Arch of Titus, Rome : The Roman triumph

The Arch of Titus is the oldest of the two remaining arches on the Forum Romanum. The triumphal arch was built in 81-85 AD to commemorate the capture of Jerusalem over the Jewish Zealots.

Jewish Revolt

Arch of Titus, Forum Romanum, Rome

Arch of Titus
In 66 AD Jewish Zealots started a revolt against the Roman occupation of Judea. Vespasian was sent from Rome to suppress the revolt. After Vespasian became emperor, his son Titus took over command of the besieging troops.

Titus captured Jerusalem in 70 AD with four legions and the revolt was completely crushed after the fall of the Masada fortress in 72 AD.

Emperor Titus

In 79 AD Titus succeeded his father as emperor of the Roman Empire. He died just two years later, in September 81 AD. The popular emperor was soon deified by the Roman Senate. Emperor Domitian, Titus’s brother and successor, commissioned the construction of the Arch of Titus that same year to honor his late brother and to commemorate the victory in the Jewish War. The arch was dedicated in 85 AD with large festivities.

The Arch

West facade of the Arch of Titus, Forum Romanum

West facade

Panel with triumphal procession, Arch of Titus, Forum Romanum

Triumphal Procession

inscription on the Arch of Titus

Inscription on the arch
The fifteen meter (about 50ft) tall arch is located at the Forum Romanum, at the highest point of the Via Sacra. It is the oldest surviving example of a Roman arch.

At the inside of the arch are two panels with reliefs. One depicts the triumphal procession with the spoils taken from the Second Temple in Jerusalem – the seven-branched candelabrum or Menorah, the silver trumpets and the Table of the Shewbread. The other one shows Titus in a chariot accompanied by the goddess Victoria and the goddess Roma.

The inscriptions in the frieze which mean ‘The Roman Senate and People to Deified Titus, Vespasian Augustus, son of Deified Vespasian’ were originally in bronze. The reliefs were also colored and the arch was topped by a bronze quadriga.


In the eleventh century the Arch of Titus was integrated into a fortress built by the Frangipani family, which helped the preservation of the monument. In 1821 the arch was restored by Giuseppe Valadier. Sections of the outer sides were rebuilt between 1822 and 1823 in travertine instead of marble, so they would be distinguishable from the original.

The Arch of Titus

Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, The Triumph of Titus: AD 71, The Flavians, 1835 oil on panel, 44.3 x 29 cm (The Walters Art Museum) “In this canvas, the artist shows Titus returning to Rome in triumph following his capture of Jerusalem in AD 70. His father, Emperor Vespasian, clad in a white toga, leads the procession. Titus comes next, holding the hand of his daughter, Julia, who turns to address her father’s younger brother and successor, Domitian. In the background is the Temple of Jupiter Victor. Among the spoils from Jerusalem is a 7-branched candlestick from the temple. Alma-Tadema depicted these events by drawing on classical sources, like the reliefs on of the Arch of Titus and on the latest 19th-century scholarship regarding everyday life in Rome.”
Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, The Triumph of Titus: AD 71, The Flavians, 1835 oil on panel, 44.3 x 29 cm (The Walters Art Museum) “the artist shows Titus returning to Rome in triumph following his capture of Jerusalem….His father, Emperor Vespasian…leads the procession. Titus comes next, holding the hand of his daughter, Julia, who turns to address her father’s younger brother and successor, Domitian…Alma-Tadema depicted these events by drawing on classical sources…and on the latest 19th-century scholarship regarding everyday life in Rome.” (source)

The Roman triumph

The Roman triumph was an ancient martial tradition—a parade so riotous that its symbolic culmination involved catapulting the victorious general (triumphator) to quasi-divine status for a single, heady day. The Romans marked his status by staining his face red using the mineral pigment cinnabar (Jupiter’s countenance was said to have the same ruddy hue).
The Romans traced the traditions of the triumph back to their own beginnings. Rome’s legendary founder, Romulus, was the first to celebrate the rite when he defeated and killed Acron, the king of Caenina.

Victory in Judea

In the summer of 71 C.E. the Roman emperor Vespasian and Titus, his eldest son, had quelled a dangerous revolt in the Roman province of Judea and returned to Rome to celebrate this major accomplishment. Not only that, but the Flavian dynasty (Vespasian and his two sons Titus and Domitian) had succeeded in winning the throne during the year 69 C.E.—a time of bloody civil turmoil known as the “Year of the Four Emperors.”

Judaea Capta Sesterti with portrait of Titus (photo: copyright © David Hendin, used by permission)
Judaea Capta Sesterti (Roman coin) with portrait of Titus (left) and a personification of Judea, captured (right)  (photo: copyright © David Hendin, used by permission)
A great deal was at stake for Vespasian and Titus, both relative political newcomers from a family line (Flavius) that was not particularly illustrious. The honor of the triumph was accorded to them jointly, and the spectacle (as described by Flavius Josephus in his text known as The Jewish War) rivaled anything that Rome had ever seen before: spoils, prisoners, pictorial narratives in abundance. All this was meant to awe the spectators and to transport the viewers to the battlefields of the war in the east. But the ritual of the triumph, its parade—even the semi-divine status accorded the triumphator—was ephemeral. For this reason, the later construction of permanent monuments (like the Arch of Titus) served to make an impact on the urban landscape (and the collective memory of city dwellers) that lasted far longer than the events of the day itself.

Arch of Titus, after 81 C.E., Rome
Arch of Titus and the Colosseum, Rome 
(photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
The tradition of triumphal monuments connects the Flavians to the traditions of the Roman Republic. Early monuments included columns—for instance the rostrate column (columna rostrata) of Caius Duilius (c. 260 B.C.E.)—and the early triumphal arch prototype known as the fornix Fabianus erected in the Forum Romanum by Q. Fabius Allobrogicus in 121 B.C.E. The emperor Augustus continued the use of the triumphal arch, even though he restructured the institution of the triumph itself. Since the Flavians were relative newcomers to the Roman power structure, they needed as much legitimization as they could find, and thus participating in the time-honored traditions of the triumph and its stock monuments made a good deal of sense.

Topography and the triumph

View across the Roman Forum (Forum Romanum) to the Arch of Titus (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
View across the Roman Forum (Forum Romanum) to the Arch of Titus (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
The Arch of Titus is located in Summa Sacra Via, the highest point of the Sacra Via, Rome’s “Sacred Way” that served as its main processional street. Furthemore, the Arch of Titus   commands a key point along the triumphal route (via Triumphalis)—one that visually links the valley of the Flavian amphitheater (known to us as the Colosseum) to the valley of the Forum Romanum and the Capitoline Hill beyond. Many triumphal parades had passed along this route for many centuries, thus the choice to place a permanent triumphal monument astride the route was not accidental but, rather, deliberately evocative of the fact that the triumph as a ritual both created and reinforced collective memory for Romans. This arch, built as an honorific monument, honored Titus posthumously and was a project executed by his younger brother and imperial successor, Domitian (emperor, 81-96 C.E.). Another arch dedicated to Titus, triumphal in its nature, was located in the valley of the Circus Maximus—but this arch only survives in the form of scattered sculptural fragments and a Medieval transcription of its dedicatory inscription. Recent archaeological excavations (2015) in the Circus Maximus have revealed previously unknown remains of this “lost” arch, including elements of its foundations.

The attic inscription

Attic inscription, Arch of Titus, after 81 C.E., Rome (photo: Dr. Steven Fine, used by permission)
Attic inscription, Arch of Titus, after 81 C.E., Rome (photo: Dr. Steven Fine, used by permission)
The surviving ancient attic inscription (above) records the dedication of the monument to Titus. Given that Titus is identified as having been deified (divus), we learn that the monument’s completion can only have occurred after Titus’ death in September of 81 C.E.
The text of the attic inscription reads:
The Senate and the Roman people (dedicate this) to the deified Titus Vespasian Augustus, son of the deified Vespasian
The inscription makes the dedication a public one—undertaken on the part of the Senate and the Roman People (Senatus Populusque Romanus), and reminds viewers of Titus’ link to his likewise deified father, Vespasian, who had died in 79 C.E. This dedication is an example of shrewd power politics on the part of the Emperor Domitian—he had been too young to take part in the military glory enjoyed by his father and brother. Perhaps he sought to bask in the generally favorable public opinion they enjoyed as he himself made the transition to power.

Relief sculpture

View of the vault of the arch’s passageway, with a relief of the apotheosis of Titus
View of the vault of the arch’s passageway, with a relief of the apotheosis of Titus (photo: Dr. Steven Fine, used by permission)
Two panel reliefs flank the single passageway of the arch, and a third adorns the vault (the vault relief is above). The subject matter of the flanking reliefs draws upon the 71 C.E. triumph of Vespasian and Titus, depicting key triumphal episodes following the fall of Jerusalem. In one scene (below)  Romans carry spoils from the Temple in Jerusalem, including a Menorah, sacred trumpets and the showbread table. Recent studies have shown these items were painted with yellow ochre.

Relief panel showing The Spoils of Jerusalem being brought into Rome, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high
Relief panel showing The Spoils of Jerusalem being brought into Rome, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
The triumph panel opposite depicts Titus in a triumphal four-horse chariot (quadriga) followed closely by the goddess of Victory (Victoria), preceded by official attendants known as lictors, and accompanied by symbolic representations (genii) of the Senate, the Roman people, and Virtus (manly virtue) (below).

Relief panel showing Titus in a triumphal four-horse chariot, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high
Relief panel showing Titus in a triumphal four-horse chariot, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
Since the triumphal parade would have passed through the very spot on which the arch was constructed, these images serve as powerful evocations of collective memories shared and held by the Roman people. The depiction in the reliefs echoes the riotous parade described by Flavius Josephus. The program of Flavian architecture largely transformed the physical landscape of Rome; this program was replete with visual cues and reminders of Flavian success, all of which stemmed from and centered around the great triumph at the culmination of the Jewish War.

Restoration and current state

Canaletto, The Arch of Titus in Rome, 1742-44, oil on canvas, 38 x 28 cm (Galleria dell’Accademia Carrara, Bergamo)
Canaletto, The Arch of Titus in Rome, 1742-44, oil on canvas, 38 x 28 cm (Galleria dell’Accademia Carrara, Bergamo)
During the eleventh century the arch was incorporated into a fortress built by the Frangipani family in Rome, resulting in damage to the panel reliefs that is still visible today. In 1821, during the pontificate of Pope Pius VII, Giuseppe Valadier undertook a major restoration of the surviving structure. In order to identify those portions that had been restored, Valadier employed travertine as opposed to the original marble. The western side of the attic received a new inscription at the time of this restoration. Canaletto’s famous painting of the arch grants a view of the monument’s condition prior to Valadier’s restoration.

Paul Philippe Cret, The National Memorial Arch In Valley Forge Park in Pennsylvania, erected 1910
Paul Philippe Cret, The National Memorial Arch In Valley Forge Park in Pennsylvania, erected 1917


The Arch of Titus has long provided a source of artistic inspiration. Leon Battista Alberti was inspired by its form as he designed the facade of the basilica of Sant’Andrea in Mantua, Italy, after 1472. The Arch of Titus has inspired many modern commemorative arches, notably the Arc de Triomphe in Paris (1806), Stanford White’s Arch in Washington Square Park in New York City (1892), the United States National Memorial Arch in Valley Forge National Historical Park designed by Paul Philippe Cret (1917), and Edward Lutyens’ India Gate in New Delhi (1921).
Essay by Dr. Jeffrey Becker

Additional resources:
Mary Beard, The Roman Triumph (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap, 2009).
A. J. Boyle and W. J. Dominik, Flavian Rome: culture, image, text (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2003).
F. Coarelli, Divus Vespasianus. Il Bimillenario dei Flavi (Milan: Electa, 2009)
R. H. Darwall-Smith, Emperors and Architecture: a Study of Flavian Rome (Latomus, 1996).
J. C. Edmondson, S. Mason, and J. B. Rives, Flavius Josephus and Flavian Rome (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).
R. Ross Holloway, “Some Remarks on the Arch of Titus,” L’antiquité classique 56 (1987) pp. 183-191.
M. Pfanner, Der Titusbogen (Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1983).
L. Roman, “Martial and the City of Rome.” The Journal of Roman Studies 100 (2010) pp. 1-30.
H. S. Versnel, Triumphus: an inquiry into the origin, development and meaning of the Roman triumph  (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970).
L. Yarden, The spoils of Jerusalem on the Arch of Titus: a re-investigation (Stockholm : Svenska Institutet i Rom; Göteborg : Distributor, P. Åströms, 1991).

Holocaust Day – The Time Is Ripe For A Jewish Apology

by  Gilad Atzmon

A mass protest in Paris on Sunday against French President François Hollande turned into an anti-Jewish demonstration and ended in clashes between police and protesters.

Seemingly, Jewish organisations around the world are scared by the recent developments in France. Once again, they clearly failed to appreciate the growing mass fatigue of Shoah indoctrination and belligerent lobby politics.

However, I would contend that instead of whining about the “rise of anti-Semitism”, Jews better, once and for all, learn to ask why?  Why the Jews again? Why are they hated? What is it in Jewish politics that evokes so much resentment? Why does it happen time after time?

It wasn’t easy for me to admit in my latest book that Jewish suffering is actually embedded in Jewish culture. In other words, Jews are actually destined to bring disasters on themselves. Jewish politics and culture, unfortunately, is obnoxious, abusive, as well as racist, and supremacist to the bone. Jewish culture is set to infuriate the Goyim just because Jews are defined by negation – that chilling sensation of being hated.

Interestingly enough, early Zionism, was a promise to change it all. Herzl, Nordau, Borochov and Weizmann believed that a “homecoming project” would transform the Diaspora Jews into ethical new Israelites.  They were sure that a settlement project would make the Jew lovable and respected.

But they were obviously wrong. Zionism was destined to crash.  In spite of being driven by anti-Jewish sentiments, Zionism was quickly defeated by Jewishness (Jewish spirit, culture and ideology). It matured into a vile chauvinist amplification of every possible crude Jewish symptom it was initially supposed to eradicate.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

Many Jews around the world are commemorating the Holocaust this week. But if I am correct, maybe the time is ripe for Jewish and Zionist organisations to draw the real and most important lesson from the Holocaust.

Instead of constantly blaming the Goyim for inflicting pain on Jews, it is time for Jews to look in the mirror and try to identify what it is in Jews and their culture that evokes so much fury. It may even be possible that some Jews would take this opportunity to apologise to the Gentiles around them for evoking all this anger.

Indeed, I take this opportunity to make an apology, even though I have not been a Jew for quite a while.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity politics and Jewish Power in particular – available on  &


Holocaust Memorial Day in Liverpool

Liverpool’s homosexual Lord Mayor Gary Millar in full regalia and defender of the Big Lie Rabbi Mordechai Wollenberg crept into the gardens of St Johns prior to 9am on the morning of the 27th January 2014 where it appeared that a rather secretive memorial took place. –…

Before and after the “Holocaust”: Jewish population numbers in 1933 and 1948

By wmw_admin on November 30, 2013

Rebel of Oz — Nov 30, 2013

For over a century, the Jewish World Almanac has been widely regarded as the most authentic source for the world’s Jewish population numbers. Academics all over the world, including the editors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, used to rely on the accuracy of those numbers. Here is what the World Alamanacs of 1933 and 1948 had to say about the world population of Jews.

World Almanac 1933

World Almanac 1948

In other words, according to the World Almanac the world population of Jews increased (!) between 1933 and 1948 from 15,315,000 to 15,753,000. If the German government under Adolf Hitler had – as alleged – murdered six million Jews those losses should have been reflected in the Jewish population numbers quoted in the World Almanac.
The suspicions raised by above numbers concerning the veracity of the allegations made against the Hitler government are confirmed by the official three-volume report by the International Committee of the Red Cross, released 1948 in Geneva, according to which 272,000 concentration camp inmates died in German custody, about half of them Jews. The following article elaborates.

A Factual Appraisal Of The ‘Holocaust’ By The Red Cross

The Jews And The Concentration Camps: No Evidence Of Genocide

There is one survey of the Jewish question in Europe during World War Two and the conditions of Germany’s concentration camps which is almost unique in its honesty and objectivity, the three-volume Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948.
This comprehensive account from an entirely neutral source incorporated and expanded the findings of two previous works: Documents sur l’activité du CICR en faveur des civils détenus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939-1945 (Geneva, 1946), and Inter Arma Caritas: the Work of the ICRC during the Second World War (Geneva, 1947). The team of authors, headed by Frédéric Siordet, explained in the opening pages of the Report that their object, in the tradition of the Red Cross, had been strict political neutrality, and herein lies its great value.
The ICRC successfully applied the 1929 Geneva military convention in order to gain access to civilian internees held in Central and Western Europe by the Germany authorities. By contrast, the ICRC was unable to gain any access to the Soviet Union, which had failed to ratify the Convention. The millions of civilian and military internees held in the USSR, whose conditions were known to be by far the worst, were completely cut off from any international contact or supervision.
The Red Cross Report is of value in that it first clarifies the legitimate circumstances under which Jews were detained in concentration camps, i.e. as enemy aliens. In describing the two categories of civilian internees, the Report distinguishes the second type as “Civilians deported on administrative grounds (in German, “Schutzhäftlinge”), who were arrested for political or racial motives because their presence was considered a danger to the State or the occupation forces” (Vol. 111, p. 73). These persons, it continues, “were placed on the same footing as persons arrested or imprisoned under common law for security reasons.” (P.74).
The Report admits that the Germans were at first reluctant to permit supervision by the Red Cross of people detained on grounds relating to security, but by the latter part of 1942, the ICRC obtained important concessions from Germany. They were permitted to distribute food parcels to major concentration camps in Germany from August 1942, and “from February 1943 onwards this concession was extended to all other camps and prisons” (Vol. 111, p. 78). The ICRC soon established contact with camp commandants and launched a food relief programme which continued to function until the last months of 1945, letters of thanks for which came pouring in from Jewish internees.

Red Cross Recipients Were Jews

The Report states that “As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. >From the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps” (Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. “Parcels were sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha, Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews” (Vol. III, p. 83).
In the course of the war, “The Committee was in a position to transfer and distribute in the form of relief supplies over twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organisations throughout the world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York” (Vol. I, p. 644). This latter organisation was permitted by the German Government to maintain offices in Berlin until the American entry into the war. The ICRC complained that obstruction of their vast relief operation for Jewish internees came not from the Germans but from the tight Allied blockade of Europe. Most of their purchases of relief food were made in Rumania, Hungary and Slovakia.
The ICRC had special praise for the liberal conditions which prevailed at Theresienstadt up to the time of their last visits there in April 1945. This camp, “where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various countries was a relatively privileged ghetto” (Vol. III, p. 75). According to the Report, “‘The Committee’s delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for Jews and was governed by special conditions. From information gathered by the Committee, this camp had been started as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich … These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy. . . two delegates were able to visit the camp on April 6th, 1945. They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit” (Vol. I, p . 642).
The ICRC also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation. The aid then ceased, and the ICRC complained bitterly that it never succeeded “in sending anything whatsoever to Russia” (Vol. II, p. 62). The same situation applied to many of the German camps after their “liberation” by the Russians. The ICRC received a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet control were futile. However, food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.

No Evidence Of Genocide

One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the war. Says the Report: “In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 … In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp …” (Vol. III, p. 83).
Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against “the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies” (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 78). By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable.
In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff) – Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes nonsense of this allegation. “Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged” (Vol. III, p. 594).

Not All Were Interned

Volume III of the Red Cross Report, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish Civilian Population) deals with the “aid given to the Jewish section of the free population,” and this chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps, but remained, subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population. This conflicts directly with the “thoroughness” of the supposed “extermination programme”, and with the claim in the forged Höss memoirs that Eichmann was obsessed with seizing “every single Jew he could lay his hands on.”
In Slovakia, for example, where Eichmann’s assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge, the Report states that “A large proportion of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming from Poland. Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944, when a rising against the German forces took place. While it is true that the law of May 15th, 1942 had brought about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the free labour market” (Vol. I, p. 646).
Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey. Ironically, post-war Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation. “The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who further agreed to recognize the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South American countries” (Vol. I, p. 645).
As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens. The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities. “Until March 1944,” says the. Red Cross Report, “Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine were free to leave Hungary” (Vol. I, p. 648). Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944 (following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a government more dependent on German authority, the emigration of Jews continued.
The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States “to give support by every means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary,” and from the U.S. Government the ICRC received a message stating that “The Government of the United States … now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave” (Vol. I, p . 649).
Biedermann agreed that in the nineteen instances that “Did Six Million Really Die?” quoted from the Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War and Inter Arma Caritas (this includes the above material), it did so accurately.
A quote from Charles Biedermann (a delegate of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Director of the Red Cross’ International Tracing Service) under oath at the Zündel Trial (February 9, 10, 11 and 12, 1988).

The above is chapter nine from the book “Did Six Million Really Die?”.


Posted in Essential Reading, Hidden and Revisionist History, Israel, ‘Anti-Semitism’, Zionism and US-UK allies | 32 Responses


anne frank

Ed note (Trevor) ~ (((Anne Frank))) has now (figuratively speaking) come back from the dead to chastise Trump. But did you know her “diary” is an admitted fake, just like the rest of the holocrock? (See: Zundel Trial, Hilberg testimony)

Israel Won the First Round of the French Election

                                                                                By Sajjad Shaukat for Veterans Today

Recall that three days before the general elections in Spain, the train bombings in Madrid on March 11, 2004, which killed more than 200 people turned the election results in favour of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero whose Socialist Party won the elections, as he had said that Spain where the “US war has been deeply unpopular”, “would withdraw its troops.” While government led by the Prime Minister Jose Maria staunchly supported the American-led war in Iraq lost the election. General masses in Spain held the North African immigrants linked to Al-Qaeda for the train bombings, while the Prime Minister Aznar’s attempts to blame the attack on Basque terror group ETA backfired the voters.

Immediately after his victory in the Spanish elections, Zapatero had announced that Spain would withdraw its troops from Iraq. The statement of the Zapatero was greatly criticized by America that was made after the bomb blasts in Spain.

The victory of the Socialist Party in Spain was being called by some in Europe and America as a victory of terrorism, a precedent that offers Al-Qaeda or groups like it the notion that they can alter the democratic process with bombs and murder. A former member of the Spanish Parliament, Pedro Schwartz remarked, “Al-Qaeda won the election”.

Similarly, three days before France’s presidential elections, held on Sunday (April 23, 2017), a French policeman was shot dead and two others were wounded in central Paris on April 20, this year whena gunman wielding a machine gun leapt out of a car and opened fire on the Champs-Elysees, Paris’s most famous boulevard. Via its Amaq news agency, the Islamic State group (Also known as Daesh, ISIS, ISIL) claimed that the attack was carried out by “Abu Yousuf al-Baljiki (the Belgian) and he is one of the Islamic State’s fighters.”

French President Francois Hollande said that he was convinced the “cowardly killing” on the Champs Elysees boulevard was an act of terrorism.

Karim Cheurfi, a 39-year-old French national who was shot dead by the police was identified as the attacker. Prosecutors said that a note defending ISIS fell out of his pocket, although there was no previous evidence of radicalization.

After the shooting, the three main candidates canceled campaign events and instead made televised statements in which they competed to talk tough on security and vowed a crackdown on ISIS.

The incident brought issues of terrorism, security and immigration back to the forefront of the campaign. The ultra-nationalist and far-right candidate—the anti-immigration National Front leader Marine Le Pen demanded the closure of all Islamist mosques, repeating her call for Europe’s partly open borders to be closed. He has also called for campaigning generally to be suspended.

Le Pen’s opponents, meanwhile, urged France to stand against the hard-line rhetoric that has dominated her campaign.

Prime Minister Cazeneuve Bernard accused Le Pen of trying to capitalize on the attack by seeking to exploit fear “for exclusively political ends.”

As regards the results of the first round of the presidential election, the French Interior ministry announced on Monday (April 24) that centrist Emmanuel Macron of the independent En Marche party won 23.75 percent votes and the far-right’s Marine Le Pen of France’s National Front party won 21.53 percent votes.

According to a poll from Ipsos/Sopra Steria, “Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen will face one another in the final round of the French presidential election on May 7. Macron is expected to win the second round of the French election with 62 percent of the vote versus 38 percent for Le Pen.”

In a speech made after Sunday’s exit polls were released—the far-right candidate Le Pen vowed to defend France against globalization and declared that now is the time to free the French population from arrogant elite. On April 24, Le Pen continued to emphasize the anti-immigrant and anti-globalization views which propelled her into the second round, and she denounced the efforts of the mainstream parties to keep her out of the presidency. Le Pen also called Macron “weak” on terrorism, an issue that drew renewed attention days before the first round of voting, when a gunman on the Champs-Élysées, in central Paris, killed a police officer.

Some of Le Pen’s advisers said, in interviews with French media on April 24, “They were hoping to lure some of the supporters of the defeated Mélenchon, whose populist program bore similarities to that of Le Pen: hostility to the European Union, NATO and the forces of globalization; and a forgiving attitude toward Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin.”

The Republican Party’s Francois Fillon who got 20 percent votes, was slightly ahead of the far-left’s Jean-Luc Melenchon, who had 19 percent. Fillon said that he was the sole person responsible for his defeat and adding that he also intends to vote for Macron as Le Pen, he stated, would lead the country to failure.

Le Pen also wants France to leave the EU, and dropping the shared euro currency to return to the French franc.

Macron who wants closer cooperation between the bloc’s 28 nations, a united Europe with open borders, supports globalization and the pro-free market.

Besides Fillon and Socialist Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve, including politicians from the Socialist and Les Républicains parties–the mainstream centre-left and centre-right groups which have dominated French politics for decades, but found themselves shut out by voters–united on April 23 in urging the people to vote for Macron on May 7, also stated that because Le Pen’s programme would bankrupt France and throw the EU into chaos, while citing the history of violence and intolerance of Le Pen’s far-right National Front party.

President, François Hollande stated, “He would vote for Macron who is his former economy minister, because Le Pen represents both the danger of the isolation of France and of rupture with the EU…A far-right president would deeply divide France.”

The fact of the matter is that if becomes the president of France, Emmanuel Macron will maintain the US-led status quo in the world and will further advance the Israeli agenda against Russia, China, Syria, Pakistan etc, and the Muslims, while further advancing the international forces of globalization, controlled by the wealthy Jews and the elite class at the cost of small countries and the poor class.

He has set aside the fact that after the disintegration of the former Soviet Union, in the unipolar world, the Third World and Muslim countries were compelled to realign their domestic policies according to Washington’s dictates. In order to obtain the hidden agenda of Jews, the US imposed its sudden terms of globalization such as free markets, privatization and de-nationalization etc. on the ill-prepared developing countries, which left behind shattered nations and a global financial crisis. It further widened the gap between the poor and the rich countries or G-7 countries. The corporations and international financial institutions like IMF and World Bank which are indirectly controlled by Jews have continued to drive the project of globalization through the United States.

Regarding Macron’s relationship with Israel, under the Caption “Emmanuel Macron’s Israeli Ties”, Gil Hoffman wrote in Jerusalem Post, “Israeli politicians across the political map boast of friendship with the French presidential candidate, expressing their support ahead of the second round of elections. Israeli politicians who have met Emmanuel Macron said Monday they are impressed with the French presidential candidate. Macron, who will face a runoff race against far-right candidate Marine Le Pen on May 7, was in Israel in September 2015 when he was economy minister and met with his counterpart at the time, Arye Deri…I was very impressed by him,” Deri said…But two Israeli politicians who see themselves as future prime ministers have built close ties with the French candidate…Macron met Labor leadership candidate Erel Margalit…Margalit, who was a hi-tech entrepreneur before he entered politics, said the two have met four or five times, sometimes spending a full day together discussing innovation…If Macron is elected, France will embark on an innovation economy and Israel will be at the center of its economic cooperation, Margalit said.”

