Singling out Smotrich and Ben-Gvir adds to Israel’s impunity
MEMO | January 6, 2024
Earlier this week, the US State Department released a statement rejecting the forced transfer and resettlement of Palestinians from Gaza, attributing the rhetoric from the Israeli side to Israeli Ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir. “We have been told repeatedly and consistently by the Government of Israel, including by the Prime Minister, that such statements do not reflect the policy of the Israeli government,” US State Department’s Spokesperson Matthew Miller declared.
Maybe the US State Department is unaware of the reports that explicitly name Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as making the suggestion during a closed-door meeting for Likud MKs. Or that the former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon called forced transfer and the international community’s possible complicit participation “a moral imperative”. Going further back, the leaked document by Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence also lists the forced transfer of Palestinians as the preferable option for Israel.
If Israel does not go ahead with the plan, it only means that the international community is not willing to go so far as visibly aiding Israel’s colonisation after public opinion has shifted so much towards Palestine, and rightfully so. Before 7 October, the Nakba could only be imagined or read about in terms of statistics on ethnic cleansing and its related destruction. Zionism has now illustrated to the world what genocide looks like, and governments are paying slight heed, if only to prevent themselves from getting further embroiled in the repercussions of Israel’s fabricated security narrative.
To make the forced displacement of Palestinians sound like it was just the concoction of Smotrich and Ben-Gvir lends additional impunity to Israel. Israel was built upon the ethnic cleansing and forced transfer of the Palestinian people. Conceptualising the forced transfer of Gaza’s Palestinian population is a continuation of the Nakba, not an innovative idea conjured up by two far-right-wing politicians. The Times of Israel is perpetuating the narrative of forced transfer being the idea of just two politicians, both of them in the public eye for their ongoing incitement. But the Israeli settler-colonial state is an incitement in itself.
Meanwhile, in a brief interlude, an unnamed Israeli official spoke of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) for its delivery of humanitarian aid as doing its work “for the first time in its history”. There is no forgetting, however, that Israel wants to destroy UNRWA and, during the Donald Trump administration, embarked upon doing so, emboldened by the so-called “deal of the century” and the US-Israeli insistence to alter the definition of who can be classified as a Palestinian refugee.
The bottom line here, however, is that Israel’s expectation that the international community clears up the mess after its atrocities knows no limit. Had Israel not bombed Gaza and rendered 85 per cent of the population forcibly displaced, the current humanitarian catastrophe could have been avoided. As things stand, and with Gaza almost completely destroyed, Israel and the international community can maintain the humanitarian paradigm for Palestinians because basic needs will always be perceived as more important than a political process where Palestinians are concerned. Colonisation required complicity, and there is no proposal Israeli officials come up with that can be separated from the narrative of Israel’s settler-colonial existence.
So You’re a Professor? Here’s What You Can Do to Oppose Genocide
By Steve Salaita | January 7, 2024
College instructors, particularly those in Europe and North America, are generally limited when it comes to meaningful intervention in imperialist horrors afflicting the Global South. Nevertheless, it is usually their governments either orchestrating or abetting the horror. They ought to do something, then, even if it seems pyrrhic or inadequate.
People around the world are now witnessing a particularly gruesome event as the Zionist entity, armed by its U.S. sponsor and enjoying the support of capitalist institutions across the globe, commits one atrocity after the other in the Gaza Strip (along with the West Bank and at times further afield). The atrocities, anyone with a modicum of integrity agrees, add up to genocide. The depth of grief and suffering Palestinians now experience is indescribable, immeasurable.
