John retweeted
I truly appreciate any help, may that be a donation or by simply sharing. Our family are needing just a bit of help in what has been such a traumatic time. gofundme.com/f/please-help-i…
John retweeted
Yes! Genocide is back on! Thanks Americans!
patreon.com/posts/174418536?…
John retweeted
Warning, this post contains the image of an Indigenous Person who has passed away.
Today we remember the talent and determination of Aunty Oodgeroo Noonuccal.
Photo: Oodgeroo Noonuccal at Moongalba ;Sourced from the National Portrait Gallery. Taken by Juno Gemes.
John retweeted
The Government™ has made an ad about the protests happening around the world, and it’s surprisingly honest and informative.🌍🌎🌏
John retweeted
The UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls has backed in my bills to end shackling of people giving birth and children being strip searched.
The UN have condemned the Albanese government for blocking them.
The Prime Minister needs to step up and stop this violence.
This Labor government is happy to pat themselves on the back for signing up to UN agreements, but they do nothing to actually implement them. It’s just performative.
abc.net.au/news/2026-10-27/u…
John retweeted
The United Nations has "expressed concern" over the blocking of two bills calling for a ban on the shackling of women during childbirth and the strip-searching of children.
nit.com.au/27-10-2026/27180/…
John retweeted
The Tasmania Commission of Inquiry had 191 recommendations.
Its most pressing recommendation was the urgent closure of AYDC.
This was set to close by the end of 2024 as promised by former premier Peter Gutwein.
The pictured Roger Jaensch was the children's service minister at the time.
How many child abuse reports that was submitted to Jaensch by former AYDC worker @Lyshrose that were never actioned by Roger the dodger, let alone referred to TasPol on his watch?
John retweeted
I've a poem in the newly released For Gaza anthology (HarperCollins India) of international writers & poets. Unfortnunelty, it's currently only available through Am*z*n. But a percentage of sales goes to a Palestinian charity
harpercollins.co.in/product/…
John retweeted
Replying to @DrewPavlou
You done yet? Total disgrace, trying to turn this country into something it has never been before. boganintel.com/p/the-dogs-of…
John retweeted
I know you know this picture. All adult people who've carried some of the pain of this world for others do. 58 years ago this month, three men stood on an Olympic podium in Mexico City.
Two of them, courageous to a level most people will never reach or even aspire to reach, became famous for raising their fists.
The third didn't raise his fist.
But he knew exactly what was happening.
16 October 1968.
The Olympic Games in Mexico City.
The United States is being torn apart by racial conflict. Martin Luther King has been murdered six months earlier. Black Americans are still fighting for rights that other Americans take for granted.
Two American sprinters, Tommie Smith and John Carlos, have just won gold and bronze in the 200 metres.
Between them stands a 26-year-old white Australian called Peter Norman.
Norman has run the race of his life.
He's won SILVER, beating Carlos, one of the overwhelming favourites.
His time of 20.06 seconds is so astonishing that it will remain the Australian national record for another 56 years.
He should be thinking about his medal, his future, the applause, the extraordinary doors that might open for him.
But Smith and Carlos have something else on their minds.
They're planning to protest racial injustice during the medal ceremony.
In front of the entire world.
And they tell Norman what they're going to do.
Norman is Australian.
The American civil rights movement isn't his fight.
He could simply stand there, smile politely, collect his silver medal and go home.
Nobody would ever know that he had been given an opportunity to demonstrate moral courage and declined it.
But Norman asks the Americans what he can do to help.
And he tells them:
"I'll stand with you."
There's a practical problem.
Smith and Carlos have planned to wear black gloves, but Carlos has forgotten his pair.
Norman suggests something beautifully simple.
Why don't they share the remaining pair?
One glove each.
That's why, in the famous photograph, Smith raises his RIGHT fist and Carlos raises his LEFT.
The Australian also finds himself an Olympic Project for Human Rights badge.
He pins it to his tracksuit.
And the three men step onto the podium.
The American national anthem begins.
Smith and Carlos bow their heads and raise their fists.
Norman stands beside them.
A small white man in an Australian tracksuit, wearing a tiny badge.
It doesn't look particularly spectacular.
No shouting.
No violence.
No great revolutionary speech.
Just three men saying, in their own ways, that human beings deserve to be treated as human beings.
And the sporting establishment goes NUTS.
