Israel’s systematic use of rape and sexual violence against Palestinian prisoners is by now well understood and exhaustively documented.

Israeli lawyer Ben Marmarelli, who represents Palestinian “security” prisoners in Israeli detention, told this reporter that his clients sometimes beg him not to visit.

One even told him directly: “Don’t come, because every time you do, I get raped.”

Marmarelli said he could recognize signs of sexual violence with riot batons – a phenomenon, he said, that has been growing since Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel’s minister of national security, assumed his position – even before his clients spoke. They are visible in the marks of abuse, and the way prisoners struggle to walk.

But batons are not the only weapon used in sexual assaults on prisoners. Specially trained dogs are increasingly deployed to abuse detainees, as revealed by organizations such as the Palestinian Center for Human Rights and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor as well as the Israeli human rights group, B’Tselem.

One striking account recounts how a young fellow prisoner was attacked and raped by dogs in front of his fellow inmates.

“The soldiers let loose trained police dogs on the young man, who was subjected to [rape],” Fadi Saif al-Din Bakr, a lawyer from Gaza who was detained early in Israel’s genocide told human rights organizations. “I was hoping to die so that this would not happen to me.”

But where do the dogs come from? And by what mechanisms do they enter the Israeli system?

Israel’s systematic use of rape and sexual violence against Palestinian prisoners is by now well understood and exhaustively documented.

Israeli lawyer Ben Marmarelli, who represents Palestinian “security” prisoners in Israeli detention, told this reporter that his clients sometimes beg him not to visit.

One even told him directly: “Don’t come, because every time you do, I get raped.”

Marmarelli said he could recognize signs of sexual violence with riot batons – a phenomenon, he said, that has been growing since Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel’s minister of national security, assumed his position – even before his clients spoke. They are visible in the marks of abuse, and the way prisoners struggle to walk.

But batons are not the only weapon used in sexual assaults on prisoners. Specially trained dogs are increasingly deployed to abuse detainees, as revealed by organizations such as the Palestinian Center for Human Rights and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor as well as the Israeli human rights group, B’Tselem.

One striking account recounts how a young fellow prisoner was attacked and raped by dogs in front of his fellow inmates.

“The soldiers let loose trained police dogs on the young man, who was subjected to [rape],” Fadi Saif al-Din Bakr, a lawyer from Gaza who was detained early in Israel’s genocide told human rights organizations. “I was hoping to die so that this would not happen to me.”

But where do the dogs come from? And by what mechanisms do they enter the Israeli system?

Israel’s systematic use of rape and sexual violence against Palestinian prisoners is by now well understood and exhaustively documented.

Israeli lawyer Ben Marmarelli, who represents Palestinian “security” prisoners in Israeli detention, told this reporter that his clients sometimes beg him not to visit.

One even told him directly: “Don’t come, because every time you do, I get raped.”

Marmarelli said he could recognize signs of sexual violence with riot batons – a phenomenon, he said, that has been growing since Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel’s minister of national security, assumed his position – even before his clients spoke. They are visible in the marks of abuse, and the way prisoners struggle to walk.

But batons are not the only weapon used in sexual assaults on prisoners. Specially trained dogs are increasingly deployed to abuse detainees, as revealed by organizations such as the Palestinian Center for Human Rights and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor as well as the Israeli human rights group, B’Tselem.

One striking account recounts how a young fellow prisoner was attacked and raped by dogs in front of his fellow inmates.

“The soldiers let loose trained police dogs on the young man, who was subjected to [rape],” Fadi Saif al-Din Bakr, a lawyer from Gaza who was detained early in Israel’s genocide told human rights organizations. “I was hoping to die so that this would not happen to me.”

But where do the dogs come from? And by what mechanisms do they enter the Israeli system?

Bikers have been bonded by the daily commute or the frequent group rides, and this ritual of biking together can be turned into an advocacy action. This should not be a surprise since the tribe of bikers who regularly ride together suffers from the same grave inefficiencies that plague our roads and communities.

Biking brings calm and exhilaration at the same time, and these feelings are amplified during a group ride.

Planning a group ride takes time and patience, and it is deservedly celebrated when it happens.

