Daily review 07/08/2024

54 comments on “Daily review 07/08/2024 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. tWig 1

   7 August 2024 at 5:50 pm

   More quotes from the IBA on their boxing decisions (but no more info about the tests they ran), which seem to chromosome karotyping, pictures of chromosomes.

   '“We don’t verify what they have between their legs,” was one early zinger, as Kremlev sat against a backdrop of Christian iconography, presumably to project a sense of pious moral authority. Thomas Bach was once again referred to by a homo phobic slur, apparently extrapolated from the Paris 2024 opening ceremony.

   Kremlev added that the Olympics was “trying to do everything to destroy feminine sports competitions”, which is in itself patent nonsense. Sat next to him, Ioannis Filippatos, a doctor and also an IBA executive, said he knows what women are and has delivered lots of babies.

   “As a Christian, believing in God, I disagree with this presentation of the scripture,” Kremlev said at one point, which is fine, but, like, can we see the medical reports please? No light was shed on the IBA’s stance on women with abnormal sexual characteristics. There was just a constant blunt insistence that “they are men”.
   • Nic the NZer 1.1

     7 August 2024 at 6:14 pm

     You'd prefer it if the IBA breaks medical report confidentiality?
   • francesca 1.2

     7 August 2024 at 6:22 pm

     What gives you the idea that the public has the right to see the reports?

     What you are asking is protected as personal data .Both boxers in question were invited to appeal the IBA decision , to the CAS

     The Taipei boxer declined and Khelif did not follow up

     https://www.iba.sport/news/iba-clarifies-the-facts-the-letter-to-the-ioc-regarding-two-ineligible-boxers-was-sent-and-acknowledged/
     • tWig 1.2.1

       8 August 2024 at 12:02 pm

       The IBA has not listed specifically which tests were carried out. Only reading between the lines is possible.
       • weka 1.2.1.1

         8 August 2024 at 12:08 pm

         yes, but there are only so many possible tests, and plenty of experienced people have worked through what is possible and what is likely. eg Emma Hilton who Karolyn quotes below.

         (Reading between the lines, the athletes are XY. There is no reasonable alternative reading.)
   • Karolyn_IS 1.3

     7 August 2024 at 8:25 pm

     Emma Hilton, developmental biologist who does genetic, including sex testing, has an informative tweet on what was learned from the IBA conference.

     (Reading between the lines, the athletes are XY. There is no reasonable alternative reading.) The IBA mentioned a “male karyotype”. (As well as confirming XY, this tells me the test process involved direct visualisation of chromosomes from cellular material. This is an entirely rational “first step” in the context of a sex screen. I would argue for a different method, but let’s wait until I get asked…)

     The IBA mentioned high testosterone, yet their statement in the test procedure say that testosterone testing was not undertaken. (An entirely reasonable interpretation is that T testing wasn’t part of the sex screen, but T levels in these athletes is known via other screens like anti-doping. Someone – a journalist maybe – should ask them. Rushing to a formal endocrine profile as part of a sex screen is not a particularly obvious thing to do, and it may be that this is what the IBA meant.)

     With an XY karyotype and high testosterone (from which the presence of testes can be strongly – and I mean strongly – inferred), these athletes have, so far, the male-typical biology that is relevant in sport.

     That’s what we know, if we don’t pretend we can’t detect the signal through the noise^

     She then said medical follow-up should be available to the athletes because it has implications for their health care. Hilton ends with,

     Understanding the precise DSD would permit rational categorisation according to the possibility of male advantage.

     All this should have been done years ago.

     More of what was learned in the tweet at the link.
     • SPC 1.3.1

       7 August 2024 at 8:31 pm

       Once Wada notes that the high level of T is from an XY chromosome source, it is no longer a doping issue concern.
       • Karolyn_IS 1.3.1.1

         7 August 2024 at 8:46 pm

         But it is of concern for women's sports because, it is part of the whole context of male biology.

         The whole point of a women’s sport division is to remove male advantage.
         • SPC 1.3.1.1.1

           7 August 2024 at 9:10 pm

           All sport has fair competition and safety rules.

           Thus those identifying as women, have weight divisions, drug testing, possibly rules about T level maximums and whatever else they specify (which might include those transgender having gone through male puberty).

           https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/mar/23/world-athletics-council-excludes-transgender-women-from-female-events

           The court case as per those designated female at birth (being in the transgender eligibility category, or not if they have the XY chromosome) is not yet resolved – CS case – appeals etc.

