Red ribbons and real reckonings by Shanna Shepard

There’s a day each year when the world briefly lifts its gaze from the next breaking headline to an older, quieter emergency, World HIV/AIDS Day. It arrives every December, polite and persistent, like a reminder note tucked under the world’s windshield wiper. And every year, we repeat the usual motions: the ribbons, the speeches, the statistics, the calls for “continuing awareness.” But beneath the choreography, something deeper deserves our attention, our relationship to long emergencies, the ones that don’t make noise unless we force them to.

HIV/AIDS is one of those crises that taught the world how selective its empathy can be. It exposed our moral priorities, our prejudices, and our bureaucratic sluggishness. And even now, decades after the darkest years, the virus still tests us, not only biologically but ethically. This is the part we forget, the part that World HIV/AIDS Day wants us to remember but struggles to say outright: the world didn’t just survive the epidemic; it survived the mirror it held up.

There’s a particular discomfort in talking about HIV today. Not because it’s taboo, it’s far from that but because it forces us to confront how quickly complacency sets in once a crisis becomes familiar. For many, HIV has faded into the background of public consciousness, tucked alongside other chronic problems we assume modern medicine has outsmarted. But the state of HIV/AIDS in the world today is not a solved equation; it’s an ongoing negotiation between science, society, and attention spans.

Treatments have improved so dramatically that they almost undermine their own urgency. When a disease becomes medically manageable, its moral weight in the public mind often dissolves. It becomes less a threat and more an inconvenience, something people file under “handled,” even when it isn’t. But viruses don’t care about our assumptions, and injustices don’t resolve themselves just because we stop discussing them at dinner.

World HIV/AIDS Day is meant to puncture that complacency, if only for 24 hours. It invites us to remember the millions of lives lost, the communities shaped by grief, the activism born in fury, and the scientific breakthroughs carved out of desperation. But remembering isn’t enough. The question isn’t whether we still care, but whether we care in a way that matters.

In a world conditioned to catastrophe fatigue, HIV/AIDS offers a paradox: a crisis that is both quieter than before yet still alarmingly present. People living with HIV today navigate a terrain that is medically hopeful but socially uneven. Stigma hasn’t vanished; it has simply changed its wardrobe. It appears now in subtler, less public ways, in the whispered assumptions, the bureaucratic hurdles, the disparities in access, the shame that lingers like background noise. If progress is real, it is also conditional. If the future looks brighter, it is unevenly lit.

What’s also uncomfortable to admit is that HIV/AIDS still disproportionately affects communities that society routinely marginalizes, sex workers, intravenous drug users, LGBTQ+ communities, and populations in regions where healthcare is treated as a luxury. The virus survives where inequity thrives. This too is part of the reckoning. HIV is not just a medical phenomenon but a social barometer: it reveals who is protected and who is left waiting outside the gate of compassion.

And then there’s the quieter truth, one we speak about sparingly that the global struggle against HIV/AIDS is also a struggle against time. Not biological time but historical time. Memory fades. Outrage cools. Movements lose momentum. Every year we move slightly further from the era in which HIV was headline news and slightly closer to forgetting what it cost to get where we are.

In that light, World HIV/AIDS Day isn’t a ceremonial nod; it’s a guardrail against forgetting.

It’s also an invitation for something journalism seeks but often mishandles: nuance. HIV/AIDS is both a triumph of science and a testament to ongoing failure. It’s a story of extraordinary medical advancement and stubborn social inequities. It’s a narrative where hope and injustice sit uncomfortably at the same table.

To talk about HIV today is to accept contradiction. Yes, the treatments are effective—but access is uneven. Yes, public awareness exists but superficiality flourishes. Yes, stigma has diminished but not dissolved. We live in the in-between, and World HIV/AIDS Day asks us not to rush past it.

If there’s an opinion worth asserting today, it’s this: the future of HIV/AIDS will depend less on laboratories and more on attention. Science can save lives only when society lets it. The virus persists where information is scarce, healthcare is uneven, and silence is culturally enforced. The greatest breakthroughs are useless if they don’t reach the people who need them.

This day, this single day, won’t change the world. But it can challenge the complacency that threatens progress more than the virus itself. It can remind us that long emergencies require long memory. It can nudge us to treat surviving crises not as closed chapters but as responsibilities inherited.

World HIV/AIDS Day shouldn’t be a moment of somber ritual but a reminder that society does its best work when it refuses to look away. And in a world trained to look away quickly, that refusal might be the most radical act we have left.


Ovi History #eMagazine #14: Rosa Parks bus boycott

 

We live in critical times and a period were historical facts and victories have been buried under populism and strong right-wing demagogy. So remembering Rosa Parks and the 1955 bus boycott becomes essential because we might have to ...repeat it!

