mojella.bsky.social

mojella.bsky.social

@mojella.bsky.social

Equality social justice human rights. Your rights end at the tip of my nose. #notmyking #alwayswasalwayswillbeAboriginalland Live on Ngawait Country

71 followers28 following402 posts

mojella.bsky.social reposted

livesarah
@livesarah.bsky.social

Replying to @big-tony.bsky.social

The ABC are really embarrassing themselves by even going there. Who- even among their LNP-voting audience- actually values ScoMo’s opinion on *anything*?

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Big T
@big-tony.bsky.social

Replying to @parahandie.bsky.social

Scum-o made the racist Abbott the minister for Aboriginal people. Imagine my surprise, it was like when they appointed Lachlan Macquarie "Protector of Aboriginals". The man who ordered troops to hang Aboriginal people from the trees so the survivors wouldn't return to their Country. Truth Telling.😡

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Kevin MacKenzie
@parahandie.bsky.social

Replying to @strangerous.bsky.social

Dear #ABC Australia, why are you giving a platform to yesterday's men? Last week it was #Morriscum this week #ToeKneeABot, will it be #LittleJohnny next week? All were hopeless PM's and are of no relevance in #Australia today, indeed they were all irrelevant when PM! #Auspol

mojella.bsky.social reposted

FWC Indivisible
@fwcindivisible.bsky.social
dlvr.it'Disgusting and incompetent': Trump demands CNN reporter be 'thrown out like a dog'Although President Donald Trump is known for avoiding e-mail and text messaging, he is an avid social media user. Trump constantly used Twitter, now X, during his first presidency. But these days, his primary social media outlet is his own Truth Social platform — where he angrily raged against his media foes late Wednesday night, June 25. Trump was especially angry at CNN. The U.S. president, who was in The Hague, Netherlands to attend the 2025 NATO Summit, posted, in all caps, "FAKE NEWS CNN IS SO DISGUSTING AND INCOMPETENT. SOME OF THE DUMBEST ANCHORS IN THE BUSINESS!" READ MORE: 'Unnecessarily chaotic': How red state Republicans are quietly fighting back against Trump Trump singled out CNN reporter Natasha Bertrand, calling for her to be fired. Trump posted, "She should be IMMEDIATELY reprimanded, and then thrown out 'like a dog.' She lied on the Laptop from Hell Story, and now she lied on the Nuclear Sites Story, attempting to destroy our Patriot Pilots by making them look bad when, in fact, they did a GREAT job and hit 'pay dirt' — TOTAL OBLITERATION!" The 79-year-old president added, "She should not be allowed to work at Fake News CNN. It's people like her who destroyed the reputation of a once great Network. Her slant was so obviously negative, besides, she doesn't have what it takes to be an on camera correspondent, not even close. FIRE NATASHA!" But CNN, according to the Daily Beast's Cameron Adams, said, in an official statement, that they are '100 percent' behind Bertrand. READ MORE: 'Time for action': Republicans beg Trump to use obscure law to deport Democratic candidate

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Big T
@big-tony.bsky.social

Replying to @peggysanders.bsky.social

I couldn't agree more, Peggy. #Albo 's first job should have been backing out of the deal. There is no way Trumpet will honour the deal anyway. 😡

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Peggy Sanders
@peggysanders.bsky.social

Replying to @big-tony.bsky.social

Scott Morrison’s legacy is AUKUS. For allies of US such as Australia, the time for reviewing their attachment to Washington’s reckless and aggressive interventions around the world is overdue. AUKUS bind us permanently to US which leaves world less stable and Aust another US military base target.

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Peggy Sanders
@peggysanders.bsky.social

Replying to @reddtruq.bsky.social

“But Mr Morrison’s office insists that claims he is holidaying in Hawaii are ‘wrong’ while refusing disclose his location or for how long he is on leave. The prime minister’s office will not confirm whether or not Morrison is in Hawaii. The lack of information or confirmation starts a story hunt.” ➡️

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Kevin MacKenzie
@parahandie.bsky.social

Replying to @big-tony.bsky.social

bsky.app/profile/para...

Kevin MacKenzie@parahandie.bsky.social

Dear #ABC Australia, why are you giving a platform to yesterday's men? Last week it was #Morriscum this week #ToeKneeABot, will it be #LittleJohnny next week? All were hopeless PM's and are of no relevance in #Australia today, indeed they were all irrelevant when PM! #Auspol

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Big T
@big-tony.bsky.social

Dear ABC, if Scott Morrison is the only person offering to provide an opinion on ANYTHING, please don't call him back. The Australian people have not recovered from his Robodebt, his Covid response, his multiple ministries, even his God. 😡

mojella.bsky.social
@mojella.bsky.social

#DonaldTrump loses patience with Iran and Israel, tho particularly Israel. Ironic, really ... Israel has always done it's own thing since day dot yet Trump has only now pointed the finger at it! Slow learner. Netanyahu has always marched to the beat of his own drums www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06...