           There is probably someone identifying as a transgender male and or non binary in a women's football team (and they have to limit any use of T to be allowed to compete)***.

           It's a mess because the WBO, set up to replace the IBA (to manage amateur boxing), has yet to do so. And the IOC has the inclusion setting, unless the sport has a regulatory system set up.

           PS Zambia had two in its football team designated female at birth (allowed to compete *** irony).
   • weka 1.4

     7 August 2024 at 8:47 pm

     but, like, can we see the medical reports please?

     wrong question. The question you should be asking is why is Algeria and Chinese Taipei are refusing permission for the tests to be released?

     These tests affect the private life of the person concerned and constitute medical information protected as personal data. We are not allowed to publish these documents without the agreement of the person concerned. However, both Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-ting received a copy of these tests, and they never disputed it. They know these tests exist and it is not fake.

     https://www.iba.sport/news/iba-clarifies-the-facts-the-letter-to-the-ioc-regarding-two-ineligible-boxers-was-sent-and-acknowledged/

     So why don't Khelif or Yu-ting release their own tests and put the matter to rest?

     Not a rhetorical question, it's a pivotal one. If the tests don't exist, then say so. If the tests do exist but IBA is lying about the results, then there are multiple people who could release them. IOC have them as well. As does at least one sports journalist (who for obvious reasons can't release them).

     The only I reason I can think of for either boxer not releasing their test, is because the results show they are male.

     Even if they don't want to release them because of being exposed, they could release them to a neutral third party who has the ability to interpret them and who can then explain what the tests show.

     But honestly, it's getting silly by that point. This is the IOC's job. They should be doing sex verification on all athletes who want to take part in women's sports where sex difference matters. And then those two boxers wouldn't be in this situation, and women's sport would be for women again.
     • weka 1.4.1

       7 August 2024 at 9:06 pm

       the sports journalist who has seen the test results, and the letter sent by the IBA to the IOC.

       IBA letter to IOC, June 2023: Boxer's 'DNA was that of a male consisting of XY chromosomes'

       https://www.3wiresports.com/articles/2024/8/3/0d4ucn50bmvbndhhqjohaneccoqueq
       • tWig 1.4.1.1

         8 August 2024 at 11:06 am

         The 3 Wire report said "from a photograph", that is where I took my interpretation from, given this is the only source for independent confirmation of the IBA tests quoted at TS.

         Karyotyping is done to check for chromosome abnormalities in pregnancy via photo analysis of the chromosomes taken out of the nucleus of a cell. You get pictures of all the chromosomes in a cell, not graphs stated to date.

         It is not a hormone test, can only give extreme chromosomal abnormalities, and does not identify differences at a gene level, or that someone went through male puberty.
         • Nic the NZer 1.4.1.1.1

           8 August 2024 at 11:24 am

           Karyotyping can determine the genetic sex allele of an individual. The reason this isn't part of pregnancy screening is because we don't screen pregnancies by male or female.
           • tWig 1.4.1.1.1.1

             8 August 2024 at 11:40 am

             Karyotyping is broader than pregnancy testing, it is used for plants, for example. Which is why I know kiwifruit have 6 copies of each chromosome, and that is why they are a bitch to breed. Most of those yummy new kiwifruit have been bred from 2-chromosome relatives of our green hairy fella.

             I just picked that web reference because it described how the process is carried out. Thanks for tidying up the pregnancy science, but you can easily tell X and Y chromosomes from a karyotyping photograph. it is not ethical to tell people though, as that is not what you took the samples for.
   • Anker 1.5

     7 August 2024 at 10:05 pm

     An easy solution TWig, The OCI could run their own tests for sex of these atheletes. But no they are happy with that test that is far superior to any of the current DNA test,that is the passport lol lol lol

     If they are so confident these athletes are women, they have nothing to lose. Atheletes are used to having to undergo tests, eg for dopeing, weight etc. Shouldn't be a problem. What do you think?
     • tWig 1.5.1

       8 August 2024 at 11:33 am

       What do I think? I m glad to see the huge Algerian support for Khelif, a Unicef ambassador, as she competes. Lin also has plenty of popular support in Taiwan historically, and both have won their respective semi-finals.

