Canadian Apologist for Israeli War Crimes Nominated for Peace Prize

mtl cotler tribute 18c70

Hypocrisy, lying, disdain for the victims of ‘our’ policies and other forms of rot run deep in Canadian political culture.

The latest example is former prime minister Paul Martin nominating Irwin Cotler for the Nobel Peace Prize, which has been applauded by the likes of Bernie Farber, Michael Levitt and Anthony Housefather.

This supposed promoter of peace and former Liberal justice minister has devoted much of his life to defending Israeli violence and has recently promoted war on Iran and regime change in Venezuela.

In a story titled “Irwin Cotler’s  daughter running with Ya’alon, Gantz” the Jerusalem Post recently reported that Michal Cotler-Wunsh was part of the Israel Resilience and Telem joint election list. The story revealed that Irwin Cotler has been an unofficial adviser to Moshe Ya’alon for years. Former Chief of Staff of the Israeli military and defence minister between 2013 and 2016, Ya’alon recently boasted about his role in setting up the West Bank colony of Leshem and said Israel “has a right to every part of the Land of Israel.” In 2002 Ya’alon told Haaretz, “the Palestinian  threat harbors cancer-like attributes that have to be severed. There are all kinds of solutions to cancer. Some say it’s necessary to amputate organs but at the moment I am applying chemotherapy.”

Ya’alon’s Telem party is in a formal electoral alliance with Israel Resilience, which is led by Benny Gantz, a former Israeli army chief. To launch his party’s campaign, Gantz released a video boasting about his role in the killing of 2,200 Palestinians in Gaza in the summer of 2014. It actually notes that “parts of Gaza were sent back to the Stone Age.” Gantz faces a war crimes case in the Netherlands for his role in the deaths of civilians in Gaza.

Cotler has described illegal Israeli colonies in the West Bank as “disputed territories” and the Canadian lawyer justified Israel’s 2006 war on Lebanon that left 1,200 dead. He savagely attacked  Richard Goldstone after the South African judge led a UN investigation of Israeli war crimes during operation Cast Lead, which left 1,400 dead in Gaza in 2008–09. Cotler called for the removal of Richard Falk as UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories and William Schabas from his position on the UN Human Rights Council’s International Commission of Inquiry into the killings in Gaza in 2014. Alongside attacking these three (Jewish) lawyers tasked with investigating human rights violations, Cotler promotes the notion of the “new anti-Semitism” to attack critics of Israeli policy.

In an indication of the unquestioning depths of his support for Israeli crimes, Cotler has repeatedly criticized his own party and government’s (mild) expressions of support for Palestinian rights. In May Cotler tweeted his “regret [of a] Canadian Government statement” criticizing Israeli snipers for shooting thousands of peaceful protesters, including Canadian doctor Tarek Loubani, in Gaza. In 2000 Cotler complained when the government he was a part of voted for a UN Security Council resolution calling on Israel to respect the rights of Palestinian protesters. “This kind of resolution, which singled out Israel for discriminatory and differential treatment and appeared to exonerate the Palestinians for their violence,” Cotler said, “would tend to encourage those who violently oppose the peace process as well as those who still seek the destruction of Israel.”

In 2002 a half dozen activists in Montréal occupied Cotler’s office to protest the self-described ‘human rights lawyer’s’ hostility to Palestinians. Cotler’s wife, Ariela Zeevi, was a“close confidant” of Likud founder Menachem Begin when the arch anti-Palestinian party was established to counter Labour’s dominance of Israeli politics.

‘Canada’s Alan Dershowitz’ has also attacked Iran incessantly. He supported the Stephen Harper government’s move to break off diplomatic relations with Tehran in 2012 and pushed to remove the MEK, which is responsible for thousands of Iranian deaths, from Canada’s terrorist list. As a member of the advisory board of “United Against Nuclear Iran”, Cotler opposed the P5+1Iran Nuclear Agreement. Recently, he called for Canada to invoke the Magnitsky Act to “impose sanctions in the form of travel bans and asset freezes” on Iranian officials.

As well as promoting US/Israel propaganda about Iran, Cotler criticized Hugo Chavez’s government since at least 2009 when Venezuela broke off diplomatic relations with Israel in response to killings in Gaza. In recent weeks Cotler has disparaged Venezuela’s government in a number of articles, including a National Post story headlined “Canadian unions helped fund delegation that gave glowing review of Venezuela election widely seen as illegitimate.” Cotler was quoted saying, “the notion that free and fair elections could possibly be taking place when you not only criminalize those who are on the opposition … but when you don’t have any allowance for expressions of freedom of speech, assembly, association and the like, simply is a non-sequitur.” But, as Dave Parnas wrote in response, “for two weeks we have been seeing pictures of streets filled with people who assembled, associated and spoke freely against President Nicolás Maduro.”

Cotler pushed for Canada to request the International Criminal Court investigate Venezuela’s government. Cotler was one of three “international experts” responsible for a 400-page Canadian-backed Organization of American States (OAS) report on rights violations in Venezuela that recommended referring Venezuela to the ICC. At a press conference in May to release the report, Cotler said Venezuela’s “government itself was responsible for the worst ever humanitarian crisis in the region.” As this author wrote at the time: “Worse than the extermination of the Taíno and Arawak by the Spanish? Or the enslavement of five million Africans in Brazil? Or the 200,000 Mayans killed in Guatemala? Or the thousands of state-murdered ‘subversives’ in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil?”

For four years Cotler has been working with Juan Guaidó’s “ultra right wing” Voluntad Popular party to oust Nicolas Maduro’s government. In May 2017 Cotler helped bring Lilian Tintori, wife of Voluntad Popular leader Leopoldo López, to meet the Prime Minister and opposition leaders. The Guardian recently reported on Tintori’s role in building international support for the slow-motion coup attempt currently underway in Venezuela. Tintori acted as an emissary for Lopez who couldn’t travel to Ottawa because he was convicted of inciting violence during the deadly “guarimbas” protests  in 2014. A series of news outlets have reported that Lopez is the key Venezuelan organizer in the plan to anoint Guaidó interim president.

Cotler joined Lopez’s legal team in early 2015. At that time the Venezuelan and international media repeated the widely promulgated description of Cotler as Nelson Mandela’s former lawyer (a Reuters headline noted, “Former Mandela lawyer to join defence of Venezuela’s jailed activist”). In response, South Africa’s Ambassador to Venezuela, Pandit Thaninga Shope-Linney, said, “Irwin Cotler was not Nelson Mandela’s lawyer.” For his part, Nelson Mandela mentions a number of lawyers (he was one) in his biography but Cotler’s name seems absent.

Cotler’s human rights credentials are a sham. He is a vicious anti-Palestinian who aggressively criticizes enemy states such as Venezuela, China, Russia and Iran while largely ignoring rights violations committed by Canada and the US.

For those appalled by the idea of Cotler receiving the Nobel Peace Prize Iranian-Canadian activist Mehdi Samadian has created a petition titled “Irwin Cotler does not deserve nomination for Nobel Peace Prize”.

*This article was originally published on yvesengler.

 

WRITER

How — and Why — Jews Gave China the Bomb

1035bEven the highest officials in the US government didn’t know of the frantic Jewish activity to checkmate Germany.

ON JANUARY 30, 1933 a Certain Person took power in Europe. The U.S., which had no diplomatic relations with Communist Russia, was then visited in June 1933 by one Maxim Litvinov. Roosevelt had consented to recognize the Soviet Union. The visit by Litvinov would formalize things and get the show on the road. (ILLUSTRATION: Tsien Hsue-shen)

The First World War, if it did nothing else, proved that no European military combination would be able to defeat Germany. It took U.S. power to tip the scales. But in 1933 the U.S. did not recognize Russia and a military alliance between these two powers was the only means the liberal-minority coalition could depend on for victory over Germany. Therefore, there was a lively communication, not for the first time, across the capitalist-communist frontier. We know that Napoleon’s Continental System was penetrated daily by enemies. So was, and is, the Iron Curtain.

The mood in 1933 among the Jews and their political allies was desperate. Could the U.S. be armed in time? The question of timing was paramount, for if France and England went down in a fast blow, and the Germans turned eastward, and Russia went down, the United States would be paralyzed, repeat, paralyzed. National Socialist Germany would be in control of the resources and manpower of all Europe — and allied with Japan! Something was needed besides a tenuous Russo-American alliance.

Now we all have learned about the frantic international cooperation by physicist after physicist, Jews nearly to a man, in the intense search for a practicable nuclear weapon to use on the Germans, a search inspired by the doubt that America could be geared for World War II in time. If such bombs could be developed and produced, Germany could be destroyed even with France, England and Russia prostrate. The feverish nature of the research is evident to anyone who has studied the individuals involved. Einstein was the key go-between in delivering the data from the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute to the U.S. and the affair was considered so crucial that only Jews were deemed trustworthy to carry it out. The trio in charge was Morgenthau, Lilienthal and Oppenheimer. In the Soviet Union, Landau and a whole string of Jewish scientists were receiving all the “secret” bomb plans.

Harry Truman: utterly clueless
Harry Truman: utterly clueless

Harry S. Truman stated that as vice president he did not know of the existence of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. atomic bomb assembly line. If he, the #2 man in Washington did not know of the project, imagine what he knew about what was going on earlier in the 1930s — that is, from January 30, 1933 on.

What nobody knew, or even knows now, was that the Jews and their allies were setting up a second nuclear bomb project for China. All that one can deduce logically is that if France, England and Russia collapsed and America finked out in one of its Congressional fits, the Chinese, preferably the Chinese Communists, would have a nuclear weapon for use on a Certain Person.

The source for this deduction is The China Cloud, America’s Tragic Blunder and China’s Rise to Nuclear Power by William L. Ryan and Sam Summerlin (Little, Brown, 1968).

The top eighty Chinese nuclear physicists received their training in America, primarily at the California Institute of Technology, but also at M.I.T., Harvard, Yale and the universities of Chicago, Michigan, California and Columbia. These eighty men are the ones responsible for setting off the first Communist Chinese hydrogen bomb on June 17, 1967, over the Takla Mahan desert in Sinkiang. Tsien Hsue-shen, the chief missileman in this successful test, received his education at Cal Tech’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Like most of the rest, Tsien got his training free from funds contributed by the U.S. from its share of Boxer Rebellion indemnities.

Theodore von Karman
Theodore von Karman

Oddly enough, reading between the lines of The China Cloud, which is necessary in order to understand the factual information presented, one observes that the people working in the federal government and in the state government of California had no comprehension of the forces at work about them. But two Los Angeles detectives did. Their names were Bill Hynes and William Ward Kimple. Hynes was head of a “Red Squad” office (his idea) and Kimple was an undercover man who at first failed to get into the Communist apparatus. “Most were New York Jews,” he would say in later years, “and I couldn’t get into the Party.”

Nevertheless, Hynes and Kimple penetrated into a most complex net centering on the training of the Chinese at Cal Tech as early as 1933. On page 44 of The China Cloud we learn that the Chinese, ostensibly not Communists, were placed in Cal Tech specifically for nuclear physics research. Theodore von Karman had assigned Tsien, mentioned above, to Cal Tech’s JPL. Von Karman, a Hungarian Jew, was the great gathering point for data on possible missile delivery systems. He and Tsien were cooperating closely as early as 1935. A typical bit of chitchat by Von Karman, “I remember that Professor Paul S. Epstein of the Physics Department, a great theoretician, once said to me: ‘Your student, H.S. Tsien, is in one of my classes.’ ‘Ja, he is good, I replied: ‘Tell me,’ Epstein said with a twinkle in his eye, ‘do you think he has Jewish blood?’”