abc.net.auLive: Donald Trump lashes out at Israel as ceasefire with Iran teeters on brinkIsrael says Iranian missiles have been fired towards its territory, just hours after Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed Israel had agreed to a ceasefire with Iran. Follow live.

mojella.bsky.social reposted

FWC Indivisible
@fwcindivisible.bsky.social
dlvr.itTrump just broke the law — againAfter the United States bombed Iran’s three nuclear facilities on Sunday, US President Donald Trump said its objective was a “stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror”. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth echoed this justification, saying:The president authorised a precision operation to neutralize the threats to our national interest posed by the Iranian nuclear program and the collective self-defenze of our troops and our ally Israel. Is this a legitimate justification for a state to launch an attack on another? I believe, looking at the evidence, it is not. Was it self defense? Under the UN Charter, there are two ways in which a state can lawfully use force against another state: * the UN Security Council authorizes force in exceptional circumstances to restore or maintain international peace and security under Chapter 7 * the right of self defense when a state is attacked by another, as outlined in Article 51. On the first point, there was no UN Security Council authorization for either Israel or the US to launch an attack on Iran to maintain international peace and security. The security council has long been concerned about Iran’s nuclear program and adopted a series of resolutions related to it. However, none of those resolutions authorized the use of military force. With regard to self defence, this right is activated if there is an armed attack against a nation. And there’s no evidence of any recent Iranian attacks on the US. There have been incidents involving attacks on US assets by Iranian-backed proxy groups in the region, such as the Houthi rebels in Yemen and Hezbollah. In his address to the nation on Saturday night, Trump made reference to historical incidents the US believes the Iranians were responsible for over the years. However, none of these actions is directly related to the strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. What about a preemptive strike? Another possible ground the US can use to mount a case for its bombardments is anticipatory or preemptive self defence. Both of these aspects of self defense are controversial. They have never been clearly endorsed by the UN Security Council or the International Court of Justice. The US has sought to assert a fairly wide-ranging, robust interpretation of the right of self defense over many years, including both anticipatory self defense and preemptive self defense (which is particularly relevant in the Iran strikes). The major point of distinction between the two is whether a potential attack is imminent. Anticipatory self defense is in response to an attack on the brink of happening, such as when armed forces are massing on a border. Preemptive self defense is a step further removed, before a genuine threat materializes. Famously, in 2002, the administration of President George W. Bush adopted what is known as the “Bush doctrine” following the September 11 terrorist attacks. This doctrine was framed around the notion of preemptive self defence justifying a strike on another nation. This was one of the grounds the US used to justify its military intervention of Iraq in 2003 – that Iraq’s alleged program of weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat to the US. However, this justification was widely discredited when no evidence of these weapons was found. Did Iran pose an imminent threat? With regard to Iran’s nuclear program, an imminent threat would require two things: Iran having nuclear weapons capability, and an intent to use them. On capability, there have been debates about Iran’s transparency with respect to its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But, importantly, the IAEA is the body that has the authorisation and capability to make judgements about a nation’s nuclear program. And it said, at this point in time, Iran did not yet have nuclear weapons capability. As Rafael Grossi, the head of the IAEA told the BBC:[…]whereas until the early 2000s there used to be […] a structured and systematic effort in the direction of a nuclear device, that is not the case now. Trump’s statement in which he referred to the US military operation against Iran’s “nuclear enrichment facilities” was particularly striking. There was no reference to weapons. So, even the language coming out of the White House does not make reference to Iran possessing weapons at this point in time. Trump’s address to the nation after the Iran strikes. Further, many states have nuclear weapons capability, but they’re not necessarily showing intent to use them. Iran has a long track record of aggressive rhetoric against Israel and the US. But the critical question here is whether this equates to an intent to strike. What about collective defense? Israel began its military campaign against Iran on June 13, also arguing for the need for anticipatory or preemptive self defence to counter the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program. If Israel is exercising its right to self defense consistently with the UN Charter, as it claims, it can legitimately call on the assistance of its allies to mount what is known as “collective self defence” against an attack. On all the available evidence, there’s no doubt the Israelis and Americans coordinated with respect to the US strikes on June 22. At face value, this is a case of collective self defence. But, importantly, this right is only valid under international law if the original Israeli right to self defense is legitimate. And here, we encounter the same legal difficulties as we do with the US claim of self defense. Israel’s claim of an imminent attack from Iran is very dubious and contentious on the facts. A concerning precedent The overarching concern is these strikes can set a precedent. Other states can use this interpretation of the right of self defence to launch anticipatory or preemptive strikes against other nations any time they want. If this practice is allowed to go unchecked and is not subject to widespread condemnation, it can seen by the international community as an endorsement – that this type of conduct is legitimate. There are many states acquiring conventional weapons that could be seen to pose a potential threat to their neighbours or other states. And there are several states considering the acquisition of nuclear weapons. One example is Japan, where there has been some debate about nuclear weapons as a deterrence to future possible threats from China. So, how might Japan’s actions be seen by its neighbors – namely China and North Korea? And how might these countries respond in light of the precedent that’s been set by the US and Israel? Donald Rothwell, Professor of International Law, Australian National University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Dan from South Bend
@danarcha.bsky.social

Replying to @thereelrandom.bsky.social

bsky.app/profile/prop...

