Connect with us

News

Auschwitz Concentration Camp Christmas Ornaments Removed by Amazon

Published

on

The holiday season can be a sensitive time for many people who regard it as a sacred part of their religious and cultural traditions. Christmas, in particular, tends to bring up a lot of controversy for the religious and non-religious alike. Some people get upset at being greeted with “Merry Christmas” while others believe that saying “happy holidays” is some kind of attack on their Christian heritage. Meanwhile, nativity scenes erected outside of churches and schools have often been vandalized.

People who come from a Jewish background are also often targets of hate crimes and discrimination during the holiday season. Needless to say, the holiday season is an emotionally tumultuous time for much of society, regardless of what traditions you practice, or if you don’t celebrate any of them at all.

Auschwitz

Sean Gallup—Getty Images

The latest controversy this holiday season happened when Amazon, a world leader in online retail, was forced to remove offensive Christmas ornaments from their online store. The controversial ornaments depicted images of Auschwitz concentration camps.

Auschwitz was a complex of concentration and death camps located in occupied Poland and operated by the German Nazis under the rule of Adolf Hitler during World War II. Millions of Jewish people were forced to live and work in concentration camps and statistics say almost six million were killed by the Nazis of which, nearly one million died in Auschwitz. The complex is now a memorial and museum visited by just over two million people to date.

The Auschwitz Memorial faculty described some of the items being sold by Amazon as “disturbing and disrespectful” according to a CNN news report. The items in question, which are no longer available, include various Christmas tree ornaments, a mouse pad and bottle opener showing pictures of the Nazi death camps.

One of the images showed the train tracks leading into the entrance of Auschwitz, by which millions of Jews were carted into the camp by force to meet their ultimate demise by way of torture and hard-kill methods such as gas chambers and firing squads. Some scenes from inside the camps were even depicted in some of this merchandise.

Amazon had removed the items being sold by third parties after officials from the Auschwitz Memorial brought it to their attention via Twitter. A later Tweet from Auschwitz Memorial officials confirmed that the items in question were removed from the marketplace but that other similar items had been identified.

After the initial post was made, officials from the Auschwitz Memorial began to notice other items being sold with pictures of the concentration camps on them. However, at the time of publishing, all of these other items also appear to have been removed from sale by Amazon.

Most of the products offered by the same sellers feature pictures from popular war-related tourism sites around the world. For example, one of the companies that was selling a Christmas tree ornament bearing an image of a freight train entering Auschwitz, continues to sell an ornament featuring a picture of the Genbaku Dome over the Hiroshima bomb site in Japan. The seller contends that this is simply merchandise showing different pivotal moments in history, but critics believe that it is making light out of a genocide, and making a profit as well.

One Amazon spokesperson was quoted by CNN Business as saying, “All sellers must follow our selling guidelines and those who do not will be subject to action, including potential removal of their account. The products in question have been removed.”

Auschwitz

Getty Images

Amazon was forced to take similar actions in the past, after products on their website cause controversy. Earlier this year, they were forced to remove numerous items citing complaints that they were offensive to the Muslim community.

Last March, some anti-vaccination documentaries were taken down from Amazon Prime after a CNN business report. Amazon also pulled books that were said to encourage the curing of children’s’ autism using bleach.

In 2015, Amazon supposedly banned Confederate-flag themed merchandise after harsh criticism from the public, although a report from July of last year states that white supremacist and Nazi-related merchandise continues to be available on the site.

While Amazon itself has been at the center of much criticism over its own practices and treatment of their employees, it seems the global retail and video streaming giant is quick to respond to complaints about content on their streaming service and items for sale in their marketplace.

JP is a social media and marketing specialist. He has a cum laude BA in Psychology from Kean University. He is an activist within the sociopolitical spectrum and a proponent for radical reform. He loves to write and produce Hip Hop and EDM. He is also a Deadhead.

News

Colombian Govt Wants To Legalize Cocaine And Then Sell It

Published

on

This article was originally published On Dec 3, 2020

Colombia is one of the most notorious producers of cocaine in the world, despite the fact that the country has gone to great lengths in hopes of diminishing the trade of the drug trade within its borders.