The 1955 Montgomery bus boycott was a 381-day mass protest against racial segregation on public buses in Montgomery, Alabama, sparked by Rosa Parks' refusal to give up her seat to a white passenger on December 1, 1955.

Her arrest led to the boycott, coordinated by the Montgomery Improvement Association and led by Martin Luther King Jr. The boycott, which involved thousands of Black citizens, severely impacted the city's bus system and ended after the Supreme Court ruled that bus segregation was unconstitutional in November 13, 1956.

The boycott desegregated Montgomery's buses and became a pivotal event in the broader American civil rights movement.

Rosa Parks became an icon of dignity and resistance, and her quiet strength became a symbol of how individual acts can inspire monumental change.

Also in this issue a historical fiction short story from Nneka Solomon.

So,
Read the Ovi History e-Zine it online HERE!
View, read itonline or download it in PDF - epub or mobi format HERE!
And enjoy viewing &reading itonline ordownload in PDF format HERE!
Remember, all eMagazines and eBooks downloads are FREE!

You can find it in the Ovi Pedia pages, HERE!
Or Ovi Thematic eMagazines pages, HERE!

With the hope that you will read and learn from the articles,
do read this historic chronicle

Thanos Kalamidas


Manish Zodiac Predictions for December 2025 #Horoscope by Manish Kumar Arora

Aries ( 21 March – 19 April  ) –You are inspired creatively, artistically, or spiritually at this time. Your imagination, intuition, and psychic sensitivity are high now, and you find yourself wanting to paint or listen to music, daydream, or fantasize rather than concentrate on practical matters. Romance has strong emotional trends this month. Avoid splashy expenditures to impress as they may have just the opposite effect.Relationships with people around will be calm and friendly. Durable relationship will stand the test and prove its substantiality again.Friendship and cooperative endeavours will flourish now. Favorable Dates – Dec 4, 7, 13, 16, 22, 25 Favorable Colors – Red & Blue

Taurus ( 20 April – 20 May ) -. You will attempt to significantly improve your work and career at this time. You may seek new employment, a promotion, or request an increase in your salary.Everything to the spirit of a complete freedom to move would be there. The field is ready for love, and there'll be either a new affair, or some fresh enthusiasm towards the current relationship.You'll feel attraction to partners that make you admire them by their cultural knowledge or spiritual potential, as well as those who belong to different places or social structures. Favorable Dates – Dec1, 3, 10, 13, 21, 28 Favorable Colors – White & Yellow

Gemini ( 21 May – 20 June) - You'll probably manifest more interest in the financial area but under conditions of stress  can result in restlessness or carelessness. This is the perfect time to make a wish and practise the law of attraction. Look out for someone who comes in to your life around these dates who can help you. It may be someone who’s successful in their career, a private benefactor or some other guardian angel. This person has the power to help you more than you can imagine and you feel as if you’ve known them for ever. Favorable Dates – Dec1, 9, 10, 18, 27, 28 Favorable Colors – Red & Yellow

Cancer( 21 June – 22 July )  - The career, the ambition to advance and succeed socially will consume a lot of your physical and mental energy. Connections will be one of the strengths, whether it's about collaboration and alliances or contacts with counsellors, clients or the public. You'll benefit from taking joint action at the material or social level.Committed relations promise to be tender, cheerful and nice. The sentimental availability will increase and, along with it, the receptivity and benevolence towards each other. You'll use your personal charm, diplomacy and connections. Favorable Dates – Dec 2, 8, 11, 17, 20, 26 Favorable Colors – Blue & Green

Leo  ( 23 July – 22 August )  - You will be better able to manage your financial and money affairs than you have in the past due to easier communication and a more solid and secure foundation from which to operate. Now is the time to put your plans into action and to get things moving because contacts you make during this time will be more open to what you are wanting.Romance may require some investment, some patienceand a bit more talking than normal. Be willing to 'do the work' necessary to fix, foster and find. Favorable Dates – Dec1, 3, 10, 12, 18, 28 Favorable Colors – Red & White

Virgo ( 23 August – 22 September )   - The work atmosphere will be tense and conflicts might arise. Irritations, conflicts with the people you relate to on a daily basis, and a generalized feeling of impatience or edginess characterize this period. Because you are not feeling very obliging or compromising, this is not a good time to try to come to an agreement with another. Errors made in haste, speaking too forcefully, sharp words spoken on impulse, or accidents occurring due to restlessness and impatience are all possible at this time. If single, this is not the time to search love. Favorable Dates – Dec3, 5, 14, 21, 23, 30 Favorable Colors – Green & White

