solo

I'm not sure I understand. This article talks about the Amazon fires and the criminals they mention are those that have been illegally ranching cattle there? Not the major deforestation companies for example? Did I perhaps miss something?

This sounds like one more theory to me since the

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) says in a written statement that “at this time, neither the substance nor its source has been identified. However, preliminary analysis at an ECCC laboratory suggests that the material could be plant-based.”

I am a bit conflicted with this article. One one hand I think I understand the intentions behind it, but It seems to me that it confuses opportunistic vanguardism with pragmatism.

Yes, Lenin managed to convince enough people to hijack the February Revolution and concentrate all the power to ~~the party~~ himself. To my understanding, he accomplished that mainly by using the wording of the actual bottom-up revolution. So the problem for me is not a matter of principle(s), but how to be sharp enough as a movement not to be fooled by people using a familiar narrative, while trying to achieve their own goals. Something like that.

Edit: Meaning, "pragmatism" was the bait. Nothing more.

It would be great if these approaches would actually contribute in a meaningful way. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be the case.

This is an article with some relevant info:

Climeworks’ “Mammoth” vacuum cleaner is not a solution to the climate crisis

Climeworks’ newest DAC plant, Mammoth, is purported to capture ten times the amount of CO2 as Orca; some 36,000 tonnes of CO2 per year. (...) If 36,000 tonnes sounds like a big number, it’s not: It equates to one one-millionth of our annual global emissions. Even if Climeworks and other DAC companies do build hundreds of these DAC plants, it would not equate to even one per cent of current annual global emissions.

From our world in data on CO~2~ emissions:

we now emit over 35 billion tonnes each year

May I add that these notes where provided to the NYT by the Israeli military?

Minutes of Hamas’s secret meetings, seized by the Israeli military and obtained by The New York Times,

So after all the debunked fabricated lies that Israel has spread thanks to the press during the last 12 months, are we supposed to take what the IDF gives in good faith?

It looks like the U.S. Journalist Jeremy Loffredo was released

Although an Israeli judge granted his release from police custody, he was ordered to remain in the country until October 20, allowing investigators more time to bring additional allegations or to further interrogate Loffredo,

Israeli police had held Loffredo, an independent journalist from New York, on suspicion of assisting an enemy in war, a serious allegation that carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death,

“The claim that Loffredo and The Grayzone represent Israel’s enemy in wartime merely suggests that the Israeli government views the American people and free press as a legitimate target,”

The statement also called on the U.S. State Department to come to Loffredo’s defense, saying that the U.S. “has an obligation to defend its journalists who are merely adhering to their ethical obligation to inform the public of pertinent facts.”

Desalination is not rocket science, it's something that people have been doing for hundreds of years, maybe thousands. Of course when it is done on a larger scale, it is done differently that in diy solutions but both approaches have one common problem (regardless of the the technic used, distillation or reverse osmosis): they are energy intensive.

The innovation that this collaboration created is in relation to the specific problem that this process has. The improvement is that not only they used solar power for this process but they actually eliminated the need for batteries. This means that they came up with a solution that tackles the actual problem desalination has. Apart from that they, they successfully tested it in the real world and it looks like they are launching a company in the next months, so it will be available to those who need it.

What do you mean?

One desired outcome — if the movement were to gain enough support — would be to deprive big-time polluters such as BP, Chevron, Exxon Mobil and Shell of the funds they need to keep investing in new oil and gas fields.

In relation to the above passage of the article, here is what the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement has to say about Chevron:

Chevron has been the main international actor extracting fossil gas claimed by Israel in the Eastern Mediterranean since it acquired Noble Energy in 2020. With its extracting activities, Chevron is implicated in Israel's policy and practice of depriving the Palestinian people of their right to sovereignty over their natural resources. Chevron’s extraction activities generate billions of dollars in revenue for apartheid Israel and its war chest, helping to fund the ongoing genocide against 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza, as well as its regime of settler-colonialism, apartheid and military occupation. Chevron fuels apartheid and environmental devastation.

The BDS Movement issued a call to boycott both Siemens and Chevron in 2022, with campaigning around Chevron previously focused on divestment. Now, we are calling on supporters of Palestinian rights and climate justice to escalate pressure on Chevron by boycotting Chevron gas stations and gas stations owned by Chevron, including Texaco and Caltex. There are thousands of Chevron, Texaco, and Caltex gas and petrol stations worldwide. (...)

Edit: that's the article from January 2024

BDS movement Calls for a Consumer Boycott of Chevron-branded gas stations

I believe your response is more accurate. In my reply, I assumed that @punkisundead was referring to the fabricated narrative of the Israeli officials. It looks like my assumption was wrong.

why we should trust the other claims in this article?

You shouldn't trust this article or any media. You should check their claims and decide for yourself depending on what you find. I did this and found out that these claims have been debunked time and time again.

Check out the following links:

• “Between the Hammer and the Anvil” The Story Behind the New York Times October 7 Exposé

• Kibbutz Be’eri Rejects Story in New York Times October 7 Exposé: “They Were Not Sexually Abused”

• Here’s what Pramila Patten’s UN report on Oct 7 sexual violence actually said

• Even Haaretz in an attempt to defend these claims mentions:

In the course of their work, which included photographing faces only and covering the victims ahead of their evacuation, more than 200 bodies were documented. These teams did not document a single case of sexual assault or cases of genital mutilation.

You can find the above and much more evidence on this topic in the video included in this article:

Debunking "Screams Before Silence," Sheryl Sandberg’s 7 October "mass rapes" film, with Ali Abunimah

U.S. Aid to Israel in Four Charts || Council on Foreign Relations || 31 Mai 2024

Israel has been the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign aid since its founding, receiving about $310 billion (adjusted for inflation) in total economic and military assistance.