On April 18, 2017, under the title Macron Fights for France’s Jewish Vote, Michael Wilner wrote in Jerusalem Post, “France’s leading presidential candidate sees threats to the nation’s Jews from the Right and Left. Across France’s largest cities, where the nation’s remaining Jews are concentrated, up to 10 armed guards protect each synagogue on a daily basis ever since a national emergency went into effect over two years ago…Indeed, French Jews have been fleeing the country in fear of violence against them for Israel and the United States….Emmanuel Macron fears this as well. The 39-year-old presidential candidate–an unknown quantity here just two years ago–is campaigning for the Jewish vote, keenly aware of the threat. But when France goes to the polls on Sunday, its Jews will face a unique choice: To vote in the spirit of Jewish Americans…or in the Israeli posture…Macron is betting…appealing to Jewish community values shared with the French Republic…He knows there is a real danger from a double extremism–from the far-Right with Marine Le Pen, and from the far-Left, said Gilles Taieb, a prominent member of the French Jewish community who joined Macron’s En Marche! campaign in August…Senior campaign officials told The Jerusalem Post that Macron considers Le Pen (National Front) a threat to French Jews, woven from the same cloth as her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who famously minimized the Holocaust during his own political rise…Yet in recent weeks, she has made comments of her own that suggest she shares her father’s views.”

In this regard, Haaretz an Israeli newspaper ( pointed out on April, 23 and 24, 2017, “In a race…Macron, a pro-European Union ex-banker and economy minister…received slightly more votes than Le Pen…Speaking on Holocaust Remembrance Day, Moshe Kantor described Le Pen as “dangerous” and added that it was extremely regrettable that more than one in five French voters voted for Le Pen…Kantor highlighted that the 48-year-old National Front leader recently made comments against the historic record of the Holocaust which makes her no less dangerous than her Holocaust-denying father who she has tried to hide…[On April 21] Russian Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar called on French Jews to leave their country if the far right politician Marine Le Pen is elected president…Le Pen recently called for banning the wearing of the kippah in public and for making it illegal for French nationals to also have an Israeli passport…As for Le Pen, she has been officially ostracized by Israel throughout her political career. Israel accepts the policy of the French Jewish leadership that sees her National Front party as anti-Semitic and therefore has no ties with it.”

It is notable that Macron did not mention, as to how he will eliminate ISIS, while all other candidates have vowed to destroy the ISIS. It further creates doubt about her Israeli connections.

Fillon had stated that if elected, his foreign policy priority would be the destruction of ISIS. He said, “In times such as these we have to demonstrate that France is united…We also have to be clear that we are in a state of emergency. We are at war. This fight for freedom and for the security of the French people must be the priority of the next five-year term.”

Fillon’s statement reminds that just after the September 11 tragedy inside the United States, President George W. Bush said, “We are at war” and used the words, “crusade against the evil-doers”, adding to the perception that the ongoing ‘different war’ against terrorism is actually a war against the Muslim countries.

Under the mask of the 9/11 catastrophe, preplanned strategy of the neo-conservatives headed towards unexpected developments such as employment of pressure-diplomacy on the weak states—Muslim countries like Pakistan, Indonesia etc., including almost all the Arab states and the Western countries which also include Europe joined Bush’s fake global war on terror. US did not bother for rise of more militancy and internal instability in these countries, because it wanted to destabilize these countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan etc. to obtain the goals of a greater Israel. Al-Qaeda which was created by America has continuously been used by the US President Bush and the President Barack Obama and some Western countries as a scapegoat to target Labia, Syria and to malign Pakistan as the latter is the only nuclear country in the Muslim World, and to propagate against Tehran’s peaceful nuclear progragmme. In all cases, the purpose behind was to safeguard the interests of the Zionists and Israel.

It is notable that while making Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda as scapegoats, a number of fake video messages were telecast on various TV channels and websites by some Zionist Jews and Israeli secret agency Mossad to obtain Israel’s anti-Muslim aims. For example, during the November 2004 elections in the US, a fake video tape helped the George W. Bush to get lead over John Kerry.

President Obama who created ISIL, used it and Al-Qaeda, including their affiliated outfits through CIA to continue the phony war on terror to secure the illegitimate interests of Israel. If the double game of President Bush (The Senior) and George W. Bush franchised Al-Qaeda on global level, President Obama’s dual policy franchised both Al-Qaeda and ISIS as part of the anti-Muslim campaign and left no stone unturned in advancing the agenda of the Zionists, Israeli lobbies and the neoconservatives in the pretext of global war on terror.

It is mentionable that when Iraq-based ISIS which itself broke away from Al-Qaeda, proclaimed a worldwide caliphate by its leader Abu Baker al-Baghdadi, on 29 June 2014, ISIS’s criminal actions had widely been criticized in the world, with many Islamic communities judging the group to be unrepresentative of Islam. One of ISIS’s goals has been to establish a radical Sunni Islamic state in Iraq and Syria Jordan, Palestine etc. (Levant region). It has been used by the CIA and Mossad for distorting the image of Islam and for inciting the feelings of Western Christians and Kurds against Muslims. Besides some Islamic countries, a majority of the religious extremists (Muslims) from the Western world, especially from France joined the ISIS. In this context, oblivion on the part of America and Europe about ISIS recruits from their countries is questionable.

Taking cognizance of the grievances of the international community, and the sole superpower’s injustices, Russian President Vladimir Putin exposed the fake global war on terror—since September 30, 2015, various unexpected developments frustrated Israel and America. In this respect, Russian successful airstrikes on the ISIS targets in the northern Syria and Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, its coalition with Iran, Iraq, the Syrian army-the National Defense Forces (NDF) and Lebanon-based Hezbollah in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, retreat of the CIA-supported rebels and mercenaries after their failure to topple the Assad government, proving links of Al-Qaeda’s Al-Nusra Front and ISIS with America and Israel, Putin’s clear-cut statement, indicating the Zionist regime in the US and  Israel for their “phony war on ISIS” surprised the Israel-led America and some European countries who wanted to oust the Assad regime.

Taking note of these developments and some other ones such as reluctance of NATO countries to support America’s fake global war on terror, acceptance of Syrian refuges by the European countries, especially Germany and the EU rule to boycott goods produced in Israeli settlements on the West Bank, Israeli Mossad which was in collaboration with the vulnerable CIA operatives arranged terror attacks in Paris on the night of November 13, 2016. As part of the double game, these terror assaults were conducted by these secret agencies, particularly Mossad which was in connivance with the ISIS terrorists who used the home-grown terrorists of France.

French President Francois Hollande who declared emergency in the country, said, “It is an act of war that was committed by a terrorist army, a jihadist army, Daesh against France…France would act with “all the necessary means, and on all terrains, inside and outside, in coordination with our allies, who are, themselves, targeted by this terrorist threat.”

Israel succeeded in its sinister designs, Europe was put on high alert and Paris attacks were being taken as assaults on the whole continent. Afterwards, France started airstrikes on the ISIS targets in Syria.

However, owing to the irresponsible approach of Western leaders, far right-wing parties and “Stop Islam” movement in the West, especially in Europe are becoming popular by largely attracting their people. Amid a migrant crisis, sluggish economic growth and growing disillusionment with the European Union, right-wing parties in a growing number of European countries have made electoral gains. The right-wing parties range across a wide policy spectrum, from populist and nationalist to far-right neofascist.

But, some other developments such as criticism of the controversial Turkish-EU refugee deal by a number of human rights groups, Britain’s decision to leave the European Union (EU), after the referendum (Brexit) on June 24, 2016, prospects of Scotland and some other countries for separation from the EU, and the divide between the elite class which run multinational companies with the direct or indirect control of the Jews and the general masses who are suffering from multiple problems in wake of differences on the refugee crisis, Syrian war, Greece’s weak economy, violent protests and strikes against the labour laws in France in 2016 in favour of the employers at the cost of the employs etc.—the chances of European Union’s disintegration which will give a greater blow to the US-Europe alliance against Russia and a rift between the NATO countries, as noted in the recent past by the “Stop NATO protests” in Europe were quite opposite to the Israeli secret interests.

 Besides revival of the fake global war on terror, Israeli-led America also got the support of its Western allies (NATO) against Russia in relation to Syrian civil war, and as part of the double game and secret strategy, American jet fighters and those of its Western coalition started targeting the ISIS terrorists in Iraq and Syria.

But, some other developments—a rift was created on a number of issues between the President Trump and America’s Western allies, especially Europe, while failure of  CIA-Mossad scheme to promote sectarian violence in the Islamic World on larger scale, after creating a rift between Saudi Arabia and Iran, failure of the Saudi Arabia-led 40 countries military alliance of the Sunni Muslim nations, which was, in fact, against Iran and Yemen and visit of foreign minister of Saudi Arabia to Iraq on February 25, 2017 to reestablish cordial relationship between both the countries frustrated Israel.

 Besides, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan took steps to improve relations with Russia and to join Russian coalition in fighting against militants and ISIS. After the failed rebellion-attempt of July 15, 2016, Turkey’s president Erdogan and top officials of his government have held the US and CIA for the failed coup to topple his regime by backing and replacing Erdogan with the CIA’s “designated figurehead”, cleric Fethullah Gülen, currently living in Pennsylvania in the US.

It is mentionable that the US-led West, especially Europe has already started a new Cold War with Russia. The US has decided to station permanently additional troops in Eastern Europe as part of NATO move to defend the continent against the presumed threat of Moscow. In response, Moscow also responded that it would send 30,000 Russian troops along its western and southern borders. Especially, Tel Aviv wants to intensify this new Cold War so as to avoid the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, as some European countries have been emphasizing on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop the expansion of West Bank settlements and restart a negotiation process for the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Even, backing out of his earlier statement, pro-Israeli American President Trump has opposed the expansion of the settlement policy of Tel Aviv, while emphasizing the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue in wake of the debate between the Zionists and non-Zionist Jews  in relation to the two-state solution of the dispute.

Earlier, on January 15, 2016, France who is staunch supporter of the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue conducted a summit in Paris which was attended by 70 nations. In a statement, delegates at the summit also restated their commitment to the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and emphasized on them to restart negotiations. Palestinians welcomed the conference, but Israel called it “rigged”. The conference came at a time of rising tension in the region, and there were fears President-elect Trump’s plans to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem could stoke it further.

 In his speech to open the meeting, French President Francois Hollande said, “The international community had to be reminded of its obligations to build peace…the much-needed reconciliation between Israel and its neighbours can go forward”.

Besides, a prolonged war of history in Afghanistan by the US-led NATO countries, continued ambush attacks on their military installations and personnel by the freedom fighters (Taliban) have demoralized, particularly American military personnel who think that they have been sent abroad—Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere in the world to maintain the supremacy of Israel, instead of protecting American national interests or their citizens. The cost of the endless war in Afghanistan is rapidly increasing, adding to the plight of ordinary citizens of the US and its Western allies. In order to divert the attention of Americans and its Western public, Mossad-CIA are acting upon the secret strategy of the US and Israel.

Similarly, by pursuing the double standards of America in its worst form, Trump also intends to favour India, while opposing the nuclear weapons of Pakistan.. However, like Obama, Trump has brushed aside the ground realities that Indian Prime Minister Modi led by the ruling fundamentalist party BJP has been implementing anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan agenda, while encouraging Hindutva (Hindu nationalism).

As part of the double game, based in Afghanistan, operatives of American CIA, Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad which have well-established their collective secret network there, and are well-penetrated in the terrorist outfits like ISIS, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and their affiliated Taliban groups are using their terrorists to destabilize Tibetan regions of China, Iranian Sistan-Baluchistan and Pakistan by arranging the subversive activities. In this context, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is their special target. Recent acts of terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Balochistan are part of the same scheme. Notably, in one of the major raids Taliban killed more than 140 soldiers on April 22, this year on northern army base, located the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif. And quite contrary to his previous statement and setting aside the ground realities President Trump wants to dispatch more troops in Afghanistan.

In order to divert attention from NATO’s defeatism in Afghanistan, at a news conference in Kabul, on April 24, 2017, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Gen. John Nicholson, the American commander in Afghanistan supposedly said that Russia was providing weapons to the Taliban. But, Moscow denied these false allegations.

And, through the executive order, President Trump on January 27, 2017 blocked visas being issued to anyone from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Trump also announced strict conditions for the citizens from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon.  Although a federal judge temporary suspended the executive order on February 4, this year restoring travel for refugees and the people from seven Muslim countries, yet American President Trump stated that the executive order which he stated was part of an extreme vetting plan to keep out “radical Islamic terrorists—also established a religious test for refugees from Muslim nations, especially from Syria. Trump also ordered that Christians and others from minority religions be granted priority over Muslims.

President Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim order faced severe criticism inside America, opposition by 900 of the State Department diplomats and around the world, particularly Europe in wake of protest-rallies.

 US intelligence agencies, particularly FBI are still investigating that Russia and President Putin authorized the hacking in the November 8 US presidential election aimed to help Donald Trump to win it. Both Putin and Trump have denied the charges.

It was owing to these developments that Israeli Mossad with the assistance of its CIA and FBI sympathizers, while using ISIL militants accelerated terror assaults, as noted in case of the recent attacks in London, St. Petersburg (Metro train) and Stockholm.

Suddenly tension has intensified between Russia and the US with the order of the American President Donald Trump, when on April 7, this year, using the pretext of chemical weapons attacks and blaming the Assad regime, American warships fired 59 cruise missiles at the Shayrat Airfield controlled by the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces. This was supposedly in response to the deadly chemical weapons attack which killed at least 100 people and injured 400 individuals on April 4, 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun town, located in Syria’s northwestern province of Idlib, controlled by a rebel alliance which also includes a former Al-Qaeda affiliate.

Both Russia and Syria condemned aerial strikes in Syria as violation of the international law and the UN charter. In response to American airstrikes, Russia suspended a cooperation pact with the US aimed at avoiding incidents between the two countries’ planes over Syria by establishing direct hotlines between their militaries. Russian Foreign Ministry said, “The chemical attack was used as pretext for a demonstration of force.”

Some online sources confirmed that the “armed terrorist groups” supported by CIA and especially by Mossad are responsible for the attack of poisonous gases in Khan Sheikhoun.

 At the United Nations, Russia’s deputy ambassador, Vladimir Safronkov, strongly criticized the airstrikes what he called the US ‘‘flagrant violation of international law and an act of aggression’’ whose ‘‘consequences for regional and international security could be extremely serious.’’

On the other side, during an emergency session of the UN Security Council session, Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the UN said, ‘‘The world is waiting for Russia to reconsider its misplaced alliance with Bashar al-Assad…the United States took a very measured step…we are prepared to do more”.

It is noteworthy that America and its allies such as UK, Germany, France etc. who are determined to oust President Assad appreciated the US missile strikes. Some Muslim countries who support the CIA-Mossad rebels groups and ISIS terrorists also welcomed the missiles attack, calling it a courageous decision by Trump. Iran, which supports the other side of the six-year war, condemned the strikes, describing unilateral action as dangerous.

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu welcomed the US attack. Syrian rebel groups and ISIL outfit also appreciated America’s aerial attack.

 Hundreds of protesters have taken to the streets in cities across the US, as well as other countries, to demonstrate against the airstrikes in Syria. In London, the British anti-war campaign group Stop the War Coalition took to the streets of Westminster to protest the US airstrikes. In a message posted to the group’s Facebook page, the organization said, “The Stop the War Coalition condemns Donald Trump’s decision to launch attacks against Syrian targets…As well as deepening the tragedy of the Syrian people, this utterly irresponsible act threatens to widen the war and lead the West into military confrontation with Russia.”

On April 12, 2017, Russia vetoed a UN resolution condemning the killings, believed to have been carried out with sarin gas, and called on Moscow ally Syria to cooperate with an international investigation of events on the ground. The resolution was backed by America, UK and France who still want to oust President Assad, as part of regime change policy of the US to achieve Israeli illegal goals.

 Now, the US-led countries and Israel are manipulating the chemical attack of Khan Sheikhoun town against the Assad regime and Russia.

 Apart from the recent terror attacks in London, Stockholm, Paris, the chemical weapons attack inKhan Sheikhoun town of Syria was also false flag terror attack which was conducted particularly by Mossad in collaboration with the ISIS militants or the Syrian rebels groups to reunite the US and Western powers, especially Europe against the Assad regime. President Trump and America’s Western allies are still blaming Moscow and Assad government in this respect.

 In the meantime, no breakthrough has yet been achieved in the talks, at the UN-sponsored international donor conference which was held on April 4-5, 2017 in Brussels—the latest round of intra-Syrian negotiations which took place in Geneva recently. Some representatives of the US-led countries, including EU’s top diplomat held Syrian President Assad responsible for chemical weapons Idlib province, while, some emphasized upon investigation. Similarly, in the G-7 meeting,Foreign ministers from the Group of Seven industrialized nations who met April on 10, this year, divided in imposing new sanctions on Syria in relation to the chemical weapons attack, though America has imposed some new sanctions on Syria on some limited scale.

 Meanwhile, on April 17, 2017, Russia warned the United States against any “unilateral action” against North Korea, saying any response to Pyongyang’s nuclear activities should not violate “international law,” amid reports of potential military confrontation between North Korea and the US. Earlier, on April, 14, this year, China also warned America in the same terms.

 On the same day, North Korea, for its part, issued a statement which denounced what it called the Trump administration’s “maniacal military provocations,” including the deployment of the carrier group. The statement elaborated, “Nothing will be more foolish, if the United States thinks it can deal with us the way it treated Iraq and Libya, miserable victims of its aggression, and Syria, which did not respond immediately even after it was attacked.”

When American President Trump’s extremist policies were strongly criticized inside America and around the world, including especially her Western allies, his advisers, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, neoconservatives and Israel-backed officials directed him to implement dual strategy of Bush and Obama, with the aim to keep America and Western allies, particularly Europe united against Syria, Russia, China, Pakistan etc., while covertly continuing anti-Muslim rhetoric so as to safeguard the interests of Tel Aviv.

Hence, President Trump has softened his extremist policies. Trump voiced optimism that the US had successfully enlisted China to try to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program through negotiations. In a news conference alongside Italian Premier Paolo Gentiloni, Trump also stated on April 20, 2017 that the US is committed to a strong Europe, though he didn’t say directly whether he prefers that the European Union stay intact.

Regarding Iran, backing out of his earlier statements, Trump and his top officials have been walking a narrow line as they seek to show an aggressive stance. While disparaging the nuclear deal and accusing Iran of fomenting violence and terrorism throughout the Middle East, Trump has avoided committing to abandoning the nuclear agreement, a move which would be staunchly opposed by US businessmen and European allies.

 Trump stated on April 13, 2017 that US relations with Russia may be at “an all-time low” and declared a new-found faith in NATO, suggesting the alliance was “no longer obsolete”.

 Despite this, the US president’s remarks at the White House followed a two-hour meeting in Moscow between his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson and President Putin which failed to resolve any of the deep differences between the two nations on Syria, Ukraine and Moscow’s alleged interference in the 2016 US election. Bur, Tillerson’s meeting with his counterpart and Putin led to the removal of the most immediate threat of escalation, as Putin “reaffirmed” the maintenance of a hotline between the two countries’ militaries to avoid midair collisions between their aircraft operating in Syrian airspace.

 In the latest of a series of dramatic foreign policy reversals in recent days, Trump also dropped an allegation he had repeated throughout his presidential campaign, telling the Wall Street Journal that the Chinese were “not currency manipulators”.

 Following the dual diplomacy of Bush and Obama, Trump has also started double game. It could also be judged from the US State Department’s recently leaked documents which said that the Trump administration announced last month that it planned on reducing the diplomacy and foreign aid budget by 28 per cent in the next fiscal year, while increasing funds for military programmes and preserving Israel’s  current $3.1bn (£2.4bn) security aid package. The leaked documents proposed a cut in assistance for several countries across the world, but a 4.6 per cent rise for both the West Bank and Gaza.

In the meantime, results of the referendum in Turkey, held on April 16 went in favour of the Turkish President Erdogan, expanding his powers. It gave another setback to Washington and Tel Aviv who were covertly backing Kurds and ISIL militant against the Erdogan’s regime. The EU which has criticized Erdogan’s referendum earlier this month, which will also revive the death penalty would be the final blow to any chance that the EU could still let Turkey join. The warning from Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn came that EU will redefine its relationship with Ankara.

Notably, despite dispatch of additional troops to assist the ISIS and rebel groups, Analysts opine thatowing to the skilful diplomacy of Russian President Putin, very soon, Russian-led coalition will liberate Syria and Iraq from the hold of the US-Israeli-led some Western powers. Therefore, in the pretext of targeting ISI terrorists, in depression, Israeli has also started airstrikes in Syria.

 Nevertheless, like Trump, Israeli rulers have also been confused due to the above mentioned developments which do not favour Israel like the past, while, still some CIA agents, Indian RAW and especially Mossad want to divide the world on religious lines.

 Although President Trump has softened his external policy, yet he is implementing the conspiracy of Mossad and RAW, as his rigid and racist policies, including America’s Western partners continue against the Muslims. If not checked in time by the peace-loving Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Jews and Buddhists, these policies of the President Donald Trump who is particularly completing the extremist agenda of Israel are likely to result into more recruitment in the militant outfits, especially in the ISIS group, inspiring the extremist Muslims for more terrorism-related attacks. Israel, who will never accept the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue, will prefer to seek the final revenge by bringing about a major war between the Muslim and the Christian worlds or to cause a major war between Russia and the US-led some Western countries, which will convert the entire world into holocaust.

Nonetheless, various leaders and politicians of the West, especially those of the EU who are pro-Macron congratulated him in the victory of the first round of the presidential election. The US President Donald Trump, who had suggested the recent terror attack in Paris could have an impact on the vote, has not commented.

Unlike several of his opponents on the left and right, Macron has avoided making pronouncements against Muslim dress codes and discriminatory laws which are, in fact, being used in persecution of the Muslims in France.

Returning to our earlier discussions, like the train bombings in Spain, three days before France’s presidential elections, shooting at Champs-Elysees-Paris-famous Boulevard was conducted by Mossad through ISIS to ensure the victory of the pro-Israeli Emmanuel Macron in the first round of the election. In other worlds, Israeli won the first round of the French election.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants,Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations



Elor Azaria and the Myth of Jewish Universal Values

The Jewish lobbies, both Zionists and ‘antis,’ are more obnoxious and arrogant than ever.

Gilad Atzmon interviewed by Alimuddin Usmani for La Pravda and E&R

Alimuddin Usmani: IDF soldier Elor Azaria was convicted of manslaughter for shooting dead a  wounded Palestinian. The case deeply divided Israel. Many Israelis said he was just doing his duty and was scapegoated by the army. On the other hand, a military spokesperson said“This is not the IDF, these are not the values of the IDF and these are not the values of the Jewish people”. Gideon Lévy called the 18 month sentence “a sentence fit for a bicycle thief”.

What are your comments on this case?

Gilad Atzmon: A lot of issues are at stake here. Azaria was obviously a cold-blooded murderer who shot a wounded Palestinian in the head. Basically, he committed an execution in broad daylight.  From an Israeli perspective, Azaria’s main crime was being caught on camera. Yet, the circumstances in which he operated were pretty impossible. These Israeli soldiers are deployed in policing tasks. They, the occupiers, are engaged in conflict with the indigenous people of the land. It is a recipe for disaster. More often than not, Israeli soldiers and police forces end up operating as execution squads. Yet, these vile practices do not necessarily reflect any official military order. Instead, they bring to light the atmosphere within the Israeli street: the PRE-traumatic stress, the impunity to kill, the lack of any ethical sense and so on.

Putting aside Azaria’s brutal act, the court case exposed a deep conflict within Israeli society. Zionism, as we know, promised to make the Jews ‘people like other people.’ Yet, the reality on the ground suggests that Israelis have to spend a lot of time and energy concealing the fact that they actually share very little with other people, if anything at all.

Azaria was found guilty of manslaughter, which is surprising considering the clear evidence of 1st degree murder. Yet he was sentenced to just 18 months in prison.  The explanation of this discrepancy between the court’s verdict and the light sentence can be understood on more than one level.

Military courts, as opposed to civilian courts, are not committed to any notion of ethics but rather to the needs of the military system. For instance, a military court sentencing a soldier to death at daybreak is not guided by the seeking of justice but by the needs of the system. It attempts to deter other soldiers from insubordination, cowardice or defection.

Similarly, because Israel needs the IDF to sustain the occupation, Israel must make sure that its soldiers are confident that the system will always eventually stand by them even if they are  caught in an unfortunate situation such as shooting a wounded Palestinian in the head.

On the day of the verdict, veteran chief of staff Moshe Yaalon, admitted that his initial and harsh reaction to the Azaria incident was because there was an immediate need to calm the situation on the ground. He basically had to throw something at the Palestinians, hoping to prevent mass protest and possible escalation. But at the end of the day, Israel wants the Palestinians to know that any form of resistance will be met with by radical and unpredictable measures.

This leads us to the notion of Jewish values in general and the IDF’s moral values in particular. As I have said many times before, there are no Jewish universal values. Judaism and Jewish culture are tribally-oriented. Moreover, Judaism is guided by Torah and Mitzvoth (commandments). Accordingly, the Jew is expected to follow rules rather than forming ethical judgments. Haskalah, the Jewish enlightenment, was an attempt to universalize Judaism by mimicking European secular thinking. Thus, those universal values that were introduced by Haskalah are not Jewish, but simply borrowed by the Jews from their host nations.

Zionism was a promise to civilise the Jews by means of ‘homecoming.’ It implicitly accepted that Jews weren’t people like all other people, but it believed they could be. Zionism promised to make the Jews productive, to gravitate towards labour and farming. The IDF was supposed to be a humane and ethical military force.  I grew up with photos of Israeli soldiers giving their own water to Egyptian POWs in the desert (1967). It took a few years before I learned that in fact, the Sinai desert was a slaughter zone for thousands of Egyptian soldiers who were sent to their deaths in the burning sand. It took a few more years before I became aware of the Nakba horror – the brutal ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population in 1948. Just 3 years after the liberation of Auschwitz the young Israeli army, together with Jewish paramilitary forces, massacred dozens of  Palestinian villages. I assume I don’t have to go into details of current Israeli war crimes.  To sum it up,  the IDF as never been a moral army. IDF moral values are a myth. What we have instead is a growing record of crimes against humanity.  The facade of the military trial was, in practice, an attempt to convey the image of ethical thinking. After all, ‘by way of deception’ must be a kosher procedure.


Alimuddin Usmani: The Jewish Telegraphic Agency wrote that Socialist primary winner in France, Benoit Hamon, had the backing of prominent anti-semites. Before the vote, Dieudonné and Alain Soral called for Manuel Valls to be knocked out of the race and Valls, known for his zealous support of Israel, did indeed receive a slap in the face.

What do these things reveal about the mood of French people?

Gilad Atzmon: It isn’t just France. We detect a global fatigue with Jewish politics and lobbying. We see it in Britain and in the USA – and Jews are the first to notice it. Jewish organisations have long been complaining about the rapid growth in ‘antisemitic’ incidents (whatever that means). Yet, instead of engaging in some elementary self-reflection, asking themselves what is it about them and their behaviour that brings such anger and opposition, these organisations manage to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. Instead of opening the discussion on Israel and Jewish power, they use every means at their disposal to suppress freedom of speech and to silence legitimate criticism of Jewish ID politics, global Zionism and the brutality of the Jewish state.

One would think that, after the Shoah, Jews would learn the necessary lessons and would go out of their way to conceal Jewish arrogance. But In practice, the complete opposite has happened. The Jewish lobbies, both Zionists and ‘antis,’ are more obnoxious and arrogant than ever.


Alimuddin Usmani: CRIF defines itself as the political representation and official mouthpiece of the organized Jewish community. In the FAQ on it’s website we find this question : Does CRIF have an influence on French politics? 

And the answer is:

Yes, CRIF influences French politics by defending its vision of what should be the public policy against racism and anti-Semitism, offering its thoughts on the transmission of the memory of the Holocaust, or defending its idea of the peace in the Middle East.

In summary, CRIF acts exactly like any other association concerned by the public interest.   

What do you think of this answer?