Libra ( 23 September – 22 October )  - If you started a project at the end of last month, keep going with it and don’t give up, especially if its work or health related. You have a few more months yet to bring your bigger goals to fruition. Anything you begin on or around this date promises financial reward. There are significant opportunities to make connections, exchange information, and to learn something through a meeting or chance encounter.Whatever’s not working in a relationship, here’s your chance to find a way forward, even if you agree ornot. Favorable Dates – Dec2, 5, 11, 14, 20, 29 Favorable Colors – Purple & White

Scorpio ( 23 October – 21 November )  - Good cooperation, especially with co-workers and financial issues in the first week may allow you to get projects rolling or wrap them up, depending upon your current status. You're going through a very promising period regarding creativity, expression and talents, excellent for promoting your own image and works. You will make your social relationships and personal charm will flourish. Everything will come easier now, people will be nice to you and  you'll get collaborations and advantageous contracts. Favorable Dates – Dec2, 5, 11, 14, 23, 29 Favorable Colors – Purple &White

Sagittarius ( 22November -21 December ) - You'll show a lot of ambition and determination, and the most appropriate thing would be to use them for initiatives requiring strength and tenacity, such as laborious, long-term projects.  Collective activities will favor you.  You'll be able to find the necessary resources to carry out your plans, provided that you have clearly defined objectives and you build strategies to help you reach them. You might also have to handle some confrontations or situations in which you have to persuade, insist, fight, maybe even face competition or rivalry. Favorable Dates – Dec2, 3, 11, 12, 20, 29 Favorable Colors – Red & White

Capricorn ( 22 December – 19 January ) - You will experience some major personal changes which will benefit your way of life. Your energy levels will remain high over the next few weeks. Channel your imagination into something creative.  Something in the field of music will appeal. In terms of romance you are likely to be a little flighty and reluctant to be tied down, but there’s nothing wrong with just enjoying yourself. Opportunities in career-related, may be a little unnerving. You may not be quite ready to embrace the new, but it  shouldsoon soothe many doubts. Favorable Dates – Dec1, 3, 10, 12, 21, 28 Favorable Colors – Red & Yellow

Aquarius ( 20 January – 18 February )  - The months ahead could start with you taking too much on, and then getting despondent because things don’t go your way. However, your impressive levels of insight and intuition will guide you through to a workable alternative, as long as you don’t give up. To your friends or loved ones, you may express a more reasonable and competent side that allows you to show those around you, that you are willing to offer solutions. If in a relationship, your ability to compromise and make concessions will keep things going smooth. Favorable Dates – Dec3, 8,  12, 17, 21, 26 Favorable Colors – White & Yellow

Pisces ( 19 February – 20 March ) - You’re likely to be feeling as though you need to make your mark,  perhaps someone inspires you or you feel you’re not making the most of your talents, but there are some original and creative ideas just waiting to be tapped. You are grounded in the material plane yet you can reach into higher planes of consciousness through your connection with nature. Changes in your personal relationships, which will ultimately be positive, feature heavily. Romantically, the laterpart of the month will bring plenty of chances to meet new people, Favorable Dates – Dec1, 8, 10, 17, 19, 26 Favorable Colors – Red & Yellow


Sceptic feathers #119 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

Cynicism with feathers on thin wires.

For more Sceptic feathers, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!


Goodbye Facebook by Nikos Laios

Three weeks, ago I decided to delete my Facebook account, deleted nearly 18 years of virtual attachments. It was giving up an addiction and hard to do. This article is a reflection of social media in the 21st Century and how desensitising social media has made the human experience and how it distorts the human condition. This is written from this writer’s personal experience.

Like most people I joined Facebook as a way of keeping in touch with family and friends around the world. In the early days of Facebook, the experience was new and novel and it really felt like a good way to connect and build online communities. A big reason for this writer was my family and friends overseas in Europe and America.

I’ve lived most of my life in Australia and also lived for a period of time in Greece as a young boy in the 70’s during the dictatorship era of Greece. My family lived in the highlands of Epirus, a rustic throwback to another era more akin to the 19th century. We had no electricity, no running water, used kerosene lamps for lighting, potbelly stoves for cooking and a fireplace for heating. The winters were bitterly cold and the mountains snowcapped . After we migrated to Australia and many years later with my first paycheques from work, I started regular annual migrations back to Greece for the European summers during my four weeks of vacation from work. The desire to reconnect with the homeland was great.

The decades passed and in 2005 Facebook arrived in Australia, and at the time it felt like it was a great way to keep in touch with family back home and rebuild our community as a virtual community. From 2005 till 2020 my trips back to Greece became more interesting, balancing time spent with family to touring archaeological sites, watching ancient Greek plays in ancient theatres, and regular extravagant partying at Santorini, Mykonos, Paros and Naxos. It felt like a drug, sharing my adventures on Facebook. Every time it felt like an ephedrine rush.