It is usually done for leisure, a chill time with fellow bikers. It can be a training session for a scheduled race. Or it can become the power of many if organized to promote a cause.

Whatever the intent that pedals the ride, it is necessary to have trust, coordination, and the unity to move forward in one direction.

Safety measures are learned, relearned, enforced, and adopted during the ride. Newbies take cues from fellow riders, hand signals are introduced, and road rules that apply to cyclists are highlighted in real time. The grounding experience allows bikers to map out routes, rediscover a place from a new perspective, and become familiar with the local scenery. If field trips immerse travelers in history and the tourism value of a town or institution, a group bike tour provides the same allure and they cover even the remote corners that cars and buses cannot reach. A bike tour always offers new ways of seeing and experiencing the peripheries in our communities.

The group ride is an educative activity for all – riders, motorists, commuters, and pedestrians. It makes the bikers more visible, and this is deliberate. A lone biker wishes to be seen for his or her safety, a group ride ensures it and compels the people on the road to acknowledge the space reserved for cyclists. And if a protected bike lane is missing, the bikers crowding the street effectively become the mobile barrier that serves as a reminder not just of the presence of two-wheeled vehicles but also the right of others (non-car drivers) to use the taxpayer-funded road infrastructure.

This is the principle guiding critical mass rides which have become a global movement. An intentional biking of the many to normalize the idea of biking, encourage people to go out and bike, and destigmatize the use of roads by bikers. It is through these collective efforts that a community of bikers is formed. Bikers sharing the joy of biking and pedaling together to remove the perils of the supposedly mundane human act of travelling on a non-motorized vehicle.

There is no single community of bikers, and the diversity of these networks highlights the power that can be harnessed to deliver a message to broader segments in society. Bikers have been bonded by the daily commute or the frequent group rides, and this ritual of biking together can be turned into an advocacy action. This should not be a surprise since the tribe of bikers who regularly ride together suffers from the same grave inefficiencies that plague our roads and communities. They all see, hear, and experience the same daily evils of bad governance that propel citizens to speak out and mobilize.

Imagine a long line of bikers occupying a road, this scene repeated several times until it becomes normal. It is an attempt to rewire our perceptions of what a car-dominated street should look like. Then imagine this determined group of citizens on the move who by their mere presence reveal the glaring inadequacies in urban planning. They can be rallied to challenge car centrism and its morbid manifestations in policymaking, public works, traffic regulations, and toxic road mindset and habits.

The potential of tapping bikers to be active advocates of sociopolitical causes is confirmed by their actual participation in protest actions against controversial issues from the flood corruption scandal in 2025 to Pax Silica this year. Frequent bike rides have been organized to raise public awareness of pressing social concerns such as the critical conditions of rivers, coastal habitats, and watersheds. Both young and old bikers have shown enthusiastic participation in rides that explore historical landmarks and celebrate the opening of parks and green spaces.

Biking alone will not change the world, but it is a brave individual defiance of the norms in our motorized megapolis. Every pedal is a plea for consideration, recognition, and basic kindness. Biking together provides greater visibility and faster pace in the demand for reforms. It is popularly argued that biking is the closest thing to experiencing the freedom of flying. We can add that biking together allows us to feel the possibility of moving things, places, ourselves, and society closer towards a destination in the future that we will define.

The post The thrill of group bike rides appeared first on Bulatlat.

But in the phone interview, Trump put on a brave face — and offered an olive branch: He said that he would be willing to work with Democrats.

“They’ve already called, and they want to work with me. I have the right to veto everything, but I don’t want to be just sitting there for two years just vetoing everything,” he said.

While a handful of seats remain to be counted, the Democrats have won comfortable majorities in both the House of Representatives, where they have secured at least 253 seats out of 435, and in the Senate, where they have won at least 54 out of 100.

Trump has since posted a picture on his Truth Social account using the Make America Great Again red baseball hat to read “VETO”. Despite the Democrats’ success, as president, Trump holds broad executive authority, with Article 1, Section 7 of the US Constitution stipulating that the president has the power to reject legislation passed by Congress through a veto.

Congress can override the veto, but would need to have a two-thirds majority, something that the Democrats do not have in either chamber.