Paul S. Epstein
Paul S. Epstein

What Hynes and Kimple apparently ran across was Dr. Sidney Weinbaum’s Communist Party Professional Unit 122, Pasadena Section, which was formed in 1936 or 1937. Tsien was in contact with Weinbaum. Coming in and out of the homes where Professional Unit 122 met was the brother of J. Robert Oppenheimer.

The authors of The China Cloud at no time provide evidence that they quite understand what their assembly of facts indicate. One could never prove before a Congressional committee that the Red Chinese were placed in American schools of physics and rocket propulsion so that when the Chinese Communists overran China (1948) they would have a ready-made team to create a nuclear stockpile and delivery system. Neither could it be proved that the movement of each Chinese into a key college course was greased by Jews. But rest assured, it was. The pattern of coincidence, if it were argued to be a coincidence, would have arrayed against it the most astronomical odds imaginable.

Dr. Sidney Weinbaum
Dr. Sidney Weinbaum

The prevalence of Jewish physicists (and agents, organizers, technical directors, and espionage operators) in wartime atomic research around the planet has never been properly evaluated. When noticed at all, the phenomenon is attributed to some sort of “genius” absent in other physicists. The peculiar circumstance of Jews all along the path of nuclear development — even to the proprietors of rooming houses used by various conspirators — is not understood. For such a dense mass of Jews — almost no end to them — to appear in cooperation at a given time and in a given place would presuppose a powerful motive. The motive was a Certain Person, who had them literally desperate, working on a time schedule that was giving practically all of them a nervous disorder. The number of them who knew about what was going on in the U.S. probably included even the inmates of Miami Beach homes for the elderly. However, Truman says he didn’t know.

Something of a similar nature is probably taking place now in regard to other technical developments. We may wake up one day and find out that not only the vice president knew nothing about it, but that the president was equally ignorant. This time the data will not be dispatched to Moscow — there’s some sort of Russian revivalism going on in the Socialist motherland — but to a computer near Mount Zion.

* * *

Source: based on an article in Instauration magazine, May 1978

 

 


West Germany ‘secretly funded Israel’s nuclear bomb’, despite Israel denials

Former chancellor Konrad Adenauer has long been accused of secretly channelling hundreds of millions of dollars into Israel’s nuclear programme in the 1960s

Israel's top secret nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona

Israel’s top secret nuclear facility in the southern Israeli town of Dimona Photo: Channel 10/AP

West Germany secretly funded the development of Israel’s nuclear weapons, a German newspaper has claimed, despite Israeli denials.

Welt newspaper repeated long-standing allegations that the government of former chancellor Konrad Adenauer secretly channelled hundreds of millions of dollars into Israel’s nuclear programme in the 1960s.


Konrad Adenauer West German chancellor pictured in the 1950s (INTERFOTO /Alamy)

The newspaper insisted the claims were true, despite a categorical denial earlier this month from Shimon Peres, the former Israeli president, who was in charge of the nuclear weapons project at the time.

In a detailed report, Welt claimed the funds were disguised as a $500 million (£338 million) loan for the development of the Negev desert.

The arrangement was agreed at a meeting between Mr Adenauer and David Ben-Gurion, the Israeli prime minister, in New York in 1960, the newspaper claimed.

The agreement was informal and was never scrutinised by the West German cabinet or parliament.

It was known as “Aktion Geschäftsfreund”, or “Operation Business Associate” by the West German foreign ministry.

The funds were channelled to Israel through the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, a government-owned development bank.

The bank has declined to release details of its payments to Israel under the programme.

It has long been claimed that West Germany helped pay for Israel’s nuclear weapons programme, but Mr Peres issued a denial earlier this month.

The 91-year-old told Spiegel magazine the allegations were the result of a misunderstanding.

The suspicions date back to claims by Franz Josef Strauss, a former West German defence minister, about a secret meeting with Mr Ben-Gurion in Paris in 1961.

The former Israeli prime minister had “come to talk about nuclear weapons production”, Mr Strauss claimed.

Mr Peres, who was also at the meeting, told Spiegel: “Maybe Strauss understood that, but I didn’t hear Ben-Gurion say it”.

He told the magazine the West German money was indeed spent on “the development of the Negev desert”.

Mr Peres is believed to have been in charge of the Israeli nuclear weapons project.

Israel has never officially acknowledged it possesses nuclear weapons.

Explicit details and photographs of its weapons project were leaked byMordechai Vanunu, a former nuclear technician, in 1986.


Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons

 This article is more than 9 years old
Exclusive: Secret apartheid-era papers give first official evidence of Israeli nuclear weapons
The secret military agreement signed by Shimon Peres and P W Botha
 The secret military agreement signed by Shimon Peres, now president of Israel, and P W Botha of South Africa. Photograph: Guardian

Secret South African documents reveal that Israel offered to sell nuclear warheads to the apartheid regime, providing the first official documentary evidence of the state’s possession of nuclear weapons.

The “top secret” minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 show that South Africa’s defence minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel’s defence minister and now its president, responded by offering them “in three sizes”. The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that “the very existence of this agreement” was to remain secret.

The documents, uncovered by an American academic, Sasha Polakow-Suransky, in research for a book on the close relationship between the two countries, provide evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons despite its policy of “ambiguity” in neither confirming nor denying their existence.

The Israeli authorities tried to stop South Africa’s post-apartheid government declassifying the documents at Polakow-Suransky’s request and the revelations will be an embarrassment, particularly as this week’s nuclear non-proliferation talks in New York focus on the Middle East.

They will also undermine Israel’s attempts to suggest that, if it has nuclear weapons, it is a “responsible” power that would not misuse them, whereas countries such as Iran cannot be trusted.

A spokeswoman for Peres today said the report was baseless and there were “never any negotiations” between the two countries. She did not comment on the authenticity of the documents.

South African documents show that the apartheid-era military wanted the missiles as a deterrent and for potential strikes against neighbouring states.

The documents show both sides met on 31 March 1975. Polakow-Suransky writes in his book published in the US this week, The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s secret alliance with apartheid South Africa. At the talks Israeli officials “formally offered to sell South Africa some of the nuclear-capable Jericho missiles in its arsenal”.

Among those attending the meeting was the South African military chief of staff, Lieutenant General RF Armstrong. He immediately drew up a memo in which he laid out the benefits of South Africa obtaining the Jericho missiles but only if they were fitted with nuclear weapons.

The memo, marked “top secret” and dated the same day as the meeting with the Israelis, has previously been revealed but its context was not fully understood because it was not known to be directly linked to the Israeli offer on the same day and that it was the basis for a direct request to Israel. In it, Armstrong writes: “In considering the merits of a weapon system such as the one being offered, certain assumptions have been made: a) That the missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads manufactured in RSA (Republic of South Africa) or acquired elsewhere.”

But South Africa was years from being able to build atomic weapons. A little more than two months later, on 4 June, Peres and Botha met in Zurich. By then the Jericho project had the codename Chalet.

The top secret minutes of the meeting record that: “Minister Botha expressed interest in a limited number of units of Chalet subject to the correct payload being available.” The document then records: “Minister Peres said the correct payload was available in three sizes. Minister Botha expressed his appreciation and said that he would ask for advice.” The “three sizes” are believed to refer to the conventional, chemical and nuclear weapons.

The use of a euphemism, the “correct payload”, reflects Israeli sensitivity over the nuclear issue and would not have been used had it been referring to conventional weapons. It can also only have meant nuclear warheads as Armstrong’s memorandum makes clear South Africa was interested in the Jericho missiles solely as a means of delivering nuclear weapons.

In addition, the only payload the South Africans would have needed to obtain from Israel was nuclear. The South Africans were capable of putting together other warheads.

Botha did not go ahead with the deal in part because of the cost. In addition, any deal would have to have had final approval by Israel’s prime minister and it is uncertain it would have been forthcoming.

South Africa eventually built its own nuclear bombs, albeit possibly with Israeli assistance. But the collaboration on military technology only grew over the following years. South Africa also provided much of the yellowcake uranium that Israel required to develop its weapons.

The documents confirm accounts by a former South African naval commander, Dieter Gerhardt – jailed in 1983 for spying for the Soviet Union. After his release with the collapse of apartheid, Gerhardt said there was an agreement between Israel and South Africa called Chalet which involved an offer by the Jewish state to arm eight Jericho missiles with “special warheads”. Gerhardt said these were atomic bombs. But until now there has been no documentary evidence of the offer.

Some weeks before Peres made his offer of nuclear warheads to Botha, the two defence ministers signed a covert agreement governing the military alliance known as Secment. It was so secret that it included a denial of its own existence: “It is hereby expressly agreed that the very existence of this agreement… shall be secret and shall not be disclosed by either party”.

The agreement also said that neither party could unilaterally renounce it.

The existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons programme was revealed by Mordechai Vanunu to the Sunday Times in 1986. He provided photographs taken inside the Dimona nuclear site and gave detailed descriptions of the processes involved in producing part of the nuclear material but provided no written documentation.

Documents seized by Iranian students from the US embassy in Tehran after the 1979 revolution revealed the Shah expressed an interest to Israel in developing nuclear arms. But the South African documents offer confirmation Israel was in a position to arm Jericho missiles with nuclear warheads.

Israel pressured the present South African government not to declassify documents obtained by Polakow-Suransky. “The Israeli defence ministry tried to block my access to the Secment agreement on the grounds it was sensitive material, especially the signature and the date,” he said. “The South Africans didn’t seem to care; they blacked out a few lines and handed it over to me. The ANC government is not so worried about protecting the dirty laundry of the apartheid regime’s old allies.”


—————————————————–

Non-White Invaders Know US System Cannot Cope with their Numbers

As Kevin Alfred Strom has pointed out, courts and police were never intended or designed to cope with an invasion. A military response will be necessary, and an entirely new government is needed to order such military action — as the present corrupt leaders are forbidden to issue any such orders.

THE CONTINUING STREAM of non-White invaders now seeking “asylum” in the US has continued to grow exponentially as word has leaked back that their sheer numbers have overwhelmed the existing US system to cope — leading entire “family units” just to be released into the US, it has emerged.

As detailed in a new study by the Center for Immigration Studies on the March 2019 report by the Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), the immigration courts’ growing asylum backlog raises significant questions about the capability of the US immigrant system to process the flood of so-called “family” units entering illegally with children at the Southwest border, which could lead to immigration enforcement breakdown.

The TRAC report warned that “arrivals greatly outnumber the families in court proceedings” and that “the number of family units apprehended by Border Patrol or detained at ports of entry dwarfs the actual number of cases that have thus far made their way to immigration court.”

The report said that as of February 28, 2019, the number of pending cases on the court’s active docket topped eight hundred and fifty-five thousand (855,807).

This is an increase of over three hundred thousand (313,396) pending cases over the backlog at the end of January 2017 when President Trump took office. This figure does not include the over three hundred thousand previously completed cases that EOIR placed back on the “pending” rolls that have not yet been put onto the active docket.

The CIS said in its review that “far more family units are being apprehended than are actually appearing on the immigration court dockets, likely because families are being released to appear for later credible fear determinations, giving many the opportunity to remain here indefinitely.

“News travels fast, and if we lack the resources to adjudicate credible fear claims in a timely manner, more aliens will come here, knowing they’ll likely be able to remain at-large in the US.”

Another explanation for the lag time, the CIS added, “could be a failure by asylum officers to place family units who have been found to have a credible fear into removal proceedings in a timely manner.”