Do professors and other campus workers have any ability to mitigate the grief and suffering? Not really. But we’re not entirely powerless, either. Higher education is an important sector for information and activism and an industry where participants like to contemplate the role of both exceptional and ordinary people in making a better world. Like anybody else, teachers and researchers can be most effective in their own communities, which are not inoculated from the genocide. Zionist groups have organized hundreds of defamation campaigns against Palestinian students and faculty, often resulting in employment termination and other serious forms of recrimination. These campaigns don’t exist in a vacuum. Targeting Palestinians and anti-Zionists is an extension of the genocide, or at least one of its attendant tactics. And then, of course, many of the campuses are somehow invested in the Zionist entity—financially, politically, or logistically. It does no good to say that “we” aren’t affected by what happens “there.”
The following is a list of suggestions for Western academics, with the understanding that not all professors are equal and each campus is different in terms of its cultural and economic composition. In turn, I have tried to be comprehensive, offering comments that I hope will be useful to everyone from contingent faculty whose employment is precarious to senior scholars with big platforms at elite institutions. (The latter are much more likely to be facilitating the genocide, either obliquely or explicitly, but nevertheless.)
One thing is clear: the world is now experiencing a moral crisis whose enormity will reshape political attitudes and alliances for generations to come. Pretending that life, no matter how sheltered or comfortable, can simply continue as normal is its own kind of moral crisis.
Try one or more of the following if you can:
Defend Palestinian Students: Be it from forces on or off campus, or be it individuals you know or don’t know personally, it is reprehensible that students should suffer doxing and harassment, whether it is orchestrated by skeezy has-beens like Michael Rapaport or hysterical faculty on their own campus. Speak on behalf of your students. It can be done publicly through the usual channels or in private communication with chairs, deans, and other administrators. Or keep it simpler: reach out to the students and offer yourself as a resource.
Defend Palestinian Colleagues: The same idea holds, but with a quick addendum. Being a Palestinian in Western academe can be deeply alienating, in no small part because shitting on Palestinians is a reliable method of upward mobility. I’m sure some of your Palestinian colleagues will appreciate any gesture that might make them feel slightly less alone.
Boycott: Up to this point, academic boycott of Israeli universities has been controversial, even in supposedly progressive quarters of the industry. The facts, however, are clear. Israel has destroyed every institution of higher learning in the Gaza Strip. It has murdered dozens of faculty and administrators, including university presidents, and an untold number of students. There is no academic freedom in Palestine. There is no academe at all in Gaza. Reluctance to boycott is no longer acceptable. It is the baseline of political decency. Anybody who continues to oppose or dissemble about academic boycott should be regarded as untrustworthy on everything else.
Divest: Start or join a local campaign to force your university to divest any holdings from the Zionist entity. Divestment can include study abroad programs in Israel, which inherently discriminate against Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim students. In the past decade, students have successfully passed divestment resolutions at numerous universities, but management simply ignores them. Faculty voices will help these efforts.
Invite People from Gaza: Surely the rank-and-file in academe are tired of the same few dozen big-name professors and celebrity activists saying the same three or four things in the lucrative lecture economy. Decisionmakers on campus invite speakers for prestige, for the brand, or else to network or be in the presence of fame. The habit needs to die and there’s no better time than now. Instead of summoning the usual Endowed Chair of Gobbledygook at Wealthy Private University to deliver radical affectations at a cost of multiple thousands, reach out to scholars and journalists from Gaza (and for God’s sake give them a proper honorarium). They will assuredly be more insightful than warmed-over relics of the pre-millennial theory craze. Likewise: recruit graduate students from Palestine. You can also look into bringing Palestinians as visiting writers/scholars or as researchers/consultants in any effort to document the genocide. Start with people who are currently outside of Gaza; when conditions are better, reach out to those still inside the territory. Gaza is filled with individuals of remarkable talent. You will be better off for having sought it.
Organize or Attend a Demonstration: You don’t need to be a seasoned organizer to raise hell about the abomination that is the Zionist entity.
Direct Action: Why should students always be the ones to shut down administrative offices or gum up the machinery of genocide? Professors can participate, as well. I’m not saying you need to do it. I just want you to bear in mind that nobody, no matter how urbane or well-published, is too good to get fired or sit in jail for a few hours in solidarity with a people whose heroism is known and admired around the world.