Gilad Atzmon: I believe that it is a valid answer as long as French people are willing to accept that one minority group that just happens to be privileged can dominate the discourse on public matters such as racism, French past and foreign affairs. But Jewish history actually teaches us that these celebrations of Jewish power always come to a tragic end.


Alimuddin Usmani: On CNN, Bernard-Henri Lévy wrote that the Trump administration has a problem with Jews.

How do you explain that BHL is so worried about Trump?

Gilad Atzmon: It is simple. BHL realises that, considering his intensive bellicosity and war-mongering, he himself is a serious Jewish problem. Zionism was all about a promised land yet global Zionism, for which BHL is a prime conduit, signals the transformation from a ‘promised land’ into a ‘promised planet.’ It is, in fact, immoral interventionists such as BHL who bring disasters on the Jews.

When BHL accuses Trump, the first American Jewish President, of antisemitsm, he may be providing us with a glimpse into his own sense of guilt. It is a last and desperate attempt to prevent the floodlight from exposing the criminal continuum between Israel and the Ziocon wars spreading around our planet.

Alimuddin Usmani: Recently you gave concerts and talks in Czech Republic. You announced that you will be back there in June. What do you like about this country?

Gilad Atzmon: pretty much everything. It is a country that has managed to sustain its culture, its work ethic, its cuisine, its productivity. It is a country that is living in peace with its past and sees a prospect of a future ahead.

Brzezinski: US must stop following Israel “like a stupid mule”

Leading US strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski – unofficial dean of the realist school of American foreign policy experts – has drawn an unflattering picture of US-Israel relations.

by Kevin Barrett


In a speech to the National Iranian American Council, Brzezinksi said:

“I don’t think there is an implicit obligation for the United States to follow like a stupid mule whatever the Israelis do. If they decide to start a war, simply on the assumption that we’ll automatically be drawn into it, I think it is the obligation of friendship to say, ‘you’re not going to be making national decision for us.’ I think that the United States has the right to have its own national security policy.”

By denying any US “obligation” to “follow like a stupid mule whatever the Israelis do,” Brzezinski accurately implied that this is exactly what the US has been doing up until now. And by plaintively opining that “the United States has the right to have its own national security policy,” the former National Security Adviser underlined the fact that since the assassination of John F. Kennedy, who secretly went to war with Ben Gurion in a doomed effort to abort the Israeli nuclear weapons program, the US has not enjoyed that right.

Brzezinski’s assertion that the US is being led by the nose like a stupid mule by the Israelis is perhaps the most candid statement of its kind ever uttered in public by a high-level US strategist. Brzezinski’s remarks reflect the mainstreaming of the arguments presented by leading US political scientists Walt and Mearsheimer in their book The Israel Lobby.

Indeed, Brzezinski has gone much further than Walt and Mearsheimer, who couch their critique of the tail-wags-the-dog US-Israel relationship in extremely cautious language. By laying it out so explicitly, Brzezinski is in effect joining the ranks of such scholars as James Petras and Grant Smith, who leave Walt and Mearsheimer in the dust as they boldly and accurately describe the outrageous, destructive, and quite literally criminal Israeli domination of the US. (As Smith argues in Foreign Agents, the hundreds of thousands of members of the Zionist Power Configuration described by Petras are acting as unregistered agents of a foreign power; if the law were properly enforced, they would all be in prison.)

The strong words from Brzezinski, and the mainstreaming of similar sentiments, illustrate a growing backlash against Israel’s ever-more-shameless, ever-more poorly concealed domination of the USA. The post-9/11 era has witnessed a rash of unbelievably arrogant Israeli actions, including:

  •  Benjamin Netanyahu’s reaction to 9/11. (He triumphantly chortled that 9/11 was “very good,” then hastily added that he meant it was very good for Israel.)
  •  Ariel Sharon’s reaction to 9/11: “We Jews control America, and the Americans know it.”
  •  Allegedly retired Mossad chief spook Mike Harari’s  huge victory party in Bangkok, Thailand celebrating the success of the 9/11 operation.
  •  The team of “dancing Israelis,” later outed as Mossad spies by The Forward, who were arrested for wildly celebrating the success of the 9/11 operation.
  • The use of organized crime assets like then-NYC Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik to cover up the 9/11 story of the century: The arrest of Israelis with vans full of explosives trying to blow up New York’s bridges and tunnels on the morning of 9/11.
  •  The actions of newly-retired Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak in the immediate aftermath of 9/11: Barak, Christopher Bollyn’s top 9/11 suspect, had come to the US for mysterious reasons after stepping down as PM in March 2001, and immediately after 9/11 all but ordered the US to declare a “war on terror” and invade Afghanistan and other countries – making him the first public figure to describe the “war on terror” response to 9/11.
  •  The Israel lobby’s demolition of the Congressional career of 9/11-truth-seeker Rep. Cynthia McKinney.
  •  The Israel lobby’s persecution of American Muslims including Sami al-Arian, who was imprisoned and tortured for the “terrorist” crime of supporting the Palestinians’ right to defend themselves.
  •  The Israel lobby’s persecution of Christian peacemaker Mark Siljander, who was sent to prison on trumped-up charges for the crime of telling other Christians the truth about Islam, and thereby undermining the Israelis’ islamophobic “war on terror” narrative.
  •  The Israel lobby’s increasing use of its organized crime assets to dominate American politics through blackmail, fraud, drug trafficking, money laundering, assassination, and other crimes.
  • Israel’s assassination threats against President Obama, notably the one delivered by unregistered Israeli agent Andrew Adler.
  • Israel’s blatant intervention in US elections, including its use of organized crime in vote-fraud efforts – which may finally have failed in 2012 when Netanyahu imploded at the UN, and his hand-picked puppet Mitt Romney imploded in the final election results.
  • Israel’s ongoing attempts to drag the US into wars-for-Israel that damage US interests – including wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan and elsewhere, as well as Israel’s proposed attack on Iran.
  • And finally, of course, Israel’s ever-more-arrogant refusal to do what the US and every other country on earth insists it must do: Return to its pre-1967 borders and make peace with its neighbors.

Is the “stupid American mule” described by Brzezinski finally waking up?

Or, to use Anatole Lieven’s animal metaphor: Is the dog finally noticing that “this is not a case of the tail wagging the dog, but of the tail wagging the unfortunate dog around the room and banging its head against the ceiling” ?


We are witnessing an historical reversal in France, where the ancient political spectrum is exploding into pieces as new fractures appear – The French scuttle their own ship

The French scuttle their own ship

We are witnessing an historical reversal in France, where the ancient political spectrum is exploding into pieces as new fractures appear. Because of the intensive storm of media propaganda which has recently almost drowned the nation, the French can now perceive nothing more than the essential markers, and cling to red lines which no longer exist. However, the facts are clear, and certain evolutions are predictable.


JPEG - 19.8 kb
Private soiree at La Rotonde – congratulated as the new French President, Emmanuel Macron welcomes personalities from the CAC40 and the entertainment world on the evening of the first round of the election. Seen here with his friend, the banker Jacques Attali.

After a very agitated electoral campaign, the French chose Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen for the second round of the Presidential election.

Already, almost all the losing candidates, with the exception of Jean-Luc Melenchon – and that’s no accident – have appealed to their followers to support Macron, who should then be easily elected.

The two major historical parties which have governed France since the beginning of the Fifth Republique – Les Republicains (ex-Gaullists) and the Parti Socialist (ex-Jaurèsians) – have been beaten. A newcomer, En Marche !, has made it to first place on the podium, facing the Front National.

Is there fascist candidate?

This is not the first time that this sort of cleavage has occurred in the history of France – on one hand, a partisan of an alliance with what seems for the moment to be the world’s greatest power (the United States), and on the other, a movement seeking national independence – on one hand, the totality of the ruling class, without notable exceptions, and on the other, a party cobbled together of various bits and pieces, composed mostly of proletarians, two thirds of whom come from the right wing and one third from the left.

Evidently, the next French President will be Mr. Macron – a man from the Banque Rothschild & Cie, now supported by the totality of the business leaders of the CAC40.

However, whether our prejudices like it or not, the unanimity of the power of money is the fundamental characteristic of fascist parties.

This unanimity of Grand Capital is always accompanied by a National unity which erases the differences. In order to become equal, we must become identical. This is what President Hollande began with the law « Marriage for all », in 2012-13. Presented as establishing equality between citizens, whatever their sexual orientation, it posited de facto that the needs of couples with children are the same as those of gay couples. And yet there were several other more intelligent solutions. The opposition to this law led to a number of very important demonstrations, but they unfortunately failed to provide any other proposition, and were sometimes mixed with homophobic slogans.

Identically, the attack against Charlie-Hebdo was celebrated to the chant of « I am Charlie ! », and those citizens who declared that they were « not Charlie » were prosecuted.

It is a shame that the French people do not react either against the unanimity of Grand Capital, nor against the injunctions to use the same judicial techniques and to favour the same slogans. On the contrary, they insist on considering the current Front National as « fascist », with no other argument than its ancient past.

Can a fascist candidate be resisted?

In the majority, the French think that Emmanuel Macron will be a President à la Sarkozy and à la Hollande, men who will pursue their political beliefs. They therefore expect to see their country increasingly decline. They accept this curse, thinking that in this way, they will evacuate the menace of the extreme right.

Many of them remember that at its creation, the Front National gathered together the losers of the Second World War and the losers of the social politics of the colonisation of Algeria. They focused on the figures of a few men who had collaborated with the Nazi occupier, without seeing that the Front National of today has absolutely nothing in common with those people. They persist in holding Second-Lieutenant Jean-Marie Le Pen (Marine’s father) responsible for the Algerian tragedy, and exonerating from their responsibilities the Socialist leaders of the time, particularly their dreadful Minister of the Interior, François Mitterrand.

No-one remembers that in 1940, it was a Fascist minister, General Charles De Gaulle, who refused the shameful armistice with Nazi Germany. This man, the official heir apparent of Marechal Philippe Petain (who was his daughter’s godfather), charged into the Resistance alone. Struggling against his education and his prejudices, he slowly gathered around himself, against the wishes of his ex-mentor, French people from all horizons to defend the Republic. He linked up with a left-wing personality, Jean Moulin, who, a few years earlier, had secretly embezzled money from the Minister of the Marine, and trafficked weapons with which to support the Spanish Republicans against the fascists.

No-one remembers that a colleague of De Gaulle, Robert Schuman, wrote his signature on the armisitice of shame, then, a few years later, founded the European Economic Community (currently the European Union) – a supra-national organisation based on the Nazi model of the « New European Order », against the Soviet Union and today against Russia.

The Obama-Clinton model

Emmanuel Macron has recieved the strong support of ex-US President Barack Obama, and has gathered a team for foreign policy composed of the main neo-conservative diplomats. He makes no secret of supporting the external politics of the US Democratic Party.

Barack Obama, although he presented his foreign policy with a rhetoric which was diametrically opposed to that of his predecessor, the Republican George W. Bush, in practice followed his lead in all points. The two men successively continued the same plan for the destruction of the societies of the Greater Middle East – a plan which has already caused more than 3 million deaths. Emmanuel Macron supports this policy, although we do not yet know whether he intends to justify it by speaking of « democratisation » or « spontaneous revolution ».

If Hillary Clinton was beaten during the US election, Emmanuel Macron had to be elected in France.

Nothing proves that Marine Le Pen will be capable of playing the rôle of Charles De Gaulle, but three things are certain :
- Just as in 1940, the British, choking back their disgust, welcomed De Gaulle to London, today Russia could support Le Pen.
- Just as in 1939, only a few Communists braved the orders of their party and joined the Resistance, there will only be a few of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s partisans who will take that step. But as from the Nazi attack on the URSS, it was the whole Communist party who supported De Gaulle and formed the majority of the Resistance. There is no doubt that in the years to come, Mélenchon will fight side by side with Le Pen.
- Emmanuel Macron will never understand people who resist the domination of their homeland. So he will not understand any better the people of the Greater Middle East who struggle for real independence alonside Hezbollah, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Pete Kimberley


Duff on Press TV: Putin Diplomacy “Trumps” US, Israeli Plans


Will Le Pen be put to the Sword?

They say that the pen is mightier than the sword, but sadly it rather looks as though Marine Le Pen will be put to the sword when France votes in the second round of the presidential election on May 7th. A French presidential election is not at all like an American one. The losing candidate doesn’t start to throw champagne bottles at TV sets within a few hours of the polls closing. The process takes a few weeks.

Of course Marine Le Pen is a rather classier lady than Hillary Clinton, no offense intended. It’s unlikely, if she loses, that she will be throwing anything at a TV set, let alone champagne. They don’t throw champagne away in France, well not good champagne anyway.

The odds are stacked against Marine. Her support base is fairly narrow and the entire French media and pro-EU political establishment is arrayed against her. Socialist, communist and soft right votes will tend to go to the EU-loving centrist candidate, Macron. If you’ve never heard of him, don’t worry. There’s no reason why you should have. He’s a colorless nonentity, no offense intended, chosen precisely because nobody knew he was and he hadn’t managed to offend anybody in his brief and undistinguished political career.

I know he was French finance minister, but how many people could name the current French finance minister? I’d have to Google it. France is in the euro, so all key economic decisions are taken in Frankfurt anyway.

The Fifth Republic

The key to understanding the Fifth Republic is that it is essentially a Vichyist construct. Please don’t remind me that De Gaulle was Free French. He was, but he was also blackmailed by the Abwehr and in turn the DVD over his sexuality (he was gay). After the Allies liberated Paris in 1944, only the German military withdrew. The Abwehr stayed behind.

Our community partner Jerry was keen to regain control of Paris. Since the German army had been comprehensively beaten, the only way to do that was by bribery, blackmail, terrorism and assassination, i.e. the usual Hun methods. Jerry sponsored a violent campaign of terrorism in Algeria and cut a deal with De Gaulle. In return for being installed in power he would support French membership of the EEC and govern France, in effect as a German puppet.

Unfortunately for Jerry we found out about De Gaulle’s homosexuality and dealings with the Abwehr – we had never entirely entrusted ‘mon general’. We were able to leverage this intelligence into two very handy vetoes of the applications to join the EEC made by two German assets, Harold Macmillan and Harold Wilson, in each case supported by the Cabinet Office, then under firm German control.

Once De Gaulle was no longer of any use to the Jerries they dumped him, in 1968, organising a few riots in Paris. Jerry knows how to organise a riot. De Gaulle’s successor, Pompidou, was a former Vichyist and a German asset, who of course tried to pretend that he had been Free French during the war.

The electoral system of the Fifth Republic is designed to favour centrists. The Jerries love centrists – they tend to be unprincipled, they’re cheap and they can pull in votes from the soft right and the soft left. Remember it was the Zentrum (Center Party) which delivered key votes in the Reichstag for our community partners the Nazis.

The DVD has a black operation in Paris, just at it has in London. The Jerries never voluntarily shut down their intelligence network in any country they occupy. This black agency co-ordinates terror attacks and assassination attempts on patriotic French politicians.

The Jerries are afraid of Marine Le Pen and have good reason to be. The sad reality is that the Hun knocked the stuffing out of the French at Verdun, ably assisted by their man General Pétain, who agreed to sacrifice French troops by the hundreds of thousands. The seeds of the French collapse in 1940 were sown 23 years before. Unlike the French political and bureaucratic establishment, however, Marine Le Pen has spirit.

My Prediction

Sadly, despite the discreet support of President Trump, my prediction is that Macron will win. He simply has too much support. The polls are saying that it’s a done deal, 60:40. It may be a bit tighter than that – no polling organisation in the Western world is capable of objectively assessing support for conservative causes or candidates, but the errors are usually of the order of 4-5%.

I can see at least half of Fillon’s voters backing Marine. Conventional wisdom says only a third, but that may ignore the effect of the recent wave of German-backed Islamist terrorist attacks in France. Marine might get 45%.
I do however predict her winning in 2022, always assuming that the Jerries don’t stage a re-run of November 1963 and assassinate her first. She will need careful guarding between now and then.

Macron will govern France in the German, not the French, interest. He won’t even try to solve France’s problems, let alone actually solve them. In five years’ time Macron will no longer be a fresh face, just another failed, establishment politician. Thankfully his somewhat artificial party is unlikely to win a majority in the National Assembly next Sunday.

The EU Summit

As I predicted, the Brexit negotiations have turned into a farce. They’re over before they’ve even begun. The EU27 have rubber-stamped Donald Tusk’s recommendations, which were doubtless dictated to him by Angela Merkel. The EU will demand an exit fee before discussing tariff-free access to the so-called single market, which we don’t want anyway, given our massive trade deficit with the EU27.

The media are talking nonsense, if that’s not a tautology, about the amounts Britain ‘owes’ the EU. We owe the EU nothing, apart from our contribution to the EU budget between now and March 2019 when we finally leave.

There is no provision for exit fees in Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. This can probably be put down to German arrogance. They were so sure of their control over EU member states, they never really thought that Article 50 would ever be used. Right up to the count they thought that they had successfully murdered their way to victory in last year’s referendum by assassinating Jo Cox. Victory was a sweet moment over opponents willing to drench themselves in the blood of a harmless, innocent Labour MP.

Article 50 is sloppily drafted, like much of EU law, but there is no doubt that a departing member state does not owe a penny to those that remain. EU pensions are an EU responsibility, e.g. The EU27 accept this, which is why they’re demanding an exorbitant sum as the price of tariff-free access to the single market, which they’re probably not willing to offer anyway without uncontrolled labor dumping on the UK. They want us to stump up the cash first, against a non-binding commitment to agree tariff-free access, which will be worth about as much as our community partner Adolf Hitler’s promise not to invade Poland.

This is all good news. The very last thing the UK wants or needs is a deal with the EU. They wouldn’t agree to any deal which was fair to Britain. The important thing is that we’ve served the Article 50 notice. We don’t need the agreement of the EU27 to leave – we’re off. These negotiations are about a possible post-departure deal.

German assets in Washington are doing their best to block the Anglo-American free trade deal. I still think it will happen, but it will take some time, given Germany’s evident influence over the Trump Administration’s foreign policy.

Sergeant Alexander Blackman RM

I refrained from commenting further on Sgt Blackman’s case lest I prejudice his appeal. I am delighted that he has now been released from prison, but I am not buying the substituted manslaughter verdict. Apart from anything else, the manslaughter conviction means that he won’t be able to own a firearm for at least five years, which is ridiculous.

Police protection in this country is largely a joke, as Theresa May saw when the Metropolitan Police let a terrorist into the Palace of Westminster in the hope that he would assassinate her. Most police forces are controlled by the Cabinet Office and would be unwilling or unable to offer any meaningful protection to Sgt Blackman. No Second Amendment rights here, let alone an NRA!

I should recap, for those unfamiliar with the case. Sgt Blackman, outrageously, was prosecuted by the Cabinet-Office controlled Service Prosecuting Authority, a pointless quango forced on us by the anti-British European Court of Human Rights, for the non-offense of slotting a badly wounded Taliban terrorist in Afghanistan.

The terrorist in question was part of a cell which had very properly been strafed by an Apache helicopter gunship. At no stage was an autopsy ever performed on this muppet. There are two major legal problems with causation for culpable homicide:

(1) There was no medical evidence tending to establish that the said terrorist was still clinging on to life when Sgt Blackman shot him. He might have been, but the prosecution had to prove that the round that Sgt Blackman fired accelerated his death, and

(2) Even if he was still alive the unlawful enemy combatant had been hit with cannon fire. Putting the matter at its lowest, he had been fatally wounded. Humanely dispatching mortally wounded enemy combatants, whether lawful or unlawful, is both morally and legally justified and in accordance with the honorable traditions of men at arms. Whatever may be said at the time, it is an act of mercy. Those arguing otherwise are welcome to try dying in agony and see how they feel about a quick bullet instead.

The Laws of War do not oblige you to be nice to the enemy you are dispatching, not least if he or she is an unlawful combatant who has been waging war outside the Laws. This particular terrorist seems to have been a murderous piece of filth, no offense intended, who richly deserved to die. Doubtless he had raped and murdered in the brutal cause to which he had dedicated himself. He was a Taliban terrorist after all, not a doctor with MSF.

The British legal system has failed Sgt Blackman, the Royal Marines and Western Civilization. Sgt Blackman put his life on the line to free Afghanistan from tyranny and barbarism. The least we owe him is to clear his name. He should be granted a Royal Pardon, restored to the ranks and promoted. I’m not saying that he should have been given a medal for slotting this particular terrorist in these particular circumstances, if he did in fact slot him, but he should not have been condemned, let alone prosecuted.

The Service Prosecuting Authority should be abolished and the old system restored. The learned trial judge, with great respect, should be shuffled off to a quiet county court somewhere, preferably in the North, or sent out to
New South Wales.

So who froze the rabbit?

The fate of Simon the big bunny has made headlines across the English-speaking world. The Chinese aren’t concerned of course, since he wasn’t a panda.

Not content with dragging elderly doctors off their aircraft in order to make them miss their appointments, United Airlines has now taken to killing fluffy bunnies. What on earth are they on?

If they were going to freeze a bunny to death, couldn’t they have chosen a skinny one? Instead they had to choose the fluffiest, cutest bunny they could find, and a British one at that. No offense, but they might have been better off freezing poor old Dr Dao to death and dragging Simon off the plane unconscious.

I’m glad my frequent flyer miles with United have expired! Next internal flight I take in the States will be on American. There is no sign, yet, that the DVD were involved, although knocking off fluffy bunnies would be just their style.

Why is France’s Macron Threatening Poland With Sanctions?

French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron presents his program

© Sputnik/ Irina Kalashnikova

14:31 30.04.2017Get short URL
142 0 0

French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron said that if elected, he would call for EU sanctions against Poland. Macron’s threat flies in the face of Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski, who only recently hailed Macron as “a predictable and experienced” politician.

In an interview with Sputnik, Polish political analyst and journalist Konrad Rekas said that the ruling Law and Justice Party had shot itself in the foot by rejecting Marine Le Pen’s offer of a serious discussion of the EU’s future and reaffirming its allegiance to Brussels and EU supporters at home by backing Macron whom they never bothered to learn about even during the ongoing presidential campaign in France.

“France’s fledgling Demo-Liberal political camp is totally at variance with what Law and Justice Party’s voters are holding out for. It wants a stronger EU and will try to persuade Poland and Hungary to embrace Brussel’s idea of a European super-state. This new diplomatic and geopolitical flop speaks volumes about the party’s dim view of the European future,” Konrad Rekas told Sputnik Poland.When asked about the unfolding scandal in France over the planned closure of a Whirlpool factory in northern France and its relocation on Poland causing hundreds of French workers to lose their jobs, he said that Poland is just a passive victim of a game played by the world’s high and mighty.

“Securing foreign investments has been topmost on our government’s mind ever since 1989. Another underlying premise  was that Poland is competitive because labor here is cheap. As a result, our cheap labor moved to places where it was no longer cheap and Poland ended up as an assembly line foreign companies use to put together their products,” Rekas emphasized.

He added that just as before, Poland remains a source of cheap labor and a major market for outsourcing in Europe.Macron’s criticism of Warsaw comes amid an ongoing row over the planned closure of a Whirlpool tumble-dryer factory in France as production shifts to Poland.

Emmanuel Macron criticized local companies, which employ cheaper labor from other EU member-states or move production to lower-wage countries like Poland.

Never miss a story again — sign up to our Telegram channel and we’ll keep you up to speed!

Here Come The Bilderbergs: The Complete 2014 Cast And Host Nation Breakdown

Tyler Durden's picture


The only thing more ominous for the world than a Fed raising interest rates is a Bilderberg Group meeting. The concentration of politicians and business leaders has meant the organisation, founded at the Bilderberg Hotel near Arnhem in 1954, has faced accusations of secrecy. Meetings take place behind closed doors, with a ban on journalists. As InfoWars notes, the 2014 Bilderberg meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark is taking place amidst a climate of panic for many of the 120 globalists set to attend the secretive confab, with Russia’s intransigence on the crisis in Ukraine and the anti-EU revolution sweeping Europe posing a serious threat to the unipolar world order Bilderberg spent over 60 years helping to build.