Under section 235(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), aliens who are found to have a credible fear are subject to mandatory detention for further consideration of the application for asylum.

“It is doubtful that ICE is detaining tens of thousands of family units until immigration judges can make determinations on their asylum applications. This, again, would mean that those aliens are being released indefinitely.” The CIS report said.

If any alien’s purpose in coming to the United States illegally is to live and work in the United States (the reason for the vast majority of illegal entrants), the release of that alien gives other foreign nationals a strong incentive to enter the United States illegally.

“If there is significant lag time between apprehension and either credible-fear determinations, or the placement of aliens found to have a credible fear into removal proceedings, or the docketing of cases of aliens found to have a credible fear with the immigration courts, and those aliens are at large in the United States during such lag times, those incentives increase,” the CIS said.

* * *

Source: Daily Archives


Barbara Lerner Spectre – Jews behind immigration into Europe

Jewess Barbara Learner Spectre calls for destruction of European Nations.


NETANYAHU: EU WILL ‘SHRIVEL AND DISAPPEAR’ IF NO CHANGE IN ATTITUDE TOWARD ISRAEL

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu | Peter Kohalmi/AFP via Getty Images

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the European Union would not survive if it didn’t change its stance on Israel, the Guardian reported Tuesday.

“I think Europe has to decide if it wants to live and thrive or if it wants to shrivel and disappear,” reporters overheard Netanyahu saying at a meeting of Eastern European leaders in Budapest.

“The truth is the truth — both about Europe’s security and Europe’s economic future,” he added. “Both of these concerns mandate a different policy toward Israel.”

“The European Union is the only association of countries in the world that conditions the relations with Israel, which produces technology in every area, on political conditions,” the Israeli PM was overheard saying on an open microphone. “The only ones! Nobody does it. It’s crazy. It’s actually crazy.”

The overheard remarks were reported by Israeli journalists covering the trip, according to the Guardian.

Netanyahu was speaking at meeting of the Visegrad Group — Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic.


Germany to Lower Educational Standards to Accommodate Migrants

20150905_Migrant-slide-ADKK-superJumbo

Whites need to discard the morality that prevents them from defending themselves and which teaches them to instead feed, educate, and house these invaders.

THE GERMAN INTERIOR MINISTER has announced his intention to drop educational standards in the country to help migrants get into school or find a training place.

One of the greatest barriers to integration for new migrants is access to jobs, which in highly developed Germany requires a qualified workforce — something which newcomers almost entirely are not.

To counter this problem federal interior minister Thomas de Maizière has said the standards long exacted at state run schools will have to be dropped, as the system struggles to provide for the tens of thousands of new, unplanned-for pupils.

Rapidly growing class sizes as Germany’s young population balloons and the number of teachers and classrooms available fails to catch up are now officially accepted as a fact of life by the German government. Former staff are to be brought out of retirement to teach German to migrants, and present staff are being asked to work extensive unpaid overtime, reports News4Teachers.de.

Standards of physical education have already fallen considerably in Germany, as hundreds of school and university gyms are filled with camp beds and turned over to migrants.

Advocating dropping the high educational standards that have helped Germany’s highly skilled workforce to flourish, Thomas de Maizière said education should be more “improvised with common sense” to help migrants. He said he hoped the change wouldn’t be a “permanent lowering of standards”, and recruiting more teachers would allow the country to return to balance.

With 20,000 new teaching positions needing to be created, such change is likely to be extremely expensive for the German taxpayer.

What effect on the German labour market and wage levels the introduction of potentially thousands of foreign competitors with artificially inflated qualifications was not explored by de Maizière in his speech.

It is little wonder the German state is having to go to such extraordinary lengths to roll out education to migrants as they arrive from around the world. According to leaked internal government documents reported on by Breitbart London last month, 81-per-cent of arrivals to the country in the coming year will have absolutely no educational or vocational qualifications whatsoever.

With so many young men arriving who have never seen the inside of a classroom, the government has already anticipated a knock-on effect on the unemployment rate. Anticipating a 400,000 rise in the claimant count from just migrant arrivals, the federal employment agency has pre-empted the growing stresses on the system by appealing to the government for more staff and money.

These changes would echo those already observed in Austria, which has just posted the latest unemployment figures, showing steep rises in areas most effected by the migrant crisis. Statistics showed foreign born adults were twice as likely to have become unemployed over the past year as natives workers.

* * *

Source: Breitbart

Does Trump Want to Sacrifice American Lives to Please Israel?

Remembrance 4621a

United States foreign policy is never fair or just, but at least, under previous administrations, it was somewhat predictable. Any country that elected a socialist leader would be destabilized until one more pleasing to the U.S., often barbarically cruel, could be installed there. Countries with oil in the Middle East would be bombed. Israel would get astronomical amounts of funding from U.S. tax dollars.

Under the current imperial leader, the unstable and bombastic president, Donald Trump, the violence continues, but where and when it will manifest itself is sometimes puzzling. In various ‘Tweets’ and other statements, Trump threatens Iran with complete destruction, something his National Security Advisor, the unhinged John Bolton, and the evangelical pseudo-Christian Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo (who worships at the Israeli altar), take great glee in. On the other hand, he wants to keep a campaign promise of not starting any more wars. This dichotomy has lead news pundits to proclaim that the revolving door of the White House is soon to swing again, with Bolton and/or Pompeo finding themselves on the outside looking in. What’s the leader of the most violent nation on the planet to do?

Trump has reissued cruel sanctions against Iran, in violation of U.S. law, since the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) was approved by Congress, and can only be rescinded by Congress. U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA also violates international law. But when you are Donald Trump, the rules don’t apply to you. This is true of every president, but most of them tried to be a bit more discreet about it. But Trump seems to believe that by attempting to cripple the Iranian economy, the government of Iran will come crawling to him, to negotiate a new deal; after all, Trump proclaims himself the world’s best at making deals.

Why, one might reasonably ask, would Iran, or any other government on earth, make a deal with the United States? Hasn’t Trump proven that the U.S. government’s word is meaningless? Trump has said he is willing to talk to the leaders of Iran, to resolve the issues that, in his mind and that of his deranged advisors and followers, threaten the very existence of the mighty United States.

If Trump & Co. really want to bring Iran to the bargaining table, this writer has a suggestion that might just get them there: honor the JCPOA. Yes, remove the sanctions and stop threatening allies with sanctions if they trade with Iran. Then, perhaps, the U.S. president could, through diplomatic channels, contact the leaders of Iran, and state that, while the JCPOA was and is an excellent agreement, there are one or two other points the U.S. would like to discuss.

Despite this suggestion, this writer hastens to say that he firmly believes that the government of Iran, like every nation, has the right and responsibility to protect its borders and its citizens. Therefore, in the case of Iran, having defensive weapons strong enough to deter and defeat any onslaught by the U.S. or Israel is of paramount importance. And while this writer also believes that the fewer nuclear weapons in existence, the safer we all are, he also believes that if Israel and the U.S., two violent, rogue states, have them, then Iran should as well.

It has been said that for Iran to comply with U.S. demands, it would cease to be Iran. Well, that’s just fine with the U.S.; for nearly three decades, after the U.S. overthrew the democratically-elected government of Prime MinisterMohammad Mosaddegh, and installed the brutal Shah of Iran as monarch, Iran did whatever the U.S. wanted. Who, in the U.S. government, ever cared that for twenty-six years the Shah brutally oppressed the people of Iran? Since the overthrow of the Shah in 1979, until 2015, the U.S. never ceased its aggression and hostility towards that nation. Finally, in that year, the JCPOA was signed, when President Barack Obama initiated overtures to Iran. Say what you will about Obama (and heaven knows there is plenty to say; his hands, like those of all his predecessors, are soaked in blood), at least he did reach out to Iran, for the improvement of the lives of common Iranians and to reduce one of the many hostilities the U.S. seems to love having.

But wait! If the U.S. and a few other nations talked Iran into giving up its nuclear program, one that Iranian officials have always said was for peaceful purposed, and not to create nuclear weapons, and if such action was said to improve the safety of the world, who could possibly object to it? Ah! Israel, of course!

Israel’s brutal, racist, long-term prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been saying for literally decades that Iran is just this close to creating nuclear weapons. Israel has even assassinated Iranian nuclear scientists. One wonders how the U.S. would react if, say, France sent assassins to Washington, D.C. to murder nuclear scientists. But Netanyahu was welcomed to the halls of the Democratic-controlled Congress to speak of the evils of the JCPOA, and urge Congress to vote against it. Alas, it was not to be! While much of Congress is bought and paid for by Israeli lobbies, those same Congress members faced a dilemma: do Israel’s bidding, thus handing their Democratic president a political defeat, or defy Israel, thus risking further campaign contributions, but providing a victory for Obama. (It continues to puzzle this writer how such a thing is a ‘defeat’ or ‘victory’ for any individual; should not all legislation be a victory for the people?). Ultimately, they decided to go with their fellow-Democrat, Obama, and disappoint the Zionist racist, Netanyahu.

But that was then; this is now. Trump withdrew from the JCPOA against the advice of all his advisors (all of whom have since departed the White House for greener pastures), the other signatories to the agreements, and the entire international community with the exceptions of Israel and Saudi Arabia. U.S. spokespeople, representing the most violent country in the world, accuse Iran of sponsoring terrorism. A puzzling charge indeed, when made by the U.S., currently bombing multiple countries, occupying and terrorizing Afghanistan, and supporting and financing terrorists in Syria and Venezuela. Iran assists its allies, and has not invaded another country since 1798; yes, that is 221 years ago.

What is next for the United States? Will Trump be persuaded to walk the nation off the cliff by invading Iran? Can he have any cognizance of Iran’s strength, and that of its allies, including Russia? Does he really want to sacrifice countless lives, including those of U.S. soldiers, to please Israel?

Time will answer these questions; it is to be hoped that the answers do not mean more war, violence and bloodshed in the Middle East and around the world. Any invasion of Iran by the U.S. or Israel would have catastrophic consequences throughout the Middle East and the U.S., and could lead to a worldwide conflagration. One hopes that even the unstable and deluded Trump can see this, and will not pull the trigger to initiate such a disaster.

*(Top image credit: Michael Levine-Clark/ flickr)

 

WRITER

Israel Hacking Elections Worldwide

Microsoft’s ElectionGuard a Trojan Horse for a Military-Industrial Takeover of US Elections

Mint Press News – Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism. (More from Whitney Webb)

_________________________

Earlier this month, tech giant Microsoft announced its solution to “protect” American elections from interference, which it has named “ElectionGuard.” The election technology is already set to be adopted by half of voting machine manufacturers and some state governments for the 2020 general election. Though it has been heavily promoted by the mainstream media in recent weeks, none of those reports have disclosed that ElectionGuard has several glaring conflicts of interest that greatly undermine its claim aimed at protecting U.S. democracy.

In this investigation, MintPress will reveal how ElectionGuard was developed by companies with deep ties to the U.S. defense and intelligence communities and Israeli military intelligence, as well as the fact that it is far from clear that the technology would prevent foreign or domestic interference with, or the manipulation of, vote totals or other aspects of American election systems.

Election forensics analyst and author Jonathan Simon as well as investigative journalist Yasha Levine, who has written extensively on how the military has long sought to weaponize public technologies including the internet, were consulted for their views on ElectionGuard, its connections to the military-industrial complex and the implication of those connections for American democracy as part of this investigation.