Teach Palestine: Hundreds of Palestinian poets, novelists, and essayists write in English or are available in translation. Consider including them on your syllabus. So what if your courses don’t focus on Palestine or the surrounding region? If you’re a modernist, then assign Fadwa Tuqan or Mahmoud Darwish. If you’re in gender studies, look up Fatima Bernawi or Rasmea Odeh. If you teach novels, try Susan Abulhawa, Susan Muaddi Darraj, Sahar Mustafah… on goes the list. If you’re an Americanist, there are numerous options. Same for Latin Americanists. A critical theorist? No problem: there’s Elias Sanbar and Bassel Al-Araj and Ghassan Kanafani. And if you’re, say, a medievalist? That’s no problem, either.
Stop Pandering to Customs of Civility: You don’t need to condemn “Hamas.” You don’t need to “affirm Israel’s right to exist.” You don’t need to bang on about “democratic values.” You don’t need to be “nuanced.” You need to defend the people suffering a genocide. Not a single one of them is asking for anything else. (“Who is my audience?” keep asking yourself. If the answer is anything other than “the dispossessed,” then recalibrate your ethics and try again.)
Shun the Genocidaires: Those rationalizing or cheering on the genocide are personae non grata from here on out. No co-authoring articles with them. No sitting together on conference panels. No buddy-buddy bullshit on the networking circuit. Sure, sometimes circumstance will force you onto the same committee or whatever, but, if the association is voluntary, then decline the opportunity and find colleagues who don’t celebrate mass murder.
Speak: [speak]
Or better still: Listen.
January 6th WAS an Insurrection! Just Not by Trump Supporters
Clandestine’s Newsletter | January 6, 2024
January 6th WAS an insurrection.
But it was not Trump supporters who overthrew the United States. It was intelligence assets who entrapped Trump supporters in a planned false flag event, to justify certifying a stolen election without hearing evidence of fraud in Congress.
Pence promised electors they would have their day in court in Congress to air the widespread evidence of voter fraud. Those grievances were never heard, because Pence decided to certify the election the next day, and stated he did not need to give electors their day in Congress, because the actions of Trump supporters were so heinous on January 6th.
Then they intentionally withheld the footage from you, only showing the negative optics, so they could shape the perception of the event, and use it to prevent Trump from becoming POTUS in 2020 AND in 2024.
Then they used the “insurrection” as justification to purge virtually all Trump supporters from all social media, and censor ANY talk of election fraud.
You witnessed an insurrection that day, but it was the Deep State who undermined, conspired against, and overthrew the duly elected President of the United States, Donald J. Trump.
Our country was stolen from us, but we are about to take it back. And swift retribution is the first thing on the agenda.
TREASON!
‘Ballot Cleansing’: How Democrats are pushing US to political chaos
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 07.01.2024
Democrats have resorted to nothing short of “ballot cleansing” as they try to bar Republican candidates for Congress under the 14th Amendment theory, writes renowned American legal expert Jonathan Turley, warning against placing the US on a slippery slope to political chaos.
Several US voters in Illinois and Massachusetts have filed motions seeking to remove former President Donald Trump from each state’s primary ballot for the 2024 election. Earlier, Colorado and Maine moved to disqualify the ex-president.
Jonathan Turley, a renowned US legal scholar, raised the red flag over Colorado’s Supreme Court decision to bar Trump from the 2024 election last month, stressing that the state’s justices “put this country on one of the most dangerous paths in its history.”
The unusual initiative is driven by Democrat politicians who decided to utilize Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which says that any candidates who have engaged in acts of insurrection after vowing to defend the US Constitution should be barred from holding political office. The amendment was ratified in 1868. Now, the Dems are arguing that the January 6 riots were a full-fledged “insurrection” and that the law could be applied to the former president.
