The Elite Jews create the illness, then sell the Cure. They create Chaos & Terrorism, then sell the solution.

Zionism is NOT about a homeland for Jews - it's to establish the base of a One World Government, where the Jews tyrannically rule the goyim worldwide

If I converted to Buddhism, does that make me Chinese? If I converted to Hinduism, does that make me Indian? When Khazarians (Turks) converted to Judaism in 740 BC and stole the true Negro Hebrew identity, and turned them into slaves... did that make the counterfeit Jews Hebrew? Well, the Jew World Order seems to think so. They crucified Jesus Christ for exposing them.

The invention of the Muslim Terrorist by our Jewish Governments... to keep us in fear, and to justify raping the World, and slaughtering billions of innocent families in every country for power and control...for their 2 horned God Moloch.

Khazarian-Babylonian Mafia known as the JEW

Every Religion and Church has been infiltrated by the Jews. How do you know? ... if your Church has not discussed the below phrases by Christ... then it has been compromised.

Entertainment Lawyer: Heather O’Rourke Was Killed By Hollywood Pedophile Ring

Child actress Heather O'Rouke was killed by Hollywood pedophile ring

A prominent Hollywood entertainment lawyer claims that Poltergeist child star Heather O’Rourke was raped and murdered by Hollywood executives. 

Heather played the character Carol-Anna Freeling in all three of Steven Spielberg’s Poltergeist films. She died in 1988 at the age of 12 from intestinal stenosis – a severe bowel obstruction. In an interview with Hollywood gossip website Crazy Days & Nights, an entertainment lawyer claims that Heather was anally raped on the set of a TV show called ‘Rocky Road’ which led to her untimely death.

Humansarefree.com reports: Back in the mid-80’s was peak child molesting time in Hollywood. There was no internet. There were very very few mobile phones. Children came to the set where they were left alone by their parents.

For the next 8 hours they were subject to every kind of horrible thing you can imagine. Drugs were commonplace. They were used to try and get the kids to not be so hysterical when being assaulted.

Producers loved casting shows with kids and tweens. If someone pitched a show that involved a handful of tweens with a dozen tween extras per week, it would get a green light.

Even if the show was going to suck, and everyone knew it was going to suck, if you got the right pedo at a studio he would say yes just to come for the casting and taping of the pilot. As sad as it is to say, there were a lot of parents who told their kids to go off with the nice man in the suit and do what he says. It was a sick sick time.

It was just past the mid 80’s when a producer came up with the idea of a tween show that not only would feature a rotating cast of extras, but would make the studio a bunch of money because they would film quickly and not hire any adults.

Further, the faster they filmed, the more time they would have to molest all the kids that would be hanging around.

From the first day, it was the worst place on earth if you were a kid. The studio where the show was filmed also had several other shows being filmed there, most of which featured lots of children. Executives would drive over to Hollywood right before lunch and would stay at the studio for several hours each day.

Anyway, on this particular show, there was a special guest star. A very special guest star. Still not a tween, everyone knew who she was. Executives flocked to the studio that day to see her. She was first molested when she was 5 or 6 and had continued to be molested throughout her hit movies and also on a previous show.

One of the stars of the show who has spent her life bouncing in and out of rehab because of what she saw, and who was actually nominated for awards from the show, described the atmosphere that day.

“A bunch of f**king pigs. I had just turned 12 or 13. I was the same age as the actress coming in. Maybe a little older. We had been shooting for months and I was old news. They knew I would do what they wanted, but they always wanted someone new. This was someone new and someone they all knew. They had it set up like a peep show almost.

“She had finished shooting that morning and they brought her out on a stage. The stage was used most of the time for a game show that was taped there. That game show is still on today. I can’t watch it knowing what happened to her there. They brought her out and the front four rows of this theatre were filled with guys who were already rubbing themselves. The girl was wearing a bikini.

“The show took place around a beach just so they could make these girls wear next to nothing. They had her walk around under the lights. The lights were focused on her and she couldn’t really see out to the audience. She was squinting. It must have been blinding for her. They had her walk back and forth.

Then they had her start dancing. All of these guys were doing what another star at that same studio got busted for. This went on for about 20 minutes. Then three of the guys took her to a different area of the studio.”

The actress didn’t see what happened, but about 45 minutes later, one of those three guys came running out and needed a set medic. Apparently they had inserted something inside the girl and things were bad. The medic came and the ambulance came. The parents of the girl were told some crap story.

That crap story ended up killing the girl because the parents believed the executives. Two weeks later, the show finished shooting six episodes all at once and then everyone was sent on their way forever. No one wanted the kids around or any witnesses to what happened.

The comments section of this blind item went wild as did 4chan and voat.com/pizzagate. Let’s break this down as to why people think this was referring to Heather O’Rourke.

  • Heather was acting in the eighties and she was not yet a tween, had hit films and television appearances / this matches
  • ENT LAWYER claims this girl was first molested at 5 or 6, Heather was discovered by Steven Speilberg and had her first acting role at the age of 5 in a show called Fanatasy Island / this matches
  • The exact television show set that these events occured on can not be verified 100% but the clues seem to lead to “Rocky Road” as it was filmed in the same studio as jeopardy (which is still running today) and Pewee Herman (who is alluded to for being busted masturbating in a theater) /this matches or at least makes sense
  • A medic needed to be called because something had been instered into the girl which ended up eventually killing her / this could match as Heather died of bowel problems

The fact that this poor girl died at such a young age is already heartbreaking but if there is any credibility to these claims it seems at least possible that some foul play was involved in her death.

The claims made by Corey Feldman and Corey Haim and countless others about pedophiles being rife in Hollywood match up so well with all the gossip and whispers that are floating around they are becoming hard to ignore.

Some have even speculated that Steven Spielberg could be implicated, as mentioned already he discovered her and has worked with countless child actors over the years including Corey Feldman and Drew Barrymore who has a sordid Hollywood Youth.

There have also been wild speculations and accusations aimed at Charlie Sheen. In his divorce proceedings his now ex-wife claimed that she caught him looking at porn of underage children:

I am on the fence about all of this, the evidence seems to be getting stronger everyday that something organized and nefarious is afoot in Hollywood.

I can understand why victims would be afraid to come forward but I hope for the sake of those currently suffering abuse in the industry that more and more people will start coming forward so these scumbags can be thrown in jail to rot.

Source Article from http://yournewswire.com/heather-orourke-killed-hollywood-pedophile-ring/

Despite Warnings From Russia, US & Japan Hold Massive Military Drill Aimed At North Korea

The US and Japan held joint exercises that have been described as one of the largest military drills to date aimed at North Korea.

Russia warned that the exercises would “increase tension” with North Korea.

On Tuesday Japan’s Air Self Defence Force (ASDF) confirmed that four Japanese F-15 fighters held drills with American B1-B bombers, F-35 stealth fighters and F-18 combat jets above the East China Sea, south of the Korean peninsula.

RT reports: Described as among the largest joint exercises of its kind to date, the drill included American aircraft stationed in Guam and Japan.

“The drill was meant to bolster joint operations and raise combat skills,” the ASDF said in a statement, as cited by Reuters.

On Monday, Russian military chief General Valery Gerasimov warned Japan that participating in military exercises with the United States around the Korean Peninsula could escalate regional tensions with North Korea.

During his visit to Tokyo, Gerasimov told Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera that military drills aimed at pressuring Pyongyang to abandon missile testing could “increase tension and bring instability.” “We believe that the issue should be resolved only through political and diplomatic means,” said Gerasimov, as quoted by Russian media.

Washington, Seoul and Tokyo began joint “missile tracking” drills on Monday. The new round of military exercises comes just days after the US and its allies concluded massive air maneuvers over the Korean Peninsula.

Moscow and Beijing have advocated for a “double freeze” agreement, in which North Korea would halt missile testing in exchange for the US curtailing military drills in the region.

“These exercises fuel the flames of an already existing conflict where we are having hundreds of military planes fly along the border with North Korea, this is particularly dangerous. It is really necessary to look seriously at the offer of freezing these military exercises, freezing this nuclear program and engaging in dialogue, something that we have not just seen the North Koreans and Washington getting together on,” author and human rights attorney Eric Sirotkin told RT on Monday.

Washington has not changed its hardline stance on North Korea’s nuclear program and missile testing. The US military is reportedly in talks with South Korea on the timing of large-scale annual military exercises that would likely coincide with next year’s Winter Olympics in PyeongChang. However, in an uncharacteristic move towards de-escalation, Washington and Seoul are considering delaying the joint military drills until after the winter games in February in a bid to reduce tensions with North Korea, according to separate reports by Bloomberg and the Financial Times.

Source Article from http://yournewswire.com/despite-warnings-from-russia-us-japan-hold-massive-military-drill-aimed-at-north-korea/

Racist Lieberman says Arab MKs ‘are war criminals’

Israeli Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman accused lawmakers from Joint Arab List of being “war criminals” after proposing bill disclosing crimes of Israeli governments against Palestinians.

The Joint Arab List Introduced a no-confidence motions that criticise the war crimes of the crazy policy of the Israeli government against the Palestinians.

“The government is criminal.” member of the Joint Arab List MK Hanin Zoabi said. “The prime minister should be taken to the International Criminal Court at The Hague because he is a war criminal.”

She added: “In this country [Israel], evil is the name of the game. It is an accepted norm that has always characterised policy. Occupation is always forceful, violent, illegitimate and the basis for war crimes.”