_______________________________________

Adam Green – KNOW MORE NEWS (Youtube)  (Bitchute)

Backup Video at BITCHUTE (Here)

Know More News Israel Tech Takeover Video Playlist (Click Here)

_______________________________________

In January, MintPress published an exposé that later went viral on a news-rating company known as Newsguard. Officially aimed at fighting “fake news,” the company’s many connections to U.S. intelligence, a top neoconservative think tank, and self-admitted government propagandists revealed its real intention was to promote corporate media over independent alternatives.

Newsguard was among the first initiatives that comprise Microsoft’s “Defending Democracy” program, a program that the tech giant created under the auspices of protecting American “democratic processes from cyber-enabled interference [which] have become a critical concern.” Through its partnership with Microsoft, Newsguard has been installed in public libraries and universities throughout the country, even while private-sector companies have continued to avoid adopting the problematic browser plug-in.

Now, Microsoft is promoting a new “Defending Democracy” initiative — one equally ridden with glaring conflicts of interest — that threatens American democracy in ways Newsguard never could. ElectionGuard is touted by Microsoft as a system that aims to “make voting secure, more accessible, and more efficient anywhere it’s used in the United States or in democratic nations around the world.” It has since been heavily promoted by mainstreamand U.S. government-funded media outlets in preparation for its use in the 2020 general election.

However, according to Jonathan Simon, election forensic analyst and author of CODE RED: Computerized Elections and the War on American Democracy, this public relations campaign is likely just cover for more insider control over U.S. elections. “It’s encouraging that after close to two decades of ignoring the security issues with computerized voting, there’s suddenly a scramble to protect our next election that suggests those issues are finally being taken seriously,” Simon told MintPress. “Unfortunately the proposed solution is just more computerization and complexity — which translates to more control by experts and insiders, though of course that is not part of the PR campaign.”

As to the likely identity of those insiders, the fact that Microsoft’s ElectionGuard was developed in tandem with a private military and intelligence contractor whose only investor is the U.S. Department of Defense offers a troubling clue. As a consequence, ElectionGuard’s promise to “secure” elections is dubious, especially given that Microsoft itself is a U.S. military contractor. Furthermore, amid the unfolding scandal of Israeli meddling in foreign elections, Microsoft’s growing ties to Israeli military intelligence and private Israeli cybersecurity firms raise even more concerns about whether ElectionGuard’s real purpose is to “secure” American elections for candidates friendly to the establishment, especially the military-industrial complex.

Explaining ElectionGuard

According to an announcement made in early May by Tom Burt, Microsoft’s Vice President for Customer Security and Trust, ElectionGuard is “a free open-source software development kit (SDK)” that “will make voting secure, more accessible, and more efficient anywhere it’s used.” Burt’s statement further claims that the ElectionGuard system “will enable end-to-end verification of elections, open results to third-party organizations for secure validation, and allow individual voters to confirm their votes were correctly counted.” While ElectionGuard may appear to concern itself only with electronic ballots, the announcement states that the system “is designed to work with systems that use paper ballots” through the use of an optical scanner.

Notably, Microsoft chose to announce ElectionGuard only after it had already partnered “with major election technology suppliers who are exploring the integration of ElectionGuard into their voting systems.” Burt further noted that Microsoft now has “partnerships with election technology suppliers responsible for more than half of the voting machines sold in the U.S.” ElectionGuard partner companies include Democracy Live, Election Systems & Software, Hart InterCivic, BPro, MicroVote, and VotingWorks.

Another interesting, and deeply troubling, admission in the Microsoft announcement is that Microsoft’s ElectionGuard development partner, the Portland-based cybersecurity firm Galois, “recently received $10 million in funding from the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to build a demonstration voting system to help evaluate secure hardware DARPA researchers are developing as part of a separate DARPA program.”

Microsoft’s announcement then notes that “the agency views ensuring the integrity and security of the election process as a critical national security concern and plans to implement the ElectionGuard SDK as part of their effort to enable an end-to-end verifiable component in future versions of their demonstration voting system.”

As deeply troubling as DARPA’s $10 million indirect investment in ElectionGuard may seem, it is merely scratching the surface, as Galois itself is essentially an extension of DARPA in the private cybersecurity industry.

The “private” company whose only investor is the Pentagon

Founded in 1999 by John Launchbury, Galois quickly became close to numerous government agencies that now – according to the Galois website – form the vast majority of its clientele. In fact, Galois currently only lists the following U.S. government agencies in its “clients” section: DARPA, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security, “Intelligence Community” (i.e., CIA, NSA, etc.) and NASA. However, other clients of Galois include top U.S. weapons manufacturer General Dynamics. Galois’ stated focus as a company is research and development in advanced computer science, with an emphasis on securing critical systems and cybersecurity. It also dabbles in artificial intelligence, human-computer interaction, and machine learning.

Though it describes itself as “a privately held U.S.-owned and -operated company,” public records indicate that Galois’ only investors are DARPA and the Office of Naval Research (ONR), both of which are divisions of the Department of Defense. In other words, while “officially” a private company, its only investor is the U.S. government, more specifically the Pentagon.

However, the company’s connections to DARPA go even further. The company’s founder and chief scientist John Launchbury, left Galois in 2014 to become program manager and subsequently the director of DARPA’s Information Innovation Office, which deals with “nation-scale investments in cybersecurity and artificial intelligence.” In 2017, he left DARPA and went back to work at Galois as the company’s chief scientist. DARPA’s Information Innovation Office’s official purpose is to develop advanced technology for issues of national security interest, but it also focuses on enhancing “human/machine partnership.”

A Galois spin-off company called Free & Fair, which develops election technology, partnered with Microsoft to produce ElectionGuard. Free & Fair’s website lists its partners as DARPA, Microsoft, voting machine manufacturer VotingWorks, vote tallying software developer Verificatum, the state government of Colorado, and the OSET (Open Source Election Technology) Institute. VotingWorks is a “non-profit” voting machine manufacturer founded by a former Mozilla director of engineering and closely affiliated with the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT). In addition to Colorado, other states like Minnesota have partnered with Microsoft’s “Defending Democracy” program, but it is unclear if they have adopted or plan to adopt ElectionGuard as a consequence of that partnership.

 

According to the CDT’s announcement of VotingWorks’ launch:

CDT WILL SERVE AS A HOME FOR VOTINGWORKS UNTIL IT BECOMES ITS OWN NON-PROFIT ENTITY. THIS PARTNERSHIP MEANS VOTINGWORKS IS WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE CDT’S EXPERIENCED TEAM TO RAPIDLY RAMP UP OPERATIONS AND BEGIN IN EARNEST THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE, SECURE, OPEN-SOURCE VOTING MACHINES FOR USE IN US PUBLIC ELECTIONS.”

The president and CEO of CDT is Nuala O’Connor, who was Amazon’s Vice President for Compliance and Customer Trust before becoming CDT president. O’Connor was also formerly chief privacy officer of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and has also worked at General Electric and the U.S. Department of Commerce.

CDT’s board includes former Deputy Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator for the White House under Obama and current Principal Counsel at Apple Philippa Scarlett; Microsoft’s corporate vice president, Julie Brill; and Mozilla’s vice president of global policy, Alan Davidson. More troubling, however, is its advisory council, which includes representatives of RAND Corporation, Walmart, Verizon, the Charles Koch Institute, Facebook and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). MintPress readers are likely familiar with AEI, one of the country’s most notorious neoconservative think tanks, known for employing John Bolton and Paul Wolfowitz, among others. One of Newsguard’s co-founders, Louis Gordon Crovitz, is also affiliated with the AEI.

Another partner of Galois’ Free & Fair is the Open Source Election Technology Institute (OSET Institute, or OSETI), whose flagship initiative is called “TrustTheVote.” One of OSETI’s co-founders and its current CTO is E. John Sebes, who has previously done work for DARPA and DHS. OSETI’s strategic board of advisors includes Chris Barr of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, which is a top investor in Newsguard; former Oregon Secretary of State Phil Keisling; former Deputy Director of the NSA William Cromwell; former head of DHS’ Cybersecurity Directorate and former DARPA project manager Doug Maughan; and Norm Ornstein of the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute and co-director of the AEI-Brookings Election Reform Project.

Aside from the numerous links to major corporations, government agencies and neoconservative think tanks, of particular concern to Free & Fair’s mission to develop “secure” election technology are its connections to DHS. This is because, before, during and after the 2016 election, DHS was caught attempting to hack into state electoral systems in at least three states — Georgia, Indiana and Idaho — with similar accusations also being made in Kentucky and West Virginia. In Indiana’s case, the DHS’ attempted hacks occurred nearly 15,000 times over a 46 day period. In an official answer to Georgia’s claim the DHS had tried to penetrate its electoral system’s firewall, DHS which initially denied being behind the attempted hack, later responded that the attempted breach was “legitimate business” aimed at “verifying a professional license administered by the state.” Some of the states targeted by DHS had turned down the department’s offer to “shore up” election systems prior to the 2016 election.

Compare this to the alleged Russian hacking into state electoral systems, which – to date – includes only the claim from the FBI that hackers alleged to be affiliated with Russian military intelligence penetrated voter registration data in two counties in Florida. That alleged hack, the details of which remain classified and for which no evidence of it even happening has been made publicly available, did not result in any alterations to data or other manipulation of those systems, per FBI officials. The DHS, in contrast, attempted to hack into the systems, not of individual counties, but entire states and acknowledged that it did so, even though they chose not to use the work “hack” and defended their activity. While focusing on foreign — and especially Russian — interference may make for a more patriotic story, the dangers posed by domestic actors with at least as great a stake in U.S. election outcomes appear to have been grossly underestimated and virtually ignored by the media.

Free & Fair’s partnerships with groups tied to DHS seem to further undermine its stated mission of providing secure and trustworthy election technology, in addition to its parent company’s deep ties to the Department of Defense, especially DARPA.

Russian-American investigative journalist, and author of Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet, Yasha Levine explained to MintPress why DARPA is likely interested in U.S. election system software like ElectionGuard and why the agency’s interest is dangerous for American democracy:

ELECTION SYSTEMS ARE NOW BEING INCREASINGLY SEEN AS A THEATER FOR WARFARE BETWEEN COMPETING NATION STATES. SO, IF YOU ARE DARPA AND YOUR REASON FOR EXISTENCE IS TO CREATE HI-TECH WEAPONS FOR THE FUTURE, THEN YOU ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS AS A THEATER OF WAR WHERE THE COUNTRY COULD BE ATTACKED BY A FOREIGN ADVERSARY. THAT EXPLAINS WHY DARPA IS INVOLVED.

BUT DARPA AND SOME OF THESE COMPANIES INVOLVED CAN ALSO BE SEEN AS FOES OF AMERICANS’ POPULAR WILL… WE CAN HYPOTHESIZE ABOUT WHAT’S REALLY GOING ON AND WHAT THEIR INTENTIONS ARE, BUT CLEARLY THE PENTAGON R&D LAB FOR WAR SHOULD NOT BE ANYWHERE NEAR AMERICA’S ELECTORAL SYSTEM BECAUSE IT REPRESENTS A HUGE AND POWERFUL AND UNACCOUNTABLE FORCE IN THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM WHOSE INTERESTS OFTEN RUN COUNTER TO DEMOCRACY.

THE FACT THAT WE ARE HANDING OVER THE KEYS OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY TO THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX — IT’S LIKE GIVING THE KEYS TO THE HENHOUSE TO A FOX AND SAYING, ‘HERE COME IN AND TAKE WHATEVER YOU WANT.’ IT’S OBVIOUSLY DANGEROUS.”

 

From mind control to vote control?