“In December 1865 many in Washington were shocked to see Alexander Stephens, the Confederacy’s onetime vice president, waiting to take the same oath that he took before joining the Southern rebellion,” Turley wrote on December 22. “So Congress declared that it could bar those ‘who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.’”
According to the legal expert, the January 6 events – no matter how bad they were – cannot be compared to the US Civil War (1861-1865) and qualified as an “insurrection.”
“It was a protest that became a riot, not a rebellion,” Turley highlighted, arguing that the Civil War-era amendment should not be used in this case.
He warned that the Colorado court’s undemocratic decision and clear defiance of the First Amendment could result in a domino effect “where red and blue states could now engage in tit-for-tat disqualifications.”
Turley’s concerns aren’t unjustified given that Democrats have decided to bar not only Trump, but all Republican candidates for Congress who have dared to question the fairness of the 2020 elections. Some Democratic lawmakers have called for the disqualification of up to 126 Republican colleagues as “insurrectionists.” What is especially chilling is that many have supported them.
Thus, on December 11, US Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ) called on House leaders to remove congressional lawmakers who were “supporting Donald Trump’s efforts to invalidate the 2020 presidential election.”
“Stated simply, men and women who would act to tear the United States government apart cannot serve as Members of the Congress. These lawsuits seeking to obliterate public confidence in our democratic system by invalidating the clear results of the 2020 presidential election undoubtedly attack the text and spirit of the Constitution, which each Member swears to support and defend,” claimed Pascrell, citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) introduced a similar initiative which was supported by 63 Democratic co-sponsors, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jamaal Bowman, Ritchie Torres, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib.
Meanwhile, Turley drew attention to an obvious double-standard approach exercised by Democrats: previously, some of them have openly challenged and even sought to block certification of election results.
“Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) praised the effort then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) organized to challenge the certification of President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election,” the legal scholar recalled on January 5, adding that Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sought to block certification of the 2016 election result.
According to Turley, Democrats are increasingly using labels of “insurrectionists” and “Putin lovers” to cancel their political rivals, opponents, and even journalists. However, if the trend turns into some sort of a legal precedent, nothing would stop overzealous lawmakers from expanding this cancellation spree, according to the expert.
“That is why the [US] Supreme Court needs to take up this issue and put this pernicious theory to bed once and for all,” Turley concluded.
Trump is Epstein’s #1 Enemy
Clandestine’s Newsletter | January 5, 2024
For those who have not figured out Trump’s affiliation with Epstein, allow me to explain.
Trump is the one who exposed Epstein in 2008, hence why all of DC fears him. Trump is Epstein’s #1 enemy.
Epstein was running a blackmail operation. He was seeking out the most powerful people on Earth, to compromise and control them. He tried to get Trump, but Trump did not bite.
Trump banned Epstein from his properties in 2008, for hitting on the teenage daughter of a club member at Mar-a-Lago. Then a couple months later, Epstein pled guilty to State criminal charges in Florida, for paying for sexual services from a 14 year old girl.
See the timeline? Epstein, tried to get close to Trump to compromise him, Trump found out Epstein was a sicko, then Trump helped turn him in to local police. But eventually the Clinton-controlled FBI intervened, and Epstein was let off the hook.
The Deep State have been coming after Trump ever since. Why? Because if Epstein is exposed, then all of DC goes down due to the blackmail Epstein possessed on the top players in DC. Hence why Clinton barged into Vanity Fair and threatened them not to write stories about Epstein. The Clintons told the MSM to bury the story.
Then when Trump got into office, he dedicated his administration to stopping human-trafficking WORLDWIDE via multiple executive orders, seized Epstein’s island, and then arrested Epstein and his accomplices in 2019.
Executive Order 13773 (see attached), is an EO literally dedicated to taking out Epstein’s international child sex-trafficking operation. “Transnational Criminal Organizations and Preventing International Trafficking”. February 9th, 2017.

HELLOOOOO that’s literally Epstein’s entire operation. Trump used Executive Power to stop Epstein, only A MONTH into his presidency. It was one of the first things Trump did.