Responding to the motion, Lieberman said: “Those who sit here are war criminals. The entire Joint Arab List are war criminals!”

Lieberman then accused members of the Joint Arab List of “taking advantage of the weaknesses and advantages of a democratic state to destroy us from within.”

On Sunday, Lieberman said that Israeli residents of the predominantly Arab area of Wadi Ara  and Um al-Fahm “do not belong in the state of Israel” and urged the Israeli public to boycott them.

He asked: “Are they citizens of Israel? Do I have to be the sucker that pays their social security? We are a bunch of suckers. We give them 14 billion shekels [$4 billion]. To me, they are not legitimate citizens.”

All five of the proposed no-confidence motions submitted by the Joint Arab List were rejected during the plenum session.

Source Article from http://daysofpalestine.com/post/10578/racist-lieberman-says-arab-mks-‘are-war-criminals’

Israel strikes Gaza, kills woman and abducts 32 men in West Bank

Israeli occupation forces launched airstrike on Gaza Strip, causing seven injuries and raided occupied West Bank, killed woman and abducted 32 men, including Hamas MP.

Palestinian and Israeli sources said that the Israeli occupation forces carried out an airstrike on the city of Khan Younis in the south of the Gaza Strip.

Medical sources said that the strike caused seven injuries, including three in serious wounds. They are receiving treatment in Nasser Hospital in the city.

Meanwhile, the Israeli occupation forces raided several areas across the occupied West Bank and broke into the Palestinians homes.

The Israeli occupation forces broke into the Palestinian houses Al-Zubaidat Neighbourhood in Jordan Valley. A Palestinian woman opened her door to see what is going on and when she saw the Israeli occupation forces abducting Palestinians, she immediately collapsed and died.

Palestinian medical sources identified the woman as Hamda al-Zbaidat, 60 years old.

At the same time, the Israeli occupation forces abducted 32 Palestinians, including MPs and former prisoners over their claimed participation or promoting the ongoing protests against the US President Donal Trump’s recognition that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital.

MP Sheikh Hassan Yousef, a Hamas leader in the West Bank and one of the group’s founding members, was accused by the Israeli Shin Bet that he was involved in promoting and advancing Hamas’s activities in the West Bank.”

Yousef was recently released from administrative detention, and has been arrested many times in recent years. Earlier this week, he called for rejecting Trump’s recognition.

Source Article from http://daysofpalestine.com/post/10577/israel-strikes-gaza-kills-woman-and-abducts-32-men-in-west-bank

Trump Serves The War Gods

Trump Serves The War Gods

Brother Nathanael Channel, BroVids

Trump Serves The War Gods
December 12, 2017 ©

Watch ‘EU-Censor-Free!’ HERE!


MORE: Trump’s Jews And Generals Here

Hiding A Military Dictatorship Here

An America-First Syria Policy Here

Trump’s Afghan Folly Here

America’s Two Minutes Of Hate Here


Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!
Br Nathanael Fnd Is Tax Exempt/EIN 27-2983459

Online donation system by ClickandPledge

Donate Via Network For Good

Support +BN On Patreon

Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, POB 547, Priest River, ID 83856
E-mail: brothernathanaelfoundation([at])yahoo[dot]com

Scroll Down For Comments

Send this article/post as a PDF attachment to PDF | PDF Creator | PDF Converter

Brother Nathanael @ December 12, 2017

Source Article from http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=1255

IsraelGate: The Arrogance of Israeli Power in the United States

By Philip Giraldi

The revelation that the Trump transition team colluded with Israel to sabotage a foreign policy initiative by the Obama White House made the news, sort of, when the story broke at the end of November. But it has since died, pushed down by the relentless pressure in the media to “disappear” all things critical of Israel or its behavior.

Thanks to the ongoing investigation of Russiagate by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, we Americans have learned that prior to President Donald Trump’s inauguration, some of his closest advisers responded to Israeli solicitation to derail a United Nations vote on illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. The effort to help Israel was implemented behind the scenes and in opposition to the official U.S. foreign policy.

Possible collusion with a foreign state has produced an avalanche of negative press coverage and congressional baying for blood related to Moscow and its President Vladimir Putin but similar action on the part of Israel has produced little to nothing in terms of a response from the Fourth Estate and political class.

Perhaps not too surprising, the story has actually taken a different turn, producing some opinion pieces, mostly from American Jews, insisting that Jared Kushner, the presidential son-in-law who was behind the effort, did the right thing because it was done “for Israel.” It is a sure sign of the invulnerability of those exercising Jewish power in the United States that something very close to treason involving a foreign country can be applauded with impunity. This is in spite of the fact that successful attempts to bury the story and even to justify what was done inevitably raises the issue of “dual loyalty” on the part of some American Jews who clearly see Israel as something that has to be protected and cherished even when it means doing serious damage to the American people and U.S. national interests.

One of the most illustrative opinion pieces written by an “Israel firster” appeared recently in Forward, America’s leading Jewish news and information website. It was entitled “Jared Kushner Was Right To ‘Collude’ with Russia – because he did it for Israel” before it was changed in the online edition to “Was Kushner doing the right thing?” The author, Daniel Kohn, lives in San Diego California. The article is particularly interesting as it makes a grotesque convoluted effort to not only justify what took place but also to sing the praises of Israel and all its works.

The extent to which the op-ed is characteristic of American-Jewish thinking regarding Israel is, of course, difficult to estimate but I would suspect that most Jews in the U.S., who are generally self-described progressives, would find much of it rather dubious, though many would be reluctant to openly criticize or counter the arguments being made for fear of ostracism by their community.

Kohn constructs a straw man around the fact that previous incoming presidential administrations have communicated with foreign governments during their transition periods. This is certainly true and even sensible. But, at the same time, meeting representatives of other countries cannot be allowed to undercut the policies being pursued by the White House team that is actually still in power. In this case, President Barack Obama had made clear that his opposition to the Israeli settlement expansion would be expressed through U.S. abstention on a United Nations Security Council vote condemning such activity.

In response, the government of Israel asked Jared Kushner to use Trump’s potential leverage to bring about a veto or delay in the resolution. Kushner clearly approached his task with some zeal, instructing incoming National Security Adviser Mike Flynn to contact the U.N. delegations of the countries on the Security Council to do just that, undercutting what Obama was doing. That is how the phone call from Flynn to Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak came about.

Kohn also critiques the applicability of the Logan Act, which blocks American citizens from negotiating with foreign governments on behalf of the United States by claiming that it “would likely not be a successful litigation path.” He argues that Kushner was “already acting in an official capacity,” which is flat out untrue as he had no official status. If Kushner had in fact been an honest broker he would have gone through the State Department, but he was instead working covertly to subvert a policy being pursued by the legally-in-power President of the United States. There is no other way to look at it.

Finally, Kohn argues that the U.N. Resolution 2334 that was approved in spite of Flynn’s call, gives the Palestinians both “more leverage” and “moral authority” in any future negotiations with the Israelis. He sees this as a bad thing, that Kushner was therefore rightly “pursuing a moral agenda that would help Israel’s security.” This is really the crux of the matter as Kohn sees the Middle East in very simple terms: Israeli dominance is a good thing, enabling Netanyahu to dictate both the pace and consequences arising from the endless peace talks that only continue to sustain land thefts and human rights violations by a powerful Jews in dealing with virtually powerless Arabs. That is just the way Kohn and the Israelis want things to be, and, unfortunately President Donald Trump has now made clear that he endorses “that reality.”

There are altogether too many American Jews like Daniel Kohn who reflexively think as he does. Israelis are cheering in Jerusalem over Donald Trump’s surrender to them over the location of their capital, but real Americans should be mourning. The arrogance of Jewish power in the United States, exemplified by Kushner in regards to the United Nations and more recently concerning Jerusalem, means that U.S. citizens will be less secure when they travel, American businesses will have to think twice when seeking overseas markets, and diplomats and soldiers working in foreign embassies and military bases will become targets. If there is an actual positive American interest concealed somewhere in the packages of concessions to Israel, I certainly cannot find it.

This article originally appeared on American Herald Tribune.

Source Article from http://www.renegadetribune.com/israelgate-arrogance-israeli-power-united-states/

Food Insecurity in Silicon Valley

Food Insecurity in Silicon Valley

December 12th, 2017

Via: Guardian:

In a region famed for its foodie culture, where the well-heeled can dine on gold-flecked steaks, $500 tasting menus and $29 loaves of bread, hunger is alarmingly widespread, according to a new study shared exclusively with the Guardian.

One in four people in Silicon Valley are at risk of hunger, researchers at the Second Harvest food bank have found. Using hundreds of community interviews and data modeling, a new study suggests that 26.8% of the population – almost 720,000 people – qualify as “food insecure� based on risk factors such as missing meals, relying on food banks or food stamps, borrowing money for food, or neglecting bills and rent in order to buy groceries. Nearly a quarter are families with children.

“We call it the Silicon Valley paradox,� says Steve Brennan, the food bank’s marketing director. “As the economy gets better we seem to be serving more people.� Since the recession, Second Harvest has seen demand spike by 46%.




Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Source Article from http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=52098

‘Here’s How to Shut Down the Internet: Snip Undersea Fiber-Optic Cables’

‘Here’s How to Shut Down the Internet: Snip Undersea Fiber-Optic Cables’

December 12th, 2017

Via: McClatchy:

Hundreds of thousands of miles of fiber-optic cable lay on the ocean floors, a crucial part of the global internet’s backbone, and only rarely do ship anchors, undersea landslides or saboteurs disrupt them.

Still, a few voices now call for stronger global mechanisms and even military action to protect the cables against future malicious activity by states, saboteurs or extremists.

“The infrastructure that underpins the internet – these undersea cables – are clearly vulnerable,� said Rishi Sunak, a British member of Parliament and champion of more vigorous action to protect submarine networks. “They underpin pretty much everything that we do.�

Undersea cables conduct nearly 97 percent of all global communications, and every day an estimated $10 trillion in financial transfers and vast amounts of data pass through the seabed routes. Satellites, once crucial but now limited in speed and bandwidth, handle only a tiny percentage of global communications.




Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Source Article from http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=52096

Alabama Senate Election: Doug Jones Wins in Major Upset, Roy Moore Won’t Yet Concede

Democrat Doug Jones has pulled off a major upset in Alabama by defeating Republican Roy Moore in Tuesday’s special election, becoming the first Democrat to win election to the Senate from the deeply conservative state in 25 years.

“We have come so far and the people of Alabama have spoken,” Jones said during a victory speech in Birmingham late Tuesday.

But in a late-night speech to supporters, Moore refused to concede. Moore told the crowd that when the “vote is this close…it’s not over.”

With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Jones had 49.9 percent to Moore’s 48.4 percent.

Moore said the campaign was looking into the state’s “recount provision.” Under Alabama law, a mandatory recount takes place if a candidate wins by a half percent or less.

“We also know that God is always in control,” he said.

Other Republicans, though, already accepted the outcome. In a tweet, President Trump congratulated Jones on his “hard fought victory.”

“The write-in votes played a very big factor, but a win is a win,” Trump said. “The people of Alabama are great, and the Republicans will have another shot at this seat in a very short period of time. It never ends!”

A Democrat winning the special election for the seat to replace Attorney General Jeff Sessions was seen as just a remote possibility several months ago.

But Jones, a Birmingham attorney famous for prosecuting the KKK, caught a break after Moore was overwhelmed in recent weeks with multiple allegations of past sexual misconduct. Moore denied the accusations throughout the race.

Moore, the former chief justice of Alabama’s Supreme Court, has faced multiple allegations he pursued romantic relationships with teenage girls while he was in his thirties — accusations that have dramatically shaken up the race. He has denied the claims.

The Fox News Voter Analysis, a new polling technique Fox News is testing to improve coverage, indicated 51 percent of voters on Tuesday believed the accusations against Moore.

The analysis also showed that 59 percent of voters thought Jones has strong moral character, while 57 percent said Moore doesn’t.

The dramatic Democratic win cuts the GOP’s Senate majority from 52 to 51, further dimming Republican hopes of enacting major legislation backed by President Trump. Jones likely won’t be seated in Congress until January.

Because he is filling the rest of Sessions’ term, Jones will not serve a full six year Senate term. The seat will be up for re-election again in 2020.

Earlier in the day, Trump, who endorsed Moore even as other top Republicans in Washington called on the nominee to drop out of the race, on Tuesday reiterated his support by arguing Moore would vote for his agenda in Congress.

“The people of Alabama will do the right thing… Roy Moore will always vote with us,” the president tweeted.

Trump painted Jones as a liberal “puppet” of Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.

“Doug Jones is Pro-Abortion, weak on Crime, Military and Illegal Immigration, Bad for Gun Owners and Veterans and against the WALL,” Trump tweeted.

Trump won 62 percent of Alabama’s vote in the 2016 presidential race.

Most of the attention in the race, though, centered on Moore. A favorite of religious conservative voters, he has a colorful political history that has both fueled and complicated his rise in Alabama.

He first got national attention in the 1990s as a county judge when he hung a wooden Ten Commandments plaque on the wall of his courtroom.


Source Article from https://redice.tv/news/alabama-senate-election-doug-jones-wins-in-major-upset-roy-moore-wont-yet-concede

House Approves Concealed-Carry Reciprocity, Gun Bill Faces Challenge in Senate

On Wednesday 6 December 2017 House Republicans voted in favor of making concealed-carry permits valid across state lines, scoring a major victory for gun-rights supporters.

But similar Senate legislation still faces an uncertain future, with top Democrats and other gun-control advocates rallying in opposition on Capitol Hill.

The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act passed 231-198 in the GOP-controlled House, with six Democrats voting in support.

“For the millions of law-abiding citizens who lawfully carry concealed to protect themselves, for conservatives who want to strengthen our Second Amendment rights, and for the overwhelming majority of Americans who support concealed carry reciprocity, Christmas came early,” Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., the bill’s sponsor, reacted.

Hudson had tried unsuccessfully for years to pass such legislation, which he says simply attempts to clarify the patchwork of state laws that confuse citizens who might unwittingly be arrested while going from state to state.

The three-term congressman has garnered strong support for his bipartisan legislation — including 213 co-sponsors as well as 24 state attorneys general and the National Rifle Association.

“Despite scare tactics by the bill’s opponents, concealed-carry licensees as a group have proven to be more law-abiding than the general population and even the police,” the NRA said before balloting. “We are on the eve of passing the most expansive piece of self-defense legislation in the history of Congress.”

New York Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler said at a rally outside House chambers, that Hudson’s bill represented “a gift to the gun lobby.”

Another critic is Jane Dougherty, whose sister, a teacher, was killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. She said, “This bill would weaken laws that I have worked hard for.”

Those attending the rally continued to make the argument that the bill would put guns in the hands of criminals, and suggested that those from states with loose concealed-carry laws would be able to exercise those privileges in places like New York City that have stricter requirements.

“When I go to New York, I have to follow New York’s laws,” Hudson recently told “Fox News @ Night.” He also maintains that the bill in no way softens background checks.

Those at the rally also contended that the House bill was combined with so-called “Fix NICS” legislation so it could pass. The reciprocity bill includes efforts to create “maximum coordination” in states providing the federal government with mental health records and other information for FBI gun background checks.

The Fix NICS Act of 2017 is a bill that applies penalties to government agencies for not reporting to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

“They are combining these to pieces of legislation together because they know the conceal carry (bill) is extremely unpopular,” said Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy. Murphy praised Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican who sponsors the Senate version of the concealed-carry legislation, for keeping the measures separate.

Gun-control advocates are also reportedly getting $25 million from ex-New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, through his Everytown for Gun Safety group, to block the reciprocity bill.

Cornyn’s bill is now in his chamber’s Judiciary Committee.

In 2013, Cornyn got support for his bill from 13 Democrats, including seven who are still in the Senate. He would need their support and more to pass the measure with a 60-vote majority, considering Republicans have 52 senators in the chamber.


Source Article from https://redice.tv/news/house-approves-concealed-carry-reciprocity-gun-bill-faces-challenge-in-senate

Big Media’s Sad and Extremely Horrible Week

Newspapermen were rarely whiners. Whining became fashionable only after “journalists” overran newsrooms. The best newspapermen, so the folk wisdom went, were Southerners, Jews and the Irish.

Southerners loved the words and the occasions to tell stories, the Jews for the opportunity to do public good, and the Irish for the bottle frequently slipped into the bottom desk drawer by boosters, lobbyists, public-relations flacks and others up to no particular good.

Such an irreverent formulation was enough to offend everybody, but in the old days no one took offense because everybody knew that nobody would particularly care if anybody did. What a hard, cruel, cold life we all led, with welcome irreverence an only consolation. It was pounded into the heads of every reporter, by an editor highly trained in head-pounding, to be skeptical of everything anyone (especially a lawyer) told them — in the famous instructions to reporters in Chicago newsrooms: “If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out.”

But times change, and only occasionally for the better. The Columbia Journalism Review, published in that citadel of journalists educated to be house-broken, correct in politics and steeped in the grand mission of “improving” readers, relieved itself this week of the sad story of “journalism’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week.” The recital was enough to break the hardest heart.

The Review set out a refresher of everything that went wrong, and it was quite a list:

Brian Ross’ disaster of a bombshell report that Michael Flynn was prepared to testify that he had been instructed by candidate Donald Trump to open contacts with Russian officials eager to meddle in the election. Later that day, Mr. Ross corrected himself, conceding that it was shortly after the election that the directive was issued. Big difference. He was taken off the beat for four weeks and the president will be off-limits to him.

Reuters and Bloomberg had to correct their dispatches that special counsel Robert Mueller had subpoenaed President Trump’s personal bank records after The Wall Street Journal reported the subpoenas were for “people or entities affiliated” with the president. Not quite the same thing.

CNN, CBS, and MSNBC all breathlessly reported they had discovered an email that proved the Trump campaign got an advance look at emails hacked by WikiLeaks. The story fell apart when it “emerged,” as the London papers typically put it, that the networks got the date of the email wrong, and it was old fake news when the president first saw it.

Mr. Trump, like all wise presidents, regards the press as an adversary if not an actual enemy, and he’s naturally eager to pounce on anything that smells, even faintly, of “fake news.” So he had a wonderful, terrific, very good, fantastic week. He heard hardly a discouraging word all week. By any definition, his week was yuuuuuuge.