It’s worth briefly describing why DARPA’s role at Galois is of concern. This stems mainly from the fact that DARPA is currently developing Orwellian and nightmarish “Terminator” technologies — including efforts to implant chips into soldiers’ brains, replace most human soldiers with robot soldiers, and create killer “Terminator” robots — and autonomous artificial-intelligence targeting systems that will use social media to identify potential targets.

In 2015, Michael Goldblatt — then-director of the DARPA subdivision Defense Sciences Office (DSO), which oversees the “super soldier” program — told journalist Annie Jacobsen that he saw no difference between “having a chip in your brain that could help control your thoughts” and “a cochlear implant that helps the deaf hear.” When pressed about the unintended consequences of such technology, Goldblatt stated that “there are unintended consequences for everything.”

It goes without saying that the fact that an institution currently developing what essentially amounts to mind-control technology, and that also sees nothing wrong with such technology, has suddenly become so interested in creating and funding with millions of dollars a “free, fair and secure” election system to protect American democracy from interference, is beyond odd and suggests an ulterior motive.

Similarly, Microsoft’s claim that it “will not charge for using ElectionGuard and will not profit from partnering with election technology suppliers that incorporate it into their products” should also raise eyebrows. Considering that Microsoft has a long history of predatory practices, including price gouging for its OneCare security software, its offering of ElectionGuard software free of charge is tellingly out of step for the tech giant and suggests an ulterior motive behind Microsoft’s recent philanthropic interest in “defending democracy.”

In addition, Microsoft’s dual role as a major technology company and a contractor for both the U.S. military and the U.S. intelligence community should also raise red flags. Indeed, Microsoft has made it abundantly clear that it plans to forge ever closer ties with the U.S. government, especially after Microsoft President Brad Smith announced last December that Microsoft is “going to provide the US military with access to the best technology … all the technology we create. Full stop.” A month prior to that statement, Microsoft secured a $480 million contract with the Pentagon to provide the U.S. military with its HoloLens technology.

This close relationship that Microsoft is building with the Pentagon may explain the company’s ulterior motive in creating and promoting ElectionGuard, as promoting the largely DARPA-funded election technology could help improve Microsoft’s chances in its current bid for a $10 billion cloud services contract with the Pentagon.

Furthermore, given the numerous corporate connections as well as the connections to the AEI, it could be argued that Microsoft and Galois’ intimate involvement in this system could be to help “guard” elections from candidates who threaten to regulate or rein in their industries, particularly the military-industrial complex. Of course, the claim that ElectionGuard is “open source” is meant to mitigate such speculation, as the open-source nature of the technology ostensibly means that no discrete code is hidden that could be used to manipulate results. However, as will be shown shortly, the fact that a technology is open-source does not necessarily mean that the data that passes through that technology is not open to manipulation from a third party.

ElectionGuard isn’t immune to manipulation

Microsoft’s press release announcing ElectionGuard highlights its claim that its system would make elections more verifiable, secure, and auditable; be open source-based; and improve the voting experience. While all of these things sound nice enough, there is reason to believe — based on the description given by Microsoft — that some of these claims are dubious and misleading. Unfortunately, for now, analysis of ElectionGuard is restricted to Microsoft’s description of the software as it is not yet available for public examination. The ElectionGuard software kit is expected to be released later this year on the GitHub platform.

The first aspect of the “verifiable” claim relates to a voter tracking system, where each voter is given a unique tracking ID which allows them “to follow an encrypted version of the vote through the entire election process via a web portal provided by election authorities.” Voters can choose the option of confirming “that their trackers and encrypted votes accurately reflect their selections.”

Yet Microsoft notes that “once a vote is cast, neither the tracker nor any data provided through the web portal can be used to reveal the contents of the vote,” meaning that while a person can track whether their vote was counted, they cannot verify whether the content of the vote (i.e., who they voted for) is counted correctly or not. Microsoft goes on to note that only “after the election is complete” will the tracker page allow the content of the vote to be seen.

The second “verifiability” component of ElectionGuard “is an open specification – or a road map – which allows anyone to write an election verifier.” Microsoft then notes that this open specification would mean that “voters, candidates, news media and any observers can run verifiers of their own or downloaded from sources of their choosing to confirm tabulations are as reported.”

Microsoft describes these two features as constituting “end-to-end verifiability” (E2E-V), which Free & Fair describes as “cryptographic technology that enables voters to vote in a normal fashion in a polling place and have evidence that the election is trustworthy.”

Another focus of ElectionGuard is security, for which the system employs “homomorphic encryption, which enables mathematical procedures – like counting – to be done with fully encrypted data” and this allows individually encrypted votes to be “combined to form an encrypted tabulation of all votes which can then be decrypted to produce an election tally that protects voter privacy.”  Notably, homomorphic encryption is the only ElectionGuard security measure named in the press release.

Election forensics analyst Jonathan Simon, author of CODE RED: Computerized Elections and the War on American Democracy, was not fully persuaded by the E2E-V claim. “Pardon my skepticism,” Simon told MintPress, “but I’ve read Microsoft’s ‘good news’ ElectionGuard flyer and it reminds me very much of the flyers and PR material long served up by the vendors and programmers of the current voting equipment — the very computers that IT experts discovered could be hacked by outsiders and programmed to add, delete, and shift votes by insiders.”

Simon continued:

RIGHT NOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY’RE HAWKING EXPENSIVE AND COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY BALLOT-MARKING DEVICES (BMDS) THAT TURN YOUR VOTES INTO A BARCODE, A CODE THAT NO VOTER CAN READ OR VERIFY. VERY SLICK BUT YET ANOTHER LEVEL OF NON-TRANSPARENCY, ANOTHER STEP AWAY FROM PUBLIC, OBSERVABLE VOTE-COUNTING, AND ANOTHER VECTOR FOR FRAUD.

I’VE SPENT THE LAST 17 YEARS EXAMINING VOTE-COUNT PATTERNS AND DRAWING ATTENTION TO A PARADE OF EGREGIOUS RED FLAGS INDICATIVE OF COMPUTERIZED VOTE-COUNT MANIPULATION. IT HAS BEEN A SYSTEM DESIGNED FOR CONCEALMENT AND ABOUT AS NON-TRANSPARENT AS A PROCESS CAN BE. IT WOULD BE GREAT IF MORE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY WOULD BRING TRANSPARENCY AT LAST, AS MICROSOFT SEEMS TO PROMISE.

BUT WHAT I SEE SO FAR IS EVEN MORE COMPLEXITY — ENCRYPTION THAT, WHETHER OPEN SOURCE OR NOT, REQUIRES THE MOST RAREFIED EXPERTS TO PENETRATE OR UNDERSTAND. AND JUST A SHORT STEP TO FULL-ON INTERNET VOTING — EVEN MORE CONVENIENT AND ABOUT AS SECURE AS, SAY, FACEBOOK.

PENDING A DEMONSTRATION SHOWING WITH PERFECT LAYPERSON-ACCESSIBLE CLARITY HOW A THIRD-PARTY ENTITY CAN VERIFY AGGREGATE VOTE-COUNTS WITHOUT HAVING TO TAKE ON FAITH SOME STEP IN THE PIPELINE (INDIVIDUAL VERIFICATION THAT ‘YOUR’ VOTE WAS ‘COUNTED’ IS A USELESS BELL-AND-WHISTLE), IT STILL FEELS LIKE THE SAME OLD ‘TRUST US’ GAME. I’M WILLING TO BE PERSUADED BUT THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT HERE IS VERY CAUTIONARY.”

Simon’s concerns reflect some controversial aspects of the ElectionGuard approach. While encryption would ostensibly protect votes from tampering and thus elections results, it is important to point out that homomorphic encryption is a malleable form of encryption.

According to Brilliant.org:

A MALLEABLE CRYPTO-SYSTEM IS ONE IN WHICH ANYONE CAN INTERCEPT A CIPHER TEXT, TRANSFORM IT INTO ANOTHER CIPHER TEXT, AND THEN DECRYPT THAT INTO A PLAIN TEXT THAT MAKES SENSE. MALLEABILITY IS GENERALLY CONSIDERED UNDESIRABLE IN A CRYPTO-SYSTEM. IMAGINE YOU’RE TRYING TO SEND THE MESSAGE ‘I LOVE YOU’ TO YOUR FRIEND USING ENCRYPTION. YOU ENCRYPT IT AND SEND IT OFF. BUT, IT IS INTERCEPTED BY A HACKER ON THE WAY. ALL THEY SEE IS SOME CIPHER TEXT, BUT THEY CAN CHANGE THAT CIPHER TEXT TO SOMETHING THAT WILL DECRYPT TO ‘I HATE YOU’ WHEN YOUR FRIEND TRIES TO DECRYPT IT. THAT IS WHY MALLEABILITY IS NOT USUALLY WANTED.”

If that’s the case, then what stops a “hacker” or another third party — say a U.S. government agency like the NSA or a political operative with access to the electoral cyber-pipeline — from changing a person’s vote from Democrat to Republican or vice versa, or altering the encrypted tabulation of all votes?

While homomorphic encryption seems a reasonable choice in one sense, for allowing votes to be tallied without decrypting, there is an added layer of concern given Microsoft’s past, particularly Microsoft’s history of actually working with U.S. government agencies to bypass encryption.

Indeed, documents leaked by Edward Snowden revealed that Microsoft actually helped the National Security Agency bypass its own encryption so the agency could decrypt messages sent via certain Microsoft platforms including Outlook.com Web chat, Hotmail email service, and Skype. In addition, in 2009, a senior NSA official testified before Congress that Microsoft and the NSA worked together to create its Windows 7 operating system, leading some to worry that Microsoft had built a “backdoor” into the operating system to aid government surveillance activities. Now that Microsoft’s ties to the U.S. military and intelligence community are deeper than ever, it begs the question whether Microsoft’s covert cooperation with government agencies to the detriment of consumers is also a factor guiding its role in creating and promoting ElectionGuard.

Furthermore, with Microsoft’s president having vowed to hand over all its technologies to the U.S. military, one wonders if this type of encryption and methodology was not chosen on purpose, especially given the fact that the NSA is quite accomplished at breaking much more secure types of encryption even without help from Microsoft.

Another of Microsoft’s talking points used to promote ElectionGuard is the fact that it will be open source, meaning the program’s code will be publicly available, a move apparently aimed at assuaging concerns that ElectionGuard’s code could contain hidden manipulations or vulnerabilities.

However, investigative journalist Yasha Levine likened Microsoft’s promotion of ElectionGuard’s still unreleased open source code to a “PR move.” Levine told MintPress:

OPEN SOURCE INEVITABLY HAS BUGS AND VULNERABILITIES THAT ARE THERE ACCIDENTALLY BECAUSE ALL CODE HAS VULNERABILITIES. THIS IS TRUE FOR OPEN SOURCE AND CLOSED SOURCE SYSTEMS. OPEN SOURCE JUST MEANS THAT PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT IT, BUT THEN THAT CODE HAS TO BE RUN THROUGH A COMPILER THAT ACTUALLY RUNS AN EXECUTABLE PROGRAM. SO THERE YOU ALREADY HAVE A DEGREE OF ABSTRACTION AND SEPARATION FROM THE OPEN SOURCE CODE. BUT EVEN IF THE EXECUTABLE CODE AND THE SOURCE CODE ARE THE SAME, THERE ARE BUGS WHICH CAN BE EXPLOITED.

SO, WHAT OPEN SOURCE DOES IS GIVE A VENEER OF OPENNESS THAT LEADS ONE TO THINK THAT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE HAVE PROBABLY VETTED THE CODE AND FLAGGED ANY BUGS IN IT. BUT, ACTUALLY VERY FEW PEOPLE HAVE THE TIME AND THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT THIS CODE. SO THIS IDEA THAT OPEN SOURCE CODE IS MORE TRANSPARENT ISN’T REALLY TRUE BECAUSE FEW PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT IT.”