So for those of you that were hoping to see Trump implicated in Epstein’s criminality, you will remain disappointed. Because not only is Trump NOT one of Epstein’s clients, he is the main individual who exposed the entire thing.
Trump is Epstein’s #1 enemy, and you all were brainwashed to hate him for that very reason.
Biden Regime Can Force Israel to Stop Fighting in Gaza But Will Not Do It
Sputnik – 06.01.2024
Three months after the escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict sparked by the October 7 attack by Hamas militants on Israeli territories, Tel Aviv appears intent to continue its invasion of the Gaza Strip — seemingly oblivious to the number of Palestinian civilians killed in its quest to punish Hamas.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has undertaken yet another voyage to the Middle East, meeting Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to discuss the ongoing hostilities in the Gaza Strip.
While media reports this week suggested that Blinken will try facilitate the return of Palestinians displaced by the fighting back to their homes and to urge Israel to increase aid to Palestinians, American human rights lawyer Francis Anthony Boyle argues that the US state secretary is “up to no good.”
In an interview with Sputnik, Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois’ College of Law, suggested that Blinken headed to the Middle East to “better coordinate the escalation of conflict” there instead of trying to put an end to bloodshed.
“In fact, the Biden administration just needs to order Israel to cease fire immediately, and they will have to do it. But of course, Blinken is not going to do that. He is a diehard Zionist. He is in on the plot over there with Netanyahu to inflict outright genocide on the Palestinians,” Boyle said.
According to him, the US appears to be “just backing whatever Israel wants to do,” which currently appears to be attempting to displace over 2 million Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.
“If you look at the countries Blinken is going to, he is going to try to neutralize any opposition to this plan by Israel and see if they can pull it off,” Boyle remarked.
He also argued that the Biden administration is “complicit in Israeli genocide against the Palestinians” by supplying Israel with military hardware and munitions and by providing Tel Aviv with political support.
Israel aiming to derail ICJ genocide case – Axios
RT | January 6, 2024
The Israeli Foreign Ministry has ordered its embassies across the globe to pressure their host countries to reject South Africa’s genocide case against it at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Axios has reported, citing an urgent diplomatic cable.
Pretoria addressed the ICJ last week, claiming that Israel’s ongoing attacks on Gaza are “genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part” of the Palestinian population. South Africa wants the The Hague-based court to issue an injunction ordering the IDF to suspend its military campaign in the enclave. More than 22,600 people have been killed in Gaza over the past three months, according to the local health ministry.
The cable, which was sent out by the Foreign Ministry on Thursday, stresses that Israel’s “strategic goals” are for the ICJ to reject South Africa’s request for an injunction, refrain from determining that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and acknowledge that the IDF’s actions in the enclave comply with nternational law, Axios said in an article on Saturday.
“A ruling by the court could have significant potential implications that are not only in the legal world but have practical bilateral, multilateral, economic, security ramifications,” the document, copies of which were seen by the outlet, read.
According to the Foreign Ministry, Israeli diplomats must pressure their counterparts and high-level politicians in host countries to issue “immediate and unequivocal public statement along the following lines: To publicly and clearly state that YOUR COUNTRY rejects the outragest, absurd and baseless allegations made against Israel.”
It’s also important for foreign nations “to publicly acknowledge that Israel is working to increase the humanitarian aid to Gaza, as well as to minimize damage to civilians, while acting in self defense after the horrible October 7 attack by a genocidal terrorist organization [Hamas],” the cable read.
The Foreign Ministry stressed that Israeli diplomats must urgently work on obtaining such statements so that they come out before the ICJ hearings begin on January 11. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will also send letters to dozens of world leaders, relaying a similar message, it added.
Countries like Türkiye, Jordan, and Malaysia have supported South Africa’s cases. However, it was rejected by Israel’s prime backer, the US. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said earlier this week that “we are not seeing any acts that constitute genocide” in Gaza.