Current list of Participants (source):


  • FRA    Castries, Henri de    Chairman and CEO, AXA Group


  • DEU    Achleitner, Paul M.    Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG
  • DEU    Ackermann, Josef    Former CEO, Deutsche Bank AG
  • GBR    Agius, Marcus    Non-Executive Chairman, PA Consulting Group
  • FIN    Alahuhta, Matti    Member of the Board, KONE; Chairman, Aalto University Foundation
  • GBR    Alexander, Helen    Chairman, UBM plc
  • USA    Alexander, Keith B.    Former Comdr, U.S. Cyber Command; Former Director, NSA
  • USA    Altman, Roger C.    Executive Chairman, Evercore
  • FIN    Apunen, Matti    Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA
  • DEU    Asmussen, Jörg    State Secretary of Labour and Social Affairs
  • HUN    Bajnai, Gordon    Former Prime Minister; Party Leader, Together 2014
  • GBR    Balls, Edward M.    Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer
  • PRT    Balsemão, Francisco Pinto    Chairman, Impresa SGPS
  • FRA    Baroin, François    Member of Parliament (UMP); Mayor of Troyes
  • FRA    Baverez, Nicolas    Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
  • USA    Berggruen, Nicolas    Chairman, Berggruen Institute on Governance
  • ITA    Bernabè, Franco    Chairman, FB Group SRL
  • DNK    Besenbacher, Flemming    Chairman, The Carlsberg Group
  • NLD    Beurden, Ben van    CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
  • SWE    Bildt, Carl    Minister for Foreign Affairs
  • NOR    Brandtzæg, Svein Richard    President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA
  • INT    Breedlove, Philip M.    Supreme Allied Commander Europe
  • AUT    Bronner, Oscar    Publisher, Der STANDARD Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.
  • SWE    Buskhe, Håkan    President and CEO, Saab AB
  • TUR    Çandar, Cengiz    Senior Columnist, Al Monitor and Radikal
  • ESP    Cebrián, Juan Luis    Executive Chairman, Grupo PRISA
  • FRA    Chalendar, Pierre-André de    Chairman and CEO, Saint-Gobain
  • CAN    Clark, W. Edmund    Group President and CEO, TD Bank Group
  • INT    Coeuré, Benoît    Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank
  • IRL    Coveney, Simon    Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine
  • GBR    Cowper-Coles, Sherard    Senior Adviser to the Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
  • BEL    Davignon, Etienne    Minister of State
  • USA    Donilon, Thomas E.    Senior Partner, O’Melveny and Myers; Former U.S. NSA
  • DEU    Döpfner, Mathias    CEO, Axel Springer SE
  • GBR    Dudley, Robert    Group Chief Executive, BP plc
  • FIN    Ehrnrooth, Henrik    Chairman, Caverion Corporation, Otava and Pöyry PLC
  • ITA    Elkann, John    Chairman, Fiat S.p.A.
  • DEU    Enders, Thomas    CEO, Airbus Group
  • DNK    Federspiel, Ulrik    Executive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S
  • USA    Feldstein, Martin S.    Professor of Economics, Harvard University; President Emeritus, NBER
  • CAN    Ferguson, Brian    President and CEO, Cenovus Energy Inc.
  • GBR    Flint, Douglas J.    Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
  • ESP    García-Margallo, José Manuel    Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
  • USA    Gfoeller, Michael    Independent Consultant
  • TUR    Göle, Nilüfer    Professor of Sociology, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
  • USA    Greenberg, Evan G.    Chairman and CEO, ACE Group
  • GBR    Greening, Justine    Secretary of State for International Development
  • NLD    Halberstadt, Victor    Professor of Economics, Leiden University
  • USA    Hockfield, Susan    President Emerita, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • NOR    Høegh, Leif O.    Chairman, Höegh Autoliners AS
  • NOR    Høegh, Westye    Senior Advisor, Höegh Autoliners AS
  • USA    Hoffman, Reid    Co-Founder and Executive Chairman, LinkedIn
  • CHN    Huang, Yiping    Professor of Economics, National School of Development, Peking University
  • USA    Jackson, Shirley Ann    President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
  • USA    Jacobs, Kenneth M.    Chairman and CEO, Lazard
  • USA    Johnson, James A.    Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners
  • USA    Karp, Alex    CEO, Palantir Technologies
  • USA    Katz, Bruce J.    Vice President and Co-Director, The Brookings Institution
  • CAN    Kenney, Jason T.    Minister of Employment and Social Development
  • GBR    Kerr, John    Deputy Chairman, Scottish Power
  • USA    Kissinger, Henry A.    Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
  • USA    Kleinfeld, Klaus    Chairman and CEO, Alcoa
  • TUR    Koç, Mustafa    Chairman, Koç Holding A.S.
  • DNK    Kragh, Steffen    President and CEO, Egmont
  • USA    Kravis, Henry R.    Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
  • USA    Kravis, Marie-Josée    Senior Fellow and Vice Chair, Hudson Institute
  • CHE    Kudelski, André    Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group
  • INT    Lagarde, Christine    Managing Director, International Monetary Fund
  • BEL    Leysen, Thomas    Chairman of the Board of Directors, KBC Group
  • USA    Li, Cheng    Director, John L.Thornton China Center,The Brookings Institution
  • SWE    Lifvendahl, Tove    Political Editor in Chief, Svenska Dagbladet
  • CHN    Liu, He    Minister, Office of the Central Leading Group on Financial and Economic Affairs
  • PRT    Macedo, Paulo    Minister of Health
  • FRA    Macron, Emmanuel    Deputy Secretary General of the Presidency
  • ITA    Maggioni, Monica    Editor-in-Chief, Rainews24, RAI TV
  • GBR    Mandelson, Peter    Chairman, Global Counsel LLP
  • USA    McAfee, Andrew    Principal Research Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • PRT    Medeiros, Inês de    Member of Parliament, Socialist Party
  • GBR    Micklethwait, John    Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
  • GRC    Mitsotaki, Alexandra    Chair, ActionAid Hellas
  • ITA    Monti, Mario    Senator-for-life; President, Bocconi University
  • USA    Mundie, Craig J.    Senior Advisor to the CEO, Microsoft Corporation
  • CAN    Munroe-Blum, Heather    Professor of Medicine,, McGill University
  • USA    Murray, Charles A.    W.H. Brady Scholar, American Enterprise for Public Policy Research
  • NLD    Netherlands, H.R.H. Princess Beatrix of the
  • ESP    Nin Génova, Juan María    Deputy Chairman and CEO, CaixaBank
  • FRA    Nougayrède, Natalie    Director and Executive Editor, Le Monde
  • DNK    Olesen, Søren-Peter    Professor; Member of the Board of Directors, The Carlsberg Foundation
  • FIN    Ollila, Jorma    Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell, plc; Chairman, Outokumpu Plc
  • TUR    Oran, Umut    Deputy Chairman, Republican People’s Party (CHP)
  • GBR    Osborne, George    Chancellor of the Exchequer
  • FRA    Pellerin, Fleur    State Secretary for Foreign Trade
  • USA    Perle, Richard N.    Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
  • USA    Petraeus, David H.    Chairman, KKR Global Institute
  • CAN    Poloz, Stephen S.    Governor, Bank of Canada
  • INT    Rasmussen, Anders Fogh    Secretary General, NATO
  • DNK    Rasmussen, Jørgen Huno    Chairman of the Board of Trustees, The Lundbeck Foundation
  • INT    Reding, Viviane    Vice President and Commissioner for Justice,European Commission
  • USA    Reed, Kasim    Mayor of Atlanta
  • CAN    Reisman, Heather M.    Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.
  • NOR    Reiten, Eivind    Chairman, Klaveness Marine Holding AS
  • DEU    Röttgen, Norbert    Chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee, German Bundestag
  • USA    Rubin, Robert E.    Co-Chair, Council For’n Rel’ns; Former Secretary of the Treasury
  • USA    Rumer, Eugene    Senior Associate and Director, Russia Carnegie Endowment for Intnl Peace
  • NOR    Rynning-Tønnesen, Christian    President and CEO, Statkraft AS
  • NLD    Samsom, Diederik M.    Parliamentary Leader PvdA (Labour Party)
  • GBR    Sawers, John    Chief, Secret Intelligence Service
  • NLD    Scheffer, Paul J.    Author; Professor of European Studies, Tilburg University
  • NLD    Schippers, Edith    Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport
  • USA   Schmidt, Eric E.    Executive Chairman, Google Inc.
  • AUT    Scholten, Rudolf    CEO, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG
  • USA    Shih, Clara    CEO and Founder, Hearsay Social
  • FIN    Siilasmaa, Risto K.    Chairman of the Board of Directors and Interim CEO, Nokia Corporation
  • ESP    Spain, H.M. the Queen of
  • USA    Spence, A. Michael    Professor of Economics, New York University
  • FIN    Stadigh, Kari    President and CEO, Sampo plc
  • USA   Summers, Lawrence H.    Charles W. Eliot University Professor, Harvard University
  • IRL    Sutherland, Peter D.    Chairman, Goldman Sachs International;
  • SWE   Svanberg, Carl-Henric    Chairman, Volvo AB and BP plc
  • TUR    Taftal?, A. Ümit    Member of the Board, Suna and Inan Kiraç Foundation
  • USA    Thiel, Peter A.    President, Thiel Capital
  • DNK    Topsøe, Henrik    Chairman, Haldor Topsøe A/S
  • GRC    Tsoukalis, Loukas    President, Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy
  • NOR    Ulltveit-Moe, Jens    Founder and CEO, Umoe AS
  • INT    Üzümcü, Ahmet    Director-General, Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
  • CHE    Vasella, Daniel L.    Honorary Chairman, Novartis International
  • FIN    Wahlroos, Björn    Chairman, Sampo plc
  • SWE    Wallenberg, Jacob    Chairman, Investor AB
  • SWE    Wallenberg, Marcus    Chairman of the Board of Directors, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB
  • USA    Warsh, Kevin M.    Distinguished Visiting Fellow and Lecturer, Stanford University
  • GBR    Wolf, Martin H.    Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times
  • USA    Wolfensohn, James D.    Chairman and CEO, Wolfensohn and Company
  • NLD    Zalm, Gerrit    Chairman of the Managing Board, ABN-AMRO Bank N.V.
  • GRC    Zanias, George    Chairman of the Board, National Bank of Greece
  • USA    Zoellick, Robert B.    Chairman, The Goldman Sachs Group

And, broken down by country of origin:

Oddly, not many Russians in there…

A Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptor arrives at Osan Air Base in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, in this handout picture provided by the United States Forces Korea (USFK) and released by Yonhap on March 7, 2017. Picture taken on March 6, 2017

National Security Adviser Reaffirms US to Pay for THAAD Deployment in S Korea


11:13 30.04.2017Get short URL

US National Security Adviser Herbert Raymond McMaster has reaffirmed on Sunday that Washington, and not Seoul, should pay for the deployment of its anti-ballistic missile system the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), despite US President Donald Trump’s claims, media reported.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — On Friday Trump told in an interview with the Washington Times that Seoul should pay for the $1-billion defense system, which will be stationed in South Korea in order to shield it from a possible missile attack by Pyongyang. The South Korean military in response reiterated that its position on the system’s deployment remained unchanged, meaning that Washington has to pay.

McMaster had a 35-minute talk with his South Korean counterpart on Sunday at Washington’s request, saying that Trump’s statements “were made in a general context with American people’s hopes for [defense] cost sharing by allies in mind,” as quoted by the Yonhap news agency.

According to the agency, both sides have agreed that South Korea’s only contribution will be the land that it has provided for the THAAD deployment earlier.

Kim and McMaster also agreed to increase their pressure on North Korea in cooperation with China and the international community in the light of Pyongyang’s failed missile launch on Saturday, the agency reported.

On Friday, the South Korean Foreign Ministry’s representative said that Seoul has not received US demands to pay the costs of the THAAD despite Trump’s statements.

In July 2016, Seoul and Washington reached an agreement to deploy THAAD in South Korea amid growing tensions with North Korea. China and Russia have criticized the decision, calling it inappropriate, possibly disproportionate and likely to affect the interests of other nations.

The construction of the system had begun in South Korean Seongju County on Wednesday despite protests from the local residents.

The THAAD system has a range of some 200 kilometers (125 miles) and is designed to intercept short, medium and intermediate ballistic missiles at the terminal incoming stage.

100s march in Tokyo against US military presence, mark Okinawa murder

Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:23AM – PressTV

PressTv User

Hundreds of Japanese protesters have staged a rally in Tokyo against the US military presence in their country, as they mark the first anniversary of the murder of a local woman by a US Marine.

Protesters marched on the streets of the Japanese capital on Saturday, calling for the removal of US military bases from the island prefecture of Okinawa.

The demonstration also marked the murder of Rina Shimabukuro by a US Marine in Okinawa in April 2016, when the 20-year-old victim, who worked at the base, was raped, struck in the head, and stabbed on her way back home.

US Marine Kenneth Franklin Gadson, 32, later admitted to the murder. The case triggered mass protests across Japan.

A grab from a Ruptly video released on April 29, 2017 shows Japanese protesters marching on the streets of Tokyo against US military presence in Japan.

More than half of the 47,000 US military forces in Japan are stationed in Okinawa.

Okinawa has become known as a source of enduring concern for the Japanese people. Pacifist inclinations as well as security and safety concerns have prompted the Japanese to protest against the US military presence in Japan from time to time.

Multiple cases of misconduct by US forces have also raised anti-American sentiment among the islanders.

Back in 2013, two American sailors admitted to raping a woman in Okinawa in the previous year in a case that sparked massive protests.

In 1995, the abduction and rape of a 12-year-old girl by three US servicemen also triggered huge protests, prompting Washington to pledge efforts to strengthen troop discipline to prevent such crimes and reduce US footprint on the island.

Sun Apr 30, 2017 10:21AM
Families of Palestinian prisoners demonstrate in front of EU offices in East Jerusalem al-Quds on April 27, 2017 after hundreds of the detainees launched a mass hunger strike earlier. (Photo by AFP)
Families of Palestinian prisoners demonstrate in front of EU offices in East Jerusalem al-Quds on April 27, 2017 after hundreds of the detainees launched a mass hunger strike earlier. (Photo by AFP)

An open-ended mass hunger strike by Palestinians to draw the world’s attention to harsh conditions at Israeli prisons has entered its second week, with some of those refusing food experiencing health decline.

The media committee of the hunger strike, dubbed the Freedom and Dignity Strike, said that several of the hunger-striking inmates had lost 10 kilograms of their weight, the Palestinian Ma’an news agency reported on Sunday.

A number of the hunger strikers held in the Israeli Ofer prison are suffering from low blood pressure, severe headaches as well as stomach and joint problems, the report added.

It further noted that the Israeli authorities do not allow the Palestinian prisoners to drink cool water and instead force them to drink warm water.

On Sunday, Palestinian churches were expected to ring bells in solidarity with the hunger strikers.

Protesters who have handcuffed and blindfolded themselves hold banners during a protest in support of prisoners in Israeli jails, in the West Bank city of Ramallah on April 27, 2017. (Photo by AP)

The long-planned mass strike, which is led by a jailed leader of the Fatah Movement, Marwan Barghouti, began on April 17.

The strike initially began with 1,500 prisoners, but now some 2,000 people are believed to be refusing food to denounce the inhumane treatment of the Palestinians held in Israeli jails.

Read more:

According to figures provided by the Palestinian prisoners’ rights group Addameer in January, 6,500 Palestinians are currently being held in Israeli jails, 536 of them arbitrarily.

Palestinian prisoners have continuously resorted to open-ended hunger strikes in an attempt to voice their outrage at the so-called administrative detention, which is a form of imprisonment without trial or charge that allows Israel to incarcerate Palestinians for up to six months,

Palestinian detainees complain that they have been subjected to assault and torture at Israeli prisons.

Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:2AM
An Iraqi Army soldier fires his machinegun at Daesh positions in the northern city of Mosul's al-Sahiroun neighbourhood on January 12, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
An Iraqi Army soldier fires his machinegun at Daesh positions in the northern city of Mosul’s al-Sahiroun neighbourhood on January 12, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

A plot by the Takfiri terror group of Daesh to copy in Iraq an alleged chemical strike in northeastern Syria in April and pin it on Iraqi security forces has been nipped in the bud.

Iraq’s al-Sumariah news network reported the development on Saturday, citing an unnamed security source.

The source said the terrorists had been arrested in the east of the northern Iraq city of Mosul in possession of toxic materials used in manufacturing chemical weapons and explosives.

They confessed to have received orders from their higher-ups to carry out gas attacks against the civilians fleeing them, the source said, adding the incidents were supposed to be caught on camera in such a way that would portray Iraqi forces as the perpetrators.

The terrorists said the entire scenario had been planned to mirror an alleged gas attack in the northeastern Syria Idlib Province that claimed dozens of civilians on April 4, he noted.

Blaming Damascus for the attack, the United States later carried out a missile strike against the southeastern part of the western Syria city of Homs, causing some 15 fatalities, including civilians.

In this image provided by the US Navy, USS Ross fires a tomahawk land attack missile Friday, April 7, 2017, from the Mediterranean Sea. (Via AP)

The missile barrage came either before a fact-finding investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged gas attack, or a United Nations Security Council mandate.

Read more:

Russia, a Syria ally, laid into the United States for the attack, saying it had seriously damaged Russo-American ties. It rescinded a bilateral pact aimed at preventing the Russian and American aircraft from clashing over Syria, and also vowed to boost the Arab country’s defenses.

Daesh has in the past used chlorine gas and other toxic agents against Iraqi security forces and civilians in Mosul. The group, which has called Mosul its so-called headquarters in the city, has already lost half of it to Iraqi forces and is increasingly losing grip over the rest.

Terrorists have also been documented, time and again, deploying the agents against the Syrian people and military. The West and its associated media outlets keep incriminating the Syrian government and military in alleged application and possession of such weaponry, while Damascus has fully handed over its chemical arms stockpiles in a UN-monitored process.

Iranian FM Calls Netanyahu’s Purim Story ‘Fake History’, Falsifying of Torah

Javad Zarif 3a3d8

Zarif made the comment on his official Twitter account on Sunday in response to claims made by Netanyahu that Iran had been trying to “destroy the Jewish people” for some 2,500 years.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

“To sell bigoted lies against a nation which has saved Jews 3 times, Netanyahu resorting to fake history & falsifying Torah. Force of habit. Once again Benjamin Netanyahu not only distorts the realities of today, but also distorts the past — including Jewish scripture. It is truly regrettable that bigotry gets to the point of making allegations against an entire nation which has saved Jews three times in its history,” he said.

Zarif Purim 24d47

Netanyahu made the claims during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Friday. He was referring to a legend commemorated through the Jewish holiday of Purim, which Israel started celebrating Saturday night.

While scholars do not agree on the accuracy of the Purim story, Netanyahu has constantly referred to the legend as a basis of his anti-Iran arguments in his meetings with different world leaders.

Earlier on Sunday, Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said that Netanyahu had both misreported Iran’s pre-Islam history and inverted facts. “Apparently, neither he is acquainted with history, nor he has read the Torah,” said Larijani.

Palestinian child in blood 84c8f

At a glance, Israel appears a true democracy. Take a closer look, and that facade of democracy will soon dissipate, turning into something else entirely.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

Tuesday, February 28 was one of those moments. The chain of events was as follows:

An official Israeli State Comptroller issued another report on the Israeli government’s handling of the July 2014 war on Gaza; it chastised Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and then-Defense Minister, Moshe Ya’alon –  among others – for the lack of preparedness and for their mishandling of the subsequent 50-day conflict; Netanyahu reacted angrily; Ya’alon took to Facebook to defend his record; the opposition in the Israeli Knesset (parliament) went on the offensive; politicians lined up, taking sides; a media frenzy followed; the country was in an uproar.

This is not a precedent. It is a repeat of a recurring scenario that often follows Israel’s military plunders.

When such reports are issued, Israelis sort out their differences in fierce parliamentary and media battles.

While Israelis begin to examine their failures, demanding accountability from their government, western mainstream media finds the perfect opportunity to whitewash its own record of failing to criticize Israel’s military onslaught at the time.

(Over 2,200 – of whom over 70 percent were Palestinian civilians – were killed and thousands more wounded in Israel’s so-called ‘Operation Protective Edge’ in 2014.)

According to US media logic, for example, Israel’s investigation of its own action is a tribute to its thriving democracy, often juxtaposed with Arab governments’ lack of self-examination.

When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, instigating a war that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians, culminating in the Sabra and Shatilla Massacres, a familiar scenario ensued: The United States did its utmost to prevent any international intervention or meaningful investigation, while Israel was allowed to investigate itself.

The outcome was the Kahan Commission Report, the conclusion of which was summarized by international law expert, Professor Richard Falk, as such: “The full measure of Israel’s victory is rather its vindication, despite all, as a moral force in the region—as a superior state, especially as compared to its Arab rivals.”

The US media touted Israel’s ‘moral victory’, which, somehow, made everything okay, and with a magic wand, wiped the record clean.

The ‘Washington Post’ editorial led the congratulatory chorus: “The whole process of the Israeli reaction to the Beirut massacre is a tribute to the vitality of democracy in Israel and to the country’s moral character.”

This sorry state of affairs has been in constant replay for nearly 70 years, ever since Israel declared its independence in 1948.

International law is clear regarding the legal responsibility of Occupying Powers but since Israel is rarely an enthusiast of international law, Israel has forbidden any attempt at being investigated for its actions.

In fact, Israel abhors the very idea of being ‘investigated’. Every attempt by the United Nations, or any other organization dedicated to upholding international law, has either been rejected or failed.

By Israeli logic, Israel is a democracy and democratic countries cannot be investigated over their army’s involvement in the death of civilians.

This was, in fact, the gist of the statement produced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin’s Netanyahu’s office in June 2010, soon after Israeli army commandos intercepted a humanitarian aid flotilla on its way to Gaza and killed ten unarmed activists in international waters.

Israel is an Occupying Power under international law and is held accountable to the Fourth Geneva Convention. The international community is legally obliged to examine Israel’s conduct against Palestinian civilians and, needless to say, against unarmed civilians in international waters.

Israel’s record of investigating itself, aside from being spun to praise Israel’s moral superiority, has never been of any help for Palestinians.

In fact, the entire Israeli justice system is systematically unjust to occupied Palestinians.

The Israeli rights group ‘Yesh Din’ reported that out “of the 186 criminal investigations opened by the Israeli army into suspected offenses against Palestinians in 2015, just four yielded indictments.” Such indictments rarely yield prison sentences.

The recent indictment of Israeli army medic, Elor Azarya, sentencing him to (now postponed) a term of 18 months in prison for the killing in cold blood of an alleged Palestinian attacker is an exception, not the norm. It has been years since an Israeli soldier was sentenced. In fact, several thousand Palestinian civilians have been killed between the last time a ‘manslaughter’ conviction of an Israeli soldier in 2005 and Azarya’s indictment.

Azarya, now perceived by many Israelis as a hero, has received such a light punishment that it is less than that of a Palestinian child throwing rocks at an Israeli occupation soldier.

Some United Nations officials, although powerless before the US backing of Israel, are furious.

The 18-month verdict “also stands in contrast to the sentences handed down by other Israeli courts for  other less serious offenses, notably the sentencing of Palestinian children to more than three years’ imprisonment for throwing stones at cars,” UN human rights spokeswoman, Ravina Shamdasani, said in response to the Israeli court decision.

While pro-Israel social media activists and media pundits went on to praise the supposedly unmatched Israeli democracy, a campaign in Israel to pardon Azarya continues to garner momentum. Prime Minister Netanyahu is already on board.

Not only is the Israeli justice system unjust to Palestinians, it was never intended to be so. A careful reading of the recent comptroller’s remarks and findings would clarify that the intent was never to examine war against a besieged nation as a moral concept, but the government’s inability to win the war more effectively: the breakdown of intelligence; Netanyahu’s lack of political inclusiveness; the death of an unprecedented number of Israeli soldiers.

Israel’s appetite for war is, in fact, at an all-time high. Some commentators are arguing that Israel might launch yet another war so as to redeem its ‘mistakes’ in the previous one, as stated in the report.

But war itself is a staple for Israel. Hard-hitting Israeli journalist Gideon Levy’s reaction to the comptroller’s report says it best. He argued that the report is almost a plagiarized copy of the ‘Winograd Commission Report’ which followed the 2006 Second Lebanon War.

All wars since 1948 “could have been avoided”, Levy wrote in the ‘Haaretz’. But they were not, frankly, because “Israel loves wars. Needs them. Does nothing to prevent them and, sometimes, instigates them.”

This is the only way to read the latest report, but also all such reports, when war is used as a tool of control, to ‘downgrade’ the defenses of a besieged enemy, to create distraction from political corruption, to help politicians win popular support, to play, time and again, the role of the embattled victim, and many other pretenses.

As for Palestinians, who are neither capable of instigated or sustaining a war, they can only put up a fight, real or symbolic, whenever Israel decides to go for yet another bloody, avoidable war.

No matter the outcome, Israel will boast of its military superiority, unmatched intelligence, transparent democracy and moral ascendancy; the US, Britain, France and other Europeans will enthusiastically agree, issuing Israel another blank check to ‘defend itself’ by any means.

Meanwhile, any attempt at investigating Israeli conduct will be thwarted, for Israel is a ‘democracy’ and, for some reason, self-proclaimed democracies cannot be investigated. Only their sham investigations matter; only their dead count.

*(ICU child Shifa hospital, Gaza. Image Credit: Kashfi Halford/ flickr).



Israeli Minister of Ed: “We have to bury Palestinian anti-occupation fighters”

11218074445 f10c57a5aa z fea2b

Naftali Bennett, chairman of the far rightwing Habayit HaYehudi party and Israeli Minister of Education, has once again brought the office of government to a new low.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

“We have to bury Palestinian anti-occupation fighters in secret cemeteries and knock down all the homes in their native villages,” he  recently threatened, according to the Palestinian Information Centre.

“Let’s roll into every single home and rake through every single corner. The anti-occupation fighters must bear in mind that all of those around them are under threat.”

Past the sheer cruelty of such a statement, Bennett proves that the Israeli government’s claims to democracy are farcical. When one of the highest ranking members of the government can incite so furiously against Palestinians with little backlash from his party, the notions of an inclusive and participatory society are negated.

First of all, when Bennett refers to “Palestinian anti-occupation fighters,” does he mean all Palestinians opposed to the illegal, 48 year occupation of Palestine by Israel? Because if he does, there are literally no Palestinians in the world that agree with the occupation. If he does, Bennett is inciting against the nearly 5 million Palestinians living live in historic Palestine, plus another 6 million refugees in the Palestinian diaspora.

All forms of nonviolent resistance against the occupation is a just fight. Just as it was in South Africa during Apartheid, just as it was in the Ghettos of Europe, just as it was in Russia at the beginning of the revolution.

And violent resistance, while abhorrent, is meeting violence with violence. It should not be advocated for, but Bennett’s comments seem to sew more violence than anything.

Nonviolent, anti-occupation Palestinians are being killed everyday by Israeli forces. Between December 2015 and January 2016, five Palestinian protestors were shot to death by authorities during protests near the Gaza border. In October and November of 2015, Israeli human rights group B’Tselem documented 14 additional instances when Palestinians were killed under the same circumstances.

Nonviolent, regular Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West Bank are losing their homes every day.

Yet Bennett’s comments, unfortunately, come as no surprise. An extreme double standard, the racist rhetoric concerning Palestinians is part and parcel of the Israeli rightwing’s arsenal.

These are the same people who hold as their heroes the Haganah and Irgun—pre-IDF Israeli militant brigades that engaged in attacks and sabotage of both the British occupation of Palestine and the Arab natives before 1948 and the founding of Israel. These groups later became the Israel Defense Forces.

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon stated on Tuesday that the grief felt by Israelis is distinctly different from that felt by Palestinians.

“Our grief is that of a society that wishes to live, a society that educates our boys to life, to be humans, to behave as human beings, to strive for peace. This is our society,” Ya’alon said, speaking with Yad Labanim, a bereaved Israeli families organization. “And opposing us is a society that yearns for death, as we can see around us in the happiness of a boy in becoming a martyr — a society that does not respect anything.”

“Our society chooses life and does not seek out wars, but strives for peace and sees war as [a] necessary [evil],” added Ya’alon. “On the other side of us is an element that desires death and causes devastation, not only against us but against itself.”

With one government official dehumanizing an entire population and another advocating their deaths, it really defies all logic to say that Israeli society “… does not seek out wars …”

167 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces since October; 30 Israelis, an American, a Sudanese and an Eritrean have also been killed in the same period.


Moshe Yaalon 5fea5

International media outlets have already reported extensively on Israeli commandos’ missions inside Syria to rescue wounded militants but a senior regime official’s acknowledgement of a link with ISIS is unprecedented.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

Ya’alon’s explosive revelation came during an interview reported Saturday on Israeli Channel 10’s website, content portal Mako, which acts as a gateway to Israeli media outlets and websites.

Mako also incorporated footage of the event in the northern city of Afula, during which the former military affairs chief was seen describing an occasion in which Syria-based ISIS terrorists had fired into the Golan Heights.

Golan is a Syrian territory, which Tel Aviv has been occupying since 1967 and lays claim on it as its own property. Save some rare alleged rocket attacks from Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, for which ISIS has reportedly claimed responsibility and have not resulted in any human injury or losses, the group has generally refused to target either Israel or the territories under its occupation.

However, Ya’alon said, after opening fire on Golan, ISIS served Tel Aviv with a quick apology, pointing to the alliance between the two, and also suggesting that the group had agreed not to target Israeli interests in line with the rapport.

“On most occasions, firing comes from regions under the control of the (Syrian) regime. But once the firing came from ISIS (ISIS) positions–and it immediately apologized,” he said.

Israeli media outlets, meanwhile, refused to report on the ISIS strike, probably because of either a media blackout or military censorship, reported Tikun Olam, a Seattle-based liberal blog dedicated to outing “the excesses of the Israeli national security state,” which also reported Ya’alon’s remarks.

“In the midst of complaining about the Islamist threat to Israel and the world, Bibi (Benjamin) Netanyahu (Israel’s prime minister) conveniently forgets that his own country enjoys a tacit alliance with ISIS in Syria,” said New York-born Dr. Richard Silverstein, who runs the blog. “It is an alliance of convenience to be sure,” he added.

According to him, Ya’alon has been speaking more candidly about the inner workings of the regime since falling out with Netanyahu and being replaced by successor Avigdor Lieberman.

“But he did reveal how closely tied Israel is to ISIS in Syria,” wrote the blogger, who has also documented Israeli collaboration with al-Nusra Front, al-Qaeda’s Syria branch, which has rebranded itself.

In June 2015, the blog published a story reporting on Israel’s interventions in the foreign-backed militancy in Syria in favor of anti-Damascus militants.

It said Tel Aviv and al-Nusra had forged an alliance, featuring the former’s building camps for terrorists and their families in Israel-held territory, holding regular meetings with terrorist commanders, and providing military and other critical supplies to them.

The report incorporated a video showing Israel’s provision of medical assistance to the terrorists who had been wounded in Syria.

It also cited an incident in which locals had intercepted one Israeli ambulance carrying two wounded ISIS forces, forcing the medics to flee and beating up one of the terrorists to death. The other was also seriously injured when the regime’s forces intervened to saved him.

*(Image: Frame grab shows Israel’s former minister for military affairs Moshe Ya’alon speaking during an event in the northern Israel city of Afula).


IMG 0802 097a8

Amid talks between the Israeli and Palestinian leadership over ending Israeli incursions into the part of the West Bank designated under full Palestinian sovereignty, the Israeli military continues carrying out raids and operations, according to the Bethlehem-based Ma’an News Agency.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

During a meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and Israeli army Chief of Staff Gadi Eizenkot, the Israeli security concluded it would continue the raids.

A cabinet statement declares “the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) maintains—and will maintain—the possibility of entering Area A, and anywhere necessary, according to operational needs.”

“There is no other agreement with the Palestinians,” added the statement obtained by Ma’an.