Levine went on to note that there are many examples of open source systems — including widely used open source systems — having major vulnerabilities that go undetected for years. One of the best examples, in Levine’s opinion, is the “Heartbleed” bug, which was a security vulnerability in the open source OpenSSL software, a system that allows for the basic encryption of web traffic by encrypting “http” connections. The Heartbleed allowed hackers access to the memory of data servers for an estimated half a million websites and went undetected for years, despite the fact that OpenSSL is an open source system.

Levine also underscored the fact that both American and foreign intelligence agencies “more than any other person or group” are involved in seeking out such vulnerabilities and exploits, which they keep hidden from the public in order to give themselves an advantage in cyberwarfare. Some of the CIA’s lists of such exploits or vulnerabilities were revealed in the WikiLeaks Vault 7 release.

Microsoft’s ties to Israeli military intelligence

ElectionGuard is currently being promoted as a key step towards preventing the “interference” of a foreign government or state actor in U.S. elections in the future. Yet, there is no guarantee that ElectionGuard itself is free from foreign influence, given that Microsoft has deep ties to the military intelligence community of a foreign nation: Israel.

Microsoft’s links to the Israeli military intelligence unit known as Unit 8200, which will be discussed momentarily, are troubling for more than a few reasons. The first is the fact that the main developer of a new election software system aimed at protecting U.S. elections from “foreign interference” has close ties to a foreign military intelligence agency. It goes without saying that if the main developer of ElectionGuard had such ties with another foreign military intelligence agency, such as Russian military intelligence, the software would not stand a chance of adoption in the U.S. and it would likely be a national scandal. The fact that Microsoft’s ties to Israeli military intelligence have not troubled proponents of ElectionGuard suggests that the problem is not foreign interference or influence as long as the foreign nation involved is an ally, not an adversary.

Arguably yet a graver concern in terms of the Microsoft-Unit 8200 relationship and Electionguard, is the recent slew of scandals surrounding Israeli interference in foreign elections all around the world. The most recent of those scandals involved the Israeli company the Archimedes Group and its social-media influence disinformation campaigns to target the elections in several African and Asian nations. According to the Times of Israel, the CEO of the Archimedes Group, Elinadav Heymann, is a former senior intelligence agent for the Israeli military. The group spent an estimated $800,000 on misleading Facebook ads as part of its disinformation campaign, a sum much larger than the $100,000 alleged to have been spent by a Russian company on a similar disinformation campaign in the 2016 election.

Prior to this latest scandal, several private Israeli companies were accused of seeking to collude with the Trump campaign in 2016, namely the now-shuttered PSY-Group — which was run by former Israeli intelligence operatives — and Wikistrat, which also has close tiesto Israeli intelligence. The fact that private Israeli firms with ties to Israeli intelligence and Israeli military intelligence have been caught in recent election meddling scandals, including in the U.S., should be a major red flag when examining the many conflicts of interests that enshroud ElectionGuard’s developers and how those conflicts may inform the program’s functionality.

Microsoft has long had a presence in Israel, which dates back to 1989. However, in recent years, they have invested in and acquired in several companies with deep ties to the IDF’s Unit 8200.

In 2015, Microsoft acquired Israeli cloud security company Adallom for $320 million, which would go on to serve as a new foundation for Microsoft’s Research and Development (R&D) Center in Israel, which has been active since 1989. Adallom’s product was subsequently rebranded as Microsoft Cloud App Security. Adallom’s CEO and co-founder is Assaf Rappaport, who now heads Microsoft’s R&D Center in Tel Aviv. Rappaport, among other things, is a graduate of the elite IDF “Talpiot” program and also served in the Israeli military intelligence unit known as Unit 8200.

Unit 8200 is an elite unit of the Israeli Intelligence corps that is part of the IDF’s Directorate of Military Intelligence and is involved mainly in signal intelligence (i.e., surveillance), cyberwarfare and code decryption. It is often described as the Israeli equivalent of the NSA and Peter Roberts, senior research fellow at Britain’s Royal United Services Institute, characterized the unit in an interview with the Financial Times as “probably the foremost technical intelligence agency in the world and stand[ing] on a par with the NSA in everything except scale.”

Notably, the NSA and Unit 8200 have collaborated on projects such as the infamous Stuxnet virus as well as the Duqu malware, a sophisticated strain of which was used to spy on countries engaged in negotiating the nuclear deal with Iran. In addition, the NSA is known to work with veterans of Unit 8200 in the private sector, such as when the NSA hiredtwo Israeli companies, whose executives are linked to Unit 8200, to create backdoors to all the major U.S. telecommunications and major tech companies including Facebook, Microsoft and Google. The unit is also known for spying on civilians in the occupied Palestinian territories for “coercion purposes” — i.e., gathering info for blackmail — and also for spying on Palestinian-Americans via an intelligence sharing agreement with the NSA.

However, Microsoft’s connections to Unit 8200 go far beyond Adallom. Another example is Microsoft’s considerable investment in Illusive Networks, an Israeli cybersecurity firm created by Team8, in which Microsoft has also invested heavily. Team8’s CEO and co-founder is Nadav Zafrir, who used to lead Unit 8200, and two of the company’s three other co-founders are also veterans of Unit 8200. Former CEO of Google (now Alphabet), Eric Schmidt, is a major backer of Team8.

Team8 has cozied up to former NSA directors, with Zafrir giving presentations alongside former NSA director Keith Alexander, for example. Those efforts eventually culminated in Team8 hiring retired Admiral Mike Rogers, former director of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, as a “senior adviser.” “I’ve worked with the highly talented resources of Unit 8200 in the past and so when I had the opportunity to join Team8, I knew this was a rare and valued opportunity,” Rogers said of his hire. Team8 described the decision to hire Rogers as being “instrumental in helping strategize” Team8’s expansion in the United States.

Rogers’ hire by a firm headed by the former boss of a foreign military intelligence agency drew sharp criticism from veterans of the NSA. One of those ex-NSA employees — Jake Williams, a veteran of NSA’s Tailored Access Operations hacking unit — told CyberScoopthat “Rogers is not being brought into this role because of his technical experience …It’s purely because of his knowledge of classified operations and his ability to influence many in the U.S. government and private-sector contractors.”

In addition to Microsoft’s ties to Unit 8200 through its connections to Adallom, Illusive Networks and Team8, Microsoft is also developing direct ties with Israel’s military, with the IDF having adopted the company’s HoloLens technology. The IDF’s C2 Systems Department has been using a pair of HoloLens devices to adapt the technology for use in war for the past three years, a precursor to what is sure to be a lucrative military contract for Microsoft, considering that their HoloLens contract with the U.S. military was nearly half a billion dollars.

ElectionGuard a bloodless coup for the military-industrial complex

Following the 2016 election and the heavily promoted concerns about “Russian hackers” infiltrating election systems, federal agencies like the NSA have used that threat to lobby for greater control over American democracy. For instance, during a 2017 hearing then-NSA Director Adm. Mike Rogers stated:

IF WE DEFINE ELECTION INFRASTRUCTURE AS CRITICAL TO THE NATION AND WE ARE DIRECTED BY THE PRESIDENT OR THE SECRETARY, I CAN APPLY OUR CAPABILITIES IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHERS – BECAUSE WE WON’T BE THE ONLY ONES, THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, THE FBI – I CAN APPLY THOSE CAPABILITIES PROACTIVELY WITH SOME OF THE OWNERS OF THOSE SYSTEMS.”

With Rogers — who is now employed by the Microsoft-funded and Israeli military intelligence-connected company Team8 — having lobbied for the direct involvement of U.S. government agencies, including the NSA and DHS, in supervising elections, it seems likely that ElectionGuard will help enable those agencies to surveill U.S. elections with particular ease, especially given Microsoft’s past of behind-the-scenes collaboration with the NSA.

Given that ElectionGuard’s system as currently described is neither as “secure” nor as “verifiable” as Microsoft is claiming, it seems clear that the conflicts of interests of its developers, particularly their connections to the U.S. and Israeli militaries, are a recipe for disaster and tantamount to a takeover of the American election system by the military-industrial complex.

“The great irony, and tragedy, here,” according to election forensics analyst Jonathan Simon, “is that we could so easily go the opposite direction and quickly solve all the problems of election security if we got the computers out of the voting process and were willing to collectively invest the modicum of effort needed for humans to count votes observably in public as they once did. If democracy is not worth that effort, perhaps we don’t deserve it.”

Feature photo | Voters use electronic polling machines as they cast their votes early at the Franklin County Board of Elections, Oct. 31, 2018, in Columbus, Ohio. John Minchillo | AP

__________________________

Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism.


Featured Video: How Israel censors the Internet

An If Americans Knew video

From the exposé by Alison Weir – Numerous well funded, organized projects by and for Israel work to flood the Internet with pro-Israel propaganda, while blocking facts Israel dislikes. The projects utilize Israeli soldiers, students, American teens and others, and range from infiltrating Wikipedia to influencing YouTube. Some operate out of Jewish Community Centers in the U.S…


————————————————-

Jared Packs Unicorns and Rainbow s for Mideast Trip

 • MAY 30, 2019
 RSS  

JARED KUSHNER couldn’t stare down an uncompromising foe if his wife, Ivanka Trump, held his soft, lily-white hand throughout the ordeal.

Yet ridiculously, a May 22, McClatchy article claimed Mr. Kushner was fixing to “stare down uncompromising foes in fights over immigration and Middle East peace.”

Let us begin with our debutant’s Middle East peace plan, the thing his father-in-law calls “the deal of the century.”

The notion of Jared solving the Israeli-Palestinian vexation is laughable, perhaps the dumbest thing ever. You just know this is a vain Ivanka move to brand the region and add it to her CV. (Ivanka, to those who don’t know, is intent on riding to the presidency herself on her father’s coattails.)

The Arabs slated to partake in the Kushner summit, Bahraini, Saudi and Emirati participants, are likely laughing the hardest.

For one, the Arabs know that Ivanka is calling the shots—and that the president’s fashion-focused daughter is behind the branding of the sexually androgynous, intellectually inchoate production that is Jared Kushner. If you think that’s something Arabs respect, you don’t know Shiite from Shinola.

Wily Arabs are hip to White House dynamics. They know who’s running the West Wing and who to flatter. Some in the region have even given Donald Trump a dubious honorificAbu Ivanka al-Amriki. Being known as “father of Ivanka the American” is, of course, no honor in the muscular, manly Middle East.

The timing of the Kushner peace plan is especially asinine. For all the upheaval in the region, the Palestinian Problem has nevertheless dropped off the geopolitical radar as an urgent matter to resolve.

For better or for worse, the two sides are locked in a deadly, tightly choreographed dance. The Palestinians rise in frustration and fury; the Israelis respond with overwhelming force. The world then offers-up perfunctory sympathy for the Palestinians. Everybody moves on.

It’s just the way it is. The world has become desensitized to the plight of the Palestinians.

Take the Economist—a liberal, pro-Palestinian, most excellent weekly. Its editors cogitated but briefly over the Israeli army’s last use of excessive force against the M.O.P.E (Most Oppressed People Ever), concluding nonchalantly that, “Every state has a right to defend its borders.” “It is time for Palestinians to take up genuine non-violence.”

In other words, “Grow up, Palestinians. The stone-throwing was cute when your struggle was in its infancy.”

Understandably, the Palestinians will have no truck with the Trump administration.