       Plenty have pointed out that the IBA could have created a properly thought-out policy on this issue in the past few years, but haven't. As I understand it, the IOC position is that it is up to individual international sporting bodies to prove that specific hormonal and sex chromosome conditions provide an unfair advantage, which will then be validated by the IOC in its Olympic policy. The IOC do not consider that it is up to individual athletes to prove they are able to compete. Gee, the IBA didn't bother to follow the IOC pathway, so blame them. Not Khelif and Lin, born with female genitalia.
       • weka 1.5.1.1

         8 August 2024 at 11:43 am

         Plenty have pointed out that the IBA could have created a properly thought-out policy on this issue in the past few years, but haven’t.

         What? The IBA established testing policy in May 2023.

         On 12 May 2023, IBA amended its Technical and Competition Rules. After internal discussion, it was decided by the Board of Directors that IBA competitions will be conducted only between male athletes and between female athletes. Participation of DSD athletes (“differences of sexual development”) in boxing competitions were found dangerous for health and security of the boxers.

         Amendments made by the Board to the T&C Rules:

         Definition of Men/Male/Boy = individual with chromosome XY.

         Definition of Women/Female/Girl = individual with chromosome XX

         Rule 4.2. Eligibility on Gender:

         4.2.1.Boxers will compete against boxers of the same gender, meaning Women vs Women and Men vs Men as per the definitions of these Rules.

         4.2.2.To determine the gender, the Boxers can be submitted to a random and/or targeted gender test which will be conducted by IBA in cooperation with the selected laboratory personnel.

         4.2.3. In case of adverse result, the Boxer will be immediately notified by IBA.

         4.2.4. In case of adverse result, the Boxer will be disqualified from such competition with immediate effect and will be prevented from competing in further IBA-owned and sanctioned competitions of that gender. For this purpose, IBA will share such information with the relevant internal bodies respecting its confidentiality.

         https://www.iba.sport/news/iba-clarifies-the-facts-the-letter-to-the-ioc-regarding-two-ineligible-boxers-was-sent-and-acknowledged/
       • tWig 1.5.1.2

         8 August 2024 at 11:47 am

         And that is PROVE, via robustly-designed scientific studies that correlate performance advantage with a natural hormonal or genetic condition.

         It may be that, after these Olympics, that pathway will be followed by whatever international boxing body replaces the IBA, perhaps using Khelif and Lin as examples. But you can’t disqualify individuals competing now without that SPECIFIC proof.
         • weka 1.5.1.2.1

           8 August 2024 at 11:55 am

           christ, where have you been for the past two weeks?

           Did you even read my post?

           Let me lay it out:

           1. males who go through puberty have a whole range of advantages compared to women in sports. There is plenty of science on this. Let me know if you want references, but this is a good place to start,

           https://x.com/wekatweets/status/1819128444929954094

           2. males who are born with specific DSDs go through male puberty and likewise gain this advantage. This is true regardless of the shape/look of their genitalia. eg 5-ARD, which is what Khelif is considered to have.

           3. all trans women who went through male puberty have this advantage

           4. men, TW, and males with certain DSDs lowering their testosterone doesn't remove that advantage. It may lower it in specific cases relative to other males, but it doesn't lower it relative to females. In other words, thinking women as a class of people are simply men with low T is regressive and sexist af.
       • weka 1.5.1.3

         8 August 2024 at 11:49 am

         As I understand it, the IOC position is that it is up to individual international sporting bodies to prove that specific hormonal and sex chromosome conditions provide an unfair advantage, which will then be validated by the IOC in its Olympic policy.

         Yes. This is exactly what the IBA did for the other competitions that it was responsible for. But it wasn't responsible for the Olympics, the IOC set up a new organisation to oversee Olympic boxing, and that org ignored the IBA process and used the IOC one (passport sex).

         The IOC do not consider that it is up to individual athletes to prove they are able to compete. Gee, the IBA didn't bother to follow the IOC pathway, so blame them.

         The IOC pathway has nothing to do with the IBA, they are an independent international sports body. The IOC's position is that gender identity trumps biological sex. Which has obvious problems for women.

         Not Khelif and Lin, born with female genitalia.

         Please provide some evidence for what you are basing that on.