Reporters and editors, like everyone else, make mistakes and when the best ones make them they’re obliged to correct them, explain what happened if they can, and move on. But sometimes the mistakes are not really mistakes, but failed attempts to get away with fudging the facts to make a point. The public, which is not as thick as some reporters imagine, notices when mistakes always seem to run to the left. A large part of the public has been persuaded that the media, which is what was once called the press, just can’t get over the results of the 2016 election, and is out to get Donald Trump by any means necessary.

The corrections, reflections, and over-the-top hand-wringing are set out now in everyone’s eye, thanks to a media dishing it out to everyone with a smartphone or a laptop. It’s often not very pretty.

Roy Moore, like Donald Trump, has been established in the media as fair game for piling on. It’s not that he might not invite piling on, but there are rules in the etiquette of piling on. You have to get it approximately right. When an accuser of Mr. Moore presented her high-school yearbook, inscribed with what appeared to be an inappropriate mash note written by him, the mainstream reporters took Gloria Allred’s word for it that the inscription had not been trifled with. She refused to submit it to a handwriting expert.

Several days later, Mzz Allred and her client conceded that well, maybe it had been tweaked a little, with emendations — all very helpful, naturally — and “improvements.” Mzz Allred is a distinguished lawyer, of course, but she was apparently indisposed on the day professors at not one but two law schools lectured the class on the inadvisability of trifling with evidence. Doctored evidence is hard to get past a judge.

The hand-wringers in the newsrooms, complaining that nobody loves them anymore, should worry less about what their critics say about them and spend more time learning their craft. An editor steeped in the art of head-pounding would have told them that.


Source Article from https://redice.tv/news/big-medias-sad-and-extremely-horrible-week

‘Minority Report’ Artificial Intelligence Machine Can Identify 2 Billion People in Seconds

Yitu Technology has made an AI algorithm that can connect to millions of surveillance cameras and instantly recognise people.

The company – based in Shanghai, China – developed Dragonfly Eye to scan through millions of photographs that have been logged in the country’s national database.

This means it has a collection of 1.8 billion photos on file, including visitors to the country and those taken at ports and airports.

It may also have access to the photos of every one of Hong Kong’s identity card holders, although Yitu has refused to confirm this.

The cutting-edge technology is now being used to track down criminals, which has been hugely successful.

“Our machines can very easily recognise you among at least 2 billion people in a matter of seconds,” Yitu chief executive and co-founder, Zhu Long, told the South China Morning Post.

“Which would have been unbelievable just three years ago.”

The first day Dragonfly Eye was put into service survielling Shanghai’s Metro, it was able to track a criminal and send police to his exact location.

A further 567 suspected criminals were nabbed on the city’s subway system.

Zhu continued: “Let’s say that we live in Shanghai, a city of 24 million people.

“It’s challenging for the government to police such a large population. And it would be impossible without technology. Even when we have many cameras installed, it’s a hard task.

“You can’t watch all the videos, and doing a search is very time-consuming and requires too many resources to get meaningful results from such a huge amount of data. But artificial intelligence can do it easily, and by using existing infrastructure.”

And the future of the Dragonfly technology doesn’t stop at catching criminals.

It is thought it could be used to identify people at ATM machines in the future, making carrying a bank card a thing of the past.

He added: “People waste time discussing whether it’s all hype or the real thing, but facial recognition already shows how real it can get. In 2015, AI had already beaten humans in face-verification tasks.

“Our algorithm is more accurate than customs officials at telling whether two images show the same person. It can even find a subject among millions of others using a 25 or 30-year-old image.

“And in the past two years, the performance of machines has increased by 1,000 times.”



Source Article from https://redice.tv/news/minority-report-artificial-intelligence-machine-can-identify-2-billion-people-in-seconds

Viral Video of Emaciated Polar Bear May Not Be What It Seems

When Leo Ikakhik saw this weekend’s viral video of an emaciated polar bear rummaging through the garbage in search of food, he wasn’t shocked.

“I wasn’t totally surprised. These things happen,” the Nunavut polar bear monitor told As It Happens host Carol Off. “Mother Nature is going to do part of that. You know, it’s just part of the cycle.”

Ikakhik has been monitoring polar bear activity in and around Arviat, a small community on the western shore of Hudson Bay, since 2010, working with organizations like the World Wildlife Federation to keep the creatures away from human populations and reduce polar bear deaths.

“Everybody probably was shocked to see a really skinny bear, but this is not my first time seeing something like this.”

In the clip, an emaciated bear, bones visible through its yellowing fur, struggles to walk as it searches for food in an abandoned fishing camp on Somerset Island, near Baffin Island in Nunavut.

It was shot in July by National Geographic photojournalist Paul Nicklen for his conservation organization SeaLegacy, which runs regular expeditions in the North to document the effects of climate change.

“When the animal first got up and we could see that he was actually in the late stages of starvation,” SeaLegacy co-founder Cristina Mittermeier told As It Happens on Friday.

“All of our team was in tears and feeling completely helpless to do anything about it except to roll our cameras and share it with the world.”

Mittermeier said that while SeaLegacy could not be sure what caused this particular polar bear’s condition, the group strongly suspects melting sea ice caused by climate change is to blame.

But Ikakhik isn’t convinced.

Instead, he suspects the creature was likely sick or recovering from an old injury that left it unable to hunt.

He said he sees healthy and well-fed polar bears in the Arctic all the time, but some are simply unlucky.

For example, he said he recently came across a bear with a broken paw that couldn’t hunt, and locals had to put it down.

“Since I’m from the North, I wouldn’t really fall for the video,” he said. 

“I wouldn’t really blame the climate change. It’s just part of the animal, what they go through.”

He’s not the only one speaking out about the video.

After As It Happens aired its interview with Mittermeier, several listeners from the North contacted the show to object to using one dramatic video clip to illustrate the wider issue of climate change without consulting locals. 

Others questioned the timing of the video’s release, noting it was filmed during the region’s snowless summer months, but posted online in December.

Ikakhik said he’s not denying the existence of climate change or its effect on the North, but he takes issue with one piece of footage being used to paint a bigger picture about wildlife in the North.

“These things happen,” he said.


Source Article from https://redice.tv/news/viral-video-of-emaciated-polar-bear-may-not-be-what-it-seems

Iran to seal deal with Russia-led trade bloc soon

Press TV- Iran says it expects the formalities over its membership to the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) – a regional trade bloc led by Russia – would be finalized soon and an agreement with the Union’s member states would be signed accordingly.  

Iran’s media quoted a trade official as saying that the agreement with the EEU would be signed by the presidents of all member countries.

Behrouz Hassanolfat, the director of Europe and Americas Department of Iran’s Trade Promotion Organization, was quoted by IRNA news agency as saying that the Islamic Republic expected its membership to the Union to become effective from as early as February 2018.

The EEU is an economic union of former Soviet states including Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia and Russia which leads it. The Union is meant to guarantee free transit of goods, services, capital and workers among member states.

The bloc which began functioning on 1 January 2015 is being considered as a major economic force to challenge the might of the European Union and the US.

The EEU is a single market comprising Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia that was set up in 2015.

The Union had already announced that it would sign a membership deal with Iran before the end of 2017.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Hassanolfat said Iran’s membership to the EEU would have numerous advantages for the country specifically given that it can significantly facilitate trade with the country’s northern neighbors.

The official added that countries which become members to the EEU would no longer have to pay certain tariffs and would also be provided with easier customs regulations to take their commodities across borders.

Hassanolfat added that Iran and the EEU had already agreed to facilitate trade on a certain list of goods, indicating that the list could later expand to all Iranian goods exported to the Union.

The EEU’s prime ministers resolved in March to make talks with Tehran a priority, scenting an opportunity to expand beyond the bloc’s combined market of 183 million people.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin said last August that Moscow wanted Iran to join the EEU – a move that was seen as crucial in bringing the two countries closer in their plans to form a strategic partnership.

Putin emphasized that a research had already started overt the possibility of creating a free-trade zone between Iran and the EEU.

“Iran is Russia’s longtime partner. We believe that bilateral relations will benefit from the reduction of tensions around Iran following the comprehensive agreement on the Iranian nuclear program,” Putin was quoted by the media as saying.

Source Article from http://theiranproject.com/blog/2017/12/13/iran-seal-deal-russia-led-trade-bloc-soon/

Iranian students rally against Trump’s decision on Quds

IRNA – Scores of students in Tehran protested the controversial decision by the US president on relocating the country’s embassy in to al-Quds (Jerusalem) to recognize the holy city as the capital of the Zionist regime of Israel.

The students, on behalf of all Iranian students, on Wednesday gathered in front of the Swiss embassy in Tehran, which represents the US interests in Iran. They condemned President Donald Trump’s decision on relocating the US embassy to Quds.

Palestinians say East Jerusalem, which was occupied by Israel in the 1967 war, is the capital of a Palestinian state.

The protesters in Tehran set fire to Israeli and American flags, chanted slogans against the Zionist regime, the US, the Britain, Wahhabism, the ISIS and Takfiri terrorists.

They also waved banners reading ‘Down with US’ and ‘Down with Israel’. They also carried banners reading ‘Trump and the Zionist aggressors should know that Al Quds al-sharif will remain Muslim Qibla and belongs to Muslims’.

The foreign media also covered the anti-Zionism protest.

The student protesters then read out a communiqué in response to the move and claims by the US president.

They denounced the move as well as the silence on international community.