Area A was designated under full Palestinian control by the Oslo Accords meaning full civil and military sovereignty. The area makes up about 18% of the occupied West Bank and includes major cities like Ramallah, Nablus and Hebron. Areas B and C are designated under joint Palestinian and Israeli control, however Israel de-facto controls both areas entirely, subjecting the Palestinian residents to varying degrees of martial law.

The Israeli military regularly carries out night raids, military exercises and general destruction under the guise of security operations in Area A, increasingly since the Second Intifada and in clear violation of international law.

This development follows Israel’s signaling it might end the raids in agreeing to talks with the Palestinian leadership.
PLO Secretary-General Saeb Erekat and chief Palestinian negotiator told Ma’an that the cabinet statements uphold the status quo.

“Israel has insisted for years to violate signed agreements, including daily violations against the Palestinian control over Area A,” Erekat told the news agency. “They’re a belligerent occupying power with a clear political program of colonization, apartheid and destruction of the prospects of a peaceful solution.”

Erekat denounced the narrative that Israel intended to enter negotiations regarding disengagement from West Bank cities, reporting instead that Israeli delegates offered only “starting a process (of military withdrawal) in Jericho and Ramallah,” but not the remained of Area A  as the Oslo Accords clearly state.

“Their response is now being delivered by Mr. Netanyahu, the man responsible for destroying all signed agreements,” added Erekat.

The purpose of Oslo was to begin a gradual transfer of power in the West Bank from Israel to Palestine, yet after 20 years no such transfer has taken place, despite the Israeli military’s ongoing and documented human rights abuses across the territory.

Israel has an earned reputation of reneging on alleged cooperation agreements with the Palestinian leadership as well as using the entrance into peace talks as a cover to continue continue settlement expansion uninhibited.

Such was the case in July 2013 when U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry finally persuaded both parties to reenter into negotiations. Yet the talks fell apart due to Israel’s utter determination to continue building settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, illegal under international law and a severe violation of Palestinian sovereignty.

Along with settlement expansion and raids in Area A, Israel has stepped up its punitive home demolitions across the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem—especially since the most recent uprising began in Fall 2015.

UN figures show that demolitions of Palestinian homes and structures by Israeli authorities have increased by a staggering 200% over the last three months.

Israel denies Palestinians building permits so often as to be an official policy, then carries out sweeping demolitions of structures it deems are illegal.


After 40 Years, Moms of Argentina’s ‘Disappeared’ Still Protest

  • Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo in Argentina.

    Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo in Argentina. | Photo: VTV

Published 29 April 2017
Argentina’s Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo are commemorating their 40th anniversary.

Forty years ago, dozens of Argentine women took a bold stand against their military government, marking the birth of one of the country’s most important social justice organizations.

Argentine Grandmas Recover 122nd Stolen Child From Dirty War

The organization, Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, was founded on April 30, 1977 in front of the Casa Rosada presidential palace. Searching for their disappeared children who were kidnapped by the military dictatorship, they began marching at the Plaza de Mayo, demanding answers.

Protests at the time were met with armed suppression by military police. Despite the threat of injury and death, the Argentine mothers moved forward with speaking out against government violence.

“I couldn’t keep quiet,” Haydee Gastelu, one of the organization’s founders, told The Guardian.

“We needed everyone to know, even if nobody believed us. That’s probably why they called us the Mad Mothers at first.”

For decades, Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo led constant protests against their government, demanding information about the whereabouts of their children. Although some have since been presented with the unfortunate news of their children’s murders, others have been lucky enough to be reunited with them.

Just last week, the organization announced that they recovered missing child number 122. The son, who has yet to be named, had parents who were critical of the Dirty War-era government.

The Dirty War, which took place during the 1970s and 80s, was Argentina’s offshoot of Operation Condor, a Cold War-era campaign of violence across Latin America.

Operation Condor-Era Argentine Dictator Gets Life Imprisonment

Today, Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo continue protesting against their government, this time directed at President Mauricio Macri. Macri’s family and government cabinet, according to Infobae, had close ties to the military dictatorship.

For the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo, Macri’s administration has not done enough to resolve the decades-long disappearance of their children.

“Argentina’s new government wants to erase the memory of those terrible years and is putting the brakes on the continuation of trials,” 86-year-old Taty Almeida, whose 20-year-old son, Alejandro, disappeared in 1975, told The Guardian.

“This struggle began when we were in our 40s. Now, 40 years later, we have to start all over again.”

To commemorate their 40th anniversary, the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo are building a gigantic wall with the faces of thousands of disappeared people, marking their 2,038 action.


Almost One Million Eye Patients Treated at Cuba’s CMO

  • Over 977,937 patients have been treated at the eye care institution.

    Over 977,937 patients have been treated at the eye care institution. | Photo: Agencia Cubana de Noticias

Published 30 April 2017
The Ramón Pando Ferrer Ophthalmology Institute’s Ocular Microsurgery Center was founded by the late former Cuban President Fidel Castro.

The Ramón Pando Ferrer Ophthalmology Institute’s Ocular Microsurgery Center (CMO) has treated almost a million patients since its inception in 1988.

Cuban Doctors Treat over 1,000 Peru Flood Victims in Just Days

The center, which is located in Havana, Cuba, was founded by the late former president of the island nation, Fidel Castro. The center has, over the past three decades, developed into a world-renowned technologically equipped innovation eye-care hub. Somewhat hinged on the establishment of Misión Milagro (Operation Miracle) in July 2004. This program, also an initiative of Castro, was put in place to serve people throughout Central America, South America, and the Caribbean.

To date, some 977,937 people have been treated at the eye care institution. At the Ninth National Cataracts Workshop, CMO chief Dr. Eneyda de la Caridad Pérez Candelaria reported that 275,773 surgeries have been performed at the center. Candelaria elaborated that almost 200,000 of that figure were cataract-related procedures.

Deputy director of the institute, Reynaldo Ríos Caso, told Agencia Cubana de Noticias that more than three million patients – from over 30 countries – have benefited from the ophthalmological program so far. Caso also said that approximately 662,000 of those patients were treated for cataracts.


Saudi Arabia Rejects Proposal to Create Women’s Sports Colleges

  • Saudi women arrive to attend Janadriyah Culture Festival on the outskirts of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

    Saudi women arrive to attend Janadriyah Culture Festival on the outskirts of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. | Photo: Reuters

Published 29 April 2017 (5 hours 29 minutes ago)
Clerics from the ultra-conservative kingdom contend that women’s exercise is far too “immodest.”

Saudi Arabia rejected a proposal to establish sports colleges for women earlier this week, reinforcing challenges for female athletes in the Middle Eastern country.

Women Should Be Allowed to Drive: Saudi Prince

The ruling by the Saudi Shura Council, the country’s top advisory body, came less than a week after Saudi Arabia was welcomed onto the United Nations Women’s Rights Commission. The proposal, which fell three votes short of getting passed, required 76 out of 150 votes.

Rejection of the proposal means that women are still banned from any physical education, fitness activity or organized sports.

Clerics from the ultra-conservative kingdom contended that women’s exercise is far too “immodest,” allegedly blurring the lines between gender. The proposal, which sought to fund colleges where women could be trained to teach fitness and physical health, didn’t fall in line with the country’s Sharia laws, according to the clerics.

According to UN Watch, women in Saudi Arabia have been barred from receiving any physical education, fitness activity or participating in organized sports for decades. They’re also banned from attending sports events as spectators.

Saudi Arabia, a close ally of the U.S., denies women basic human rights such as education, healthcare, legal representation or business ownership without the written consent of their male custodian.

Improvements, albeit minor, have been made in the realm of sports.

Saudi Man, Who Kidnapped, Caged Daughter, Must Return Her to UK

In February, women started to receive women-only gym licenses. The move was intended to improve women’s health since large segments of the female population, devoid of practicing sports and other forms of exercise, suffer from hypertension, diabetes, obesity and heart disease. Still, some hardliners in government oppose the authorization since they interpret it as a major step toward female independence.

Overall, women’s public participation in sports continues to be stigmatized.

The Saudi government provides no support for clubs or organizations that allow for women to participate in sports activities. Those who want to participate without fear of state reprisal are forced to go abroad.

Claims of Syrian Chemical Weapons Attacks are Total B.S.

A Little Background: The U.S. Has Tried to Carry Out Regime Change Since Syria Became An Independent County …

The U.S. government has been trying to replace the Syrian government with folks who will be subservient to America since 1949 … 3 years after Syria became an independent nation.

The CIA succeeded in carrying out a coup in Syria 1949.

In 1957, the American president and British prime minister agreed to launch regime change again in Syria using a false flag. (False flags are not only historically documented, but presidents, prime ministers, congressmen, generals, spooks, soldiers and police have ADMITTED to planning and carrying out false flat attacks).

In 1983, 1986, 1991, 2001, 2009 and 2012, American officials again schemed about regime change in Syria.

The 2013 Syrian Weapons Attack Was Carried Out By …

The 2013 sarin attack in Ghouta, Syria, was blamed by the U.S. on the Syrian government.

However, the United Nations’ report on the attack did NOT blame the government, and the U.N.’s human rights investigator accused the rebels – rather than the Syrian government – of carrying out the attack.

Moreover, high-level American and Turkish officials say that Turkey supplied Sarin gas to Syrian rebels in 2013 in order to frame the Syrian government … to provide an excuse for regime change.

Pulitzer-prize winning investigative reporter Seymour Hersh – who uncovered the Iraq prison torture scandal and the Mai Lai massacre in Vietnam – previously reported that high-level American sources tell him that the Turkish government carried out the chemical weapons attacks blamed on the Syrian government.

As Hersh noted:

‘We knew there were some in the Turkish government,’ a former senior US intelligence official, who has access to current intelligence, told me, ‘who believed they could get Assad’s nuts in a vice by dabbling with a sarin attack inside Syria – and forcing Obama to make good on his red line threat.’

Indeed, it’s long been known that sarin was coming through Turkey.

And a tape recording of top Turkish officials planning a false flag attack to be blamed on Syria as a justification for war was leaked … and confirmed by Turkey as being authentic.

The 2017 Chemical Incident … Which “Justified” Trump’s Bombing Syria with 57 Cruise Missiles

The recent chemical incident was immediately blamed on the Syrian government. And the Trump administration immediately launched 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian air base based on the accusation.

But many of the American intelligence officials who warned that the claims about Iraq (which led to a disastrous war) were fake say that these claims are fake as well.

Indeed, former CIA officer Philip Giraldi says that American intelligence community insiders are furious that the Trump administration has twisted the intelligence so as to claim that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack. And see this.

Indeed, the lead UN investigator into Syrian chemical weapons attacks has debunked one of the main allegations attempting to pin the recent chemical incident on the Syrian government.

And a top U.S. rocket scientist has made Swiss cheese out of the government’s claims that the Syrian government was responsible. And see this.

But when the military-industrial folks want a war, do facts even matter?

Pyongyang slams Israel as ‘disturber of peace armed with illegal nukes under US patronage’

Pyongyang slams Israel as ‘disturber of peace armed with illegal nukes under US patronage’
North Korea has accused Israel of being the “only illegal possessor” of nukes and threat to peace in the Middle East, and threatened Tel Aviv with a “thousand-fold punishment” after Israeli Defense Minister called Pyongyang’s leadership a “crazy and radical group.”

In an interview with Hebrew news site Walla this week, Avigdor Lieberman stated that North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un is a “madman” in charge of a “crazy and radical group” which is “undermining global stability.”

Pyongyang “seems to have crossed the red line with its recent nuclear tests,” the Israeli defense minister said, according to the Times of Israel.

In response, Pyongyang promised a “thousand-fold punishment to whoever dares hurt the dignity of its supreme leadership,” calling Lieberman’s “sordid and wicked” remarks a part of Israel’s smear campaign to cover up its own crimes.

Firing back at the perceived hypocrisy, the North Korean Foreign Ministry said that, unlike Israel, which is a “disturber of peace” in its neighborhood, their country is full entitled to seek deterrence against “US aggression.”

“Israel is the only illegal possessor of nukes in the Middle East under the patronage of the US. However, Israel vociferated about the nuclear deterrence of the DPRK, slandering it, whenever an opportunity presented itself,” the Foreign Ministry spokesman said, as cited by state-run agency KCNA.

While Israel has never publicly confirmed or denied possessing nukes, it is universally believed to have dozens of warheads, and maintains ambiguous policy that it will not be the first to “introduce” them in the Middle East.

“The DPRK’s access to nuclear weapons is the legitimate exercise of its righteous right for self-defense to cope with the US provocative moves for aggression and the DPRK’s nuclear force is the treasured sword of justice firmly defending peace on the Korean peninsula and in the region,” the North Korean statement added.

Pyongyang went on to call Israel a “culprit of crimes against humanity” and an “occupier” which seeks to dominate the region and oppress Palestinians.

Russia backs China’s call to stop N. Korea nuke tests in exchange for halt in US, S. Korea military drills 

Lieberman’s remarks also sparked criticism at home, with some Israeli politicians noting that their country has enough enemies to create even more with such reckless statements.

“We have enough enemies. Let’s focus on them,” MP Shelly Yachimovich of the Zionist Union said on Twitter.

“The minister of talk is chattering irresponsibly about North Korea. And there is no prime minister to rein in the babbling and posturing ministers,” former defense minister Moshe Ya’alon wrote on Twitter, Times of Israel reports.

US kicks off joint naval drills with S. Korea as US aircraft carrier group enters Sea of Japan 

Already heightened tensions on the Korean Peninsula escalated further on Saturday after the North conducted yet another failed test of its ballistic rocket technology. The test was conducted as US kicked off joint naval exercises with South Korea just after the US aircraft carrier group led by the USS Carl Vinson entered the Sea of Japan.

‘Just let him play… Don’t play into his hands’ – Duterte warns Trump of conflict with N. Korea 

For some time now, it has been speculated that Pyongyang is also getting ready to conduct its sixth nuclear test. Speaking about North Korea on Saturday, Trump noted that neither China nor the US would welcome a further North Korean nuclear test.

“I would not be happy,” Trump said in a CBS interview for Sunday’s Face the Nation. When asked if the sixth Korean nuclear test would prompt American military action, Trump responded: “I don’t know. I mean, we’ll see.”

‘Euro is dead’: Le Pen eyes return of the Franc, preserving single currency for int’l trade

‘Euro is dead’: Le Pen eyes return of the Franc, preserving single currency for int’l trade
A week before the 2nd round of the French election, eurosceptic presidential hopeful Marine Le Pen has reminded her supporters that the ”euro is dead” and should be left only for international trade, while France should regain control and reintroduce the Franc.

“We need to control the currency, to adjust it to the economy because today the single currency is a burden,” Le pen said ahead of May 7 French presidential election, stressing that the “euro is dead.” 

“We will have a national currency like all other countries, and we will have a common currency together,” Le Pen said in in an interview with Le Parisien.

In her interview Sunday, she explained that euro should become the currency that will be used by “only large companies that trade internationally.”

On Saturday, Marine Le Pen struck a deal with a former rival Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, a fellow euro critic who garnered 4.7 percent of votes in the first round, who will serve as the prime minister if the 48-year-old right-wing populist gets elected.

“We will create a government of national unity,” said Le Pen, as she appeared with Dupont-Aignan on BFM television.

That same day, in an interview with newspaper Sud Ouest, Le Pen noted: “If everyone is agreed we could take a year or a year and a half to organize a coordinated return to national currencies.”

Yet the alliance statement by Dupont-Aignan’s Stand up France’ produced following the forming of the coalition noted that the return to Franc is not a pre-requisite.

READ MORE: Smoke grenades at rally against French presidential candidates in Paris (VIDEOS)

“The transition from the single currency to the European common currency is not a pre-requisite of all economic policy, the timetable will adapt to the immediate priorities and challenges facing the French government,” the statement said.

Le Pen’s presidential race rival Emmanuel Macron, who is an advocate of deeper European integration, had also expressed scepticism about the euro in its current state before, although insisting on reforms to bolster the single currency union to make sure it does not fail.

“The truth is that we must collectively recognize that the euro is incomplete and cannot last without major reforms,” Macron said in January, citing a lack of trust between France and Germany that hampers the needed reforms. “The dysfunctioning of the euro is of good use to Germany… The euro is a weak Deutsche Mark… The status quo is synonymous, in 10 years’ time, with the dismantling of the euro.”

Le Pen who will face off the big business’ hopeful Macron next Sunday in a second round vote, has repeatedly promised her electorate to leave the euro zone, hold a Brexit-style referendum, and levy taxes on foreign workers. She also vowed to lower the retirement age and increase some welfare benefits, while cutting income tax.

READ MORE: ‘He is a hypocrite!’ France’s Macron heckled by pro-Le Pen workers in his hometown (VIDEO)

Despite the daring and radical proposals, Le Pen is still running behind her rival in the polls. In a poll by Odoxa released Friday, Macron’s support stands at 59 percent versus Le Pen’s 41 percent.ed Friday, Macron’s support stands at 59 percent versus Le Pen’s 41 percent.

Russia slams US arms control report as ‘biased’, says it ignores Washington’s violations

Russia slams US arms control report as ‘biased’, says it ignores Washington’s violations
The Russian Foreign Ministry has criticized an annual report by the US State Department on global arms control, saying Washington remains in denial about its own misdeeds, while accusing other nations of violations.

The US report, released earlier this month, reviewed several international treaties on arms control, non-proliferation and reduction in which the US has an interest. It stated that the US has been in compliance with its own obligations under those treaties and accused several other nations, including Russia, of deviating from theirs.

In a statement Saturday, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Washington’s report was biased and failed to acknowledge issues with America’s adherence to its international obligations.

“The US claims it has monopoly rights in assessing other nations’ compliance with treaties. Washington does this in a lecturing manner and ignores the established practice for settling points of dispute through corresponding multilateral mechanisms,” the statement said.

It also accused the US of bringing “unfounded accusations” and trying to conceal its own violations of international arms control treaties.

In recent years, Russia has received a “growing [amount] of evidence showing that the reasons for such actions by the US by no means consist in a reluctance to burden itself with a difficult and lengthy expert dialogue, but rather lie in something much more serious – in Washington’s fear of being exposed as a [state] bringing unfounded accusations against other countries, as well as the US’s own violations of international arms control treaties,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

It went on to say that it was particularly “not the first time, when the US side repeats trite accusations against Russia concerning its alleged violations of the Treaty on Open Skies,” adding that the US “keeps quiet about their own violations … of [this treaty] as well as about violations committed by their NATO allies and other states affiliated with the US.”

First signed in March 1992, the Open Skies Treaty entered into force in 2002 and now has 34 states as signatories, including Russia, the US and most European countries. The agreement allows its participants to conduct unarmed surveillance flights over the entire territory of other countries and to gather information about those countries’ armed forces to enhance mutual understanding and trust.

In total, the Russian Foreign Ministry listed 11 complaints Moscow has with Washington relating to arms control and nonproliferation. Many of these issues are also mentioned in the American report, but it only states that the US is in full compliance with its obligations.

One such issue is the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. The US report states that Washington does not violate it while Russia does. Moscow disagrees, saying that America’s drone program, the target missiles for testing ABM technology and the placement of a naval vertical launch system as part of the AEGIS Ashore shield in Eastern Europe are all in violation of the INF, as Russia has repeatedly told the US.

Another one is the agreement between Russia and the US on disposal of plutonium from decommissioned nuclear warheads. Under this agreement both countries pledged to process the material in reactors, rendering them useless for nuclear weapons.

Russia did so, but the US decided that it would be too costly and is instead mixing its plutonium with special dilutant, a process that can potentially be reversed. Russia considers this unilateral decision a violation of the deal and last year suspended it after the US refused to return to the original terms of the agreement.

Russia also sees problems with America’s compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, saying that the US is stepping outside of it by its nuclear weapons-sharing arrangement with European nations. In particular, Moscow complains that the US trains non-nuclear nations to deploy American nuclear bombs stored in Europe.

The Foreign Ministry also challenged the State Department’s accusations against Russia on several issues, saying the American report omitted key facts related to the accusations, which challenge the narrative and expose America’s complicity in those disputes.

“We are calling on the US again to stop its unseemly practice of mounting ungrounded accusations against other nations, especially amid its own missteps, which only mislead global public opinion,” the statement said.

Pres. Trump has authorized His Generals/Pentagon to Start Nuclear WWIII whenever they Like. Putin Embraces North Korea – and Trump Bluffing so far

Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Behold, evil shall go forth from nation to nation, and a great whirlwind shall be raised up from the coasts of the earth. And the slain of the LORD shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried; they shall be dung upon the ground. (Jeremiah 25:32,33).


I do not want to unnecessarily scare anyone. But WW3 is now being seen in all mainstream media on a daily basis – and the rumours are intensifying. To me, it is obvious that the Illuminati – who own the MSM media – are preparing us for for the conclusion of their great, satanic project: Their NWO  through WW3 – as planned by Albert Pike (and William Guy Carr?) – and apparently in Revelation 13, 17, 18.

You may shake your head at this religious consideration. But do not forget: The Illuminati and here are deeply religious satanists – guided by their Jewish Orthodox masters, The Chabad Lubavitch  who now rule both the White House through Trump´s son-in-law, Kushner, and through Rabbi Berel Lazar Jewish Putin, too, appointed King of orthodox Jews and “enemy” of Jacob Rothschild, i.e. a staged theatre to deceive you and me. For Putin is Rothschild´s antithesis and purportedly even Rothschild´s Antichrist.

The Daily Star 19 April 2017: Russia has reportedly moved weapons towards Vladivostok, just eight miles from the border with North Korea.
And Russia and China have reportedly sent ships to shadow a US fleet sent to threaten North Korea.

Here is Kim Jong Un´s wishful dream, Reuters 19 April 2017.

The New American 19 April 2017

Reuters/Business Insider 17 April 2017

‘Trumpomania’ dead as Kremlin TV says Trump is more dangerous than Kim Jong UN

The Daily Star 19 April 2017 :

But reports suggest the US’s boats are 3,500 miles off course.

The Moscow Times 19 April 2017:

Military Times 13 April 2017: President Trump on Thursday called the recent high-profile military actions overseas proof that he’s

Sputnik 19 April 2017 

“What I do is I authorize my military,” in response to a press question about the use of a massive bomb in an assault on Islamic State group positions in Afghanistan.“Frankly, that’s why they’ve been so successful lately.
During the presidential campaign, he repeatedly promised to review rules of engagement for U.S. troops in war zones and limit micro-management of military operations by executive branch bureaucrats.

THE FACT?: The Guardian 19 April 2017:

 So Trump has told us a lie

But, as you know: He who fears and runs away, he lives to kill us another day 

Stephen Lendman, Global Res. 18 April 2017:  Pentagon and intelligence community power holds the Trump administration, Congress and the courts hostage. Diplomacy is inconsequential, for show only. Tillerson has no say over geopolitical policymaking.

With Pentagon commanders and intelligence community bosses in charge of war making and other key geopolitical issues, a potential nightmarish scenario could unfold.

Articles in the Atlantic and Wall Street Journal discussed Trump’s approach to militarism and war making.

He’s letting hawkish generals make battlefield decisionsoverseen by Defense Secretary Mattis, National Security Advisor McMaster and Joint Chiefs chairman Dunford.

Generals always want more funding. No matter the amount budgeted, it’s not enough. Trump proposed an additional $54 billion for the next fiscal year.

Inadequate, according to Pentagon commanders, said the Atlantic.

They complain about Trump’s “unpredictability” even though he’s giving them free reign over battlefield decisions, including drone strikes and special operations missions in countries where America is not officially at war.

On April 14, the Wall Street Journal headlined “Trump Gives Generals More Freedom on ISIS Fight,” saying: The president “urges them to make more battlefield decisions on their own.” On Friday, an unnamed senior Defense Department official said: “(t)here is a sense among…commanders that they are able to do…more – and so they are.” Now they’re acting more on their own.”

They’re “being encouraged to stretch the limits of their existing authorities when needed, but to think seriously about the consequences of their decisions.”

Last week, US Forces Afghanistan (USFOR-A) commander General John Nicholson, Jr. allegedly used the Pentagon’s Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb (MOAD) on his own.

More likely, along with aggression on Syria, it was a Defense Department message to North Korea, Syria, Russia, China, and other US adversaries, indicating America’s willingness to do whatever it takes to achieve military and geopolitical objectives – not part of waging war on ISIS, a US creation it supports.

The Journal cited an unnamed senior administration official, saying Trump didn’t know about MOAB’s use until after it was dropped, adding:

Mattis “is telling them, ‘it’s not the same as it was. You don’t have to ask us before you drop a MOAB.’”

Your News Wire 17 April 2017: President Trump announced that he has given the United States military the “full authority” to strike foreign targets and declare war without the “interference” of elected officials in Congress or the Senate.

This news  comes as top military bosses claim that World War 3 is “almost guaranteed” and will be “extremely lethal and fast ”(Army Chief of Staff General Mark A. Milley, Defense One, Major General William Hix ). Hix also warned that the US is preparing for “violence on the scale that the U.S. Army has not seen since Korea” when over 30,000 American troops were killed.
Lt. General Joseph Anderson said America must face up to frightening threats from “modern nation-states aggressive in militarised competition.” He added: “Who does that sound like? Russia?” He said: “While we’re ready now, we are being challenged. “Our Army and our nation must be ready.”

Your news Wire 9 April 2017:  Russian President Vladimir Putin has issued a direct threat to President Trump, warning him that Russia and Iran are fully prepared to go to war with the U.S. following the US strike in Syria on Friday.
The two countries say they fully support Syrian President Bashar al Assad, and will respond with “full military force” if Trump commits any “further acts of aggression.”

Impossible, you might say? Just read what Prof. Chossudovsky, Global Res. 18 April 2017 writes: ” Our country has had 4 war criminal presidents in succession.

Clinton twice launched military attacks on SerbiaGeorge W. Bush invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and attacked provinces of Pakistan and Yemen from the air. Obama used NATO to destroy Libya and sent mercenaries to destroy Syria.

Trump attacked Syria with US forces, thereby becoming a war criminal early in his regime.

To the extent that the UN participated in these war crimes along with Washington’s European, Canadian and Australian vassals, all are guilty of war crimes. Perhaps the UN itself should be arraigned before the War Crimes Tribunal along with the EU, US, Australia and Canada.

The London City´s thesis – the US and its presidents – are playing their aggressive role to be eliminated by the antithesis, Russia and Putin, into the synthesis: Their Luciferian technocratic  NWO, the Agenda 21.

This entry was posted in english, euromed. Bookmark the permalink.

UN Planned Europe´s Demographic Suicide already in 2001

Richard Coudenhove KalergiThe EU is animated by Baron Louis de Rothschild’s paid agent´s, EU father Richard Coudenhove Kalergi´s, plan for racial exchange in Europe through mass immigration: Europeans are supposed to look like the ancient Egyptians in the upcoming one-world state of the technocratic Illuminati / Freemasons to avoid racial tensions – everything governed by the Jewish master race. Nicolas Sarkozy  foolishly made the  the “duty” of the French to contribute to this madness through “métissage” (mixed marriages/ procreation)!!

The UN draws a gloomy demographic picture of Europe hier und  hier: The population figure will fall drastically – and in order to make  up for this trend drastic immigration quotas should be created!

The late Udo Ulfkotte wrote in “The End of Europe” in 2015: In the recently published UN report “Replacement Migration” (ST / ESA / SER A./206)” of the UN Population Division from the UN In 2001, the opening up of Germany to 11.4 million migrants was demanded, even if this would lead to social tensions within the country (“rise to social tensions”).


However, the fight against resistance in the population against the population exchange is necessary to achieve economic growth. All this serves the interests of industry. Scientists worldwide support this goal. In October 2015, Jim Yong Kim, President of the UN World Bank, announced that the “population exchange” in Europe would become an “engine of economic growth”.

At a confidential meeting at St. Augustin near Bonn, the Federal Government has made an internal decision about what the ministries will have to do in the future:

Up to 10 (!) Million asylum seekers are expected in Germany by the end of 2016.