Smith and Carlos are expelled from the Games.
They're denounced, threatened and treated as traitors for daring to make people uncomfortable during a sporting event.
Norman returns to Australia.
His country has its own ugly history of racial exclusion, particularly concerning its Indigenous population.
And there are plenty of Australians who aren't particularly thrilled that their Olympic silver medallist has associated himself with two Black American protesters.
Norman encounters hostility and ostracism in parts of the sporting world.
Four years later, he isn't selected for the Munich Olympics.
Norman never repudiates what he did.
Peter Norman dies in 2006, aged 64.
At his funeral in Melbourne, two men have travelled all the way from America.
Tommie Smith.
John Carlos.
The two Black American athletes he had supported 38 years earlier.
And they carry his coffin.
Carlos told the mourners that Norman hadn't stood in front of them or behind them.
He had stood WITH them.
In 2012, the Australian Parliament finally apologised for Norman's treatment and its failure to recognise his courage while he was alive.
Forty-four years after the protest.
Six years after the man was dead.
One day governments will offer apologies to journalists sacked for holding Israeli officials' feet to the fire.
Hopefully before they die.
John retweeted
Hey @ChappellRoan you forgot the ciggie; but still 9/10
John retweeted
The Colony Has Deliberately Siloed First Nations Culture youtu.be/MtMaFOHjEQw?si=GSMA… via @YouTube
John retweeted
To all the people chanting “I stand with Ukraine”, @HavryshkoMarta asks a simple question:
“Are you standing with the Ukrainian people — or merely with the Ukrainian state?”
When the State Demands Your Life, Do You Still Have the Right to Resist?
Dear Western “Stand With Ukraine” crowd,
You repeat it like a sacred mantra: “Ukraine has the right to resist Russian aggression.”
Very well.
But let me ask you a question you seem remarkably unwilling to confront:
Does a human being have the right to resist, too?
Does a man have the right to resist when armed men in military uniforms descend upon him, seize him from his home, snatch him off the street, or drag him out of a hospital?
Does he have the right to resist when he is forced into an unmarked van, subjected to a sham medical examination, and declared fit for military service regardless of whether he is suffering from AIDS, tuberculosis, or cancer?
Does he have the right to resist when he is stripped of his freedom, his bodily autonomy, and his dignity — and dispatched to a battlefield to kill and to die?
Or does the sacred right to resistance suddenly evaporate when the aggressor wears the uniform of his own country?
Here is the moral contradiction at the heart of your solidarity: You passionately defend the right of a nation to resist coercion, yet seem prepared to look away when that same nation coerces the very people in whose name it claims to fight.
Why, in your moral universe, does an abstract political entity possess rights more sacred than those of a living, breathing human being?
Why should the sovereignty of a state outweigh the sovereignty of a person over his own body, his own conscience, and his own life?
A nation cannot bleed. A flag cannot feel pain. A state cannot experience terror, humiliation, or death.
Only human beings can.
And yet you appear willing to sacrifice the real human being upon the altar of the abstract nation — and call it freedom.
But freedom for whom?
What exactly are you defending when the individual becomes expendable, when human dignity is treated as a luxury, and when the state claims the ultimate authority to decide who must live and who must die?
Isn't this precisely the authoritarian logic that liberal democracy was supposed to reject?
And when the state is elevated above the individual, when obedience becomes more sacred than conscience, and when human lives become mere instruments of national destiny — how is that not the very logic of fascism?
You cannot credibly champion freedom from foreign tyranny while refusing to confront coercion exercised in freedom's name.
You cannot proclaim that Ukraine has the right to resist while denying that the Ukrainian individual has rights worth defending.
And you cannot claim to stand for human dignity if your compassion ends precisely where the demands of the state begin.
The ultimate measure of a free society is not how fiercely it defends its borders, but whether it remembers that the people living within those borders are human beings — not property of the state.
So I ask you again:
If Ukraine has the right to resist an aggressor, why shouldn't a Ukrainian have the right to resist those who come to take his freedom, his dignity, and potentially his life?
And if your answer is that the state must come first, then perhaps it is time to ask yourselves an uncomfortable question:
Are you standing with the Ukrainian people — or merely with the Ukrainian state?
And this sums up Palestinian struggle - they face a modern military and settler militias armed and supported by the weapons of western powers, often only armed with rocks and their wits.