         Shape of genitalia has nothing to do with the problem, unless you are arguing that males with DSDs who go through male puberty should be allowed to compete in women's sports based on genital observation at birth and ignoring biological male advantage. Is that what you are arguing here?
         • tWig 1.5.1.3.1

           8 August 2024 at 12:08 pm

           I guess otherwise their respective families, one a poor, large Algerian family who almost certainly had a homebirth, accepted them as female.

           And because some XY women can apparently go through life without testing, believing themselves to be women, to the point of giving birth naturally to multiple children (again). And some XY women do not go through male puberty (again).

           How am I arguing against biological hormaonal advantage being taken into account? Didn’t I say the new improved, non-transphobic IBA replacement will almost certainly do performance-based testing on Lin and Khelif. But any ‘male’ advantage they have has yet to be proved scientifically.
           • tWig 1.5.1.3.1.1

             8 August 2024 at 12:19 pm

             Sorry, 'wouldn't have identified and accepted them as female'.
             • weka …

               8 August 2024 at 12:27 pm

               yes. This is the assumption. But it's an assumption, not a known fact. Make your deductions accordingly, just like the people arguing K has a male DSD.

               And because some XY women can apparently go through life without testing, believing themselves to be women, to the point of giving birth naturally to multiple children (again). And some XY women do not go through male puberty (again).

               can you please be more specific? Which DSD does that?
           • weka 1.5.1.3.1.2

             8 August 2024 at 12:31 pm

             How am I arguing against biological hormaonal advantage being taken into account?

             What do you mean by 'biological hormaonal advantage'? You know that post puberty there are a whole range of anatomies that are hardwired in, right?

             Didn’t I say the new improved, non-transphobic IBA replacement will almost certainly do performance-based testing on Lin and Khelif.

             What is performance based testing?

             But any ‘male’ advantage they have has yet to be proved scientifically.

             Not really. The scientific tests already exist that establish maleness (assuming the IBA isn't outright lying, but anyway IOC, the sport bodies, and the two athletes all have the results). And we already have the scientific research that demonstrates post-puberty male advantage. What else do you want?
             • tWig …

               8 August 2024 at 12:43 pm

               Well, the IOC HAS accepted evidence from other international sporting bodies that HAS excluded some female XX androgen sensitive women and trans women who have undergone male puberty from competing, following a scientifically and legally validated process. Guess the IBA haven't PROVED Lin and Khelif's advantage is directly related to the tests the IBA claim to have made, and neither have commentators at TS.

               I think I've made a strong case here for the legality of Khelif's and Lin's competing at the Olympics, and now you are splitting hairs. I'm prepared to leave the proof of any advantage to later times. That may detract from their wins at Olympics 2024, sadly, but that is a failing of the poorly-managed IBA, not of IOC and its processes, or of Khelif and Lin, who box legally there, and who are managing to stay the course with grace under enormous media and social media pressure.
               • weka …

                 8 August 2024 at 12:52 pm

                 Well, the IOC HAS accepted evidence from other international sporting bodies that HAS excluded some female XX androgen sensitive women and trans women who have undergone male puberty from competing, following a scientifically and legally validated process. Guess the IBA haven't PROVED Lin and Khelif's advantage is directly related to the tests the IBA claim to have made, and neither have commentators at TS.

                 Please provide three examples, with links, so we can see what you are referring to.
               • weka …

                 8 August 2024 at 12:53 pm

                 I think I've made a strong case here for the legality of Khelif's and Lin's competing at the Olympics…

                 you literally made multiple claims today that you are unwilling to explain or back up, so no, you haven't.
                 • tWig …

                   8 August 2024 at 1:31 pm

                   Here is the IOC statement on their framework on fairness, inclusion and non-discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sex variations. Have a read, it's comprehensive, and lays out the principles and the process by which IFs go about creating their individual policies.

                   "The Framework recognises the need for separate women’s and men’s categories in elite sports. It also acknowledges the significance of fair competition opportunities for the women’s category, given the historical and contemporary struggle for gender equality in sport. The Framework does not preclude the possibility that certain individual athletes could be subject to participation restrictions or exclusions where an unfair and disproportionate advantage and/or unacceptable safety risk is clearly demonstrated and cannot be mitigated via reasonable accommodations. The challenge before [international Federations] IFs is to find ways to develop eligibility pathways that are fair and non-discriminatory and that provide opportunities for inclusion in an athlete's preferred category wherever possible, while also continuing to take meaningful action on gender equality."