ProPublica@propublica.org

NEW: Meet the 22-Year-Old Trump’s Team Picked to Lead Terrorism Prevention One year out of college and with no apparent national security expertise, Thomas Fugate is the Department of Homeland Security official tasked with overseeing the government’s main hub for combating violent extremism.

propublica.org“The Intern in Charge”: Meet the 22-Year-Old Trump’s Team Picked to Lead Terrorism PreventionOne year out of college and with no apparent national security expertise, Thomas Fugate is the Department of Homeland Security official tasked with overseeing the government’s main hub for combating v...

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Pissed Off Survivor
@johnnymack619.bsky.social

Replying to @thereelrandom.bsky.social

When it's all said and done, the guy in the orange prison jumpsuit will end up having caught more terrorists, than the kid the Orange Fürher appointed to catch terrorists! 😳

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Rollen
@viyx-dbc.bsky.social

Replying to @sussexbylines.co.uk

Selling your natural resources to the merchant of war, to conduct a war on behalf of said merchant of war, at the expense of your own people, all because you hated a minority of your own people.... Yeah, he is a perfect example of the current "democratic world", all hypocrisy bloodthirsty.

mojella.bsky.social reposted

Sussex Bylines
@sussexbylines.co.uk

With the media focusing on America's attack on Iran the eyes of the world will be turning away from Russia's illegal war in #Ukraine. it's essential that we don't forget the moral leadership that Ukraine and its leader have shown to the democratic world.

sussexbylines.co.ukThe man who refused to runHe visits soldiers on the frontline and refuses to abandon his people. Not for power or wealth but because his country is worth fighting for

mojella.bsky.social reposted

FWC Indivisible
@fwcindivisible.bsky.social
dlvr.itTrump 'laughing all the way to the bank' as he takes grift 'to a new level'President Donald Trump's net worth, according to Forbes, has fluctuated over the years. And estimates of his net worth in 2025 —the year he returned to the White House after a four-year absence — vary. The group State Democracy Defenders Action, in a report released on April 23, estimated that Trump's digital currency holdings had reached approximately $2.9 billion — which would be around 40 percent of his net worth, according to the group. But digital currency is only one of the many ways in which Trump has increased his net worth during his second presidency. Trump's assets include everything from Trump-branded gym shoes to a social media outlet (Truth Social, which is part of the publicly traded Trump Media & Technology Group) to a "Trump Bible" to the new Trump Mobile. And the Trump Organization still has plenty of real estate holdings all around the world. READ MORE: George Conway slams 'sociopath' Trump’s rambling incoherence In an article published on June 21, The Guardian's Edward Elmore stresses that no one in U.S. history has monetized his presidency more than Trump. "In his second term," Elmore observes, "Trump has been thinking big about making money. Since his reelection campaign began, Trump is estimated to have more than doubled his net worth to $5.4bn. A sizeable chunk of that cash has come from the launch of Trump-branded products." Elmore continues, "This week. the Trump Organization entered the mobile phone business with a Trump-branded service that will include a 'sleek gold' phone, which costs $499, that is 'made in America.' Maybe?.... The blurred lines between business and politics, impacting how candidates are portrayed, policies are shaped and voters engage with the political process — commonly referred to as the commercialization of politics — may not be Trump's to own exclusively, but he's taken it to a new level." Public relations specialist Mark Borkowski finds Trump's monetizing of the presidency "troubling." READ MORE: 'Auditioning for SNL': Republican brutally mocked after Trump debate with Bill Maher Borkowski told The Guardian, "There was a lot of dialog when Trump returned to power that we would see in this term a particularly interesting residency in the White House about how much money would be made and this is a typical Trump side-hustle playing off MAGA patriotism…. It is troubling, and more than in jest, that this is now a political economy and he's actually saying this presidency is a brand-franchise. There is no separation between power and profit." Borkowski continued, "He's redrawn the boundaries between commerce and the office of the president, and he's accelerated the notion of post-ethical politics…. It's a new hyperreality that exists in America. It's about turning political fandom into money, and he's laughing all the way to the bank." READ MORE: 'Go on the warpath': Trump nominated judge to federal bench after he ruled in his favor Read Edward Elmore's full article for The Guardian at this link.

mojella.bsky.social reposted

FWC Indivisible
@fwcindivisible.bsky.social

"No Kings" Coverage. Local news outlets continue to outperform the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal on covering the pro-democracy movement. open.substack.com/pub/mediaand...

open.substack.com"No Kings" Coverage. Local news outlets continue to outperform the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal on covering the pro-democracy movement.The New York Times, Washington Post and WSJ leadership continue to downplay mass demonstrations. Editors of smaller outlets do a much better job communicating the growing pro-democracy movement.