Then any time I lived life - be it in Europe or Australia - subconsciously the motivation was not only to share life’s adventures with family and friends, but also with the world. To gain existential validation and a boost to the ego, and slowly, the majority of people I knew on Facebook did the same. It became an addiction for us all, and then the algorithm.

A constant bombardment of posts and reels;  on death, violence, conflicts, war, protests, unrest, Palestinians, Israel, the incessant struggle of the left versus the right in Europe and the US, Sudan, Nigeria, religion, ego and vacuous shallow influencers, and the supposed death of the planet due to greenhouse gas emissions and identity politics. Yet the reality for the majority of humans on this planet is a constant struggle for survival, to provide food, shelter and a future for themselves and their families. They have no time for existential masturbation. Only a fraction of the western world has the luxury, comfort and security to reflect on and ruminate on the meaning of life. To construct meanings and juxtapose their own value systems on the rest of the world through postmodernist ideologies; and the algorithms on social media enable this, it creates a false illusion and a narrative - contrary to the lives of the majority of people on this planet, or what is also referred to as the ‘developing world.’

In the last five years, the addiction to Facebook became acute, more hours spent at night scrolling posts and reels, and the perception was that if one didn’t keep connected on Facebook, that one was living the life of a misanthrope - regardless of the real world physical interactions with family and circles of friends. Even back home in Greece, some relatives (who shall remain anonymous) - simple hillbilly rustic highland shepherds joined Facebook and started to share their lives.

But the photos and content were the same every time; photos of the same countryside, the same festivals, small moments that justified their own illusory glories, buttressing the delusions of their life meaning. It became sad and pathetic, idealised lives masking some dark undercurrents of Greek society; and these obvious contradictions caused me to experience cognitive dissonance. That became the catalyst for the motivation to consider deleting Facebook. Also the obvious difference between life in Europe and life in the new world, in Australia.

Firstly, I’ll briefly touch upon life in Australia, and then explore some of the dark undercurrents of modern Greece, to provide some context. What can I say about life in Australia? It’s a new world, a successful multicultural society, and that’s one of the best qualities about life in Australia. One leaves the old world behind and upon arriving in Australia it’s an opportunity to throw away old world hatreds, baggage, civilisational clashes, misogyny and patriarchal biases, ideas of class structure, religious orthodoxy and attitudes.

For this writer, this is the glorious aspect of living life here. An opportunity to reinvent oneself. Then there is the thoroughly healthy, outdoors and fitness-oriented living, the warmth and friendliness of everyday Australians, and the politics in Australia is refreshing. No polemic and combative left-right politics like in Europe and the US. Here there are centre-left and centre-right parties, and whoever wins an election, they then rule for all Australians from a centrist position, and Australians then get right behind the elected government. Then finally, there is the geography of Australia, located at the bottom of the world, part of the Asia-Pacific region. Away from the troubles of the northern hemisphere, and the attention in respect to what happens in the news for Australians is what happens here and to our northern Asia-Pacific neighbours. Besides a very tiny minority who spend their lives on social media - the majority of Australians couldn’t care less regarding what happens in Europe, Africa, the Middle East or the US.

Then we have some of the dark civilisational undercurrents of Modern Greece, undercurrents that need light shed on. On the surface, Greece is a magical and beautiful place, rich in history. But Greece is also suffocating under the burden and dead weight of its own history. A suffocating monoculture with unwritten strict norms and a societal pressure to conform.

Greece is still a very patriarchal society - and has been so continuously since the ancient times - with higher misogyny and femicide rates than the European average. Discourse in public can be overtly sexist, with unfiltered hate speech and misogyny being prevalent in social media and online spaces. While the rest of Europe went through a reformation and the enlightenment, in Greece - except for the Ionian Islands ( where my late mother is from) and which was ruled mostly by Venice and briefly by France since the fall of Constantinople - the rest of Greece was under Ottoman rule, and one can tell the difference. Where Italy is known for a north-south divide, in Greece the divide is western Greece versus the rest of Greece.

This writer’s late father would call my late mother not by her name, but by ‘woman’; not once by her first name. She was an asset and a housemaid, while he was a working class card playing misogynist-patriarchal undeducted yokel bumpkin from the hills who imagined himself as some kind of modern day shepherd-Homeric hero resisting the modern world, Whilst my late mother came from an educated classical world due to her famous middle-upper class trading family from Cephalonia.  As a girl she learned deportment, the Walz, listened to theatre and opera, and tuning in to Italian radio stations was her favourite activity. This writer witnessed many moments of cruelty and greed, experiences that were and are still being experienced today by many women in Greece. The last straw for this writer and the majority of my siblings was when my mother died in 2021 in Australia. We decided on cremation rather than a traditional ‘big-fat Greek funeral’, and the reaction from Greek family overseas and the Greek community here cemented the decision to delete Facebook.