Amal Clooney Accuses a French Company, but Ignores the Crimes of the US and UK
By Steven Sahiounie | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 5, 2024
Amal Clooney, the international human rights lawyer, is representing victims of mass atrocities, including genocide and sexual violence, from the Iraqi Yazidi community who are seeking accountability for crimes perpetrated by ISIS.
The case alleges French conglomerate Lafarge SA conspired to provide material and funds to support ISIS terrorist campaigns against the Yazidis.
“Lafarge has admitted to a conspiracy that aided ISIS by providing millions of dollars in cash to ISIS, and is alleged to have provided ISIS with cement to construct underground tunnels and bunkers used to shelter ISIS members and hold hostages, including captured Yazidis,” a news release stated.
Clooney has focused on the French cement company which supported ISIS in Syria in order to remain in business during the war.
The crime committed by Lafarge is serious, but it is just one small incidence of western entities supporting terrorists in Syria following Radical Islam. Clooney is singling out a French company, and France is allied with both the U.S. and UK. While the crime affected hundreds of Yazidis, the same crime carried out by the U.S., UK and EU has affected millions of Syrian citizens.
The Free Syrian Army (FSA) forces were caught selling arms to the ISIS.
Weapons sent to terrorists in Syria from the U.S. directly allowed ISIS to obtain substantial amounts of sophisticated supplies which they used against civilians.
A study by Conflict Armament Research found that anti-tank weapons given to the ‘rebels’ in Syria by the U.S. ended up in the possession of the ISIS within two months of leaving the factory.
The U.S. provided extensive lethal and non-lethal aid to many terrorist groups fighting against the Syrian government. The CIA ran a covert program Timber Sycamore to arm, fund and train terrorists in Syria. U.S. President Trump shut the program down in 2017.
ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, Jabhat al-Nusra and the FSA fighting in Syria all shared the same political platform: to remove the Syrian government in Damascus, and replace it with a Islamic governing system. In March 2011, the U.S. and NATO began a war in Syria for the purpose of regime change. It was not successful, and the same government in Damascus has remained. However, the U.S.-NATO war was very successful in destroying the country, ruining the economy, killing thousands and sending the largest Syrian migrant wave to Europe in history.
U.S. President Barak Obama praised the FSA as ‘moderate’ rebels fighting for freedom and democracy. But, early on the FSA demonstrated that they were fighting to kill Christians and non-Sunni Muslim minorities, and had no interest in lofty ideals of freedom and democracy. They wanted to over throw the Damascus government with the support of the Obama administration, and realize the dream of a Sunni Muslim governing system which was based on Islamic Law, not civil codes.
In April 2014, investigative journalist Seymour M. Hersh exposed the Obama-Clinton “Rat Line”, which was a CIA weapons highway into Syria, serving the terrorists fighting for Obama’s regime change goal. Weapons and ammunition was sent from Libya to Syria via southern Turkey, and the terrorists on the receiving end were affiliated with Al Qaeda, and later aligned with ISIS.
Hersh revealed a 2012 agreement by Obama, and supported by the UK spy agency, MI6, which was responsible for getting weapons from Libya into Syria.
In 2013, Clooney was appointed to a number of United Nations commissions, including as adviser to Special Envoy Kofi Annan on Syria. The U.S. and UK involvement in supporting the terrorists who would later fight alongside ISIS was not any secret.
In 2016, Obama signed into law a defense policy bill which led to U.S. weapons provided to ‘rebels’ ending up in the hands of terrorists following Radical Islam, who became brothers in arms on the Syrian battlefields.
The Yazidis have suffered greatly and should receive justice. Clooney has focused on this one small incidence of ISIS benefiting from a French business. Clooney has ignored that the U.S., UK and their western democratic allies supported, funded, trained and weaponized terrorists in Syria which directly benefitted ISIS.