Now, some members of the Columbian government are proposing a new approach. They are calling for the drug to be legalized and for the government to take control of the industry for themselves.

In a new bill first proposed earlier this year, senators Iván Marulanda and Feliciano Valencia call for the Colombian government to take total control of the cocaine industry to bolster public funds and cut violent cartels out of the trade.

In a recent interview with VICE, Marulanda explained that the government would purchase coca at market price from the 200,000 farming families that are believed to be involved in the trade.

The senators argued that it would actually be cheaper for authorities to buy the crop from the farmers than it would for them to destroy their crops. It costs the government roughly $1 billion every year to destroy coca crops, while it would only cost about $680 million to buy it.

The thing is, we have to recover control over the state. We’re losing control of the state to corruption, narcos in politics. They’re in municipalities, in departments and in congress. All the way to the highest echelons of government,” Marulanda explained.

From here, the state would supply cocaine to users and research groups looking to study its use for painkillers, but it would not be sold recreationally. However, cocaine use is already legal in Columbia, after a court ruled that personal consumption was a human right.

Marulanda is not sure if his bill will make an impact, or how long it will take to gain traction, but he is hoping to make it a major election issue in 2022.

‘The first big obstacle is to open up the conversation among public opinion. This has been a giant taboo. Colombians are born and raised under this assumption that drug-trafficking is a war. There’s no information about coca and cocaine. So, with this bill we hope to open the conversation,” he explained.

In recent years, the government has stepped up their military-police-style enforcement of the industry, and yet cocaine production continues to grow in the country.

Coca cultivation reached 212,000 hectares last year, a rise of nearly 2% from 208,000 hectares the year before, according to figures released by the White House in March. Potential pure cocaine production, meanwhile, rose to 951 metric tons, an 8% increase, according to the Associated Press.

“It’s pretty remarkable that they manually eradicated 100,000 hectares last year and didn’t move the needle,” Adam Isacson of the Washington Office on Latin America think tank said earlier this year. “I guess it means replanting has at least kept pace.”

It seems that no matter what the government does, the cocaine keeps on coming, so politicians are willing to try things that may drastic. However, as Marulanda pointed out in his interview with Vice, cutting out the criminal middlemen will reduce the violence seen in the country’s drug war, and also make the drug safer for the people who use it.

UPDATE: Historic win for coca/cocaine regulation Bill in Colombian Senate – 22nd April 2021

Continue Reading

News

Another Little Black Book That Once Belonged To Epstein With New Names Is Found

Published

on

It is well-known that the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein kept detailed records of all the powerful people that he stayed in contact with. There is a notorious “little black book” that was published by Gawker in 2015, which exposed many of the powerful people in his circle. This book is believed to contain the contacts that he most frequently called around 2004 and 2005. However, a new list of contacts, recently published by The Insider, reveals new names that were friends with Epstein in the 1990s.

The new black book has the names of 349 people, many of whom did not appear in the list that was previously released to the public.

Among the names on the list are Suzanne Ircha, who’s married to Woody Johnson, owner of the New York Jets, famous wall street investor Carl Icahn, supermarket owner John A. Catsimatidis, actress Morgan Fairchild, former New Republic owner Marty Peretz; and Cristina Greeven, the wife of CNN anchor Chris Cuomo.

The new black book was made public through a strange twist of fate. A woman initially found the book in the late 1990s and saved it for many years until she finally sold it on eBay.

Denise Ondayko, the woman who found the book, said she was walking down Fifth Avenue in the mid-’90s when she spotted a black address book on the ground. She said that she didn’t realize it was Epstein’s book at the time, because he was pretty much unknown to the public, but she did realize that it had a lot of famous names and figured that it might be worth something, so she held onto it.

Last year, Ondayko was cleaning out an old storage unit where she was keeping some of her things and she stumbled upon the book. Now that Epstein was all over the news, the information contained in the book was much more obvious to identify.

Ondayko said she reached out to everyone in the media that she could, including John Oliver, Rachel Maddow, and The New York Times, but none of them ever got back to her, so she eventually just put it up for sale on eBay.