                   It is a satisfying read for those looking for fairness in womens' sports, and I recommend it to TS commentators on this subject. The IBA's rather lamentable gender fairness policy listed by weka falls well short of the robustness set out by the OIC in their framework, looking much like it was drawn up on the back of an envelope, frankly. There is no way that it can have met the IOC’s policies and processes. Given the OIC has a 41% membership of women since 2023, that is not a decision taken behind closed doors by a bunch of old men, which more accurately describes the IBA.
               • tWig …

                 8 August 2024 at 1:15 pm

                 "As of 2023, 41% of the IOC are women". Goodness! Well, hard to accuse the IOC of bias against women with that ratio.

                 Wiki Participation of women in the Olympics

                 And, tibit, many sports, e.g. sailing and skating, used to have open categories.

                 "Helen de Portales of Switzerland became the first woman to compete at the Olympic Games and became the first female Olympic champion, as a member of the winning team in the first 1 to 2 ton sailing event on May 22, 1900"
                 • weka …

                   8 August 2024 at 1:17 pm

                   "As of 2023, 41% of the IOC are women". Goodness! Well, hard to accuse the IOC of bias against women with that ratio.

                   Only if you are a liberal who has abandoned class analysis.
                   • tWig …

                     8 August 2024 at 1:38 pm

                     Why do I get a feeling you are past splitting hairs, and are now clutching at straws?
                   • weka []

                     8 August 2024 at 2:26 pm

                     because you are out of your depth and don’t actually understand the arguments of the people you are debating with.

                     Class analysis is fundamental to left wing positions. Liberals value identity politics over that. Valuing identity politics over class analysis is what leads to thinking 41% female means the IOC can’t be biased against women. It takes superficial numbers and ignores deeper understanding of the causes of women’s oppression.
2. SPC 2

   7 August 2024 at 5:55 pm

   House prices are over-valued, non tradeable inflation is still high (power, rates, home insurance) – but some are calling for a cut in the OCR because of the economy.

   Government could make moves to reduce the rising cost of power, rates and home insurance (but has not, apart from some conditional allowance for local government debt).

   The RB has brought in income to loan rules, but the two track concept floated by Bollard in 2007 is still off the table. It was to allow a (variable) mortgage surcharge on residential property loans. Thus allow a lower OCR (to assist exporter returns) without risk of an inflationary impact on property values.

   Each 0.5% OCR cut coming with a 0.25% mortgage surcharge, would allow a OCR of 4.5% and a MS of 0.5%. Then one of 3.5% and a MS of 1.0%.

   That said one constraint is of course not rushing OCR cuts because of domestic recession, as there is still the issue of this causing a lower dollar and more imported inflation.

   Whether 0.5% or 1.0% a MS would generate significant revenue to government – and it seems schools, health and public housing need the money now.

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/524404/heads-should-roll-if-ocr-is-cut-next-week-economist

   Medallists in the highest level of household debt to national GDP.

   US dollar 229 billions in debt.

   1% or 0.5% of this would buy a lot of envelopes.

   http://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/new-zealand/household-debt–of-nominal-gdp
3. adam 3

   7 August 2024 at 6:31 pm

   Tim Walz seems half bloody decent.
4. Joe90 4

   7 August 2024 at 6:44 pm

   It's started.

   /

   In Health, you just ask for more money, and Labour (especially) were always willing to give it. When they came to power, health spending was $16 billion, they nearly doubled it. Until there is a real incentive to invest when it will add to efficiency and cuts costs when there is waste, it will be difficult to make health work.

   $5,300 is enough to buy every person private health insurance. Why shouldn’t you be able to opt out and buy a private policy? What if you could take your share out and spent it with NIB or Southern Cross?

   What if they were required to accept any patient, and keep them for life if the patient chooses. What if they purchased services off an open market of private and state providers? What if certain services where competition is not possible, such as Starship’s Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, became regulated monopolies, required to serve patients from any insurer at the same price?

   https://www.act.org.nz/free_press_healthcare
   • Graeme 4.1

     7 August 2024 at 8:02 pm

     Like to see Southern Cross' view on having to do everything and accept everyone.

     Their business model is very much about cherry picking what they do and who they do it to. Private surgical would also be another story if the private hospitals had to finance and staff their own ICU capacity. That $5300 pp might include a hidden subsidy of the private side.
     • joe90 4.1.1

       7 August 2024 at 9:29 pm

       Like to see Southern Cross' view on having to do everything and accept everyone.