Trump’s decision prompted strong criticism by the international community, including the US allies in Europe. World leaders have denounced it as a move in violation of the UN resolutions and international laws.

Source Article from http://theiranproject.com/blog/2017/12/13/iranian-students-rally-trumps-decision-quds/

Senior IIDF service members arrested over alleged scam

Israeli flag


Almost two dozen senior Israel Defense Force service members, Defense Ministry officials and technology company employees were put in handcuffs on Tuesday for allegedly stealing $28 million, or 100 million new Israeli shekels, from the government, the Times of Israel reported.

The scheme to steal taxpayer funds allegedly involved the suspects billing Israel’s Defense Ministry for telecom projects that never happened or were only partially complete.

Giltech and Uricom, two telecommunications firms in Israel, were listed as the technology companies involved in the scam, according to the Times of Israel. The identities of the IDF and officials involved in the operation have not been disclosed.

The arrests followed an extensive investigation by Israeli military police.

In October, six people working for a contractor to maintain IDF bases were arrested for receiving money from the government in exchange for tasks that were never completed, while an IDF lieutenant colonel, four majors and a non-commissioned officer are under investigation for taking bribes in exchange for looking the other way while the contractors ran off with “huge sums” of money, an October 19 Times of Israel report states.

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/371116-Senior-IIDF-service-members-arrested-over-alleged-scam

Another double-standard for Pelosi: ‘Horrible’ that accuser Paula Jones was able to sue Bill Clinton

Nancy Pelosi


In the eyes of Nancy Pelosi, sexual harassment accusers are equal. Some are just more equal than others – and equality apparently depends on the political party of the accused.

The House Minority Leader, and highest ranking woman in the U.S. government, told reporters she thought it was “horrible” that Paula Jones was able to sue President Bill Clinton for sexual harassment in the 1990s.

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Pelosi recalled hearing the news that Jones would have her day in court. Pelosi said she was traveling with Bill and Hillary Clinton through Europe and stopped in London to meet with Prime Minister Tony Blair.

“It was very festive with President Clinton, Mrs. Clinton – here we were at 10 Downing Street, we go to a Cabinet meeting, they’re about to have a press conference.

“The word comes to us that the court said, uh, that, uh Paula, Paula, what was her name? Jones? Jones could sue, could take the president to court,” Pelosi said.

“It was horrible, oh, it was terrible, but it happened.”

Pelosi went on to say the Jones case creates a “precedent” for suing a president.

But Jones’s allegations are vastly different than those against Trump.

The Washington Post reported in 1998:

Jones filed her suit in May 1994, accusing Clinton of luring her to a suite at the Excelsior Hotel during a May 8, 1991, conference when he was governor of Arkansas and she was a state clerk. During that brief encounter, she said he touched her, tried to kiss her and dropped his pants and asked for oral sex. Clinton has denied that steadfastly, maintaining he does not even remember meeting her.

Clinton paid Jones $850,000 to drop the case.

Only two weeks ago, Pelosi effectively dismissed claims of sexual harassment against Rep. John Conyers by calling him an icon.

“We are strengthened by due process,” she said on “Meet the Press” on November 26.

“Just because someone is accused – and was it one accusation? Is it two? I think there has to be – John Conyers is an icon in our country. He has done a great deal to protect women – Violence Against Women Act, which the left – right-wing – is now quoting me as praising him for his work on that, and he did great work on that.

“But the fact is, as John reviews his case, which he knows, which I don’t, I believe he will do the right thing,” Pelosi said.

Conyers resigned last week after several former employees came forward with allegations against the 88-year-old congressman.

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/371115-Another-double-standard-for-Pelosi-Horrible-that-accuser-Paula-Jones-was-able-to-sue-Bill-Clinton

Trump saved basketball player from Chinese prison, now he is leaving the country

UCLA basketball players LiAngelo Lonzo LaMelo LaVar Ball


Suspended UCLA basketball player LiAngelo Ball is going to play in Lithuania after a very public feud between his father Lavar Ball and the president over his role in saving his son and two other players from imprisonment in China.

Where is Lithuania?

The country of Lithuania is located on the coast of the Baltic Sea, wedged between Latvia to the North, Poland to the South, and Belarus to the East.

LiAngelo and his brother LaMelo Ball have signed to play with the Lithuanian team, Vytautas Prienai, for the rest of the season, according to their agent Harrison Gaines.

Why was Trump angry at Lavar Ball?

President Donald Trump said that the family was ungrateful for his role in saving their son and two other UCLA players after they were accused of shoplifting while visiting China.

“Now that the three basketball players are out of China and saved from years in jail, LaVar Ball, the father of LiAngelo, is unaccepting of what I did for his son and that shoplifting is no big deal,” Trump tweeted.

“I should have left them in jail!” he added.

Lavar Ball later pulled his son out of UCLA, saying that the suspension was too harsh.

“You shouldn’t hang them on the cross for this long for that,” he said. “A kid wants to play basketball all his life. You take that away, that’s worse than jail. Why should we as parents and adults keep jumping on them? It’s not like we’re going through life without making mistakes.”

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/371114-Trump-saved-basketball-player-from-Chinese-prison-now-he-is-leaving-the-country

Turkey slams ‘weak’ response of some Arab countries to Trump’s Jerusalem move

Demonstrators set U.S. and Israeli flags on fire during a protest against U.S. President Donald


Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has criticized the Muslim countries which failed to show a strong response to Washington’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, accusing them of being afraid of the US.

“There was a lot of strong reaction, reaction from the highest level. Some countries, however, have shown a very weak response. It seems that some countries are very timid, since the decision came from that country [the US],” the Minister told NTV broadcaster on Tuesday, adding that such countries were afraid of challenging the US and its “superpower mentality.”

The remarks came ahead of an extraordinary Summit and Ministerial meetings of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on the Jerusalem issue, scheduled to take place in Istanbul on Wednesday. Several countries, namely Egypt and the United Arab Emirates will send only foreign ministers to the meeting, according to Cavusoglu, while Saudi Arabia and some others still have not decided how they would participate

“Some countries in the Islamic world are in a state of fear. Who or what are you afraid of? If we do not protect Jerusalem today, when will we protect it? If we cannot defend Jerusalem, one of Islam’s three holy cities, what can we defend?” Cavusoglu stated.

Many non-Muslim countries, the EU and even Jews worldwide have expressed a far stronger rejection to the US move than some Muslim countries, Cavusoglu added. The minister vowed to make a bold statement at the OIC meeting and make the US to back off from the Jerusalem decision, urging those countries which have not recognized Palestine to do so.

On Sunday, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan harshly criticized Israel, branding it a “terrorist state”while describing the Palestinians as its “victims.” Erdogan vowed to fight Trump’s decision and not “abandon”Jerusalem at the hands of a state which “kills children.”

The controversial move by the US president came last Wednesday, amid numerous warnings coming from world leaders against recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The move was approved by the US Congress back in 1995, but all US Presidents since then have waived it.

The US decision effectively violated the UN resolutions on Palestine, which stated that the status of Jerusalem must be decided during reconciliation talks between Israelis and Palestinians. The resolutions explicitly prohibit establishing diplomatic facilities in the city before the peace agreement is brokered.

Trump’s move has triggered unrest among Palestinians, who believe that the city is under Israeli occupation, as well as mass demonstrations in a number of Muslim countries. Many other countries voiced concerns that the decision would only raise tensions in the Middle East, despite US claims that peace was still possible. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin branded Trump’s move “counterproductive” and “destabilizing.”

“We consider counterproductive any moves that pre-empt the result of negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians,” Putin said during a state visit to Egypt on Monday. “Such steps are destabilizing, and don’t help to resolve the situation, but instead provoke conflict.”

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/371113-Turkey-slams-weak-response-of-some-Arab-countries-to-Trumps-Jerusalem-move

The documentary must not be allowed to die



I first understood the power of the documentary during the editing of my first film, The Quiet Mutiny.

In the commentary, I make reference to a chicken, which my crew and I encountered while on patrol with American soldiers in Vietnam.

“It must be a Vietcong chicken – a communist chicken,” said the sergeant. He wrote in his report: “enemy sighted”. The chicken moment seemed to underline the farce of the war – so I included it in the film.

That may have been unwise.

The regulator of commercial television in Britain – then the Independent Television Authority or ITA – had demanded to see my script. What was my source for the political affiliation of the chicken? I was asked. Was it really a communist chicken, or could it have been a pro-American chicken?

Of course, this nonsense had a serious purpose; when The Quiet Mutiny was broadcast by ITV in 1970, the US ambassador to Britain, Walter Annenberg, a personal friend of President Richard Nixon, complained to the ITA.

He complained not about the chicken but about the whole film. “I intend to inform the White House,” the ambassador wrote. Gosh.

The Quiet Mutiny had revealed that the US army in Vietnam was tearing itself apart. There was open rebellion: drafted men were refusing orders and shooting their officers in the back or “fragging” them with grenades as they slept. None of this had been news. What it meant was that the war was lost; and the messenger was not appreciated.

The Director-General of the ITA was Sir Robert Fraser. He summoned Denis Foreman, then Director of Programmes at Granada TV, and went into a state of apoplexy. Spraying expletives, Sir Robert described me as a “dangerous subversive”.

What concerned the regulator and the ambassador was the power of a single documentary film: the power of its facts and witnesses: especially young soldiers speaking the truth and treated sympathetically by the film-maker.