We were ostracised by the majority of the Greek community here in Australia, and a huge chunk of relatives back in Greece stopped talking to us altogether. All because we chose against the peer pressure to conform with the religious and societal expectations of a suffocating monocular, because we are progressive and separate church and state in our lives here in this new world.

The above is this writer’s societal observations on the mental and psychological affects of an addiction to Facebook, and one that many today silently suffer. Also on the illusion that it creates in regards to online communities based on family and friends (who some in fact never were that). It’s been three weeks now since I deleted Facebook, and pressure has lifted. I now experience life for myself and feel happier. Hopefully this story will help others reflect on and seek a more authentic life rooted in the real world. Carl Jung once said: “The privilege of a lifetime is to become who you truly are”, and only by engaging with the real physical world, not the online world can this happen.

 *******************************
Digital painting and cover by Nikos Laios

 *******************************
Check Nikos Laios' eBOOK, HERE!


The quietest threat by John Reid

When Andriy Yermak resigned as chief of staff to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, just hours after anti-corruption agents raided his home amid a sprawling graft investigation, the tremor that shook Kyiv may carry a message far heavier than the official narrative suggests. On its face, the departure reads like a forced exit under pressure: a necessary purge to safeguard legitimacy, to reassure both Ukrainians and foreign backers.

But beneath the official skin lies a darker, more strategic undertone, a warning shot across the bow not only to Yermak, but to Zelenskyy himself.

Yermak was not just another functionary. For years, he was arguably the second-most powerful person in Ukraine; the man who controlled access, shaped messaging, directed both domestic power plays and foreign negotiation tracks. That makes his abrupt removal now, precisely when Ukraine is on the brink of sealing or rejecting a controversial U.S.-backed peace plan suspiciously timely.

Consider the optics: A trusted insider, part of the peace negotiation team, stripped of position under a cloud, days before Ukraine’s delegation was to travel for talks with U.S. envoys.

Now imagine the message this sends not just to Kyiv’s bureaucracy or to domestic elites who might have lined their pockets but to the president himself. If even the inner circle isn’t safe, then who is?

It doesn’t require public accusations or indictments to deliver the threat. The optics alone, a home search, resignation under pressure, media blitz about corruption, are enough to sow doubt, fear, and uncertainty. In a war-time context, under immense external pressure, that kind of uncertainty can be paralysing.

And make no mistake: Ukraine is being pulled in multiple conflicting directions. On one side, there is growing domestic frustration over corruption in the energy and defence sectors, scandals that sparked this purge. On the other, there is mounting foreign pressure to conclude a peace deal, perhaps at the cost of hard-won territory or compromising concessions. And at the centre of this storm stands Zelenskyy, reliant on trust, cohesion, and strength.

Yermak’s removal might therefore be read as the recalibration of political levers: a demonstration that no one, not even the closest adviser, is immune if they become inconvenient. For Zelenskyy, it is a reminder that the roof above him may hold no loyalty beyond expedience.

If the peace deal under negotiation requires unpopular concessions, territorial compromises, amnesties, unsavoury compromises, the Ukrainian public and political class alike will demand someone to blame. With Yermak gone, Zelenskyy alone could bear that burden. And if history is any guide, leaders under such pressure often find themselves isolated, stripped of allies, and forced to choose between being the scapegoat or being cast aside.

Perhaps that is the real signal behind this dramatic exit: before even drafting a final peace deal, before signing anything, shape the political battlefield. Show that loyalty, even to the president, is conditional. Show that even close proximity to power offers no guarantee. And show that, if needed, the next fall could be from the top.

Of course, there is a benign reading too: Ukraine’s leadership attempting a genuine reboot, showing the world that corruption cannot stand even in wartime. And if that is the story they want to tell, they will need consistency: accountability, independent investigations, and perhaps most difficult, a peace deal that preserves not only territorial integrity, but public trust.

Yet I remain unconvinced. In a country at war, with a fragile coalition of internal and external supporters, every move is also a message. And the message from Yermak’s resignation is too pointed, too well-timed, and too loaded to be mere coincidence.

Because if the system could swallow its own negotiator without public charges, maybe the next target won’t be negotiators at all. Maybe it will be the man holding the pen at the final treaty the one whose signature will decide Ukraine’s fate.

And that thought alone may be the gravest danger Kyiv now faces.