John retweeted
It is not enough to recognize Palestine.
Because recognition still assumes "Israel" has a right to exist as it is.
A colonial regime cannot coexist with the people it was built to erase.
So long as "Israel" is recognized, Palestine will never be free.
True justice begins not with recognition, but with un-recognition of the criminal project that calls itself a state.
John retweeted
Heil Austria 🧵
Mustafa Ayyash cresce nel campo profughi di Nuseirat a Gaza, a quindici anni crea il forum online "Gaza Now" che riscuote un successo clamoroso. Raggiunto il sogno di fare il giornalista, fonda "Gaza Now news" che in pochi anni diventa uno dei media più popolari della regione.
Nel 2017 riesce a raggiungere l'Austria da dove pensa di raccontare liberamente i crimini di Israele senza il pensiero di ricevere in regalo un missile in camera da letto.
A differenza di quei cialtroni dei media mainstream europei, ignoranti e felici di raccontare Gaza attraverso le veline degli invasori, Ayyash racconta la sua città, la sua gente, e non si può parlare di Gaza omettendo i combattenti della Resistenza.
Ayyash pubblica tutto, senza censura. Pubblica i video di Hamas ma anche quelli di altre fazioni e personalità politiche che si oppongono ad Hamas.
Con l'inizio dello sterminio, Israele vieta ai media di entrare a Gaza, il mondo deve sapere solo attraverso i portavoce dell'esercito sterminatore.
"Gaza Now" è una spina nel fianco della narrazione israeliana, diventa la principale fonte di informazione su Gaza per i giornalisti internazionali, pubblica in continuazione video dall'inferno di Gaza che ottengono milioni di visualizzazioni.
Su Telegram, "Gaza Now" raggiunge due milioni di iscritti.
Tutto questo per Israele è intollerabile, e contrattacca con i suoi noti metodi democratici.
A novembre del 2023, un missile colpisce l'abitazione di Ayyash a Gaza e uccide la madre, il padre e venti parenti tra i quali bambini e una neonata.
Gli Stati Uniti sanzionano "Gaza Now" e il giornalista Ayyash in quanto "presunto facilitatore finanziario chiave" (?) di Hamas.
(Classica pagliacciata tipicamente americana: "Gaza Now" pubblica migliaia richieste di donazioni provenienti da Gaza ma i canali che effettuano il passaggio di denaro sono americani o europei).
Nell'aprile del 2024 la polizia austriaca irrompe all'alba in casa di Ayyash e lo arresta insieme alla moglie.
Sequestrano tutti i dispositivi elettronici.
Dopo un luogo interrogatorio, vengono rilasciati.
Ayyash ha paura, capisce che questo è solo l'inizio, ma continua i suoi viaggi nelle città europee per raccontare la distruzione di Gaza.
Nell'agosto del 2024 l'Austria spicca un mandato di arresto europeo per Ayyash, la polizia olandese esegue e lo arresta.
Israele chiede l'estradizione, Ayyash entra in sciopero della fame, gli olandesi scendono nelle piazze per manifestare contro la detenzione del giornalista.
Dopo due mesi rinchiuso in carcere, l'Olanda consegna Ayyash alle autorità austriache.
Da novembre del 2025, il giornalista Ayyash è rinchiuso in attesa di processo in cella di isolamento per 24 ore al giorno, vietata l'ora d'aria, vietato avere colloqui con altri detenuti.
Le accuse della giustizia austriaca a carico del giornalista palestinese sono un'offesa al diritto, l'ennesimo passo verso l'israelizzazione delle società europee.
Ayyash, assente da Gaza da nove anni, è accusato di finanziare e APPARTENERE contemporaneamente ad Hamas, Fronte Popolare per la Liberazione della Palestina, Jihad Islamica, Brigate dei Martiri di al-Aqsa e pure la libanese Hezbollah.
(Un record da Guinness dei primati!)
Il processo dovrebbe iniziare a dicembre, gran parte delle accuse si basano su informazioni e prove SEGRETE fornite dai servizi di intelligence israeliani.
Ed essendo segrete, l'imputato e l'avvocato difensore non possono prenderne visione.
Questa non è più una questione palestinese, qui siamo davanti all'abbattimento delle colonne portanti delle nostre democrazie.
Dovrebbe interessare tutti.

