I was a newspaper journalist. I had never made a film before and I was indebted to Charles Denton, a renegade producer from the BBC, who taught me that facts and evidence told straight to the camera and to the audience could indeed be subversive.

This subversion of official lies is the power of documentary. I have now made 60 films and I believe there is nothing like this power in any other medium.

In the 1960s, a brilliant young film-maker, Peter Watkins, made The War Game for the BBC. Watkins reconstructed the aftermath of a nuclear attack on London. The War Game was banned. “The effect of this film,” said the BBC, “has been judged to be too horrifying for the medium of broadcasting.”

The then chairman of the BBC’s Board of Governors was Lord Normanbrook, who had been Secretary to the Cabinet. He wrote to his successor in the Cabinet, Sir Burke Trend: “The War Game is not designed as propaganda: it is intended as a purely factual statement and is based on careful research into official material … but the subject is alarming, and the showing of the film on television might have a significant effect on public attitudes towards the policy of the nuclear deterrent.”

In other words, the power of this documentary was such that it might alert people to the true horrors of nuclear war and cause them to question the very existence of nuclear weapons.

The Cabinet papers show that the BBC secretly colluded with the government to ban Watkins’ film. The cover story was that the BBC had a responsibility to protect “the elderly living alone and people of limited mental intelligence”.

Most of the press swallowed this. The ban on The War Game ended the career of Peter Watkins in British television at the age of 30. This remarkable film-maker left the BBC and Britain, and angrily launched a worldwide campaign against censorship. Telling the truth, and dissenting from the official truth, can be hazardous for a documentary film-maker.

In 1988, Thames Television broadcast Death on the Rock, a documentary about the war in Northern Ireland. It was a risky and courageous venture. Censorship of the reporting of the so-called Irish Troubles was rife, and many of us in documentaries were actively discouraged from making films north of the border. If we tried, we were drawn into a quagmire of compliance.

The journalist Liz Curtis calculated that the BBC had banned, doctored or delayed some 50 major TV programmes on Ireland. There were, of course, honourable exceptions, such as John Ware.

Roger Bolton, the producer of Death on the Rock, was another. Death on the Rock revealed that the British Government deployed SAS death squads overseas against the IRA, murdering four unarmed people in Gibraltar.

A vicious smear campaign was mounted against the film, led by the government of Margaret Thatcher and the Murdoch press, notably the Sunday Times, edited by Andrew Neil.

It was the only documentary ever subjected to an official inquiry – and its facts were vindicated. Murdoch had to pay up for the defamation of one of the film’s principal witnesses. But that wasn’t the end of it. Thames Television, one of the most innovative broadcasters in the world, was eventually stripped of its franchise in the United Kingdom.

Did the prime minister exact her revenge on ITV and the film-makers, as she had done to the miners? We don’t know. What we do know is that the power of this one documentary stood by the truth and, like The War Game, marked a high point in filmed journalism.

I believe great documentaries exude an artistic heresy. They are difficult to categorise. They are not like great fiction. They are not like great feature movies. Yet, they can combine the sheer power of both.

The Battle of Chile: the fight of an unarmed people, is an epic documentary by Patricio Guzman. It is an extraordinary film: actually a trilogy of films.

When it was released in the 1970s, the New Yorker asked: “How could a team of five people, some with no previous film experience, working with one Éclair camera, one Nagra sound-recorder, and a package of black and white film, produce a work of this magnitude?”

Guzman’s documentary is about the overthrow of democracy in Chile in 1973 by fascists led by General Pinochet and directed by the CIA.

Almost everything is filmed hand-held, on the shoulder. And remember this is a film camera, not video. You have to change the magazine every ten minutes, or the camera stops; and the slightest movement and change of light affects the image.

In the Battle of Chile, there is a scene at the funeral of a naval officer, loyal to President Salvador Allende, who was murdered by those plotting to destroy Allende’s reformist government.

The camera moves among the military faces: human totems with their medals and ribbons, their coiffed hair and opaque eyes. The sheer menace of the faces says you are watching the funeral of a whole society: of democracy itself.

There is a price to pay for filming so bravely. The cameraman, Jorge Muller, was arrested and taken to a torture camp, where he “disappeared” until his grave was found many years later. He was 27. I salute his memory.

In Britain, the pioneering work of John Grierson, Denis Mitchell, Norman Swallow, Richard Cawston and other film-makers in the early 20th century crossed the great divide of class and presented another country. They dared put cameras and microphones in front of ordinary Britons and allowed them to talk in their own language.

John Grierson is said by some to have coined the term “documentary”. “The drama is on your doorstep,” he said in the 1920s, “wherever the slums are, wherever there is malnutrition, wherever there is exploitation and cruelty.”

These early British film-makers believed that the documentary should speak from below, not from above: it should be the medium of people, not authority. In other words, it was the blood, sweat and tears of ordinary people that gave us the documentary.

Denis Mitchell was famous for his portraits of a working-class street. “Throughout my career,” he said, “I have been absolutely astonished at the quality of people’s strength and dignity”.

When I read those words, I think of the survivors of Grenfell Tower, most of them still waiting to be re-housed, all of them still waiting for justice, as the cameras move on to the repetitive circus of a royal wedding.

The late David Munro and I made Year Zero: the Silent Death of Cambodia in 1979. This film broke a silence about a country subjected to more than a decade of bombing and genocide, and its power involved millions of ordinary men, women and children in the rescue of a society on the other side of the world.

Even now, Year Zero puts the lie to the myth that the public doesn’t care, or that those who do care eventually fall victim to something called “compassion fatigue”.

Year Zero was watched by an audience greater than the audience of the current, immensely popular British “reality” programme Bake Off. It was shown on mainstream TV in more than 30 countries, but not in the United States, where PBS rejected it outright, fearful, according to an executive, of the reaction of the new Reagan administration. In Britain and Australia, it was broadcast without advertising – the only time, to my knowledge, this has happened on commercial television.

Following the British broadcast, more than 40 sacks of post arrived at ATV’s offices in Birmingham, 26,000 first-class letters in the first post alone. Remember this was a time before email and Facebook.

In the letters was £1 million – most of it in small amounts from those who could least afford to give. “This is for Cambodia,” wrote a bus driver, enclosing his week’s wages. Pensioners sent their pension. A single mother sent her savings of £50. People came to my home with toys and cash, and petitions for Thatcher and poems of indignation for Pol Pot and for his collaborator, President Richard Nixon, whose bombs had accelerated the fanatic’s rise.

For the first time, the BBC supported an ITV film. The Blue Peter programme asked children to “bring and buy” toys at Oxfam shops throughout the country. By Christmas, the children had raised the astonishing amount of £3,500,000.

Across the world, Year Zero raised more than $55 million, mostly unsolicited, and which brought help directly to Cambodia: medicines, vaccines and the installation of an entire clothing factory that allowed people to throw away the black uniforms they had been forced to wear by Pol Pot. It was as if the audience had ceased to be onlookers and had become participants.

Something similar happened in the United States when CBS Television broadcast Edward R. Murrow’s film, Harvest of Shame, in 1960. This was the first time that many middle-class Americans glimpsed the scale of poverty in their midst.

Harvest of Shame is the story of migrant agricultural workers who were treated little better than slaves. Today, their struggle has such resonance as migrants and refugees fight for work and safety in foreign places. What seems extraordinary is that the children and grandchildren of some of the people in this film will be bearing the brunt of the abuse and strictures of President Trump.

In the United States today, there is no equivalent of Edward R. Murrow. His eloquent, unflinching kind of American journalism has been abolished in the so-called mainstream and has taken refuge in the internet.

Britain remains one of the few countries where documentaries are still shown on mainstream television in the hours when most people are still awake. But documentaries that go against the received wisdom are becoming an endangered species, at the very time we need them perhaps more than ever. In survey after survey, when people are asked what they would like more of on television, they say documentaries.

I don’t believe they mean a type of current affairs programme that is a platform for politicians and “experts” who affect a specious balance between great power and its victims. Observational documentaries are popular; but films about airports and motorway police do not make sense of the world. They entertain.

David Attenborough’s brilliant programmes on the natural world are making sense of climate change – belatedly.

The BBC’s Panorama is making sense of Britain’s secret support of jihadism in Syria – belatedly. But why is Trump setting fire to the Middle East? Why is the West edging closer to war with Russia and China?

Mark the words of the narrator in Peter Watkins’ The War Game: “On almost the entire subject of nuclear weapons, there is now practically total silence in the press, and on TV. There is hope in any unresolved or unpredictable situation. But is there real hope to be found in this silence?”

In 2017, that silence has returned.

It is not news that the safeguards on nuclear weapons have been quietly removed and that the United States is now spending $46 million per hour on nuclear weapons: that’s $46 million every hour, 24 hours a day, every day. Who knows that?

The Coming War on China, which I completed last year, has been broadcast in the UK but not in the United States – where 90 per cent of the population cannot name or locate the capital of North Korea or explain why Trump wants to destroy it. China is next door to North Korea.

According to one “progressive” film distributor in the US, the American people are interested only in what she calls “character-driven” documentaries.

This is code for a “look at me” consumerist cult that now consumes and intimidates and exploits so much of our popular culture, while turning away film-makers from a subject as urgent as any in modern times.

“When the truth is replaced by silence,” wrote the Russian poet Yevgeny Yevtushenko, “the silence is a lie.”