ICE walls of incompetence by Emma Schneider

There is something deeply unsettling about a system so consumed by its own mandate that it fails to recognize the very people it claims to protect. When immigration agents arrest American citizens, Native Americans whose ancestors lived on this land long before any borders were imagined, it becomes impossible to pretend the system is merely “overwhelmed” or “imperfect.” No, what we are witnessing is a culture of enforcement that has lost the ability, and perhaps even the desire, to distinguish right from wrong. ICE’s war on legal immigrants has spiraled so far beyond reason that even citizens are caught in its dragnet. And that truth alone reveals a reality many prefer to ignore: an institution this reckless cannot be trusted to carry out a mission that demands precision, fairness, and humanity.

The defenders of ICE often insist that the agency exists to uphold the rule of law. But the rule of law depends on competence. It depends on restraint. It depends on a sober, clear-eyed understanding of who is a threat and who is not. When agents detain Native Americans, people whose identity, history, and citizenship should be unassailable, the argument collapses. This is not safeguarding the nation. This is not protecting the public. This is bureaucratic violence wielded by people who have confused authority with legitimacy.

The pattern is not isolated. For years, legal immigrants, green card holders, refugees, and naturalized citizens have lived with an omnipresent fear that one wrong interaction, one officer’s misunderstanding, one typo in a database, could lead to detention or worse. The message from ICE has been brutally consistent: if you are not white and your paperwork is not immediately recognized, you are suspect. You are detainable. You are someone who must prove their right to exist inside the lines someone else drew.

This is the quiet tragedy underlying every mistaken arrest: the shock on a person’s face when they realize that it doesn’t matter what documents they have, how long they have lived here, or even more damning, that they were born here. The machine has decided they do not belong, and the machine does not apologize.

What does it say about a country when the descendants of its first peoples are stopped and interrogated as foreigners? When their accents, their appearance, their communities, their lives are treated as if they are intrusions rather than origins? It says that we have not simply lost our way; we have lost our memory. And ICE, charged with enforcing the smallest technicalities of immigration law, has taken on the role of arbiter of identity, a role it is wildly unqualified to perform.

At its core, ICE is an agency built on suspicion. Suspicion is not inherently bad; any enforcement work requires some level of investigative instinct. But ICE’s version of suspicion has metastasized into paranoia. It now operates as if everyone is lying, everyone is dangerous, and everyone is deportable until proven otherwise. This mindset is not law enforcement; it is ideological enforcement. And it leads exactly where we see it leading: to citizens arrested, legal residents intimidated, entire communities treated as enemy territory.

Critics are often told that calling for reform or abolition is extreme, that ICE is simply enforcing laws written by Congress, that the fault lies elsewhere. But laws do not detain citizens. Databases do not interrogate people. Policies do not handcuff Native Americans on their own land. People do. And when a system repeatedly fails, repeatedly harms the wrong individuals, repeatedly abuses its power, we must question not just its leadership but its foundation.

The cruelty is not accidental. And the incompetence is not incidental. In fact, the two feed each other. A culture that encourages officers to treat migrants as threats naturally encourages sloppiness, because compassion and accuracy come from the same place, the recognition of another person’s humanity. Strip that away, and mistakes multiply. Abuses multiply. Arrests of citizens, once unthinkable, become shrugged off as “regrettable errors.”

ICE’s defenders often warn that without aggressive enforcement, the nation will be unsafe. But safety built on humiliating citizens and terrorizing legal immigrants is not safety at all. It is domination disguised as order. It is fear masquerading as patriotism.

The United States can choose a different path. It can choose immigration enforcement that is evidence-based, rights-respecting, and rooted in the understanding that citizenship is not a matter open to debate on the side of a highway. But we cannot take that path until we recognize the reality of the current one, a system that arrests the very people whose heritage predates this country’s founding is a system that has stopped serving the nation and begun serving itself.

There is nothing patriotic about that. There is only violence, bureaucratic, casual, and profoundly un-American.


Ant-biotics #070 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

Ant-biotics is a type of antimicrobial cartoon strip active against boredom’s bacteria.

For more Ant-biotics HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!


A desert of words by Fahad Kline

Speak long enough about solidarity, and the word begins to feel like sand, dry, shifting and ultimately slipping through the fingers of those who need it most. Every year, as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People approaches, the diplomatic machinery whirs into motion. Delegations gather, speeches are written and polished, statesmen from podiums gleaming under warm lights, proclaim their unbreakable commitment to justice, dignity, and the Palestinian cause. And then, as the cameras dim and the microphones cool, nothing happens.

The truth, plain, uncomfortable, and habitually avoided, is that the Palestinian people have long been deprived not only of justice but of genuine solidarity from those who most loudly claim to champion them. And this failure rests most heavily not on distant Western powers, nor on the familiar geopolitical villains that dominate the usual scripts, but on the Arab states themselves.

