yes and the law is expected to pass. What does the law say? Let me quote from it directly (full text here: assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/textes/…): 1) Article 1 introduces the concept of "implicit" provocation to terrorism and punishes it with five years imprisonment and a fine of €75,000 That's the one I was speaking about. Under this provision, describing anyone France designates as terrorist as a "resistance movement" - the way France describes its own Résistance against Nazi occupation - could effectively become a crime. The key concept is what does "implicit provocation to terrorism" mean? Nobody knows. And that's the point. It means whatever a prosecutor wants it to mean: a perfectly good case could be made that, for instance, quoting international law on the right of occupied peoples to resist with respect to Hamas is, in fact, "implicit provocation to terrorism." France's most famous anti-terrorism judge, Marc Trévidic, says he has never seen anything like it in his entire career (x.com/CharliesIngall…): "Implicit provocation to terrorism: do you realize what that means? Becoming a censor of other people's thoughts, trying to guess what a person really meant." 2) The same article also expands the terrorism apology offense to include "minimizing or trivializing acts of terrorism in an outrageous manner." This is even crazier: until now, "apology of terrorism" meant actually expressing a favorable judgment of "terrorist acts" (which is already insane because, as we all know, one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter). Well, under this new provision, a judge could decide that providing context, explaining root causes, or insufficiently condemning an act amounts to "trivializing" terrorism - and that would now be punishable with 5 years in prison. So, for instance, a history teacher explaining the origins of Hamas or Hezbollah is providing context - but a prosecutor could argue that contextualization is trivialization. The same reasoning could apply to a journalist, a researcher, or anyone on social media who says "yes, it was terrible, but here's why it happened." The "but" becomes a crime, as it is trivialization. 3) Article 4 expands Holocaust denial law Under current French law, denying the Holocaust is already a crime. This provision extends that crime by specifying that contestation of crimes against humanity now includes, "whatever its formulation, a negation, minimization, or outrageous trivialization" of those crimes. Again with "outrageous trivialization"! In this instance the very authors of the text - Caroline Yadan and her colleagues - explain their reasoning explicitly in the law's preamble (assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/textes/…): "Comparing the State of Israel to the Nazi regime would thereby be punishable as an outrageous trivialization of the Shoah." So while the provision is written in general terms, its architects are openly saying what it's for: making it a crime to draw any parallel between Israel's actions and those of the Nazis. 4) Article 2 creates a brand new crime: calling for the destruction of a state. The law adds to an existing 1881 press law a provision punishing anyone who "publicly, in disregard of the right of peoples to self-determination and the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, calls for the destruction of a state recognized by the French Republic." Five years imprisonment, €75,000 fine. The qualifiers about self-determination and the UN Charter are meant to sound reassuring. But what does "destruction" mean? In practice, if you advocate for a one-state solution where Israelis and Palestinians live as equals, you are de-facto calling for the "destruction" of the state of Israel. Well, that would now be punishable by 5 years in prison 🤷 There you go. Absolutely insane: if this new law passes, and it unfortunately very much looks like it will, France - the country that gave the world the Declaration of the Rights of Man, the country whose national identity is built on the Résistance - will have made it illegal to use the word 'resistance' about anyone the government doesn't like. Jean Moulin would be prosecuted. De Gaulle would be prosecuted. The only people who wouldn't be prosecuted are those who stay silent. Which, of course, is the whole point.


Say no more. Nigerian babies are fed sugar-packed Cerelac while European babies get the same brand with zero added sugar. The same culprit? Nestlé. Ultimately, NAFDAC is to be held responsible. Their mandate is to protect the health of Nigerians and they are failing at it.

Gravely concerned by reports #Israel cabinet in April approved 34 new settlements in occupied West Bank – the highest number ever approved at one time. This continues the sharp upward trend of unlawful settlement building that extends & consolidates Israel's annexation of occupied Palestinian territory. Israel must immediately cease the establishment & expansion of settlements, & reverse its settlement policies by evacuating all settlers & ending the occupation of Palestinian territory.

I am deeply concerned about developments in the Palestinian territories. In my phone call with Prime Minister @netanyahu, I made it clear: There must be no de facto annexation of the West Bank.

I remember the first time I realized how everyday men must have felt during the “Me Too” movement I was on a tinder date when a guy asked permission to kiss me. It was the first time in my life anyone had ever done that and it completely turned me off It was also the first time I noticed how the politics of “Me Too” had seeped into my personal life, how men’s natural behavior had started to shift, shaped by fear “I don’t want to get in trouble,” he said, after noticing my reaction. “Have you seen the news?” This was right after Alyssa Milano asked people to reply “Me Too” if they had experienced sexual harassment or assault. The hashtag was everywhere. Suddenly unavoidable Women don’t understand how the excesses of Me Too have done REAL damage. They’ve made normal interactions between men and women impossible, they’ve made all men marked as “predators” for normal behavior, and it’s turned all women into helpless victims with no agency It’s time we #MuteMeToo

Scientists call for an immediate BAN on boiling lobsters alive - as study confirms crustaceans can feel pain trib.al/hpcOJRS

I really feel like workdays should be 10am–3pm or 9am– 2pm. There’s no reason for people to spend most of their lives at work. Let people go home and have time for their families, partners, friends, and rest. That’s why everyone is so miserable today.