Whenever young documentary film-makers ask me how they can “make a difference”, I reply that it is really quite simple. They need to break the silence.

This is an edited version of an address John Pilger gave at the British Library on 9 December as part of a retrospective festival, ‘The Power of the Documentary’,held to mark the Library’s acquisition of Pilger’s written archive.

Source Article from https://www.sott.net/article/371112-The-documentary-must-not-be-allowed-to-die

The Unspoken Epidemic — Immaturity


December 13, 2017


Source Article from https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/12/immaturity-unspoken-epidemic.html

Hanukkah Celebrates Victory Over Liberal Jews — says Zionist


December 12, 2017


Source Article from https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/12/Hanukkah-Victory-Over-Assimilated-Jews.html

Trump’s Bully Roy Cohn


December 11, 2017


Source Article from https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/12/trump-apprenticeship.html

Another Ponzi Roll Over of Treasury Debt

  • Email Us

    For general inquiries and advertising, email:
    Admin (at) BlacklistedNews.com.

    Article submissions, tips, and feedback, email:
    Tips (at) BlacklistedNews.com.


    Feel free to send us a message anytime

    (512) 222-3067

  • Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blacklistednews/hKxa/~3/qJ5aB2KXVB4/M.html

    Cryptocurrency Chaos: Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ethereum All Keep Surging To New Record Highs With No End In Sight

    The cryptocurrency revolution is the biggest story in the financial world right now. In recent days I have spent a lot of time writing about Bitcoin, but the truth is that all of the major cryptocurrencies have been on an unprecedented run lately. In fact, some of them have been rising much faster in price than Bitcoin has. So even though Bitcoin is now worth almost 18 times as much as it was at the beginning of 2017, that actually pales in comparison to how fast Litecoin has been rising. Of course not all of these cryptocurrencies will eventually succeed. There are about 1000 different cryptocurrencies in existence at the moment, and most of them will inevitably fail. But for now virtually every cryptocurrency is soaring, and the total market cap for all cryptocurrencies combined is rapidly approaching half a trillion dollars.

    Let’s start our discussion with Bitcoin. As I write this, a single Bitcoin is worth $17696.99, and that is absolutely astounding considering that the price was sitting at just about $1,000 as 2017 began.

    We have seen the price of Bitcoin double over and over again, and this last cycle only took 22 days. At this point Bitcoin is so hot that people are actually mortgaging their homes in order to get money to invest…

    Securities regulator Joseph Borg says he has seen people doing everything from running up credit card debt to mortgaging their homes to pour money into the cryptocurrency.

    It’s easy, from one angle, to see why. Bitcoin started out the year being worth $1,000. On Nov. 20, Bitcoin set a new record by passing the $8,000 mark. As of mid-morning Tuesday, it was worth over $17,000. Very few investments double their value in just 22 days.

    Of course Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies don’t actually have any intrinsic value at all. They only have value because people think that they have value, and right now we are witnessing one of the wildest “financial manias” in recorded history.

    In fact, Bitcoin mania has now actually surpassed the infamous Dutch Tulip bubble of 1636 and 1637 according to one analyst

    One month later, the price of bitcoin has exploded even higher, and so it is time to refresh where in the global bubble race bitcoin now stands, and also whether it has finally surpassed “Tulips.”

    Conveniently, overnight the former Bridgewater analysts Howard Wang and Robert Wu who make up Convoy, released the answer in the form of an updated version of their asset bubble chart. In the new commentary, Wang writes that the Bitcoin prices have again more than doubled since the last update, and “its price has now gone up over 17 times this year, 64 times over the last three years and superseded that of the Dutch Tulip’s climb over the same time frame.”

    Can Bitcoin defy financial gravity and continue to climb higher in price?

    We shall see.

    Meanwhile, the fifth largest cryptocurrency, Litecoin, has more than doubled in price since Sunday afternoon. And overall, the price of Litecoin has been rising much, much faster than Bitcoin so far this year…

    Litecoin (LTC) has proved the underdog and is currently dominating crypto charts. In the past 24 hours, the price of Litecoin has surged over 45% hitting a new all-time high of $255.40, according to CoinMarketCap. The 24-hour trading volume for Litecoin has crossed $4.68 billion while the market cap has surpassed $13 billion. Currently the cryptocurrency is trading at $245.51.

    An interesting fact is that if we closely look at the stats since the beginning of 2017, when Litecoin traded at a mere price of $4.3, the token has appreciated investors’ money almost twice as much as bitcoin has done. If to calculate the returns as on the existing date, it turns out that during the afore-mentioned period Litecoin has gained more than 5500 percent against Bitcoin’s 1800 percent.

    5500 percent in a single year is absolutely crazy.

    There are some people out there that have made absolutely extraordinary amounts of money investing in cryptocurrencies, and another one that is extremely hot right now is Ethereum

    Ethereum, the number two digital currency by market capitalization, topped $600 today to set a new all time high. According to CNBC, the surge comes as UBS announced they will head an Ethereum-based Blockchain initiative along with Barclay’s, Credit Suisse, KBC, Swiss stock exchange SIX and Thomson Reuters. The initiative is designed to help these companies comply with new European Union trade data standards that go into effect in 2018.

    Ethereum now has a total market cap of more than 60 billion dollars.

    That makes Ethereum more valuable than General Motors or Aetna.


    After seeing all of the money that has been made, many are racing to learn how to invest in cryptocurrencies, but it is never wise to invest after a giant bubble has already formed. According to banking giant UBS, Bitcoin is “the bubble to end all bubbles”, and they are not optimistic about where things are headed…

    UBS Wealth Management is not a believer in bitcoin becoming a legitimate currency even as the launch of futures lead some investors to believe the cryptocurrency will become a more stable market.

    “The bubble to end all bubbles continues. Cryptocurrencies only have value if accepted as currencies. However, they cannot be used for the most important transaction in an economy, and cryptocurrency supply can only rise and never fall (making them a poor store of value),” global chief economist Paul Donovan wrote in a post Monday. “To date, using cryptocurrencies requires (effectively) a simultaneous asset sale and purchase of goods or services.”

    But there are others that are entirely convinced that we are in the very early stages of a global financial revolution that is going to completely change the world. Just consider the words of Alex Stanczyk

    Imagine a world where a teenage girl in India can start a business, sell her wares or services, and then through her phone, internet, and crypto-currency store the fruit of her labor. She can then buy an item on Amazon and have it shipped to her half-way around the world without ever having to open a bank account. This is the future that crypto-currency promises.

    Having transactions validated with cryptography means we can trust the math, and not have to rely on a human intermediary or the bank. The only way to compromise the cryptography requires computing power that no private (or sovereign) entity in the world can bring to bear. I have heard one crypto expert assert that the current hashing power of the voluntary nodes processing the bitcoin algorithm has more power than all of the world’s supercomputers combined. Because it is a distributed public ledger, it means that no single entity controls it, but everyone gets to see the transactions in it. This performs the primary function of every bank since Medici, which is keeping track of where the money goes. Only now, you don’t need the bank. The technology has the potential to dis-intermediate the banks, and therefore the political class, from having total control of every aspect of peoples financial lives.

    In the end, the real story is not how valuable these cryptocurrencies become relative to U.S. dollars.

    Rather, the real story will be whether or not these cryptocurrencies will be used to free humanity from the debt-based system that the central bankers are currently using to oppress the entire planet.

    If these cryptocurrencies can be used as a tool for freedom, we should all greatly applaud that. But if they are only going to serve as speculative investments, then their ultimate value is going to be greatly limited.

    Michael Snyder is a Republican candidate for Congress in Idaho’s First Congressional District, and you can learn how you can get involved in the campaign on his official website. His new book entitled “Living A Life That Really Matters” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.

    Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blacklistednews/hKxa/~3/iGZu5ZrbSrg/M.html

    CNN & MSNBC Attempt Coverup of Bogus Story They Started

    The BBC names the key players, but it missed one: the media.

    On December 9, Glen Greenwald at the Intercept reported The U.S. Media Suffered Its Most Humiliating Debacle in Ages and Now Refuses All Transparency Over What Happened.

    I covered the story in Trump Accuses CNN of Purposeful Fake News “Fraud on American Public”.

    In a nutshell, three news outlets, starting with CNN and followed by MSNBC broke a bombshell story on Trump that false. CBS jumped on the bandwagon but later blamed CNN.

    Supposedly, multiple, credible sources said Trump had access to Wikileaks information on Russia before Wikileaks posted it.

    The story timeline was false.

    Coverup Begins

    Days later, CNN refuses to disclose its sources or say what happened.

    Greenwald blasted CNN in a Tweet again today…

    How Did It Happen?

    The Slate reports We Still Don’t Know Why Three Different Outlets “Confirmed” the Same Bogus Russia Story Last Week.

    “None of the outlets disclosed anything about the identities and/or motivations of the sources – and there are supposedly at least two of them! – who made such a consequential error of reading comprehension.


    Nor did any of them provide further information when I contacted them this afternoon asking whether they’d found out anything more about last week’s mysterious, sudden D.C.-wide inability to distinguish between 4 and 14,” says the Slate, offering six possibilities.