Then there’s Bibi Netanyahu’s ingenious, Israel First tactics. You have to be a special kind of dumb—Jared and Ivanka dumb—to imagine you can present Bibi with a plan to fix his part of the world. The Israeli prime minister will make the right noises and will … have Jared for breakfast.

Netanyahu has been busy befriending “once hostile neighbors and has gained the respect of world leaders.” Like himself, his new friends (the murderous Saudi regime is among them) don’t seem to care much that Israel’s “supposedly temporary occupation [of 4.5 million Palestinians] has become permanent conquest.”

Don’t blame me for dishing Middle Eastern realpolitik. These are just the facts and the deductions therefrom.

By the Economist’s telling, Mr. Netanyahu’s strategy toward the Palestinians is a finely honed “anti-solutionism.” Netanyahu “has sought to convince Israelis that the conflict can be managed, if the right people are put in charge of managing it, and thus need not be solved.”

From experience, Netanyahu knows that an “anti-solutionism” puts his army and him in control, to better deliver on the security needs of the Israelis. This makes Bibi even more of a mystery to the self-aggrandizing Kushners. After all, they are not acting in America’s self-interest. A provincial leader who does just that is anathema to the mindset dominant in America.

Like him or not, the conservative, patriotic Bibi will not allow Jared Kushner to steer Israel in a radical direction. Instead, Bibi will likely let The American rattle on about radical change (which he, Jared, will not have to live through), and will quietly ignore him in favor of maintaining the safer status quo.

You see, the Israeli prime minister is a grizzled old warrior—and a true populist, the kind that builds walls to protect his people and passes laws to safeguard their ancient patrimony.

Netanyahu and his new Sunni partners will make polite noises and then shrug off this Middle-East plan with a hearty laugh and some good arak, behind Jared’s slender, sylphlike back.

As the Economist noted derisively—its writers, too, are radicals in the mold of Jared and Ivanka—Netanyahu is no radical. He is a reactionary nationalist. Temperamentally conservative,” and “wary of change,” as all true conservatives ought to be, Netanyahu “governs as if Israel needs no change.” The Israeli prime minister has even passed nation-state legislation consecrating Israel as the home of the Jewish people.

But by golly, Bibi will give the first-couple-in-waiting good hospitality—leading Ivanka and her poodle to “think” they succeeded in plastering their brand on the region. Then he’ll send Ivanka’s emissary packing, to be celebrated by his clueless American fans.

And the region will return to its old ways.

Bibi, moreover, reads his voters well. The appetite for the charade that are the Israeli-Palestinians peace talks has diminished. “The percentage of Israelis favoring talks with the Palestinians has dropped from over 70 percent to closer to 50 percent over the past decade. Among Mr. Netanyahu’s supporters it is 30 percent.”

In case you’re unfamiliar with Bibi’s base—supporters of Likud since the party’s inception—they are, “Voters from conservative religious and working-class backgrounds, Russian-speaking immigrants and Mizrahi Jews (who are descended from immigrants from the Arab world).” The political equivalent of Trump’s deplorables.

To sum, “should it ever to arrive,” Mr. and Mrs. Kushner’s peace plan “will be dead on arrival.”

Americans like Jared and Ivanka don’t know the past and show little respect for it. Netanyahu, however, understands history and what it portends for the future. “Because the Palestinian issue cannot be solved,” Bibi’s statecraft entails preparing his people for a reality they understand all too well:

“We will forever live by the sword.” Bibi’s words in 2015.

Let us wrap-up on a more mirthful note.

Here’s some stuff our oracular Mr. Jared has said about rainbows and unicorns in the Middle East:

“Progress could ‘look like a lot of different things.” “Success ‘can look like an agreement, it can look like a discussion, it could lead to closer cooperation, maybe resolve a couple of issues.”

Now that’s deep. Reality TV deep.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ilana Mercerhas been writing a weekly,paleolibertarian columnsince 1999. She is the author of Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa(2011)&The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed(June, 2016). She’s on Twitter,FacebookGabYouTube


BREAKING! America’s highest-ranking military officer wary of anti-Iran false flag

JCS Chair Dunford, responding to Northwoods/Sabrosky question, puts false flaggers on notice

WATCH THE VIDEO

“ARE THERE PEOPLE WHO MIGHT LIKE TO GET THE UNITED STATES TO DO SOMETHING? CERTAINLY, YOU CAN SEE THAT EVEN IN THE OPEN SOURCE WHERE THAT SPECULATION IS OUT THERE.” -Gen. Joseph Dunford

By Kevin BarrettVeterans Today Editor

It isn’t every day that America’s top military man gets a question referencing Dr. Alan “Israel Did 9/11” Sabrosky AND Operation Northwoods. And it’s even more unusual when he acknowledges that he knows about that stuff—and is on the lookout for a (presumably neocon-Zionist/Saudi) false flag to lure the US into war with Iran.

It happened yesterday at the Brookings Institution, where Gen. Joseph Dunford, USMC responded to a question from retired US Customs Special Agent and 9/11 truth supporter Karl Golovin by essentially giving Golovin (and, indirectly, Dunford’s fellow Marine officer Sabrosky) a thumbs up.  (Full C-Span video HERE—the exchange happens at  37:00 – 39:20.)

Golovin asked:

“My question concerns the potential for false flag terrorism leading us into war with Iran. As background, in 1962 your predecessor Lyman Lemnitzer prepared Operation Northwoods, presented to John Kennedy proposing various false flag attacks on US persons to be attributed to Cuba and used as a pretext for war with Cuba. More recently, Dr. Alan Sabrosky of the Army War College, and former Defense Minister of Germany Andreas Von Bulow have written credibly about aspects of false flag terrorism in the events of 9/11. My question is, today are there allies of the US that would like to see a conflict with Iran, the utter destruction of Iran, and would perpetrate a false flag event on US interests in order to cause that to happen?”

Gen. Dunford’s reply:

LOOK, I’M NOT GOING TO ANSWER THE QUESTION DIRECTLY. I DON’T KNOW WHAT OTHERS WANT. I WILL JUST TELL YOU THIS — I’M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF GOING TO WAR AND TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PROVIDING MILITARY ADVICE IN THAT REGARD VERY SERIOUSLY. I KNOW THE CONSEQUENCES OF GOING TO WAR FROM AN ECONOMIC AND MORE IMPORTANTLY HUMAN PERSPECTIVE. CAN ASSURE YOU THAT ANY MILITARY ADVICE THAT I WOULD PROVIDE WOULD BE CAREFULLY MEASURED BY CHECKING THE INTELLIGENCE MULTIPLE TIMES, ENSURING THE VERACITY OF INTELLIGENCE AND THEN MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR A RESPONSE TO WHATEVER THE PROVOCATION MAY BE, THAT IS APPROPRIATE, WHETHER IT IS IRAN OR ANY OTHER CONFLICT. ARE THERE PEOPLE WHO MIGHT LIKE TO GET THE UNITED STATES TO DO SOMETHING? CERTAINLY, YOU CAN SEE THAT EVEN IN THE OPEN SOURCE WHERE THAT SPECULATION IS OUT THEREI CAN GUARANTEE YOU, THAT IS NOT GOING TO INFORM THE MILITARY ADVICE I AM GOING TO PROVIDE AND IT IS NOT GOING TO INFORM MY PERSPECTIVE WHEN I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

Mentioning Alan “Israel did 9/11” Sabrosky’s name in the Q&A of a public event can be dangerous, as Jeremy Rothe-Kushel discovered during a Dennis Ross talk at the Kansas City Public Library. Apparently Gen. Joseph Dunford, unlike Dennis Ross, is not allergic to Sabrosky’s name.

Read “Alan ‘Israel Did 9/11’ Sabrosky: Most Censored Man in America

It seems that Gen. Dunford does not share the view of Patrick Clawson and other neocon-Zionists that a big anti-Iran false flag would be ideal for “crisis initiation.”

With John Bolton about to be tossed out of the White House on his mustache, Bibi Netanyahu unable to form a government, and Gen. Dunford telling the neocon false flaggers “not on MY watch,” it looks like the prospects for war on Iran are sinking straight toward the bottom of the Persian Gulf of Tonkin.


Saudi Arabia says firm Arab stand needed to deter Iran, Iraq demurs

King of Saudi Arabia, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud meets Tunisian President Beji Caid Essebsi (not seen) at Carthage Palace in Tunis, Tunisia on 29 March 2019. [Bandar Algaloud / Saudi Kingdom Council / Handout - Anadolu Agency]

King of Saudi Arabia, Salman Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud on 29 March 2019 [Bandar Algaloud/Saudi Kingdom Council/Anadolu Agency]

 

1
SHARES

Saudi Arabia’s king told an emergency Arab summit on Thursday that decisive action was needed to stop Iranian “escalations” in the region following attacks on Gulf oil assets, as American officials said a US military deployment had deterred Tehran, Reuters reports.

A Gulf Arab statement and a separate communique issued after the wider summit both supported the right of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to defend their interests after the attacks on oil pumping stations in the kingdom and tankers off the UAE.

But in a sign of regional tensions, Iraq, which has good ties with neighbouring Iran and Washington, said it objected to the Arab communique, which stated that any cooperation with Tehran should be based on “non-interference in other countries”.

READ: Saudi urges dealing with Iran with ‘force and firmness’

“The absence of a firm deterrent stance against Iranian behaviour is what led to the escalation we see today,” King Salman told the two late night consecutive meetings.

The ruler of the world’s top crude exporter said Shi’ite Iran’s development of nuclear and missile capabilities and its threatening of world oil supplies posed a risk to regional and global security.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Thursday that the attacks on the four vessels near a significant bunkering hub, just outside the Strait of Hormuz, were “efforts by Iranians to raise the price of crude oil around the world.”

Riyadh accused Tehran of ordering the drone strikes, which were claimed by Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi group. US national security adviser John Bolton said on Thursday that evidence of Iran’s being behind the tanker attacks would be presented to the UN Security Council as early as next week.

Tehran denies any involvement.

READ: Iraq’s neutrality in the midst of US-Iran tensions is crucial

Iraqi President Barham Salih, asking the gathering to support his country’s stability, said that rising tensions with Iran could spark a war if not managed well and voiced hope that Iran’s security would not be targeted.

Both Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have said they do not want war.

“The kingdom is keen to preserve the stability and security of the region, to spare it the scourge of war and to realise peace and stability,” King Salman said.

Tensions have risen between the United States and Iran after US President Donald Trump a year ago withdrew Washington from a 2015 international nuclear deal with Iran, re-imposed sanctions and boosted its military presence in the Gulf.

US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on 13 May 2019 in Washington, DC [Mark Wilson/Getty Images]

US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office in Washington, DC on 13 May 2019 [Mark Wilson/Getty Images]

Bolton has said that Iranian mines were “almost certainly” used in the tanker attacks. An Iranian official dismissed Bolton’s remarks as “a ludicrous claim.”

The Islamic Republic has said it would defend itself against any military or economic aggression. Iranian Vice President Eshaq Jahangiri has said Tehran was not allowed to pursue the development of nuclear weapons as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei banned it.

The final communique said regional stability required the establishment of an independent and sovereign Palestinian state along 1967 borders. In 1967 Israel captured Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem in a war with Arab states.

READ: How Saudi Arabia is losing the war in Yemen

US special envoy for Iran, Brian Hook, said on Thursday that a repositioning of US military assets in the region had succeeded in deterring Iran, but that the United States would respond with military force if its interests are targeted.

Last week the Pentagon announced the deployment of 900 additional troops to the region and extended the stay of 600 other service members, after speeding up the deployment of an aircraft carrier strike group and sending bombers and new Patriot missiles.