The buyer was Chris Helali, an aspiring politician from Vermont. He purchased the book for $425.

Helali also tried reaching out to the media, including journalists that were already reporting on Epstein, but none of them seemed interested. Finally, Nick Bryant, the reporter who wrote the original Gawker black book story forwarded the book to the Insider who decided to publish.

Insider hired Dennis Ryan, a former forensic document examiner and laboratory supervisor for the Nassau County Police Department, to verify the authenticity of the book. Ryan says that the book is definitely from the late 90s, and many of the dates and addresses match up perfectly with Epstein’s properties and known contacts at the time.

The Insider also reached out to dozens of contacts listed in the book who had never previously been publicly associated with Epstein. Fourteen acknowledged on the record that they knew or had met Epstein in the ’90s.

There are over 120 names that appear in both books, including Donald Trump and Bill Clinton. Some of the other names included, Steve Rattner, Beth Anne Bovino, Dominique Bluhdorn, Jill Harth, Ted Field, Robert Nunnery, Stanley Shopkorn, Steve Ruchevsky, Ellen Susman, William and Ann Nitze, Les Gelb, Ron Daniel, Sandy Warner, Cyril Fung, Marius Fortelni, Michael Cutlip. Many of these names aren’t necessarily famous, but they are very powerful people in business and finance.

The address book is now available in a searchable database on the Insider, but it is unfortunately hidden behind a paywall.

 

Continue Reading

News

Ghislaine Maxwell’s Lawyers Cite Cosby Case As Precedent To Have Her Released From Prison

Published

on

Last week, former actor Bill Cosby was released from prison on a technicality, despite the fact that he admitted to drugging and assaulting multiple women, and was accused by many others. After his release, legal experts warned that the ruling could set a dangerous precedent that attorneys in similar cases would use to get their clients released as well.

Now, just a week later, Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers are arguing that she should have her case thrown out on the same grounds, according to The Guardian.

Cosby was released because the prosecutor involved initially didn’t press any charges, and claimed that Cosby would not be facing any legal trouble, so when Cosby later confessed, his confession was called into question and no longer admissible in court. The judge also ruled that Cosby had no chance of a fair trial because evidence that was not admissible was so freely available in the media that the jury was unable to make a judgment without considering those facts.

Photo: AP

Maxwell’s case is similar because the first time that Epstein was arrested for human trafficking, he was given a sweetheart deal by Alex Acosta, a friendly prosecutor. The deal helped Epstein avoid any serious jail time, but it also gave him and his associates legal protection from being held accountable for any future crimes.

Obviously, it is not possible to shield a criminal from the consequences of actions that they will take in the future, so Epstein was arrested again many years later after it was discovered that he continued his crimes long after his initial arrest. If Epstein and his friends did have any kind of immunity from that deal, it ended when they continued to commit crimes after the deal was made.

Still, Maxwell’s lawyers are optimistic after Cosby’s recent release.

“The government is trying to renege on its agreement and prosecute Ms Maxwell over 25 years later for the exact same offenses for which she was granted immunity,” Maxwell’s lawyers wrote in a statement to Judge Alison Nathan.

However, the judge has previously ruled that the deal did not apply to the current case.

In an opinion piece for the New York Daily News, Maxwell’s attorney David Oscar Markus wrote that releasing Bill Cosby from prison was the right decision, and that Ghislaine Maxwell should be released as well. Markus argued that prosecutors should have to keep the promises that they make to suspects, because people will sometimes incriminate themselves if they think they have immunity.

However, many times prosecutors are corrupt and make promises that are against the best interests of the public, as we saw in Jeffrey Epstein’s first “sweetheart deal” with Alex Acosta while he was district attorney in Southern, Florida. Prosecutors are lawyers, they aren’t the judge and jury, and they shouldn’t hold this much power in a case this serious.

Judge Alison Nathan has not yet responded to the recent request, but she did condemn the recent opinion piece that was published by her lawyers in the New York Daily News earlier this week.

Continue Reading

Trending

Total
1
Share