What at first glance sounds completely absurd to the average citizen, however, can already be proven with facts.

One must only know that the Federal Government expects (at least) two family stragglers for each asylum seeker: In 2014, there were a total of 300,000 asylum seekers (ie about 900 000).

In 2015 it was clearly more than one million (with family sufficiency, ie at least three million) and for 2016 one expects at least three million people, including including the family reunification. But it can easily be four or five million people.

The United Nations calls this all “replacement migration”.

In  so doing, peoples are easily replaced by others with the blessing of the UN. In the context of the UN, a proposal has already been made on how this should be financed:the Germans are to raise their pension age in the first step to 72 and in the second step to 77 years.

This is the only way to feed the many new fellow citizens in the  Mecca of Germany.
The Germans, who are so self-destructive, finally have something from it. They are allowed to swing flags and applaude at the station, to welcome the new citizens, and to throw teddy bears to them

D.A. Coleman, University of Oxford 2001 had this still very valid comment to the UN report on the the prospect of demographic salvation from population ageing by migration.
The impression given was that substantial increases in immigration, some of them astronomical, were the only option in many cases to prevent declining population, declining workforce and support potential.

Typically these three aims require progressively higher numbers of immigrants. Any population with sub-replacement fertility attempting to maintain a given
population size through immigration would accordingly, acquire a population of
predominantly, eventually entirely, immigrant origin. Populations can only adopt this solution to stabilise the numbers at the risk of the loss of their original identity by massive immigration and rapid displacement of the original population from its majority position.

The official response (Tweede Kamer der Staten Generaal 1983) concluded that ‘Continuing population growth will have an adverse effect on the wellbeing of the nation, and therefore the perspective of growth coming to an end as a consequence of below-replacement fertility (asobserved since 1972) is welcomed.

The official submission to the UNECE/UNFPA Regional Population Meeting in Budapest 1998, for example, just stated that ‘in the longer run a stationary population is viewed as desirable’ (Government of the Netherlands 1998 p 9).

Work force
There is a low ‘demographic advantage’. Large numbers are required for
modest results. Then immigrants themselves age and need to be replaced by further immigrants with high birth rates. 

Most examples of ‘replacement migration’ in the UN study required immigration so high (1.2 million per year for 50 years in the UK case) that population would be doubled in fifty years and then more than doubled again in fifty years and so on ad infintum.

The difficulty of correcting ageing through immigration, except though very high population growth, is underlined by a comparative analysis by the EU Commission. While it would ‘only’ take between 500,000 and a million additional immigrants per year to avert population decline in the EU in the earlier part of the next century, to preserve the current age-structure of the 15 EU countries would require 4.5 million (net) immigrants per year by 2007 and 7 million net per year by 2024 (European Commission, 1996, 1998).

These results have imply that , very high proportions of the populations concerned – eventually a majority – would be of immigrant origin. The UN report made some simple calculations to show the effect, assuming that immigrant fertility immediately declined to that of the host population and that no previous immigrant-origin population existed. Neither of these assumptions is correct, but the UN data provide a base-line. Fertility levels of immigrant populations are usually higher , sometimes
much higher than those of Western host populations, although not always.

In the long run the minority will become the majority in a country if there remains even one region where the increase of the proportion of the minority continues to increase through immigration and higher birth rates. (Steinmann & Jäger, 1997).

16 years on, we are witnessing this development at a stunningly accelerating tempo

This entry was posted in english, euromed. Bookmark the permalink.

Why Brussels Teamed Up With Soros to Bring Hungary to Its Knees

George Soros

© Flickr/ Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung

17:20 29.04.2017Get short URL

Brussels has exerted pressure on Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban for his high education law, which allegedly targets American billionaire George Soros. In his op-ed for RIA Novosti, political pundit Anatoly Vasserman explained why the EU leadership has stood up for the protection of the infamous magnate.

The European Commission is up in arms about Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s latest initiatives, especially the higher education law that could result in the closure of the Central European University (CEU) founded by Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros.The legislation passed on April 4, and inked by Hungarian President Janos Ader, requires foreign accredited universities to provide education services in the countries of their origin and bans them from awarding Hungarian diplomas in the absence of an agreement between Hungary and a country of accreditation.

The Budapest-based CEU is accredited in the United States but does not provide any educational services there. Furthermore, there is no legally binding bilateral agreement between Budapest and Washington, as required by the new Hungarian law.

Commenting on his decision, the Hungarian Prime Minister called attention to the fact that CEU has got an advantage over the other Hungarian universities since its diplomas are accepted in both Hungary and the United States.

“There is competition among universities and it is inexplicable why we should put our own universities at a disadvantage… while securing an unfair advantage for the foreign university,” Orban said as quoted by Deutsche Welle.

The move has prompted fierce criticism from academics and politicians who accused the Hungarian Prime Minister and the ruling Fidesz party of targeting billionaire Soros.Responding to his critics, Orban called Soros an “enemy of the euro” who “has destroyed lives of millions of Europeans through his financial speculations.”

In his article for RIA Novosti Russian journalist and political pundit Anatoly Vasserman pointed out that Orban’s concerns are not unjustified.

“Soros has gone down in the history of the economy with his theory of the relevance of ‘Reflexivity’ to economics [and capital markets]. That means that when he plays the stock market he doesn’t focus on the real situation in the economy in general or in any specific businesses, but only on what people ‘think’ about these businesses,” Vasserman elaborated.

To illustrate his point the Russian political pundit recalled how in 1992 the Hungarian-born billionaire nearly brought the Bank of England to its knees by dumping the pound.

“It is worth remembering [Soros’] famous stock-market trick when he borrowed a huge sum of money (about one billion pounds) and sank the British pound. [The trick] was not based on the fact that at that time the British economy was unstable. It was, of course, unstable, but the reserves of Britain would be enough to cope with this trouble. However, Soros’s speculative actions had affected the minds of big stock players. And all of them, seeing that a very large sum had been converted from British pounds to Deutsche marks, believed that the pound would not resist [the pressure]. As a result, they all rushed to convert their assets from pounds to other currencies,” Vasserman wrote.

The damage was done and Soros’s trick worked. Some say that in the process the American magnate pocketed more than a billion dollars.

In a Thursday article titled Wake Up, Europe!, George Soros said that Russia's policy toward Ukraine represents a threat to the very existence of the European Union
In a Thursday article titled “Wake Up, Europe!”, George Soros said that Russia’s policy toward Ukraine represents a threat to the very existence of the European Union

“It is clear that such tricks work only in cases where you can clearly predict the state of minds of other stock exchange players or affect it,” Vasserman highlighted.

Apparently, therefore, Soros started propagating specific economic and political theories through his NGOs and educational institutions to make the behavior of those indoctrinated predictable, the political pundit wrote.

“People who have been indoctrinated by Soros’ theories are ideal assets for his game. These people are predictable and unable to protect their own interests from propaganda fantasies,” Vasserman said, “That’s why there is growing opposition to [George Soros] in the countries which experienced firsthand the consequences of his policies.”

To complicate matters further, Brussels is enthusiastically supporting the Hungarian-American billionaire, although Soros has repeatedly predicted the collapse of the euro.Vasserman recalled that having joined the European Union Hungary was forced to bring many of its industries to a halt.

The crux of the matter is that “the countries that joined the European Union later than the others are forced to abandon those of their industries which compete with manufacturers of member-states that were accepted to the EU earlier,” he explained.

According to the political pundit, it is hardly surprising in this context that the European Commission has taken the side of George Soros: Eurocrats are interested in maintaining the inequality in the bloc and “stultifying” the citizens of Central and Eastern Europe.

Meanwhile, on Saturday Orban was summoned to the Presidency of the European People’s Party (EPP) “to explain the latest developments related to the Hungarian Higher Education Act and the national consultation ‘Let’s stop Brussels,'” the EPP press release says.

“The EPP Presidency sent a clear message to Prime Minister Orban and his party, Fidesz, that we will not accept that any basic freedoms are restricted or rule of law is disregarded. This includes academic freedom and the autonomy of universities. The EPP wants the CEU to remain open, deadlines suspended and dialogue with the US to begin,” EPP President Joseph Daul’s official statement reads.


Published On 10/14/2015 | By infostormer | Featured Articles, Jewish Problem, News

The evil billionaire Jew George Soros has come under fire in Hungary.  Hungarians are accusing him of supporting the foreign invasion of Europe.  He is also being criticized for his role in sovereign debt defaults.

Put it this way, Soros did not make his billions by building anything.  He made it through manipulation and schemes in the financial markets.  He has used his ill gotten wealth to cause all sorts of trouble around the world.  The most recent being his financing of Black Lives Matter and the overthrow of Ukraine’s government.

This Jew is a traitor to humanity.  He should be tried for crimes against humanity and then put to death.

From CNBC:

Hedge fund mogul George Soros has come under fire in his native Hungary, where politicians have accused him of supporting illegal migration amidst a refugee crisis that’s brought the right-wing government under pressure.

Government representatives including Prime Minister Viktor Orban have slammed Soros in recent weeks for promoting liberal migrant policies and backing a variety of organizations through his pro-democracy charity that have criticized the way Orban’s government has dealt with the crisis.

In opinion pieces published by the Financial Times and Project Syndicate, Soros has said frontline states like Hungary were shirking their asylum obligations, and controversially suggested that a comprehensive European refugee plan should provide each asylum seeker with $16,800 annually for two years to help cover housing, health care and education costs.

“[Soros] keeps bombarding the international public with his earth-shattering plans, quite obviously, in the name of true selflessness which he has manifested in so many ways in the countries where his activities have resulted in sovereign default in the past 30 years,” Hungarian Minister János Lázár, who currently heads the Prime Minister’s Office, said at a press conference earlier this month.

Like this Article? Share it!


Israel fueling Syria crisis over expansionist agenda: Analyst

Sat Apr 29, 2017 1:20PM


PressTv User

A political analyst believes Israel has played a very negative role fueling the conflict in Syria, adding that weakening President Assad’s regime would be very beneficial for Tel Aviv because Damascus has been one of the “stumbling blocks” in the process of Israeli expansion.  

“They [the Israelis] do not really want any peaceful solution. So because of that they are using any pretext to try to destroy Hezbollah and bomb ammunition depot … but obviously it is totally against any international law and totally illegal,” Rustem Safronov told Press TV in an interview on Saturday.

The analyst’s comments came after an Israeli missile strike targeted a Syrian military base southwest of the capital Damascus on Thursday.

“All these attacks against Syrian army and against Syrian allies are very well thought and coordinated by Israelis, probably with the American cosponsors, because they do not want the regime in Syria to consolidate power and destroy the foreign terrorists,” he noted.

Israel has carried out multiple attacks on Syrian government positions since the foreign-sponsored militancy erupted in March 2011. Damascus says the raids aim to help Takfiri militants fighting against government forces.


Sat Apr 29, 2017 5:27AM
Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi
Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi

Iran has condemned Israel’s recurrent military incursions into Syrian territory as attempts to shore up the Takfiri terrorists in Syria, who are increasingly losing ground against the Arab country’s army.

Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Bahram Qassemi said on Friday that there was no doubt that the inroads were “aimed at weakening Syria’s legitimate government” and “in line with reinforcing Takfiri-Zionist terrorists, who are moved closer to annihilation and defeat in the battlegrounds every day.”

He also said that the military attacks constituted violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of an independent state, which is a member of the United Nations (UN). The raids thus flouted international laws and regulations, Qassemi said.

Israel struck an area near the International Airport in the Syrian capital, Damascus, on Thursday.

Tel Aviv has conducted many such attacks in the past. The forays, however, have increased in number since the outbreak of the foreign-backed militancy in Syria in 2011.

Read more:

On March 18, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu surprisingly admitted to a series of the attacks by the regime that had hit several targets near the ancient city of Palmyra in the central part of Syria the previous day.

He claimed the attacks had been aimed at targets belonging to the Lebanese resistance movement of Hezbollah and said Israel would continue hitting the group. Hezbollah has been efficiently assisting Damascus in its anti-terror fight.

Qassemi said the Israeli attacks worked to upset regional and international stability and security. He asked international bodies, especially the UN, not to remain silent regarding the acts of aggression and invest all in their power in preventing their recurrence.

‘Supporting Takfiri terrorists’

Last September, an Israeli lawmaker said Israel was directly aiding the terrorist group formerly known as al-Nusra Front in Golan.

Israeli forces take part in “military training” in Syria’s Tel Aviv-occupied Golan Heights, March 22, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

In a status posted on his Facebook page and quoted by the daily Ha’aretz, Knesset member Akram Hasoon said Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, as the group is currently known, was bombing the Druze Village of Khadr with Israeli minister of military affairs Avigdor Lieberman’s support and protection.

On April 22, the website for Israel’s Channel 10 published a video in which Israel’s former minister of military affairs Moshe Ya’alon admitted to a tacit alliance with Daesh, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham’s fellow terrorist group.

The Israeli regime is also known to be providing medical treatment to the Takfiri terrorists fleeing Syria into the Israeli-occupied Syrian territory of the Golan Heights.

Sat Apr 29, 2017 10:14AM
Turkey blocks access to all language editions of the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia. (Photo by AP)
Turkey blocks access to all language editions of the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia. (Photo by AP)

A Turkish internet monitoring group says Ankara has blocked all access inside the country to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia amid the government’s ongoing post-coup crackdown.

Turkey Blocks, which calls itself an independent “digital transparency project,” said in a statement that a block on all language editions of the Wikipedia website had been detected at 8:00 a.m. (0500 GMT) on Saturday.

“The loss of availability is consistent with internet filters used to censor content in the country,” it added, noting that the latest block was after an administrative order by the Turkish authorities.

Turkey’s Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) confirmed the ban report but gave no details.

“After technical analysis and legal consideration based on the Law Nr. 5651, an administrative measure has been taken for this website,” it said.

Over the past years, Turkey has become notorious for provisionally blocking access to popular sites, including Facebook and Twitter, in the wake of major events such as mass protests or militant attacks.

Ankara has also been engaged in suppressing the media and opposition groups, who were believed to have played a role in a failed putsch on July 15, 2016, when a faction of the Turkish military declared that the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was no more in charge of the country.

Over 40,000 people have been arrested and 120,000 others sacked or suspended from a wide range of professions, including soldiers, police, teachers, and public servants, over alleged links with terrorist groups.

Jewish Fingerprint: GAZA
  • Thumbnail

Pimping for Israel Remains Undiminished Since UN Report Branded It an Apartheid State

In the UK you can start a petition on the Government website. If it reaches 10,000 signatures you get a response from the Government. If it tops 100,000 it will be considered for debate in Parliament.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

Currently there’s a petition saying the UK must apologise for the Balfour Declaration and lead peace efforts in Palestine. “We call on Her Majesty’s Government to openly apologise to the Palestinian people for issuing the Balfour Declaration. The colonial policy of Britain between 1917-1948 led to mass displacement of the Palestinian nation. HMG should recognise its role during the Mandate and now must lead attempts to reach a solution that ensures justice for the Palestinian people.”

The Government’s response is unhelpful to say the least:

“The Balfour Declaration is an historic statement for which HMG does not intend to apologise. We are proud of our role in creating the State of Israel. The task now is to encourage moves towards peace….

“Establishing a homeland for the Jewish people in the land to which they had such strong historical and religious ties was the right and moral thing to do…. We recognise that the Declaration should have called for the protection of political rights of the non-Jewish communities in Palestine, particularly their right to self-determination. However, the important thing now is to look forward and establish security and justice for both Israelis and Palestinians through a lasting peace. We believe the best way to achieve this is through a two-state solution: a negotiated settlement that leads to a safe and secure Israel living alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state, based on the 1967 borders with agreed land swaps, Jerusalem as the shared capital of both states, and a just, fair, agreed and realistic settlement for refugees.

“We believe that such negotiations will only succeed when they are conducted between Israelis and Palestinians…. If both parties show bold leadership, peace is possible. The UK is ready to do all it can to support this goal.”

– Foreign and Commonwealth Office

I wonder what bureaucratic nitwit wrote that. They’ve been spouting nonsense about “a two-state solution: a negotiated settlement that leads to a safe and secure Israel living alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state” for decades and they know full well that it won’t happen without forcing measures. International law has spoken and waits to be implemented. World powers, if they truly respect the rule of law, must mobilise and apply it without fear or favour. Many experts are now saying that the international community’s conniving inaction has allowed Israel to establish enough ‘facts on the ground’ to make their illegal occupation permanent.

Note also the crude bias: “a safe and secure Israel living alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state”. No safety and security for Palestine, no sir! Just threadbare viability.

And who – ignoring all reports to the contrary – praised Israel recently for being “a thriving democracy, a beacon of tolerance” and said that the British government will be marking the centenary of the infamous Balfour Declaration later this year “with pride”? And who has invited the arch war criminal Netanyahu to the celebrations? None other than Britain’s prime minister Theresa May, the daughter of an Anglican priest and a regular churchgoer. What does that say about this righteous lady’s real values, real standards, and real concerns for the endless misery inflicted on her Christian and Muslim brothers and sisters in the Holy Land by Israel with its military boot on their necks?

And who hurriedly declared the Shai Masot affair “closed” after Masot, an employee of the Israeli embassy and probably a Mossad asset, plotted with gullible British MPs and political hangers-on to “take down” senior government figures? That’s right,  the Foreign Office and Boris Johnson, the UK’s clownish Foreign Secretary: “The UK has a strong relationship with Israel and we consider the matter closed,” they announced.

Meanwhile in the latest show of just how far how truth and freedom of expression have become subservient to Jewish sensibilities the Liberal Democrats have barred their former MP David Ward from standing for the party in the coming general election after its leader, Tim Farron, said his comments about Jews had been “deeply offensive, wrong and antisemitic”.

Ward has ‘form’ in defying the Israel lobby. Yet he was selected by his local party to stand again for the seat he held from 2010 until 2015. But after criticism from Theresa May in the House of Commons and a meeting of senior LibDem officials, Farron said: “I believe in a politics that is open, tolerant and united. David Ward is unfit to represent the party and I have sacked him.”

Why is David Ward “unfit”? What exactly was his (alleged) crime?

Four years ago I reported that the Liberal Democrat leadership threw a mighty wobbly when Ward made this remark on his website: “I am saddened that the Jews, who suffered unbelievable levels of persecution during the Holocaust, could within a few years of liberation from the death camps be inflicting atrocities on Palestinians in the new State of Israel and continue to do so on a daily basis in the West Bank and Gaza.”

Goaded by the Holocaust Educational Trust and the Board of Deputies of British Jews, who complained that Ward’s remarks “deliberately abused the memory of the Holocaust” and were “sickening” and “offensive”, the party’s Chief Whip, Alistair Carmichael, agreed they were “wholly inappropriate” and that singling out ‘the Jews’ in that way crossed a red line.

Ward, who had visited Palestine and seen the truth for himself, was treated like a delinquent. Party leader Nick Clegg ordered him to work alongside the party’s Friends of Israel “to identify and agree language that will be proportionate and precise” in future debate. Disciplinary steps would then be reviewed.  Ward subsequently received a letter from Carmichael withdrawing the whip (i.e. suspending him from the parliamentary party). According to Sky News Carmichael wrote: “As we have sought to impress upon you repeatedly, we are having to decide on whether language you chose to use…. is language which brings the party into disrepute or harms the interests of the Party.”

Carmichael banged on about the need for language that was proportionate and precise and how Ward’s language caused “considerable offence rather than addressing questions of political substance about the plight of the Palestinian people and the right of Israel’s citizens to live a life free of violence”. He claimed Ward misrepresented the views of the party. “We put it to you that your most recent statement – which specifically questions the continuing existence of the State of Israel – is neither proportionate nor precise.”

Carmichael’s reprimand plumbed new depths of stupidity where he said: “We have given you every opportunity to reconcile the expression of your views with the party’s policy on a two-state solution… the two-state solution for which the party has long argued.” Carmichael and Clegg, and especially Farron, really need to watch this video by Miko Peled. Same goes for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Peled is an Israeli Jew, the son of an Israeli general, and a former soldier in the Israeli army. You couldn’t find a more authentic insider source. He confirms in suitably proportionate and precise language what many others have been saying for years. Here’s a flavour.

“The name of the game: erasing Palestine, getting rid of the people and de-Arabizing the country…

“When people talk about the possibility of Israel somehow giving up the West Bank for a Palestinian state, if it wasn’t so sad it would be funny. It shows a complete misunderstanding of the objective of Zionism and the Zionist state.

“By 1993 the Israelis had achieved their mission to make the conquest of the West Bank irreversible. By 1993 the Israeli government knew for certain that a Palestinian state could not be established in the West Bank – the settlements were there, $ billions were invested, the entire Jordan River valley was settled… there was no place any more for a Palestinian state to be established. That is when Israel said, OK, we’ll begin negotiations…”

Peled also describes the Israeli army, in which he served, as “one of the best trained and best equipped and best fed terrorist organisations in the world.”

As for his punishment, Ward claimed his views were widely shared. “I will not apologise for describing the state of Israel as an apartheid state. I don’t know how you can describe it as anything else.”

Farron’s bully-boy tactics are completely at odds with the opinion of top legal experts who were recently asked for their views by Free Speech on Israel, Independent Jewish Voices, Jews for Justice for Palestinians and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. In a nutshell, those in public life cannot behave in a manner inconsistent with the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for freedom of expression and applies not only to information or ideas that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that “offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population”.

There is a further obligation to allow all concerned in public debate “to express their opinions and ideas without fear, even if these opinions and ideas are contrary to those defended by the official authorities or by a large part of public opinion, or even if those opinions and ideas are irritating or offensive to the public”.

What’s more, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights says that everyone has the right to freedom of expression including “freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.”

Also, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says the same sort of thing, subject of course to the usual limitations required by law and respect for the rights of others.

Farron and his handlers have no excuse for treating David Ward like this. The big question-mark hangs over Farron himself, as to whether he’s fit to represent the LibDems let alone lead them.

*(David Ward. Image courtesy of Facebook).



Emmanuel Macron: An insider disguised as an outsider, wrapped in opportunism

Macron is the arch-establishment figure. Statements to the contrary are worse than misleading, they are lies.

The French elections have made it easier than usual to spot fake news merchants. Anyone who calls Emmanuel Macron a ‘political outsider’ or ‘anti-establishment’ is telling a lie. That of course includes Macron himself.

Macron was the Minister of the Economy, Industry and Digital Affairs from 2014 to 2016. He was a member of Francois Hollande’s Socialist party during this time. Being a government minister under a President whose popularity was so low that he saved himself the embarrassment of seeking a second term, is as far from  being a political outsider as one could imagine. Only it gets worse.

Between 2004 and 2008 Macron worked in the French Ministry of Economy but then left in order to pursue work in the private sector.

To be specific, he left his government post to work as an investment banker at Rothschild & Cie Banque, a position which has about as much anti-establishment credibility as being Hillary Clinton’s speech writer, the EU President or the Prince of Wales.

Odd though it may have been for a Rothschild banker to be a member of the French Socialist Party, it is safe to say that Macron declared himself a proverbial Rothschild socialist in order to further his career.

But when Macron saw just how much President Hollande had tarnished the Socialist brand (so to speak) he jumped ship and started his own party ‘En Marche!’, a party which stands for the only thing Emmanuel Macron believes in….Emmanuel Macron.

Opportunism is par for the course in politics and Macron has mastered the art of both seizing and forging opportunities. But to call himself an ‘outsider’ when his CV includes being a government minister and working for the notorious Rothschild investment bank; he really must see the French people in much the same way Marie Antoinette did.

A vote for Macron is a vote for eating cake while he has his cake and eats it too. He is emblematic of a politician stooping to every known low in the book, even by French standards.

A vote for no one would be a more honest vote than a vote for Macron. As things stand, Marine Le Pen gives French voters an opportunity to redeem themselves in the eyes of the multi-polar world after years of hawkishness abroad and foppishness at home.


Who’s behind the mysterious rise of Emmanuel Macron?

Until recently, he had no visible record of political commitment. But he might be about to destroy the Socialist party

4 February 2017

Before the horrified gaze of its militants, the French Socialist party — which has been a major force in French politics since 1981, and forms the present government — is falling to pieces.

There are many reasons behind this catastrophe. They go back to 2005 and the dithering leadership of the then secretary-general, François Hollande, at a time when the party was dangerously divided after the referendum on a European constitution. And they continue up to 1 December last year, when President Hollande, after again dithering for months, announced on national television, in tears, that he had bowed to the inevitable — his own failure and unpopularity — and would not run for re-election. But the most significant reason for the Socialist implosion is the sudden arrival of a man from nowhere called Emmanuel Macron.

Macron, at 39, would normally be considered at least 15 years too young to mount a serious presidential challenge in France, but the most recent polls show him in third place, just behind the front-runner, the far-right Front National’s leader, Marine Le Pen, and François Fillon, the candidate of the conservative party, Les Républicains.

His rapid rise makes Macron a genuine original in French politics and his opponents do not know what to make of him. Unlike all other serious contenders, he has no visible record of political commitment. In 2004 he graduated from the National School of Administration (ENA) and joined the upper civil service. Then, in 2008, he paid €50,000 to buy himself out of his government contract and became an investment banker with Rothschild, where he was highly regarded and quickly made a small fortune. Then, in 2012, with the election of President Hollande, his career took another unexpected change of direction: he left Rothschild to become deputy secretary-general at the Elysée. When Manuel Valls became Hollande’s second prime minister in 2014, with instructions to deregulate the French economy, Macron was catapulted into the economics ministry.

Hollande and Valls congratulated themselves on an imaginative choice, and Macron set out to please Brussels by cutting France’s deficit while encouraging business activity. In 2015 he introduced la loi Macron, a measure designed to stimulate growth by abolishing public service monopolies and union restrictions on hours. This had to be forced through the National Assembly by decree, against the opposition of Socialist deputies, an unpopular move that consecrated Macron as the bête noire of the left.

As the months in office passed, Macron openly developed a separate political agenda, often disagreeing in public with Valls. Soon after his appointment, a mysterious movement appeared called ‘Les Jeunes avec Macron’ (‘Young people for Macron’). This was launched as a ‘spontaneous’ internet site, but quickly grew into a well-organised group numbering several thousand activists whose average age was said to be 33.

Macron then began to dominate the debate on European and welfare policy — but Hollande and Valls did nothing to rein him in. In 2015, a few days after Hollande insisted that Macron was ‘respecting his authority’, the maverick minister attacked the wealth tax — a central plank of Socialist fiscal policy since it was introduced in 1989. Meanwhile, party leaders mocked his inexperience and lack of support on the left, and estimated his electoral appeal at 6 per cent.

Undaunted, the economics minister announced that he was forming his own political ‘movement’, ‘En Marche!’ (Let’s Go!), ‘open to everyone of progressive views’ and ‘aimed at younger voters’. Last August he started touring French holiday resorts appealing for a vision that would ‘re-forge the country’s politics, culture and ideology’. At the end of the month he announced his resignation, and in November he launched the presidential campaign that he must have been secretly preparing ever since he joined the government.

While the seven hapless candidates for the Socialist party’s nomination were struggling throughout December to achieve three-figure attendance at their meetings, Macron — with no party machine behind him — was attracting thousands. In Clermont-Ferrand it was 2,500, in Lille 4,000, and in Paris last month 12,000 people packed into the hall to hear him speak.

As a presidential candidate, Macron is seen as an outsider, someone who will ‘break the system’ and challenge the stifling consensus of unions, over-entitled functionaries and remarkably youthful pensioners that prevents France from responding to the challenges of globalisation. He usually describes himself as ‘centrist’ but he also objects to being called ‘anti-socialist’.


If Macron’s unique selling point is unclear, his unique talking point is that he married his former school teacher, a lady 24 years older than him. This startling fact, when first encountered, tends to bring political discussion to a halt, while all pause for a few moments of profound reflection. His latest fan is Ségolène Royal. Ségolène is the current minister of the environment, and, by chance, she too is 24 years older than the dynamic new arrival. She has repeatedly spoken of her affection and admiration for Macron. Ségolène was the defeated Socialist presidential candidate of 2007, but last week she urged the party’s voters to ignore their own candidate, Benoît Hamon — a hardline leftist sacked as education minister by Valls in 2014 — and back Macron instead.

Macron has not just divided the Socialists, he has replaced them. So how has this apparently isolated and underfunded individual managed all this in such a short time? It is clear that Macron has powerful supporters behind the scenes, and a clue may lie in the little-discussed fact that some years ago he was identified as a member of ‘les Gracques’ — a discreet centre-left pressure group loosely staffed by influential chief executives and civil service mandarins. They are pro-market socialists who long ago gave up on the Socialist party. Many are fellow ‘énarques’ (graduates of ENA) and every step of Macron’s career could have been directed by them. Spotted as a brilliant and charming student, Macron could first have been launched into the prestigious state Finance Inspectorate, then switched into Rothschild to gain business experience (and wealthy support) and then placed like a time bomb in Hollande’s outer office, where he ticked away until he could be moved into the heart of the Valls government. Last August he finally exploded into action at the perfect moment to cause maximum damage to Hollande, Valls and the entire Socialist presidential election campaign. Macron’s rise bears all the hallmarks of a classic ENA undercover operation, a fundamental part of the énarques’ stock-in-trade and one in which the country’s leading bureaucrats are cynically trained.

Now that the Socialists have lumbered themselves with a dinosaur — Hamon — as their candidate, Macron is in an even stronger position. He will be able to tune his campaign to attract moderate Socialist voters as well as the centrists and centre-rightists who flock to his meetings and are having second thoughts about François Fillon.

Mr Fillon and his British wife Penelope are currently under investigation for misuse of public funds. Both deny the accusations. Interestingly, the information that has placed him under suspicion seems to have come from dissident members of Les Républicains, his own party — angry that neither ex–president Nicolas Sarkozy nor Alain Juppé, mayor of Bordeaux, won the nomination. If Mr Fillon is formally charged, he has said that he will not run. In which case the most likely solution for his party, at this short notice, would be to select Mr Juppé in his place.


Subscribe to The Spectator

French Establishment Mount The Ramparts Against Le Pen

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Finian Cunningham via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

«Centrist» candidate Emmanuel Macron was no sooner announced winner in the first round of the French presidential election at the weekend, and with unseemly haste the political establishment rushed to close ranks against rival Marine Le Pen of the Front National.

Macron topped the poll in the first round winning 23.8 per cent of the vote. Le Pen came in second place with 21.5 per cent. Both candidates will now proceed to face off in the second round, to be held on May 7, with the other nine candidates having been eliminated.

The FN leader is entitled to call her electoral performance a «historic» achievement. It was the best result for the nationalist party in the French presidential elections since its foundation in 1972. But while her supporters were celebrating a landmark victory, the French establishment was desperately pulling up the drawbridge. Slings, arrows and boiling oil are being readied to make sure Le Pen is kept at bay from the seat of power.

Le Pen, who took over the party leadership in 2011 from her father Jean-Marie, has taken the FN from «fringe» status to now being a major mainstream political force, within a shot of winning the presidency of the French Republic.

But it is unlikely that Marine Le Pen will become Madame President – at least in the 2017 cycle. Her rival Macron is already receiving fulsome endorsements from the erstwhile two main parties, the center-right Republicans and the incumbent Socialists. Both parties suffered painful defeats at the weekend, the first time in 60 years than neither of them have a candidate going forward to the second round.

Republican candidate Francois Fillon, who won 19.9 per cent of the vote, immediately gave his endorsement to Macron, telling his supporters that Le Pen would be a «disaster» for the country. Socialist contender, Benoit Hamon, whose electoral performance crashed to scraping only 6.5 per cent of the vote, was even more vehement in endorsing Macron. In his defeat-acceptance speech, Hamon called on his supporters to get behind Macron because Le Pen was «an enemy of the state».

The so-called «hard left» candidate Jean-Luc Melénchon, of the France Unbowed party, came in fourth with a respectable vote of 19.6 per cent, narrowly behind Fillon. Considering that Melénchon was campaigning on a staunch socialist manifesto and that his party was only recently formed, it was a commendable result for the veteran left-winger. He can claim to have secured the mantle of the «genuine left» in France, and going forward has a strong base upon which to build a new socialist party. For that reason, Melénchon refused to endorse either Macron or Le Pen for the second round. To his credit, he is not selling out on political principles.

The final head-to-head election next month is shaping up to be a repeat of the 2002 presidential contest, when Marine’s father Jean-Marie caused a political shock when he made it through to second round back then. Similar to that occasion, as now, the establishment rallied to support Jacques Chirac, of the center-right UMP (forerunner of the present-day Republicans). In 2002, Jean-Marie Le Pen was trounced, winning only 18 per cent of the final vote, against Chirac’s nearly 80 per cent.

As before, the same maneuver of mounting the ramparts against Marine Le Pen is underway. Macron will consolidate voters from Fillon’s Republicans and Hamon’s Socialists, and he is projected to win up to 60 per cent of the final tally against Marine Le Pen.

In terms of votes, Le Pen’s FN has evolved to become an undoubted central political force in French politics. At the weekend, she garnered some 7.6 million, less than one million behind Macron, and well ahead of the other contenders. Her party’s performance exceeded that of its previous best in the 2015 municipal elections when the FN won 6.6 million votes.

Nevertheless, Le Pen’s FN is still tainted with its original association with fascism, racism and anti-semitism. Le Pen says that mainstream media labelling of her party as «far-right» is a smear. She prefers to call the FN «nationalist».

To a large extent, the 48-year-old lawyer has managed to «detoxify» the image of the party and has positioned it as a populist movement that stands against global capitalism and the European Union’s servility to corporate finance. Le Pen is campaigning on left-leaning economic policies of «social protection» and taking France out of the EU, in the same manner as the Brexit for Britain. She also wants to quit the US-led NATO military alliance and is openly calling for friendly relations with Russia. The FN aims to restore national control over French borders and implement big cuts in immigration numbers. Her strident denunciation of «Islamization» of French culture has earned her criticism of being xenophobic.

However, to label Le Pen and the FN as «an enemy of the state» seems to be an hysterical caricature. The suspicion is that it is her party’s policies of opposing global capitalism, the EU and NATO which is the real source of establishment animus, which is concealed by hollow accusations of «racism, xenophobia and fascism» and «enemy of the state».

It is notable that EU leaders also joined with French establishment figures in rushing to endorse Macron at the weekend. European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and German Chancellor Angela Merkel responded quickly to congratulate him on winning first place in the initial presidential round. With two weeks to go until the second and final round, those public comments from EU leaders seem to be a flagrant interference in the French election. Nonetheless, they underscore the urgency for the political establishment within France and across Europe to keep Le Pen from entering the Élysée Palace on May 7.

As for Macron, the branding of the «centrist» politician has the unmistakeable air of slick marketing by the powers-that-be. Of course, being avidly pro-EU, pro-NATO and frosty towards Russian leader Vladimir Putin makes Macron a keen favorite in the eyes of the status quo.

The 39-year-old Macron claims that, politically, he is «neither right nor left» and the mainstream media have glowingly dubbed him a fresh-faced «outsider». Corny comparisons are made to John F Kennedy, Tony Blair and Barack Obama. There is a palpable sense that Macron’s image is being intensely manufactured as the golden boy of politics who, it is advertised, will bring «hope and change» for everyone.

Only in a crass, superficial sense could Macron be described as «an outsider» who is forging a «new politics». It is true that he has never served in elected office. And he formed his political party, En Marche, (Forward) only a year ago.

But everything else about Macron is deeply establishment and status quo. With an elite education, he worked as a former Rothschild investment banker on a multi-million-euro income, before being appointed by Socialist President Francois Hollande as economy minister four years ago. In that post, he was the architect of the widely hated pro-business labor «reforms» (hire-and-fire), which the Hollande government forced into law last year by decree, despite massive public protests.

Macron cleverly stepped down from his ministerial post in anticipation of entering the presidential elections, and thereby gave himself a modicum of distance from the despised governing Socialists. The latter, by the way, is really a misnomer, as Hollande’s government (2012-2017) served as ardent proponents of neoliberal capitalism in the service of global finance. That is partly the reason why Hollande’s would-be successor Benoit Hamon received such a drubbing in the latest poll, while Jean-Luc Melénchon of the Communist-backed France Unbowed emerged with respectable support.

So, Macron is certainly no «outsider» nor fresh-faced «challenger» of the status quo. That’s just all superficial marketing and branding to ensure that he prevents Le Pen winning power. Macron will eventually prove to be a willing servant of global capitalism, the EU and NATO, and a ruthless economic hitman against the working class.

In his first-round victory speech at the weekend, Macron declared that he would create a France that is «fair and efficient» for everyone. The use of the word «efficient» is a creepy harbinger of the priorities that this establishment-technocrat will deliver in his presidential service to big business, global capital and US-led transatlantic militarism.

Macron’s endorsement list tells a lot. It includes: incumbent President Francois Hollande and current prime minister Bernard Cazeneuve, the foreign minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and defense minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. As well as the entire center-right Republican leadership. These two parties were solidly rejected in the first round of the presidential election at the weekend. And yet they are now cheerleading for Macron, the supposed «outsider». This amounts to failed French politicians begetting more failed French politicians. Wow, plus ca change!



Donald Trump’s deep state dilemma: Free reign at home–totally compromised in foreign affairs

Donald Trump is still Donald Trump, but only when it comes to domestic issues.

When the so-called ‘neo-conservative’ movement took over much of the Republican party towards the end of the Cold War, the movement was generally defined by ultra-hawkish politicians, keenly desperate to maintain and expand US global hegemony while embracing much of the ‘big government’ policies typically associated with many in the Democratic party.

The neo-cons were big on ideology and possessed not an ounce of foreign policy pragmatism. They were more interested in war crimes than the culture wars, they were friendly to finance capitalism and big business, they were big on corporate driven free trade and spoke increasingly little about small business initiatives and middle class tax cuts.

The total failure of these policies as adopted by Republicans and copied by Democrats throughout the 1990s and early 21st century, helped get Donald Trump elected. He campaigned against neo-conservatism on both the domestic and foreign policy fronts.

Sadly, Trump has become co-opted and some would say brainwashed by the neo-cons who control much of Congress and the deep state. It seems that he’s more or less given up this battle. The swamp that he was meant to drain, increasingly looks as though it has drained him.

READ MORE: Dr. Strange-Trump or How I learned to stop swamp draining and love the deep state

However, on the domestic front, Trump is still very much Trump.

Yesterday, he became the first sitting POTUS to address the National Riffle Association(NRA), following through on his campaign pledge to the stalwartly Republican group to protect the 2nd Amendment which grants Americans the right to bear arms.

This followed the announcements of wide-ranging tax cuts to middle and low earners and a simplification of the grossly unfair and complicated US Federal Tax Code. He has also called for the full elimination of Federal inheritance tax, a punitive tax which is best described as anti-family social engineering.  Again, these were all conservative campaign promises that Donald Trump is sticking by.

In addition to simplifying the notorious odd US Federal tax brackets, Trump has also proposed measures to incentivise people to bring corporate earnings back to the US.

Because neo-cons generally care less about home grown issues than about big war, big finance and big globalism, it is as though they’ve allowed Trump to remain Donald Trump when it comes to the so-called meat and potatoes issues of US conservatism, but in turn, he has had to relinquish his campaign pledges on NATO, Russia, Syria, the wider Middle East, Asia and to an extent, also the Federal Reserve.

READ MORE: 6 BIG LEAGUE Trump U-turns in less than 100 days in office

But something else is apparent in Donald Trump’s address before the NRA, he looked and sounded himself. He was lose, he was jovial and was spouting conservative catch phrases. He felt at home. It was very reminiscent of the excitement which permeated Trump campaign rallies during the long election.

By contrast, his recent foreign policy speeches have seemed stiff, highly scripted, uncomfortable and very un-Donald Trump.

The differences are quite staggering. If only Trump realised that peace could be good for business and that in the long term his middle class conservative base would benefit more from peace than from war in every sense, including economically. Trump himself campaigned on fixing American airports, roads, dams and bridges rather than rebuilding the Middle East. He was very much correct about that.

Most of Trump’s domestic conservative base are people who don’t have shares in Raytheon or Lockheed Martin. These people have never had dinner with the Rothschilds, these people don’t really know what the Yinon Plan is nor what the Tirana Platform is. They almost certainly don’t know the difference between Donbass and Lviv. But this really doesn’t matter. These people have lives to life and they put their own needs first. This is a normal situation.

If the deep state decided to do the same, then Trump could have perhaps continued with his America First policies which relate to both foreign affairs and domestic issues. But if that happened, the deep state wouldn’t be the deep state and America might become democratic and great again. That simply could not be allowed to happen.

FBI Director Comey confirms US does NOT know Russia provided DNC/Podesta emails to Wikileaks

In congressional testimony FBI Director Comey slips out that US intelligence does not know how Russia passed on stolen emails to Wikileaks, revealing that the entire Russiagate scandal is based on guesses.

Ploughing through the testimony FBI Director James Comey gave to the House Intelligence Committee on 19th March 2017, I came across an exchange he had with Representative Adam Schiff, which has gone entirely unreported and the importance of which has been entirely looked.

This exchange shows that the US intelligence community admits that Russian intelligence did not have direct contact with Wikileaks, and did not pass on the stolen Podesta and DNC emails to Wikileaks.

The exchange between Schiff and Comey reads as follows

SCHIFF: Are you aware that Mr. Stone also stated publicly that he was in direct communication with Julian Assange and WikiLeaks?

COMEY: Same answer.

SCHIFF: Are you aware that Mr. Stone also claimed that he was in touch with an intermediary of Mr. Assange?

COMEY: Same answer.

SCHIFF: This is a question I think you can answer. Do you know whether the Russian intelligence service has dealt directly with WikiLeaks or whether they too used an intermediary?

COMEY: We assessed they used some kind of cutout. They didn’t deal directly with WikiLeaks. In contrast to D.C. Leaks and Guccifer 2.0.

SCHIFF: In early October, are you aware that Mr. Stone tweeted I have total confidence that my hero, Julian Assange will educate the American people soon. Are you aware of that tweet?

COMEY: I’m back to my original same answer.

SCHIFF: And are you aware that it was only days later that WikiLeaks released the Podesta e-mails?

COMEY: Same answer.

(bold italics added)

In other words US intelligence admits that the stolen emails were not passed on to Wikileaks by Russian intelligence.  Instead it ‘assesses’ (ie.believes) that they were provided to Wikileaks by someone else, who US intelligence ‘assesses’ (ie. believes) was acting as a ‘cutout’ for Russian intelligence.

From the exchange it appears that both Schiff and Comey were aware of the fact, obviously because it is set out in the classified section of the ODNI report on Russia’s alleged interference in the US election, which Schiff as a member of the House Intelligence Committee will have read.

Julian Assange and Craig Murray insist that Wikileaks did not have any contact with Russian intelligence and were not given the Podesta and DNC emails by Russian intelligence.  Comey’s exchange with Schiff conclusively proves that they are telling the truth.

What about the US intelligence community’s ‘assessment’ that the person or persons who passed on the Podesta and DNC emails to Wikileaks was a ‘cutout’of Russian intelligence – ie. an intermediary concealing his/her/their true identity – and what of Representative Schiff’s fairly transparent attempt to imply that Donald Trump’s aide Roger Stone was that ‘cutout’?

The point about the first is that an ‘assessment’ means that there is no actual knowledge but that there is merely a guess.  In other words US intelligence does not actually know that the person or persons who passed on the Podesta and DNC emails to Wikileaks actually was a ‘cutout’ of Russian intelligence.   It merely guesses that he/she/they was.

As to Schiff’s insinuations against Roger Stone, Stone was actually fired from the Trump campaign amidst much public acrimony as early as 8th August 2015 ie. a full year before the supposedly suspicious activities Schiff  is talking about, which took place between August and October 2016.  However Stone does seem to have had some sort of informal role in the Trump campaign thereafter, even though it doesn’t seem to have been a very helpful one.

In any event, to see the absurdity of Schiff’s claim that Stone could be some sort of ‘cutout’ employed by Russian intelligence, it is in fact merely necessary to see what Schiff has to say about him

The U.S. intelligence committee also later confirms that the documents were in fact stolen by Russian intelligence and Guccifer 2.0 acted as a front. Also in late July, candidate Trump praises WikiLeaks, says he loves them and openly appeals to the Russians to hack his opponents emails telling them that they will be richly rewarded by the press.

On August 8th, Roger Stone, a long time Trump political advisor and self-proclaimed political dirty trickster, boasts in his speech that he has communicated with Assange and that more documents would be coming, including an October surprise. In the middle of August, he also communicates with the Russian cut out Guccifer 2.0 and authors a Breitbart piece denying Guccifer’s links to Russian intelligence.

Then later, in August, Stone does something truly remarkable. When he predicts that John Podesta’s personal emails will soon be published, trust me he says, it will soon be Podesta’s time in the barrel, #crookedHillary. In the weeks that follow, Stone shows remarkable prescience. I have total confidence that WikiLeaks and my hero, Julian Assange will educate the American people soon, he says, #LockHerUp. Payload coming, he predicts and two days later it does.

WikiLeaks releases its first batch of Podesta emails. The release of John Podesta’s emails would then continue on a daily basis, up until the election.

What sort of a Russian intelligence ‘cutout’ is it who openly brags on Twitter and in the media of his contacts with Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0 – the latter supposedly the ‘public front’ of Russian intelligence?  Given that by his own admission Stone was in contact with Julian Assange and Wikileaks, it is far more likely that he obtained his “remarkable prescience” about the imminent publication of the Podesta emails as a result of a tip-off from them.  That is the obvious explanation, which has apparently been given by Stone himself, and there is no reason to doubt it, or to involve the Russians.

As it happens Comey’s response to Schiff (“we assessed they used some kind of cutout”) clearly implies that the US intelligence community does not know the identity of the alleged ‘cutout’, and Stone’s brazen behaviour makes it very unlikely he could have been that person.

The importance of all this is that though there is some very circumstantial and highly disputed evidence that the Russians may have hacked into the DNC’s and John Podesta’s computers, the Russiagate allegations also require that the Russians passed on the emails they stole from the computers to Wikileaks.  If this was not the case then the Russians could not have been responsible for the publication of the emails, in which case the whole thesis that they interfered in the US election collapses.

It now turns out that the US intelligence community does not in fact know that it was the Russians who passed on the stolen emails to Wikileaks.  On the contrary the US intelligence community admits the Russians were not in contact with Wikileaks, and it seems US intelligence does not actually know who was.  Its theory it was the Russians who passed on the emails to Wikileaks it turns out is no more than a guess.

It is difficult to avoid the impression that the reason why the US intelligence community believes it was the Russians who passed on the stolen emails to Wikileaks is because it believes it was the Russians who hacked John Podesta’s and the DNC’s computers.

Whilst that is possible, the one does not follow from the other, and the first may anyway not even be true.  After all the FBI has never itself examined John Podesta’s and the DNC’s computers, and the whole theory it was the Russians who hacked the computers depends on a guess made by a private company CrowdStrike that Cozy Bair and Fancy Bear – the malware tools used to hack the computers – have some connection to Russian intelligence.

In other words, it turns out that the whole foundation story of the whole Russiagate scandal – that the Russians hacked the DNC’s and John Podesta’s computers and passed on their stolen emails to Wikileaks – turns out to be based on no factual knowledge but purely on a chain of guesses.

That has actually been obvious all along, but it is interesting to see James Comey confirm it.

Palestinians Hold General Strike ‘Like First Intifada’ to Support Prisoners

  • A poster depicting Ahmed Saadat, jailed leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, is seen as shops are closed during a general strike.

    A poster depicting Ahmed Saadat, jailed leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, is seen as shops are closed during a general strike. | Photo: Reuters

Published 27 April 2017
Palestinians say the streets have been so empty, they are reminiscent of the First Intifada, when Palestinians held general strikes beginning in 1987.

On the 11th day Thursday of the historic, mass hunger strike launched by over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, thousands of Palestinians in launched a general strike in solidarity across the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, shutting down their public transportation services, shops, businesses, banks and schools.

Hunger-Striking Palestinian Prisoners Begin Refusing Water

The strike was held just one day before the Fatah movement’s call for a Day of Rage on Friday, in which Palestinians are expected to clash with Israeli forces in order to show their solidarity with the Palestinian prisoners’ movement.

Palestine’s Ma’an news service reported that during the strike, the streets were so empty, they were reminiscent of the First Intifada, which started in 1987, when Palestinians held general strikes as part of a coordinated civil disobedience campaign against Israeli forces.

On Tuesday, the National Committee to Support Hunger-Striking Prisoners also called on Palestinians to boycott Israeli products, adding that Palestinian merchants should stop selling Israeli products.

“As the freedom and dignity battle continues, the (Israeli) occupation escalates its discourse and oppressive measures against our children and our heroes who are fighting this saga,” the support committee said in a statement. “To help them remain firm, it has been decided to completely boycott Israeli goods in Palestinian markets.”

Over 1,000 Palestinian Prisoners Launch Mass Hunger Strike

That same day, a number of prisoners being held in solitary confinement in Ramla prisons had stopped drinking water as well.

According to Qaraqe, Israel Prison Service officials have continued to punish participating prisoners for their strike, including preventing them from accessing commissaries to purchase salt — as some prisoners are only consuming salt and water — giving them only dirty sheets and covers and carrying out provocative search raids of prisoners’ rooms.

Last week, Israeli authorities had begun cracking down on the prisoners, forcibly moving many to different sections of Israeli jails, confiscating their clothes and personal belongings and preventing lawyers and family members from visiting them in jail.

Throughout the world, many groups have expressed their solidarity with the strikers, with near-daily rallies continuing to take place in Palestine.

Ma’an-Al Jazeera

Israel threatens to kill Islamic Bloc representative

Image of Israeli occupation forces [File photo]

Image of Israeli occupation forces [File photo]

The Israeli Occupation Forces have failed, this morning, for the third time in a week to detain the representative of the Islamic Bloc at An-Najah University, Mumin Sabbah.

Mumin Sabbah representative of the Islamic Bloc at An-Najah University [Safa]

A Safa correspondent said that a large number of troops from the Israeli army raided Sabbah’s house in the town of Asira Ash-Shamaliya, on the outskirts of Nablus. They left the house in ruins and handed his family members notices for questioning to pressure Sabbah to hand himself in.

The commander of the area threatened to kill Sabbah if he doesn’t hand himself in.

The Israeli forces tried to arrest Sabbah two days before the student council elections when a “counter-terrorism unit” raided the Rafidia neighbourhood in Nablus, but they failed after being exposed.

The army forces also raided his family home twice.

The innocent imprisoned. Movement restricted. Trade suffocated. Homes demolished. Human rights abuses are rife in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

We do not take a position on issues of statehood.

We stand with those demanding that all sides respect human rights, and that perpetrators of human rights abuses are brought to justice.

Palestinian ‘day of rage’ in support of prisoners

Palestinians across occupied territories protest in solidarity with hunger-striking prisoners.

The 'day of rage' was called for by Fatah and the national committee to support the prisoners' hunger strike [Abbas Momani/AFP]
The ‘day of rage’ was called for by Fatah and the national committee to support the prisoners’ hunger strike [Abbas Momani/AFP]

Ramallah, West Bank – At least 50 Palestinian protesters were injured in clashes with Israeli forces on a “day of rage” held across the occupied Palestinian territories to show solidarity with more than 1,500 prisoners on hunger strike in Israeli prisons.

The majority of injuries resulted from tear gas inhalation, while some protesters were shot with live or rubber bullets, a ministry spokesperson told Al Jazeera.

Director of Ramallah Hospital Ahmad Bitawi said more than 20 people were injured. He said most were leg injuries and not life threatening.

The “day of rage” was called for by Fatah, the political party of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, and the national committee to support the prisoners’ hunger strike.

In a statement issued last week, Fatah said the “excessive” practices of the Israeli occupation, particularly by the Israeli Prison Service, meant Palestinians should “clash with the occupier everywhere across our homeland”.

On Friday, Palestinians across the occupied West Bank gathered at the solidarity tents set up before proceeding to nearby military checkpoints.

On a hillside overlooking the entrance to Ofer prison, where a number of the hunger-striking prisoners are detained, dozens of young men hurled stones at Israeli military vehicles.

Israeli forces responded with volleys of tear gas and rubber bullets, while the occasional live round was heard.

“I know that by being here you are not directly helping the prisoners but you are helping a little bit,” 26-year-old Anas Salous, who did not participate in the protests, told Al Jazeera.

“I can’t accept being at home and doing nothing. Unless we support them and show up, nothing will happen. It is better to come here than just giving it a Facebook like.

“I was a prisoner in the past. At the end of the day, it is their own fight. I know they have no power and that they are fighting with their bodies. They have the right to use their bodies. Using their bodies as a weapon, this is the last chance they have.”

READ MORE: How Israel denies rights to Palestinian prisoners

Clashes also erupted in towns and villages across the West Bank where protesters threw stones at Israeli forces, who responded with a variety of crowd control weapons and live fire, according to local media.

Palestinian prisoners began a hunger strike on April 17 in protest over conditions in Israeli prisons, calling for more family visits, better medical attention and an end to torture and administrative detention – imprisonment without charge or trial.

Around 6,500 Palestinians are currently being held in Israeli prisons, 500 of whom are held under administrative detention.

The mass prisoner hunger strike was organised by Marwan Barghouti, a senior Fatah figure who is serving multiple life terms in an Israeli prison for his role in killing Israelis during the second intifada.

The “day of rage” followed a general strike that shuttered businesses, schools, government institutions and public transport across the occupied Palestinian territories on Thursday.

A number of clashes broke out between Palestinians and Israeli forces on Thursday, local media reported.

Source: Al Jazeera News

Amiens: Le Pen upstages Macron at Whirlpool factory

Far-right candidate beats centrist favourite in meeting with Whirlpool factory workers threatened with outsourcing.

French presidential frontrunner Emmanuel Macron has been booed and heckled with chants backing his far-right rival Marine Le Pen in his home town.

Wednesday’s incident happened outside the Whirlpool appliance factory in northern city of Amiens after Macron arranged to meet the plant workers’ union representatives, without actually visiting the facility.

He only arrived there after Le Pen turned up unannounced outside the plant and posed for selfies with workers.

“Everyone knows what side Emmanuel Macron is on – he is on the side of the corporations,” Le Pen said. “I am on the workers’ side, here in the car park, not in restaurants in Amiens.”

After arriving, Macron told angry workers that the only reason that anti-EU Le Pen had come was “because I’m here”.

He also retorted on Twitter that she had spent “10 minutes with her supporters in a car park in front of the cameras” whereas he had spent “an hour and a half with union representatives and no media”.

Le Pen’s campaign coup

Al Jazeera’s Natacha Butler, speaking from Arras, said Le Pen showed Macron that “the gloves are off in the battle for the French presidency”.

“He was totally upstaged by the far-right leader. It was a real campaign coup. It perhaps shows what some people have been saying – that he is inexperienced,” she said. “Marine Le Pen is a veteran politician. She knows how to campaign hard.”

The factory operated by Whirlpool, a US multinational company, is threatened with outsourcing to Poland.

Macron was in Amiens to try to counter accusations that he had made a complacent start to campaigning for the presidential runoff on May 7.

After winning Sunday’s contest with 24.1 percent to Le Pen’s 21.3 percent, Macron gave an exuberant victory speech followed by a high-profile celebration at La Rotonde bistro in Paris, drawing criticism from some quarters.

READ MORE: Parisians react to first round, mull Le Pen’s chances

Socialist Party chief Jean-Christophe Cambadelis told French radio: “He was smug. He wrongly thought that it was a done deal. It’s not a done deal.”

President Francois Hollande appeared on Tuesday to admonish his former economy minister for not taking the fight to Le Pen immediately after the first round.

Macron shot back, saying: “I will continue to fight for two weeks … I will defend the progressive camp to the end.”

A poll on Wednesday suggested that Macron will defeat Le Pen by a margin of 21 points, but as the day’s events showed, the far-right candidate is a more experienced political campaigner.