But Trump’s comments to Politico underscore an alternate possibility — the president may pick and choose when to veto, and when to work with Democrats.

Network of 1,653 X profiles reportedly pushed Israelis to back Likud in coordinated Hebrew posts, then went back to promoting the shah’s son

...

As is universally acknowledged in the media, the 2026 midterm election was the greatest electoral repudiation of a sitting president in over half a century, and one of the largest in American history. The shift against Trump ran through every region of the country and every section of the population, and it was sharpest among rural voters, young men and workers whom Trump had claimed as his base.

The vote was a rejection not only of Trump but of the entire agenda of his administration. It expressed mass opposition to the growth of social inequality, war, the assault on immigrants and attacks on democratic rights.

Yet the Democrats came out immediately offering bipartisanship.

Hakeem Jeffries, who is expected to become speaker of the House in January, declared that Democrats are “ready, willing and able to find bipartisan common ground” and that “the American people don’t want us to get even.” He added that not a single member of his caucus had raised impeachment with him.

Barack Obama declared that Americans “want a politics that brings people together rather than divides them.” The same line was repeated in various forms by newly elected Democrats: a call to “restore a sense of decency and bipartisanship in Washington,” (Kansas Senator-elect Adam Hamilton); the assurance that “come January, we will be forced to work together,” (Iowa Governor-elect Rob Sand); a disavowal of any interest “in moving Minnesota to the left or the right,” (Minnesota Governor-elect Amy Klobuchar).

James Talarico, elected to the Senate from Texas, said he had not been elected “for retribution.” On immigration, the policy of mass roundups, detention camps and deportations, he said one should “give the president credit where credit is due.”

This response demonstrates the fraudulent character of the elections and the imperviousness of the ruling elite to the will of the population. The Democrats are not acting as an opposition party that has defeated the government. They do not need Republican support. They will hold substantial majorities in both the House and the Senate. Why, then, are they talking about bipartisanship at all?

They treat the losing party as if it had won, and a hated president as a suitor whose favor they seek. It is as if Abraham Lincoln, reelected in November 1864 on a program of prosecuting the war to victory and abolishing slavery, had responded by offering “common ground” to the Confederacy.

...

...

As is universally acknowledged in the media, the 2026 midterm election was the greatest electoral repudiation of a sitting president in over half a century, and one of the largest in American history. The shift against Trump ran through every region of the country and every section of the population, and it was sharpest among rural voters, young men and workers whom Trump had claimed as his base.

The vote was a rejection not only of Trump but of the entire agenda of his administration. It expressed mass opposition to the growth of social inequality, war, the assault on immigrants and attacks on democratic rights.

Yet the Democrats came out immediately offering bipartisanship.

Hakeem Jeffries, who is expected to become speaker of the House in January, declared that Democrats are “ready, willing and able to find bipartisan common ground” and that “the American people don’t want us to get even.” He added that not a single member of his caucus had raised impeachment with him.

Barack Obama declared that Americans “want a politics that brings people together rather than divides them.” The same line was repeated in various forms by newly elected Democrats: a call to “restore a sense of decency and bipartisanship in Washington,” (Kansas Senator-elect Adam Hamilton); the assurance that “come January, we will be forced to work together,” (Iowa Governor-elect Rob Sand); a disavowal of any interest “in moving Minnesota to the left or the right,” (Minnesota Governor-elect Amy Klobuchar).

James Talarico, elected to the Senate from Texas, said he had not been elected “for retribution.” On immigration, the policy of mass roundups, detention camps and deportations, he said one should “give the president credit where credit is due.”

This response demonstrates the fraudulent character of the elections and the imperviousness of the ruling elite to the will of the population. The Democrats are not acting as an opposition party that has defeated the government. They do not need Republican support. They will hold substantial majorities in both the House and the Senate. Why, then, are they talking about bipartisanship at all?

They treat the losing party as if it had won, and a hated president as a suitor whose favor they seek. It is as if Abraham Lincoln, reelected in November 1864 on a program of prosecuting the war to victory and abolishing slavery, had responded by offering “common ground” to the Confederacy.

...