It’s an awkward conversation, politically, historically, and emotionally. But awkwardness is often where the truth lives.

For decades, many Arab governments have built an identity, sometimes a mythos, around the Palestinian cause. It has appeared in their speeches, in their schoolbooks, in their state media narratives. The Palestinian struggle has been used as a rallying cry for unity in a region that often struggles to find any. It has provided moral high ground for leaders who lacked it elsewhere, and excuses for internal repression disguised as the necessity of “national security” in the face of the Israeli threat. It has become a political currency, valuable precisely because it never needs to be cashed.

But solidarity, real solidarity, is not a currency. It is not a posture. It is not an ornament to be displayed during commemorative days and shelved during the rest of the year. Real solidarity costs something. And this is where the gap between rhetoric and reality yawns wide.

The uncomfortable reality is that many Arab states have retreated into a position best described as ceremonial solidarity, a symbolic stance that demands no sacrifice, no confrontation, no meaningful support beyond public sentiment and occasionally a donation carefully calibrated to appear generous without being consequential. The speeches grow more emotional even as the policies grow more indifferent.

In many capitals, the Palestinian cause is still spoken of in the language of shared destiny. But behind the curtains, geopolitical realignments, security partnerships, and economic ambitions paint a different picture, one in which Palestinian suffering has become diplomatically inconvenient.

Normalization, that once-taboo word, now moves from whisper to signature ceremony. Meanwhile, Palestinians watch from the sidelines, observing the same pattern they’ve endured for generations: their fate negotiated by others, their needs subordinated to alliances that do not include them, and their struggle reduced to a symbolic gesture performed annually to demonstrate moral sincerity without moral responsibility.

The Arab states are not a monolith, nor should they be treated as one. But across the region, from monarchies to republics, from wealthy petro-states to poorer nations navigating internal strife, a pattern repeats itself, lofty declarations paired with action so timid it barely rises to the level of gesture.

It is not solidarity to speak about Palestine only when it is convenient, or when global attention momentarily demands it. It is not solidarity to condemn occupation while quietly pursuing security cooperation with the occupier. It is not solidarity to express empathy while offering no meaningful political leverage, no unified diplomatic front, no sustained economic commitment, and often no protection to Palestinians living within these same Arab countries.

Perhaps the most telling indicator of this hollow solidarity is the patient expectation, shared by many Arab states, that the Palestinian issue will one day simply resolve itself. This hope is not rooted in political analysis but in exhaustion, avoidance, and the desire to move on without admitting to having moved on. And yet, the Palestinians themselves have never had the luxury of moving on.

To live in Gaza, in the West Bank, or in refugee camps across the region is to inhabit an ongoing crisis. To carry a Palestinian passport, if one is lucky enough to have one, is to exist in a liminal space between statelessness and recognition. To be Palestinian is to navigate a world where promises are plentiful but protections are scarce, where international law is invoked often but enforced rarely, and where solidarity is celebrated globally but practiced selectively.

What Palestinians need from the Arab world is not another round of poetic speeches or elegiac statements. They do not need another year of rhetorical crescendo followed by political silence. They need action: coordinated political pressure, humanitarian corridors that function, financial commitments that meet actual needs, policies that reflect not nostalgia for a shared past but responsibility for a shared future.

They need Arab states to treat the Palestinian cause not as a symbol, a slogan, or a shield, but as a real political and human priority.

Solidarity is ultimately a verb. It means standing with, not just speaking for. It means investing political capital, not merely moral sentiment. It means accepting that justice is not achieved through memory alone but through will.

Until that shift happens until the Arab world chooses to replace ceremonial solidarity with substantive solidarity the Palestinian people will continue to confront a cruel paradox: celebrated everywhere, supported nowhere.

And on days of international commemoration, amid the speeches and the solemnity, the truth remains unchanged: there is no shortage of words spoken in their name. There is simply a shortage of those willing to stand beside them when the microphones turn off.


The second sun in Trump’s sky by Harry S. Taylor

Marjorie Taylor Greene has always been more comet than congresswoman flashing across the political firmament with a tail of outrage, conspiracism, and self-promotion in her wake. But something has shifted lately. The comet seems to have stalled in orbit, not around the Capitol, not even around her home state of Georgia, but around the drifting and unpredictable gravity well of Donald Trump. And the big question for Trump, if he’s asking himself anything deeper than which applause line to repeat tonight, is what to do about her next.

Because Greene is no longer simply a loyal foot soldier in MAGA’s culture-war militia. She is openly auditioning for something larger, something that may require her to pull her constituency, America’s most excitable corner of populist conservatism, closer to herself and farther from him. Her ambitions have grown louder, sharper, and unmistakably less patient. The puzzle for Trump is not whether she wants more power; the puzzle is whether she can take any from him, and how much turbulence she’s willing to introduce into his movement to find out.