       Something like this I would imagine.

       .

       Monthly premium costs

       For monthly premiums, the overall average cost was $1,178. But that number can change a lot based on age. For instance, a 21-year-old paid a monthly average premium of just $397, while a 50-year-old paid an average of $712.

       Deductibles

       The average yearly deductible for an individual was $5,101. That number more than doubles for families, who had an average deductible of $10,310 per year.

       Maximum out-of-pocket expenses

       The maximum out-of-pocket expense for individual policyholders averaged $8,335. It doubled for families, averaging $16,672 per year.

       https://edition.cnn.com/cnn-underscored/money/how-much-is-health-insurance
       • tWig 4.1.1.1

         8 August 2024 at 12:17 pm

         And no coverage of 'existing conditions'.
   • Descendant Of Smith 4.2

     7 August 2024 at 8:36 pm

     lol like you go to private surgery for your car accident, your stroke, your heart attack, your stabbing in a fight, being shot, your botched private hospital cosmetic surgery fix, running health campaigns, your diabetes, etc etc etc or that they even have the equipment to deal with that stuff.
     • aj 4.2.1

       7 August 2024 at 8:59 pm

       My experience of health insurance is that it is capped, and in many instances treatments are not covered 100%
5. bwaghorn 5

   7 August 2024 at 7:25 pm

   https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/2018950006/soaring-electricity-prices-could-see-ruapehu-saw-mills-close

   Unfucking believable this government and the last one should be flayed for this , just useless beyond belief
   • srylands 5.1

     7 August 2024 at 8:13 pm

     What do you want the government to do? Is the market not working?
     • weka 5.1.1

       7 August 2024 at 8:30 pm

       you seem to have missed my earlier mod note. In premod now until you read and acknowledge.
     • bwaghorn 5.1.2

       7 August 2024 at 8:57 pm

       Plan ahead for the future to make there is enough supply to keep the lights on and and keep a market economy functioning,
     • roblogic 5.1.3

       7 August 2024 at 9:34 pm

       Restart the Lake Onslow hydro project

       Regulate the dysfunctional "market"

       Reinstate home insulation initiatives

       Invest more in green tech
6. roblogic 6

   7 August 2024 at 9:39 pm

   Emboldened by the success of its hate campaign against Jacinda and the Labour government, the National Party Herald is trying to turn the clock back 150 years and rip up race relations in Aotearoa.

   WTF

   

   https://x.com/moanatribe/status/1821078211041882420
   • SPC 6.1

     7 August 2024 at 9:57 pm

     © Hobson's Pledge 2024
   • Drowsy M. Kram 6.2

     8 August 2024 at 12:36 am

     CoC MPs are Acting as if a more ‘perfect’ assimilation of Māori would be best for NZ
   • Rolling-on-Gravel 6.3

     8 August 2024 at 3:36 am

     That genuinely shocked me to see.

     Hobson's Pledge has no place whatsoever in mainstream politics.

     Fuck you, The Herald for espousing such far-right nonsense.
7. SPC 7

   7 August 2024 at 10:10 pm

   Meanwhile other influential groups that advertise in the Herald …

   Taxpayers Union – want TVNZ sold (so we can be unique in lacking a public broadcaster – like we are without a CGT and estate tax).

   Free Speech Union – want to determine what police learn about cultural divisions in New Zealand. Kiwi not Iwi – as per Hobson's Pledge code for settler majority decides, or recognising how young people refer to each other.
   • roblogic 7.1

     7 August 2024 at 10:38 pm

     All astroturf groups funded by Atlas and shady billionaires.
8. SPC 8

   7 August 2024 at 10:25 pm

   Is there any difference between the government of Thailand, Iran and China – when they use a monarch, or an Islamic Republic primacy or a one party state ruling order to block democracy …

   https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crkmdd4vevxo
   • Obtrectator 8.1

     8 August 2024 at 1:07 pm

     Doesn't seem to me to be much difference in essence between Thailand and Burma (won't use the junta's "rebranding"). The Thai military are just a bit more subtle about it.
9. Joe90 9

   8 August 2024 at 1:29 am

   Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem's report on systematic abuse and torture in Israeli prisons since Oct 7th.

   https://www.btselem.org/publications/202408_welcome_to_hell

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS