US Government Shuts Down in Dispute Over Funding for Border Wall
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) – The US federal government partially shut down after members of Congress failed to resolve differences over $5 billion in spending for President Donald Trump’s border wall.
When commenting on the lawmakers’ failure to resolve differences over his demand for funding for a border wall guarantees, US President Donald Trump stated in a video published on Twitter that the partial shutdown of the government would hopefully “not last long”.
Funding for key government operations expired at 11:59:59 pm on 21 December (around 5:00 am GMT on 22 December). Earlier in the day, the Senate failed to reach a compromise over a House-passed bill and decided to adjourn until 22 December.Essential services such as retirement payments, air traffic control and airport security will continue to be funded while every essential agency and department such as the US military — will remain open, according to government officials.
Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s Office will also be able to continue working, CNN said citing a Justice Department official.
Meanwhile, the shutdown prompted Trump to cancel plans to spend the holidays at his resort in Florida.
The federal government previously closed twice this year with minimal impact. A three-day shutdown in January took place over a weekend and a February closure only lasted for a day. All three shutdowns this year involved disputes over immigration.The US government shut down after senators failed to pass a stopgap motion and funding ran out on 18-19 January at midnight (5:00 am GMT). The second brief shutdown took place on 9 February and ended the same day when both the US House of Representatives and Senate passed a continuing resolution to keep the government funded for six more weeks, while also raising sequestration budget caps on military and non-defence spending for fiscal years 2018 and 2019.
Building a wall on the US-Mexico border was one of Trump’s key promises throughout his presidential campaign. The president believes that the wall will stop illegal migration, as well as human and drugs trafficking.
In today’s False Flag Weekly News (watch it above, click HERE for links) Jeremy and I covered the latest series of Zionist outrages against free speech and free thought, including:
Speaking of which, here is the latest from occasional radio guest Richard Hugus.
Fiasco In Islington
December 21, 2018
Jazz saxophonist and writer Gilad Atzmon was recently banned from playing at an assembly hall in Islington, a borough of London, by order of the Islington Town Council. This came about as a result of an e-mail from one person—Martin Rankoff saying nothing more than that if Atzmon was going to be at the venue on December 21 he would give a ticket that was given to him to someone else. Rankoff wrote, “Mr Atzmon’s news and beliefs I personally find repulsive and do not wish to be in the same place as him, let alone listen to his music.” Rankoff included links to ADL and Israeli news outlets accusing Atzmon of antisemitism. Incredibly, on the basis of this letter alone, the Islington Council went way out of its way and contacted the show’s promoter to get Atzmon banned—something Rankoff didn’t even ask for.
Imagine the situation in reverse: Gilad Atzmon writes a letter to the Council saying he is uncomfortable with Martin Rankoff appearing in the audience at Islington assembly hall. He refers to Mr. Rankoff’s pro-Israel Twitter page where Rankoff calls Jeremy Corbyn “A F***ing Antisemite and Racist” and where Corbyn is pictured on a bike with a comment suggesting Corbyn should be rammed by a car. Atzmon says that he doesn’t feel safe with Rankoff in the audience. He finds Mr. Rankoff’s support for Israel repulsive because Israel was founded on genocide against the people of Palestine. As proof he provides links to news reports on the slaughter of unarmed protestors in Gaza since March 30, 2018, and a story on the Deir Yassin massacre of 1948.
This imaginary second complaint would have been scorned as an abridgement of Rankoff’s rights. Indeed, since the Islington Council has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, in which criticism of Israel is deemed antisemitic, the Council would probably feel obliged to forward the letter to the authorities as evidence of hate speech.
The Council provided a statement on the banning in which it says: “under the Equality Act 2010, the Council must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to foster good relations between different races and religions within the borough. The Council took account of the fact that Mr Atzmon’s presence at the Hall, and knowledge of his presence among residents of the borough, might harm such relationships, as well as the Council’s duty to tackle prejudice and promote understanding within the borough.”
This begs the question—in what way would either the “presence” of Gilad Atzmon or “knowledge of his presence among residents” harm the relationship between different races and religions in the borough? Atzmon was to appear at the venue as a saxophone player in a jazz group. It’s hard to imagine a more severe inversion of the concept of discrimination. On the basis of the feelings of one complainant, the right of a musician to work or even be present in Islington is taken away.
What lies behind this is a familiar tactic. Zionists have no argument to counter critics of Israel, so they try to shut them up by attacking their character and robbing them of their livelihood. Now AIPAC and other lobbies are working to make it illegal to criticize Israel, as we see in the recent case of a Texas speech therapist whose yearly contract was denied because she refused to sign a pledge not to support a boycott of Israel. One might ask, what does a teaching position in Pflugerville, Texas have to do with one’s opinions about a country seven thousand miles away? And why does that country have the right to compel anyone in the US to sign a loyalty oath?
If the BDS movement doesn’t do it, zealotry and fanatacism will be the undoing of the Zionist project. People don’t like being told what they are allowed to think and say. When our words and thoughts are policed, it makes us question all the more. What were once decent leftist positions against racism and discrimination have been twisted into a new kind of totalitarianism, one in which it is racist to question the racist, and discriminatory to question discrimination; one in which we are told to think something doesn’t exist when we can see with our own eyes that it does. The self-righteous members of the Islington Town Council have set a very dangerous precedent, and have been used as fools on top of it.
The resignation of US defence secretary James Mattis was triggered by a phone conversation between Donald Trump and the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, in which Trump abruptly decided to upend previous US policy and withdraw troops from Syria, according to new accounts of the call.
Mattis went to see the president on Thursday afternoon in a last-ditch attempt to change the president’s mind, and argue for standing by the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which have take the lead role in ejecting the Islamic State from its Syrian strongholds.
Trump rebuffed Mattis’s arguments over the course of a 45-minute meeting. Trump had already recorded a video in the White House garden, announcing he was bringing the troops home, and it had been shown to Mattis.
At the end of the meeting Mattis took Trump by surprise by presenting his resignation letter. According to the New York Times, Mattis ordered 50 copies to be made and circulated around the Pentagon on his return to his office.
Accounts in the US and Turkish press of the Friday call between Trump and Erdoğan show the volatile US president complying with the Turkish leader’s demands and taking his own advisers by surprise.
It is the latest example of a pattern in which Trump tends to side with authoritarian foreign leaders, over the advice of US officials.
read more at UK Guardian