For years, Greene has been treated as Trump’s most radioactive devotee, a kind of congressional extension of his id unbound by decorum, allergic to fact-checking, and fluent in the language of grievance. She was useful. She made noise where he needed noise; she caused Democratic indigestion where he needed chaos. But political ecosystems evolve, especially ecosystems built on emotional volatility. And within that ecosystem, Greene has grown from mascot to competitor.

There are whispers and increasingly, shouts, within the MAGA base that Trump has gone soft, too accommodating, too interested in survival and not interested enough in revolution. This frustration is the kindling Greene knows how to catch with a spark. When she talks about betrayal, she doesn’t need to name Trump; her audience can fill in the blanks. It is the slow roll of a once-frenzied movement now nursing old suspicions: Has Trump forgotten who they are? Has he drifted toward the bland center they despise? And if he has, is she the one brave enough to drag the movement back to purity?

This is the essence of Greene’s pitch: not that she can replace Trump outright, MAGA’s devotion to him is too theological for that—but that she can be the next iteration, the keeper of the flame should he falter, compromise, or simply age out of the role. She positions herself not as a successor but as a safeguard, the “just in case” leader for a movement defined by distrust. And she understands a truth Trump has always known but prefers to forget: revolutions eat their founders.

Her problem and Trump’s lies in determining what she really wants. Is it the vice presidency she sometimes flirts with in interviews? Is it a Cabinet job where she could turn conspiracy into policy? Or does she want something more symbolic but more destabilizing: a formal claim to being the true heart of the MAGA base, the only one who still speaks their uncensored language?

Trump, who can smell ambition from miles away, appears to be alternating between amusement and irritation. On one hand, it flatters him that someone so nationally recognizable has modeled her entire persona on a distilled, unfiltered version of himself. On the other hand, Trump has no interest in being overshadowed particularly by someone he considers a junior partner in theatrics. It is not lost on him that Greene absorbs oxygen from his rallies simply by showing up, that the cameras track her movements with a fascination once reserved exclusively for him.

And then there’s the question Trump tends not to consider until it’s too late: how much appetite his followers actually have for a rival voice. Trump built a movement that worships strength, confrontation, and the illusion of authenticity. But when a movement worships those qualities, it will not hesitate to follow someone else who embodies them, even if the shift is temporary, even if the loyalty is fickle.

Greene’s power is not institutional. It is emotional. Trump’s power, increasingly, is performative. And somewhere in the overlap between those two realities lies the possibility, remote but not laughable, that she could fracture his coalition at precisely the moment he needs it unified. A movement that feels betrayed is a movement primed for adoption.

This is not a prediction that Greene will topple Trump. She won’t. But she doesn’t have to. What she can do is force him to negotiate with her ambitions instead of assuming her loyalty. She can remind him that the MAGA base is not a monolith but a crowded room of grievances seeking oxygen. And she can do what she has always done best: turn the spectacle inward, toward her own ascent.

The question, ultimately, is whether Trump sees in Greene a threat or a tool. If he treats her as the former, he risks escalating a rivalry he does not need. If he treats her as the latter, he may find that tools sometimes figure out how to use themselves.

Either way, Greene is no longer content to orbit Trump. She is trying to become a second sun, smaller, stranger, and far more volatile. And in a movement defined by its appetite for chaos, there is always room for another star, at least until the heavens begin to collapse under their own heat.


#eBook: The soul of Henry Jones by Ray Cummings

The soul of Henry Jones

At the age of thirty-two Henry Jones awoke one brilliant summer morning with the sudden realization that the soul in him was starving.

He lay quiet, staring idly at the white ceiling above the bed, his mind groping dully with this abrupt enlightenment. After a moment of mental confusion—for the enormity of the conception stirred him profoundly—he raised himself upon one elbow in bed and looked at his wife who lay sleeping beside him.

For Henry was neither in looks nor by nature inspiring to the female mind. But he made her a good husband; Martha knew that, and she loved him and was content.
This was Henry Jones’s wife—not the woman he knew—but the real woman, as she was on this summer morning when his soul suddenly expanded.

Raymond King Cummings born August 30, 1887 and died January 23, 1957. He was an American author of science fiction literature and comic books.

In Public Domain
First Published 1920
Ovi eBook Publishing 2024

Read it online or download HERE!
Enjoy viewing & reading it online or download in PDF format HERE!
All eBooks and downloads are FREE!


Check Ovi eBookshelves HERE!

Red ribbons and real reckonings by Shanna Shepard

There’s a day each year when the world briefly lifts its gaze from the next breaking headline to an older, quieter emergency, World HIV/AID...