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi told the summit that this month’s attacks provided an impetus to renew discussions on joint Arab defence mechanisms.

The United States and the UAE, which hosts a US air base, on Wednesday activated a defence cooperation agreement signed earlier this year.

READ: Trump says Iran nuclear deal possible as sanctions bite

Gulf states have a joint defence force under the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), but the alliance has been fractured by a boycott imposed on Qatar by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and non-GCC Egypt since mid-2017.

The Gulf Arab communique, carried by Saudi state news agency SPA, said the six nations had discussed the GCC defence mechanism during their meeting.

Qatari premier Abdullah bin Nasser Al Thani, whose country hosts the most extensive US military base in the region, attended the summits, the most senior Qatari official to visit the kingdom since the embargo.


Fri May 31, 2019 06:25AM [Updated: Fri May 31, 2019 08:39AM ]
Protesters in Tehran burn an Israeli flag during International Quds Day rallies, May 31, 2019. (Photo by Tasnim)
Protesters in Tehran burn an Israeli flag during International Quds Day rallies, May 31, 2019. (Photo by Tasnim)

Iranians have taken to the streets in massive numbers to mark the International Qud Day after Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei called this year’s rallies more important than ever.

People in Tehran and other cities are flocking to main streets to support Palestinians who are facing the dangerous prospect of a sellout of their rights through a US plan called the “deal of the century”.

Demonstrators carried banners with slogans such as “Al-Quds is the eternal capital of Palestine” and “Death to America” as well as “No to the deal of the century”.

People in Tehran rally on streets to mark the International Quds Day, May 31, 2019. (Photo by Tasnim)

Similar rallies are planned across the world, including in many Muslim countries as well as in Europe and America, to show solidarity with the Palestinians and condemn Israeli atrocities and US policies.

In Iraq, television networks broadcast live footage from tens of thousands of people who were rallying in several cities to condemn “the deal of the century” and support the Palestinian people.

Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar on Thursday sent a grave warning to Israel ahead of Quds Day and used the opportunity to reject US President Donald Trump’s plan and a summit in Bahrain next month to promote it.

“Trump wants to sell al-Quds to the Zionists without paying a price,” Sinwar said. “I call him from here and say that I and the Palestinian people will be demonstrating along the [Gaza] fence in light of Quds Day in numbers that have not been seen before.”

Sinwar also warned to attack Tel Aviv and other cities with double the force if “the enemy dares to attack once again.”

“We will not sell al-Quds …We believe liberation of al-Quds will come soon,” he added.

The International Quds Day is a legacy of the late founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini, who designated the day in solidarity with the Palestinians.

Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, the International Quds Day has been marked worldwide on the last Friday of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.

Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner on Thursday met Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem al-Quds to drum up support for the conference in Bahrain.

The Trump administration seeks to use the Bahrain meeting to bring Arab states traditionally opposed to the Israeli occupation of Palestinians lands into line.

Sinwar warned, “Anyone who deals with the issue of al-Quds is an enemy to us, and we have no dialogue with him.”

“I call upon the leaders of the Arab countries – if you want to keep your seats, you have no choice but to choose our option, the option of liberating Palestine,” he added.

J.J.-Chabad-Lubavitch-Worldwide-Mafia
In London, England, the police have threatened to arrest anybody carrying an Hezbollah Flag in the protest this year,
(Many did last year). In Canada there is pressure like this
also, but I’m American and I got my Hezbollah Flag, and
the Right to Free Speech, so I’m waving my Hezbollah
Flag and nobody can stop me LOL HA HA HA
Fritz
Most of the Arab leaders are are dictators who only live on U.S. support like Iran’s Shah. The Wahabi Saudis and Emiratis are Kufars.

Boris Johnson to face court over ‘lies’ about UK’s £350 million-a-week cost of EU membership

Boris Johnson to face court over ‘lies’ about UK’s £350 million-a-week cost of EU membership
A UK judge has ordered the controversial MP Boris Johnson to appear in court over allegations the Brexiteer lied by repeatedly claiming that £350 million-a-week was being spent by London on EU membership.

Johnson, who is one of the favorites in a crowded field of candidates to replace Theresa May as the next Tory Party leader and British prime minister, made the statements during the 2016 EU referendum; that claim about UK spending was also infamously displayed on the side of a bus. The summons comes resulting from a private lawsuit brought by businessman Marcus Ball, who claims Johnson had purposely lied about the true costs of Britain’s EU membership.

ALSO ON RT.COMBoris Johnson under fire for saying £350mn NHS Brexit pledge was ‘underestimated’Ruling on the case on Wednesday, District Judge Margot Coleman said the allegations brought forward by Mr Bell are “unproven accusations” but that she was, however, satisfied that the suit was a “a proper case to issue the summons as requested.”

“This means the proposed defendant will be required to attend this court for a preliminary hearing, and the case will then be sent to the Crown Court for trial,” she added.

A date for Johnson’s appearance has yet to be set, however, if found guilty of misconduct in a public office, he could face a sentence of life in prison.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!


Top Jew Calls for Jeremy Corbyn to be “Sacrificed”

Diversity Macht Frei
May 30, 2019

The Board of Deputies of British (sic) Jews is the leading Jewish ethno-activist organisation in Britain. In fact it is the prototype of such organisations in the world, having been formed in 1760.

At an Elders of Zion – sorry Board of Deputies – meeting on 19 May, the former president of the BOD, Lionel Kopelowitz, called for Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the British Labour party, to be ‘sacrificed’.

The Times:

The word Corbyn is a very suitable one for him, after Corbyn in Hebrew is ‘korban’, which is a sacrifice. And I think we should sacrifice him for all the trouble that he has caused.

You might think these are words that could be uttered in jest. But listen to the bizarre note of truculence in his voice. This is someone who could do it for real.

As soon as he had said these words, current president Marie Van Der Zyl quickly warned her fellow Jews of a potential Goyim Knowing problem:

I’d just like to remind you that you are being live streamed. And before any more speakers I’m reminding all of you that you are being live-streamed!

Too late, dear! The Goyim Know!

Unfortunately Corbyn is no more an antisemite than I am a feminist. He is just a standard left-wing critic of Israel and the Jews have contrived completely bogus accusations against him for that reason.

They have now got the Equalities and Human Rights Commission to investigate the Labour party over its “antisemitism”. The EHRC will now effectively launch an Inquisition into the Labour party. Jews are salivating at the prospect.

The Commission will be able to compel testimony and access any evidence it requires. Whether by breaking non-disclosure agreements of former staff, or ordering the release of documents, emails and messages, we are very confident that they will find wrongdoing that needs to be put right.

We’re also confident that what we have submitted that has come to light so far will be just be the tip of the iceberg. So, I’d say to anyone within the Party who has been witness to institutional racism but has been concerned about coming forward because of political retribution: now is the time to do so.

The Chair of the EHRC is one David Isaac, Jew.

Its Chief Executive is one Rebecca Hilsenrath, Jewess.

The Jews have weaponised the bureaucracy to pursue their tribal agenda.

If anyone talks back to the Jews in a political party, and isn’t instantly persecuted for it, the Jew Crew will come to investigate, impound all your documents and interrogate all your staff under sub poena.

And not a single person even comments publicly on the fact that the people running this unaccountable quango are Jews. They are so cowed by Jewish power that they dare not even defend themselves against it. All they they can do is prostrate themselves and beg for mercy. The Labour party has announced that it will “fully cooperate” with the inquiry.

There is a certain poetic justice in this for Labour. They are the ones who endowed the EHRC with the extraordinary powers it now has in order to nobble the British National Party (BNP). After legal action by the EHRC, the BNP was forced to admit brown people as members. Labour are now Robespierres going to their own guillotine.

After this, I predict, the Jews at the EHRC will launch an investigation into the Conservative Party over “Islamophobia”. Why? Jews worry about their privileged status becoming too obvious. That’s one reason why they try and big up other minority-grievance-mongering organisations, to make Jewish Privilege seem like something more generic: Minority Privilege.

All British political parties will soon require kosher and halal certification. The prospect of a political solution to our current problems becomes ever more remote.


Labour Friends of Israel joins call for ban on ‘Israeli Apartheid Week’ events

GAZA – Operation Cast Lead by Tzipi Livni

 

The poster for Israeli Apartheid Week 2019
1.1K
SHARES

Westminster-based lobby group Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) has joined calls by other pro-Israel organisations for Israeli Apartheid Week events to be banned on British campuses.

In their latest newsletter, LFI urged its supporters to back “the campaign against Israel Apartheid Week”, describing the annual event was “a vicious slur against the world’s only Jewish state”.

Israeli Apartheid Week is marked every year with events around the world, especially on university campuses, where Palestinians and their allies draw attention to Israeli human rights violations.

“Please support the campaign against Israel Apartheid Week currently being run by our friends at the Israel Britain Alliance and We Believe in Israel,” LFI added

READ: Israel’s ‘Apartheid Road’ opens in West Bank, separating Palestinian and Jewish settlers

Israel Britain Alliance is a project of the Zionist Federation, while We Believe in Israel is a project of Israel advocacy organisation BICOM.

The newsletter contains a link for the censorship campaign, which refers to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, and asks why the UK government is allowing such events to take place.

“It’s because our lawmakers are too afraid and politically correct to ban hate speech”, the campaign continues, urging the sympathetic to “stand against hate”.

READ: Israel elections obscuring ‘growing apartheid’ in Palestine, professor claims

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
The Jewish Chronicle

JLM hires Deborah Lipstadt lawyer James Libson in Labour antisemitism case

James Libson, who was part of team that defended Holocaust historian, will represent organisationin in EHRC probe into party’s antisemitism

April 2000: Deborah Lipstadt (centre) celebrates her libel victory outside London's High Court against David Irving alongside James Libson (right), who was part of her legal team
April 2000: Deborah Lipstadt (centre) celebrates her libel victory outside London’s High Court against David Irving alongside James Libson (right), who was part of her legal team (Photo: Getty Images)

The Jewish Labour Movement has hired James Libson, the lawyer who was part of the team that defended Deborah Lipstadt against David Irving, to represent it in the Equalities and Human Rights Commission’s probe into Labour antisemitism.

JLM was one of the bodies that sparked the inquiry – only the second time the EHRC has investigated a party – and

Mr Libson was part of the Mishcon de Reya team, led by Anthony Julius, who defended Prof Lipstadt when Mr Irving sued her for calling him a Holocaust denier.

Her high-profile victory was turned into a film, Denial, in which Prof Lipstadt was played by Rachel Weiz and Mr Libson was played by Jack Lowden.

Announcing the decision to appoint Mr Libson on Wednesday, JLM urged Jewish Labour members to continue submitting evidence of antisemitism to them, donate to help its legal fight – which it said “will not be cheap” –  and encourage Constituency Labour Parties to publicly back JLM’s case.

“The Jewish Labour Movement – affiliated to the Party for 99 years – gathered clear evidence and put its case to EHRC as the Party has time and time again refused to respond to our requests, and those of the community, to put its own house in order,” it said.

“We have always said that this is a problem of leadership and culture, as well as policy and process. The EHRC must shine a bright light into the dark recess of the Party and its membership if Labour is able to truly call itself a anti-racist Party again.”

Jewish Labour Movement@JewishLabour

7. But we need your help… Pursuing this until the end will not be cheap and we need your help and the help of anyone who cares about the soul of our Labour Party to support our efforts. All of JLM’s income comes from our members and supporters. http://jewishlabour.uk/ehrcfund

—————————————————————————————————————————————–