After the shocks of Britain’s vote to leave the European Union and Donald Trump’s unlikely ascent to the White House, analysts say a late surge by Le Pen is still possible.

Who to endorse

A key factor in the race is which candidate the supporters of Communist-backed Jean-Luc Melenchon, who finished in fourth place with 19.58 percent on Sunday, will support in the runoff.

Melenchon faced criticism after he failed to urge people who voted for him to get behind Macron as part of the so-called “republican front”, the decades-old French tactic of closing ranks to block the far-right.

Melenchon’s spokesman Alexis Corbiere said the hard-left firebrand would not endorse anyone.

Corbiere, however, told French TV channel LCI earlier on Wednesday that “for us the National Front is a danger” and urged viewers to not give “a single vote to the National Front”.

What would a Le Pen victory mean for France? – Inside Story

Source: Al Jazeera and news agencies

NSA to Stop Gathering Some Messages from US Citizens: Sources

  • An aerial view shows the National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters in Ft. Meade, Maryland, U.S. on January 29, 2010.

    An aerial view shows the National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters in Ft. Meade, Maryland, U.S. on January 29, 2010. | Photo: Reuters

Published 28 April 2017 (12 hours 46 minutes ago)


The change is an attempt to remedy privacy compliance issue.

The U.S. National Security Agency has halted a form of surveillance that allowed it to collect the digital communications of Americans that mentioned a foreign intelligence target without a warrant, three sources told Reuters.

The decision to stop the program, which collected messages sent or received internationally and which had been criticized by privacy advocates, was first reported by the New York Times.

The change is an attempt to remedy privacy compliance issues raised by rules implemented in 2011 by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which operates in secrecy, sources said. The chief concern had been that the specific kind of collection sometimes produced surveillance of messages that were wholly domestic because of technical reasons.

Julian Sanchez, a privacy and surveillance expert with the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, called the decision “very significant” and among the top priorities for reform among civil liberties group.

The NSA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


America’s Hype over WMD: Five Invasion Plots, Three Continents, Identical Lies

From Panama to Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya and Syria

“Fake news” and media lies are a talking point. The MSM targets the alternative media.

This pathbreaking article by veteran war correspondent Felicity Arbuthnot first published in December 2012 deciphers America’s war propaganda and media disinformation campaign. (And yes: Winston Churchill was in favor of chemical weapons against rogue enemies).

*     *     *

“I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare…. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes.” (Winston S. Churchill, 1874-1965, from War Office  minute, 12th May 1919.)

As the sabre rattling against Syria gets ever louder, the allegations ever wilder and double standards, stirring, plotting and terrorist financing (sorry: “aiding the legitimate opposition”) neon lit, it is instructive to look at the justifications presented by US Administrations for a few other murderous incursions in recent history.

This month is the twenty third anniversary of the US invasion of Panama on 20th December 1989, as Panamanians prepared their Christmas celebrations. A quick check reminds the late Philip Agee recalling President George H.W. Bush telling the American people that the threat from Panama (pop: 3,571,185 – 2011) was such that: “our way of life is at stake.” Agee referred to this in his aptly named talk “Producing the Proper Crisis.”(i) Apt then as now. Nothing changes.

The aim of the invasion was to capture the country’s leader General Manuel Noriega and, of course, to: “establish a democratic government.” Regime change.

With the approaching transfer of control of the Panama Canal to Panama (originally scheduled for 1st January  1990) after a century of US colonial stewardship, America wanted to ensure it was in the hands of malleable allies.

Noriega a CIA asset, since 1967 (ii) who had also attended the notorious School of the Americas, at Fort Benning, Georgia, came to power with US backing, but seemingly his support for the US was cooling. To encapsulate a long story, the US kidnapped him and sentenced him to forty years in jail.

Plans to invade were called: “Operation Prayer Book.” It was later re-named “Operation Just Cause”, with General Colin Powell commenting that it was a moniker of which he approved as: ”Even our severest critics would have to utter ‘Just Cause’ whilst denouncing us.” (Colin Powell, with Jospeh E. Persico: “My American Journey”, 1995.)

All military marauding should simply be called: “Operation Silly Name 1, then 2,3,4” etc., until the numbers finally run out.

Twenty seven thousand US troops backed by Apache helicopters decimated much of the small country, with a defence force of just three thousand. George Bush Snr., said he was removing an evil dictator who was brutalizing his own people  (sound familiar?) and that the action was needed to:” protect American lives.” It was also to: “defend democracy and human rights in Panama” – and to “protect the Canal.” Surprise, eh?

Manuel Noriega was released from US jail in 2007, extradited to France which had awarded him the country’s highest honour, The Legion d’honneur in 1987. He remained in jail in France until December 2011, when he was returned to Panama, where he is still imprisoned.

In the near forgotten Panama decimation (unless you are Panamanian) the densely populated, poverty stricken neighbourhood of El Chorillo was incinerated by American actions to such an extent that it became named “Little Hiroshima.”

One woman charged that: “The North Americans began burning down El Chorillo at about 6.30 in the morning. They would throw a small device in to a house and it would catch on fire – then they would move to another, they burned from one street to the next, coordinating the burning on walkie-talkies.”

A US soldier was recorded stating: “We ask you to surrender … if you do not, we are prepared to level each and every building.”

“Everything that moved they shot”, said a city resident.

The dead were consigned to mass graves with witnesses stating that US troops used flame throwers on the dead, noting the bodies shriveling as they burned. Others were bulldozed in to piles.(iii)

There was worse. As the current self righteous, if contradictory statements flow from Washington and Whitehall about Syria’s unproven chemical weapons, proven facts relate to America’s.

“From the 1940s to the 1990s the United States used various parts of Panama as a testing ground for chemical weapons, including mustard gas, VX, sarin, hydrogen cyanide and other nerve agents in … mines, rockets and shells; perhaps tens of thousands of chemical munitions.” (William Blum: Rogue State, 2002.)

Further, on departing Panama at the end of 1999 they left: “many sites containing chemical weapons. They had also: “conducted secret tests of Agent Orange in Panama …” In the 1989 invasion, the village of Pacora, near Panama City: “was bombed with (chemicals) by helicopters and aircraft from US Southern Command, with substances that burned skin, caused intense pain and diarrhea.”

Many analysts felt that Panama was the testing ground for Iraq.

Nine months after the poisoning of Panama, on Hiroshima Day 1990, the strangulating US-driven embargo on Iraq was enforced by the UN, after the US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie had given the green light for Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait, after Kuwait’s considerable provocation and financial and geographical destabilization.(iv.)

The hype over chemical and other weapons went in to overdrive, leading Saddam Hussein to comment: “I am afraid, one day, you will say ‘You are going to make gunpowder out of wheat.’ ”

Thirteen months after Panama, America led a thirty one country coalition to “reduce Iraq to a pre-industrial age.” The only chemicals released from Iraq were the poisonous mix from the bombed pharmaceutical and fertilizer factories, the car manufacturing plants and the factories of Iraq’s entire industrial base, including the compounds holding the chemical and biological substances, including medical ones, sold to Iraq by the US, UK Germany and others over the previous decades, sales ironically, still ongoing at the time of the onslaught. (v.)

Highly toxic and radioactive substances were introduced into Iraq however, in the form of up to seven hundred and fifty tonnes of chemically toxic and radioactive depleted uranium munitions (DU) which have a toxic “half life” of 4.5 billion years. Iraq’s litany of deformed, still born, aborted babies, infants born with cancers, the tiny graves, silent testimony to weapons of mass destruction of unique wickedness. Iraq was bombed for forty two days and nights.

The hyped chemical weapons alleged to have been manufactured by Iraq were, of course, never deployed.

On 24th March 1999, NATO began to liberate Kosovo from Serbia. (US Silly Name: Operation Noble Anvil) Kosovo had an estimated ten trillion dollars worth of “inexhaustible” minerals in the Trebca mines.

The “liberation” was seventy eight days of relentless bombardment, including use of depleted uranium weaponry. Twenty thousand tonnes of bombs were dispatched. Destroyed systematically were communications centres, fuel depots, airports, traffic communications, trains, markets, the Chinese Embassy – China was against the attack, NATO, resoundingly unconvincingly, said they had the wrong map. And of course, the media centre. Murdering journalists is now another routine, unaccountable war crime.

Before the attack, the Pentagon stated that the Army of Yugoslavia possessed at least two kinds of poisonous gasses, with the facilities to produce them. The US Department of Defense warned Slobodan Milosevic the General Staff of the Yugoslav Army : “If Belgrade uses poisonous gasses sarin and mustard gas against NATO, the response of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will be devastating.”

Oddly, after the air strikes began, NATO mentioned not one word to indicate that it was attacking Serbia’s US-stated capacity to produce chemical weapons. (Zagred Globus, 16th April 1999, pp 18-19.)

The industrial scale destruction, however, left the Trebca mines unscathed.

   On 14th August 2000, nine hundred heavily armed British, French, Italian, Pakistani and KFOR troops were landed from helicopters at the mines. Managers and workers tried to fight them off and were beaten, tear gassed with plastic bullets used. The resisting staff were arrested.

UN papers described the action as: “ … induction of democratization in Kosovo.” The attack in fact, paved the way for selling of the mines -containing “the inexhaustible” estimated 77,302,000 tons of coal, copper, zinc, lead, nickel, gold, silver, marble, manganese, iron ore, asbestos and limestone “to name a few” – to private foreign groups. (News reports, websites.)

The  “Kosovo Liberation Army” had been: “ … trained for years and supported with millions of US dollars and German Marks … through the CIA and BND” (German Intelligence) “for this war, misleadingly called a civil war”(vi) by NATO governments and spokespersons.

DU’s chemical and radiological properties were rained down throughout former Yugoslavia too. By 2001, doctors in the Serb run hospital in Kosovo Mitrovica stated that the number of patients suffering from malignant diseases had increased by two hundred percent since a 1998 survey.

A 2003 study by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) found drinking water and air samples contaminated in Bosnia Herzegovina. There was, of course: “no cause for alarm.” Pekka Haavisto, former Environment Minister of Finland, Heading UNEP, called for a wide and thorough scientific investigation to establish the full extent and hazards of the contamination. The US – cited as the only country to use DU weaponry in that conflict – blocked the request. (vii.)

However alarm was raised in Europe when Italian, Portuguese, Belgian and French peacekeepers in the region developed cancers, within a matter of months, a high proportion of those diagnosed died. Norwegian peacekeepers refused to be deployed.(viii.)

“Less than a month after the war in Yugoslavia ended in 1999, the British National Radiological Protection Board warned British citizens about the dangers from staying in Kosovo because of the contamination of its territories by D.U. weapons.”

The peacekeepers, of course were there for just weeks or months, the people of the region live there, the plight of their health and that of future generations ignored and forgotten by their “liberators.” They had other “tyrants” to topple, other populations to relieve of their lives and limbs and livelihoods.

Iraq, had again been bombed by the US and UK during the Christmas season of 1998, four months before the assault on Yugoslavia and had been back on the invasion radar ever since. The lies were familiar – and relentless, a currently topical example, one of of countless:

“2nd September 2002: Experts: Iraq has tons of chemical weapons.

“As some in the Bush administration press the case for a pre-emptive strike against Iraq, weapons experts say there is mounting evidence that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has amassed large stocks of chemical and biological weapons he is hiding from a possible U.S. military attack.

“Washington’s concern is that Iraq could supply those weapons to terrorist groups …  ‘If we wait for the danger to become clear, it could be too late’ said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Delaware, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.”

With Biden now Vice President, it is impossible not to wonder whether he has any input in to the Syria spin, with its uncannily similar words.

“Jon Wolfsthal, an analyst with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Iraq’s inventory is significant: ‘Iraq continues to possess several tons of chemical weapons agents, enough to kill thousands and thousands of civilians or soldiers’, Wolfsthal said.” (ix)

Further: “U.N. weapons experts have said Iraq may have stockpiled more than 600 metric tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, VX and sarin. Some 25,000 rockets and 15,000 artillery shells with chemical agents are also unaccounted for, the experts said.

“The concern is they either have on hand — or could quickly re-create the capability to produce — vast amounts of anthrax, tons of material”, was Wolfsthal’s additional spin.

“Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld” asserted :“… Iraq has mobile biological weapons laboratories, which would be nearly impossible for U.S. forces to target.” The lives of thousands of people were at stake, he said. Indeed, since the invasion, Iraqi deaths at American and British hands or that of their militias, and imposed puppet government, are nothing short of holocaustal.

According to Jonathan Schwartz, who revisited General Colin Powell’s pack of lies on Iraq to the UN on 5th February 2003 : “ My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence …”  Powell is now regretful.

Schwartz is unsympathetic. On the  fifth anniversary of Powell’s misleading nonsense, 5th February 2008, he commented: “As much criticism as Powell has received for this – he calls it ‘painful’ and something that will ‘always be a part of my record’ – it hasn’t been close to what’s justified. Powell was far more than just horribly mistaken, the evidence is conclusive that he fabricated evidence and ignored repeated warnings that what he was saying was false.”

The entirely illegal invasion of Iraq, based on a trans-Atlantic pack of lies had commenced just forty five days later. Operation Very Silly Name? “Operation Iraqi Liberation”: OIL.

The lies over Libya – which under Colonel Quadaffi came top of the Human Development Index for Africa – are of recent memory. Nevertheless a few reminders:

CIA paid Quislings abound in the above invasions and others over many decades. Meet General Abdul Fatah Younis, Colonel Gaddafi’s Interior Minister, who “defected to the opposition” – wonder what his price was – and became chief of staff of the insurgents: “ … he pleaded for NATO allies to arm the rebels with heavy weapons, including helicopters and anti-tank missiles, to defend the besieged city of Misurata.. He predicted the dictator  … would be ready to use chemical weapons in a last stand against rebels or the civilian population.” (Amazing, words straight out of the current Syria “opposition” check list.)

“Gaddafi is desperate now. Unfortunately he still has about 25 per cent of his chemical weapons, which he might use as he’s in a desperate situation. …”

“Col. Gaddafi is known to have around ten tons of mustard gas remaining from stocks that he had been destroying under the supervision of a United Nations body, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.”(x.)

In context, back in 2002, Neil Mackay, multi-award winning investigations Editor of the Sunday Herald explained that: “Driven by greed and a profound lack of morality, the British government violated the Chemical weapons Convention by selling chemicals “that could be converted to weapons of war.”

Countries benefiting from UK sales, Mackay stated, included Libya, Yemen, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Cyprus, India, Kenya, Kuwait, Malaysia, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Turkey and Uganda, a charge the Department of Trade and Industry “clearly admitted.”

After Tony Blair’s embrace of Colonel Gaddafi in March 2004, the British government announced plans to send their experts to Libya to destroy the chemical weapons they had sold, stating that Colonel Gaddafi had mislead Blair over their existence. That they had the remittance documents seems to have escaped them. Identical to UK duplicities over Iraq.

Between the start of Libya’s destruction on 19th March 2011 and NATO taking over on 31st March 2011, the US and UK dropped one hundred and ten Cruise missiles on a country with a population of under six and a half million. When NATO assumed command of the “humanitarian intervention” they assaulted this minimal population with 26,500 bomb- releasing sorties.

There were, of course no Presidential tears for Libya’s lost children, whose demise would have been preceded by unimaginable terror, in an onslaught which had two Silly Names, one for the US: “Operation Odyssey Dawn” and one for NATO: “Operation Unified Protector”, the latter, comment defying.

Quadaffi himself lost three small grandchildren and three sons. In 1986 in another US bombing, he lost a just toddling adopted daughter.

Moments after she learned of his terrible death at the hands of a rabid NATO “protected” mob, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appeared on television laughing as she said: “We came, we saw, he died.”

What an age since she said: “I really believe that it takes a village to raise a child.” Now her beliefs are apparently to wipe out the village, its children, parents and lynch the village elder for a tele-opportunity of raucous mirth.

On 4th December 2012, Clinton warned that Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad may be moving, guess what – a “chemical weapons stockpile.”

“We have made our views very clear.This is a red line for the United States. I’m not going to telegraph in any specifics what we would do in the event of credible evidence that the Assad regime has resorted to using chemical weapons against his own people, but suffice to say we are certainly planning to take action if that eventuality were to occur,” she said at a press conference in Prague.

Weapons of course:  “could be used to contain sarin gas”, according to another U.S. official. Another added:  “ … we are concerned about any move that might signal that they are somehow ready to use those chemical weapons on their own people.” (xii.)

“Déjà vu all over again”, as the saying goes.

Syria responded on 6th December: “Syria stresses again, for the tenth, the hundredth time, that if we had such weapons, they would not be used against its people. We would not commit suicide,” Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Al Maqdad told Lebanon’s Al Manar television …”

“We fear there is a conspiracy to provide a pretext for any subsequent interventions in Syria by these countries that are increasing pressure on Syria.” Indeed. It would hardly be a first.

In late October US troops arrived in Jordan for a major joint exercise near the Syrian border. Operation Silly and Childish Name: “Operation Eager Lion.” Al Assad in arabic translates as: the lion.

Ironically the first allegation of Syria having chemical weapons would seem to have come from John R.Bolton, alleged by Congressman Henry Waxman to have persuaded George W. Bush to include the fairy story of Iraq purchasing yellow cake uranium from Niger in his 2003 State of the Union address.The allegation is unproven, however, since the documents are still classified.

Bolton is involved with a plethora of less than liberal organizations, including the Project for the New American Century, The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the currently in the news, The National Rifle Association.

Relating to Syria, it should also be remembered that the country has been under increasingly strangulating sanctions since 2004.

Former Chief Weapons Inspector in Iraq, Scott Ritter has written that: “chemical weapons have a shelf life of five years. Biological weapons have a shelf life of three.” They also give off an “ether”, say experts, which can be picked up by satellite surveillance, which Syria, as Iraq before it is certain to be comprehensively subject of.

Heaven forbid Washington, Whitehall, Tel Aviv and the coalition of the coerced are crying “Wolf!” again. Heaven help anyone who believes them.













Macron’s campaign accuses RT of spreading ‘fake news,’ dodges requests for clarification

French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron’s campaign team, which rejected accreditation and accused RT of spreading fake news, has literally hung up on the request to clarify why they refuse to honor freedom of the press.

Macron’s spokeswoman did not last on the phone for a minute, and hung up the moment she discovered she was being asked for a comment from the political movement’s apparent arch-foe, RT, which En Marche! a day earlier called a “two-headed entity” engaged in state propaganda and fake news.

Refusing to speak to RT, the spokeswoman asked to send her an email and patiently wait for their comment – despite being told that several previous letters from RT were left without an answer. Seconds later, she hung up under the pretext of being outside of the office and having bad phone reception.

Speaking to Reuters, however, Macron representative was much more communicative going as far as accusing Russian media, such as RT and Sputnik, of “systematic desire to issue fake news and false information.”

Although the spokesman failed to provide any specific examples of Russian media spreading fake news, he hinted that Macron’s position on Russian media won’t change.

“If this creates problems with the Kremlin, it will be the subject of an open discussion in the event of the candidate (Macron) being elected,” the spokesman added.

En Marche official refuses to say when RT will be accredited by Macron’s team (VIDEO)

So far, RT has not received any comments from Macron’s camp, despite numerous attempts since last Sunday to clarify the situation. On Wednesday, RT caught up with En Marche’s spokesperson at Whirlpool tumble dryer factory rally in Amiens to ask when the channel will be accredited.

“Will you finally accept the accreditation request by RT?” the RT correspondent asked. Twisting and turning the spokeswoman refused to comment, dodging the question. Seconds later, she just walked away, saying she had “work” that needed to be done.

“M. Macron wishes to underline his attachment to the campaign against Russia. When Western countries make allegations they never provide any evidence. It is not the point. The point is to get to the news showing he is anti-Russian,” Robert Harneis, an independent journalist, told RT.

READ MORE: ‘Russian hacking’ used as dog-ate-my-homework excuse

Moscow views En Marche! attitude towards RT and Sputnik as a violation of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. RT asked Reporters Without Borders, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Committee to Protect Journalists to issue a comment and intervene. RT also appealed to the Freedom of the Press Foundation, International Federation of Journalists and International Media Support to assess Macron team’s actions.

On Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called En Marche!’s move “outrageous,” calling the ban a “deliberate and bare-faced discrimination against Russian media by the presidential candidate of a state that has historically been vigilant when it comes to free speech.”

Zakharova called on the relevant French authorities and international organizations to ensure that freedom of the press was upheld in the second round of voting.

Macron just seems to be riding the wave of an anti-RT campaign in the West just to score some political points, Martin Summers, a writer and broadcaster, has told RT.

“There has been a general witch hunt against RT. The impression is of a certain childishness in response to RT. It is partly due to the fact that RT has become a whipping boy for mainstream pundits and politicians,” Summers told RT.

“There is a kind of collective hysteria that has developed in the ruling circles in the West, and in a way a backhanded compliment to RT because then they presume that RT has this huge influence,” Summers added.

‘Destabilizing factor’: Russia urges US, S. Korea to reconsider THAAD anti-missiles deployment

‘Destabilizing factor’: Russia urges US, S. Korea to reconsider THAAD anti-missiles deployment
Russia has urged Washington and Seoul to reconsider their decision to station THAAD anti-missile system on the Korean Peninsula, warning that it will serve a “destabilizing factor” that could tip the existing military balance in the tense region.

Speaking in front of the UN Security Council just hours before North Korea reportedly conducted its second failed ballistic missile test this month, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov noted that placing THAAD anti-missiles on North Korean borders will serve as “additional destabilizing factor in the region.”

Gatilov said that the deployment of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) was made “in line with the vicious logic of creating a global missile shield.” But the missile defense system deployment, he warned, is also undermining security and deterrent powers of adjacent states, such as China, thus threatening “the existing military balance in the region.”

“It is not only we who perceived this step very negatively. We are once again urging both the United States and the Republic of Korea to reconsider its expediency and other regional states not to yield to the temptation of joining such destabilizing efforts,” the deputy foreign minister said.

Following a series of nuclear and missile tests by North Korea, Barack Obama’s administration in 2016 managed to strike a deal to place THAAD missiles in South Korea with the declared goal of keeping Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions at bay.

THAAD is designed to intercept short, medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles during their terminal flight phase. Equipped with long-range radar, it is believed to be capable of intercepting North Korea’s intermediate-range ballistic missiles.

This has nothing to do w/ N.Korea – US launch Minuteman III ICBM to verify its ‘effectiveness, readiness & accuracy’ 

Photo published for US launches Minuteman III ICBM to show ‘nuclear capabilities’ amid N. Korea tensions — RT America

US launches Minuteman III ICBM to show ‘nuclear capabilities’ amid N. Korea tensions — RT America

An unarmed intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) has been launched from a US Air Force base in California to ensure its “effectiveness, readiness and accuracy,” and demonstrate “national nuclear…

The first elements of the system were moved onto a golf course in Seongju, North Gyeongsang Province, South Korea on Tuesday, prompting clashes between locals and police. The system will be operational in the coming days.

US THAAD anti-missile deployment in S. Korea sparks clashes between locals & police

“It is moving very quickly, it will (have) initial operational capability very soon,” Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis said Friday.

The illusion of security under the US anti-missile umbrella does not come for free, as US President Donald Trump apparently expects South Korea to pay around $1 billion for the deployment of the THAAD battery, according to his exclusive interview with Reuters.

“I informed South Korea it would be appropriate if they paid. It’s a billion-dollar system,” Trump told Reuters. “It’s phenomenal, shoots missiles right out of the sky.”

South Korean military officials however made clear that paying for THAAD was not part of the bilateral deal struck last year.

“South Korea will provide land and infrastructure and US will be responsible for purchase, operation and maintenance costs for the defense system per regulations of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA),”said officials at the South Korean Defense Ministry, the country’s Donga newspaper reported.

China to go on with drills, weapons tests in response to deployment – Defense Ministry 

Photo published for China to go on with drills, weapons tests in response to THAAD deployment – Defense Ministry — RT...

China to go on with drills, weapons tests in response to THAAD deployment – Defense Ministry — RT…

China will continue to stage live fire drills and test new weapons to protect its national security, the Defense Ministry says. It comes after the deployment of the US THAAD anti-missile system to…

In response to the deployment of THAAD, China announced Thursday that it will continue to stage live fire drills and test new weapons to protect its national security.

“The deployment of the THAAD anti-missile system in South Korea damages the regional strategic balance and stability. The Chinese side is resolutely opposed to this,” Defense Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun told reporters on Thursday, when asked about THAAD.

Back at the UN, Gatilov condemned the North Korean nuclear buildup and called for talks to find a diplomatic solution to the crisis. At the same time Russian diplomat found some sense in Pyongyang’s argument that it is forced to pursue missile and atomic programs because it perceives US buildup in the region and annual war games with South Korea as a threat to its national sovereignty.

North Korea “will hardly give up nuclear weapons as long as it feels direct threat to its security,” Gatilov said. “This is precisely how North Koreans qualify regular large-scale maneuvers and drills by the United States and its allies in the region – and also the dispatch to that region of a US naval armada as we witnessed this month.”

Gatilov’s comments came just hours before Seoul and Washington accused North Korea of conducting yet another test-launch of what is presumed to be a KN-17 medium range ballistic missile. The projectile allegedly exploded “within minutes” of the launch with the debris landing in the Sea of Japan.

Montenegro defies democracy by ratifying NATO membership without referendum – Moscow

Montenegro defies democracy by ratifying NATO membership without referendum – Moscow
The ratification of Montenegro’s NATO membership by a parliamentary vote instead of a referendum is a violation of democratic norms, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said, adding that Moscow reserves the right to protect its national security after the move.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry has expressed “deep regret that the current leadership of [Montenegro] and its Western backers didn’t heed the voice of conscience and reason.”

“The adoption of fundamental acts, affecting the key issues of state security, by the vote of individual MPs on the basis of a formal majority without taking into account the opinion of the country’s people is a demonstrative act of violation of all democratic norms and principles,” the statement read.

The ministry said that the will of around half of the population was ignored by the Montenegrin authorities with the NATO vote.

“What cynicism should one have to state unabashedly that there was no need to clarify the opinion of the people for such a decision, like the Montenegro president, Filip Vujanovic, did the other day,” it said.

During the “shameful” NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 there were casualties in Montenegro as well, with children being among the victims, the Russian Foreign Ministry said. Blaming those deaths on Serbia, which is accused of having provoked the interference from the US-led military bloc, is a “hypocritical” interpretation of events, the ministry said.

“Those who voted in the Skupstina [parliament] for joining NATO under the pretext of an imaginary Russian threat should take responsibility for the consequences of implementing the plans of external forces, seeking to deepen the division in Europe and the Balkans, drive a wedge into the historically rooted friendly relations of Montenegrins with Serbs and Russians,” the statement read.

The Russian ministry said that “given the potential of Montenegro, the North Atlantic Alliance is unlikely to receive significant ‘added value’ thanks to the inclusion of its 29th member.

“But Moscow can’t ignore the strategic consequences of this step. Therefore, we reserve the right to adopt such decisions that are aimed at protecting our interests and national security,” the Foreign Ministry said.

Earlier on Friday, the Montenegro parliament ratified the law on the country’s accession to NATO, with all 46 lawmakers (out of the total of 81) present at the session supporting the country’s inclusion into the bloc.

The move took place in absence of the main opposition party, the Democratic Front, which instead staged a protest, demanding a referendum on whether to join NATO.

The vote in the Montenegrin parliament followed the decision by US President Donald Trump to approve the country’s membership bid on April 11. Accepting Montenegro into NATO will send a message to other aspirants that the “door to membership in the Euro-Atlantic community of nations remains open,” the White House said at the time.

READ MORE: ‘Fake news recycling’: Russian Embassy calls out UK media over ‘Montenegro coup plot’ report

Montenegro, a country with a population of around 622,000 people that seceded from Serbia in 2006, was granted a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 2009. Since then the country remained split on the issue, with protests against NATO across the country only intensifying as the republic drew closer to becoming a member of the bloc.