Where is the international court case to serve justice for the hundreds of thousands of Syrians dead, maimed, raped, kidnapped and made homeless by the FSA and their allies Al Qaeda and ISIS?
Clooney chose an easy win with the case against Lafarge. Clooney said she hopes to get a financial award for the Yazidis from her case so they can rebuild their lives.
The U.S. has prevented the Syrian people from rebuilding any hospital, school or home because of the U.S. imposed sanctions which prevent importing any products for reconstruction. The U.S. sanctions against Syria prevent any wealthy Arab country, or investor, from developing any reconstruction project to benefit the Syrian civilians, such as the repair of the water infrastructure in Aleppo. Last summer, Aleppo suffered cholera because the water plant is in need of repair.
The Syrians have no court case pending, and have no hope of any recovery from their suffering caused by the U.S.-NATO attack on the Syrian people for regime change.
40 Years in Jail for a Marijuana Offense
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | January 5, 2024
When I read an article yesterday by a man named Edwin Rubis, I sat there, shook my head, and asked myself how any government could do such a thing to anyone.
The reason that Rubis’s article caught my attention is captured in the title of his article: “I’m Serving 40 Years in Federal Prison. Here’s a Glimpse Into My World.” That title intrigued me because I have often wondered what daily life is like for prison inmates. Do they sit around all day reading books? Do they work out? Do they have jobs inside the prison? What type of food do they eat? Are they constantly getting harassed by prison guards? Are they raped or beaten up by other inmates?
That “40 Years” in the title of the article also caught my attention. Imagine: 40 years in jail! As a former criminal-defense attorney, I figured that Rubis had most likely been convicted of a serious federal offense, such as bank robbery or kidnapping, perhaps even felony-murder.
Not so. After describing what his daily life in prison is like, Rubis included a tagline at the bottom of his article that stated that he was serving a 40-year jail sentence for a non-violent marijuana offense.
Yes, you read that right! 40 years! For … a … non-violent .. marijuana … offense.
That’s incredible. After all, we’re not talking Turkey or North Korea. We are talking about the United States.
40 years for a non-violent marijuana offense. Just let that sink in. Not heroin. Not cocaine. Not fentanyl. Not opioids. Just marijuana.
What would motivate any federal judge to issue such a horrific jail sentence for a non-violent marijuana offense? I did some online research but I could not find the name of the federal judge who issued that sentence. But whoever he is, he ought to hang his head in shame. In fact, if he’s still serving as a federal judge, he ought to resign his position and return to practicing law. It would be the right thing to do.
My research did reveal that Rubis was convicted in Houston of distribution of marijuana rather than possession.
Ever since the start of the war on drugs, possession of drugs has been considered less grave than distribution of drugs. But that always has been a ridiculous distinction. Both possession and distribution are entirely peaceful acts. Unless one is growing his own marijuana, in order to possess a drug, one must receive it. So, why should the one who is selling or delivering the drug be treated more harshly than one who receives or possesses the drug?
The purpose of meting out high jail sentences to marijuana distributors is to dissuade people from distributing drugs. If people are deterred from distributing drugs, the argument goes, then people won’t be able to consume or possess them.
How’s that working out for you drug warriors, including you federal judges who are convinced that you have the responsibility of helping “win” the war on drugs? I’m sure that that federal judge who meted out that 40-year jail sentence to Rubis figured that he was doing his part to “win” the war on drugs. That’s certainly what federal judges were doing back when I was practicing law on the U.S. Mexico Border back in the 1970s. It’s one thing for a judge in the 1970s to have such a mindset. But how in the world could later judges — and judges today — have that same mindset? Their obtuseness boggles the mind.
Edwin Rubin began serving his jail sentence in 1998. He’s been in jail for some 25 years. For a non-violent marijuana offense. He is set to be released in 2032.
How in the world can the American people permit this drug-war madness to continue? How many more lives must be destroyed before a nationwide crisis of conscience forces federal officials to bring it to an end?