    Six Possibilities

    1. The outlets were relying on solid sources who all made the same honest mistake.
    2. The outlets were relying on secondhand sources who were just B.S.-ing the whole time and repeating a bad story that had gotten to them via a game of national security telephone.
    3. The outlets were relying on bad-faith sources who were intentionally trying to make the mainstream media look bad. (The Sept. 14 email in question is in the possession of the House Intelligence Committee; maybe some Trump loyalists on the committee pulled a James O’Keefe.)
    4. Only one source ever actually misread the date of the email; the rest of the sources that “confirmed” the story simply confirmed the existence of the email, not when it was sent. These “confirming” sources were then all conflated together by outlets overeager to rush out a big scoop.
    5. “Fake news.” (As in, the reporters made all of it up to GET TRUMP.)
    6. Aliens.

    Trump Blasted CNN

    That Tweet was on the day it happened. Here are some followups.


    Trump on Fake News

    Trump on Dumbest Man on Television

    Trump on Coverup


    Which Door?

    The Slate writer opted for door number four. I suggest it’s safe to rule out door number one, an honest mistake, and door number six, aliens.

    After that, many combinations are possible.

    But regardless of the answer, it’s clear that CNN is willing to rush unconfirmed garbage to the press, from sources that are not exactly credible.

    Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blacklistednews/hKxa/~3/T5xPzHIHowk/M.html

    Roy Moore Refuses To Concede: "We’ve Got To Go By The Rules"

    With 100% of precincts reporting, Doug Jones has officially defeated Republican Roy Moore in what was undoubtedly one of the most controversial special elections in modern history. But unsurprisingly, given the obstinance he displayed by steadfastly refusing to step aside following allegations of inappropriate sexual contact with teenagers, managing to infurate conservative commentator Matt Drudge in the process…

    … Moore is taking it one final step too far, and is refusing to concede.

    In a late-night speech to his supporters (not a concession speech, mind you), Moore said he realizes that “when the vote is that close, it’s not over,” later saying that “it’s going to take some time” before the final outcome is determined.

    Moore suggested that the state’s “recount provision” – which allows for a recount when the margin between the two leading candidates is less than half a percentage point – could still tilt the race in his favor.

    “We’ve still got to go by the rules about this recount provision. The Secretary of State has explained it to us, and we’re expecting that reporters will go up there and find out what’s going on.”

    However, as Jones pulled away, it quickly became apparent that a recount would be unlikely. The final margin was 1.5 percentage points, more than enough to clinch an uncontested victory for the Democratic former prosecutor.

    Jones’s victory was aided by heavy turnout among Democrats in the state’s largest urban centers, including Birmingham and Mobile, and wealthy Republicans in the state’s suburbs abandoning Moore in favor of a write-in candidate.

    As the New York Times reported, about 20,000 voters wrote in a third candidate – a margin that’s roughly equivalent with Jones’s margin of victory.

    Shortly after Moore’s speech, Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill was asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper if he expected “anything other than Mr. Jones being the next senator from the state of Alabama.”

    “I would find that highly unlikely to occur, Jake,” Merrill said.

    In his victory speech, Jones to his supporters in Birmingham, where he said his campaign was about “finding common ground” and that Alabamians led by example in showing the rest of the country how to be united.

    “I have said throughout this campaign that I thought Dec. 12 was going to be a historic day,” Jones said.

    Jones also noted Tuesday’s election fell on the same day as his 25th wedding anniversary, saying “Dec. 12 has always been a historic day for the Jones family.” Jones is the first Democrat to win an Alabama senate seat in 25 years.

    While stock futures dumped after it became apparent that Jones would win, they’ve already climbed back. Despite the typical back-and-forth yesterday about when the reconciled bill would be finalized, investors still expect the plan to be signed into law before the end of the year. As we discussed earlier, yesterday’s vote needs to certified before Jones can take the oath of office. That’s unlikely to happen before the new year.

    Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blacklistednews/hKxa/~3/kujgFAszmlE/M.html

    Trump administration’s turnaround in Syria

    On the campaign trail, in his speeches as well as on TV debates with other presidential contenders, Donald Trump repeatedly mentioned that he has a ‘secret plan’ for defeating the Islamic State without elaborating what the plan is? To the careful observers of the US-led war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, however, the outlines of Trump’s ‘secret plan’ to defeat the Islamic State, particularly in Syria, have now become obvious.

    As far as the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq is concerned, the Trump administration has continued with the policy of its predecessor. The Trump administration’s policy in Syria, however, has been markedly different from the regime change policy of the Obama administration. Unlike Iraq, where the US has provided air and logistical support to Iraq’s armed forces and allied militias in their battle to retake Mosul from the Islamic State militants, the conflict in Syria is much more complex that involves the Syrian government, the opposition-affiliated militant groups and the Kurds.

    Regarding the recapture of Palmyra from the Islamic State by the Syrian government forces, a March 2 article in the Washington Post carried a rather paradoxical headline: “Hezbollah, Russia and the US help Syria retake Palmyra” [1]. The article by Liz Sly offers clues as to how the Syrian conflict has transformed under the new Trump administration. Further, according to a March 31 article [2] for the New York Times by Michael Gordon, the US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, and the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, have stated on the record that defeating the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq is the first priority of the Trump administration and the fate of Bashar al-Assad is of least concern to the new administration.

    Under the previous Obama administration, the evident policy in Syria was regime change, and any collaboration with the Syrian government against the Islamic State was simply not on the cards. The Trump administration, however, looks at the crisis in Syria from an entirely different perspective, a fact which is obvious from Donald Trump’s statements on Syria during the election campaign, and more recently by the statements of Nikki Haley and Rex Tillerson. Moreover, unlike the Obama administration which was hostile to Russia’s interference in Syria, the Trump administration is on friendly terms with Assad’s main backer in Syria, Vladimir Putin.

    It is stated in the aforementioned article by Liz Sly that the US carried out 45 air strikes in the vicinity of Palmyra against the Islamic State’s targets in the month of February alone, which must have indirectly helped the Syrian government troops and the allied Hezbollah militia recapture Palmyra along with Russia’s air support.

    Although expecting a radical departure from the six-year-long Obama administration’s policy of training and arming Sunni militants against the Shi’a-led Syrian government by the Trump administration is unlikely, however, the latter regards Islamic jihadists as a much bigger threat to the security of the US than the former. Therefore, some indirect support and a certain level of collaboration with Russia and the Syrian government against radical Islamists cannot be ruled out.

    What has been different in the respective Syria policy of the two markedly different US administrations, however, is that while the Obama administration did avail itself of the opportunity to strike an alliance with the Kurds against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, but it was simply not possible for it to come up with an out of the box solution and use the Shi’a-led government and allied militias against the Sunni Arab militant groups, particularly the Islamic State. The Trump administration, however, is not hampered by the botched legacy of the Obama administration in Syria, and therefore it has been willing to some extent to cooperate with the Kurds as well as the Russians and the Syrian government against the Islamic jihadists in Syria.

    Two obstacles to such a natural alignment of interests, however, are: first, Israel’s objections regarding the threat that Hezbollah poses to its regional security; and second, Turkey, which is a NATO member and has throughout nurtured several Sunni militant groups during the six-year-long conflict, would have serious reservations against the new US administration’s partnership not only with the Russians and the Syrian government but also with the PYD/YPG Kurds in Syria, which Turkey regards as an offshoot of the separatist PKK Kurds in southeast Turkey.

    Therefore, in order to allay the concerns of Washington’s traditional allies in the Middle East, the Trump administration has conducted a cruise missiles strike on al-Shayrat airfield in Homs governorate on April 6 after the chemical weapons strike in Khan Sheikhoun, but that isolated incident was nothing more than a show of force to bring home the point that the newly elected president, Donald Trump, is a ‘powerful and aggressive’ president, while behind the scenes he has been willing to cooperate with Russia in Syria in order to contain and eliminate the threat posed by Islamic jihadists to the security of the US and the rest of the world.

    It would be pertinent to mention here that unlike the dyed-in-the-wool politicians, like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who cannot look past beyond the tunnel vision of political establishments, it appears that Donald Trump not only follows news from conservative mainstream outlets, like the Fox News, but he has also been familiar with alternative news perspectives, such as Breitbart’s, no matter how racist and xenophobic.

    Thus, Donald Trump is fully aware that the conflict in Syria is a proxy war initiated by the Western political establishments and their regional Middle Eastern allies against the Syrian government. And he is also mindful of the fact that the militants have been funded, trained and armed in the training camps located in the Turkey-Syria border regions to the north of Syria and the Jordan-Syria border regions to the south of Syria.

    Finally, Karen De Young and Liz Sly made another startling revelation in a March 4 article [3] for the Washington Post that: “Trump has said repeatedly that the US and Russia should cooperate against the Islamic State, and he has indicated that the future of Russia-backed Assad is of less concern to him.” Thus, it appears, that the interests of all the major players in Syria have converged on defeating the Islamic jihadists, and the Obama era policy of regime change has been put on the back burner for all practical purposes.

    Sources and links:

    1- Hezbollah, Russia and the US help Syria retake Palmyra:


    2- White House Accepts ‘Political Reality’ of Assad’s Grip on Power in Syria:


    3- Pentagon plan to seize Raqqa calls for significant increase in U.S. participation:


    About the author:

    Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst focused on the politics of Af-Pak and Middle East regions, neocolonialism and petroimperialism.

    Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blacklistednews/hKxa/~3/0WyLjYe0V_c/M.html

    Genocide and American liberals

    Recently FAIR ran a report concerning the coverage given the incipient genocide in Yemen by 60 Minutes and the Washington Post.  It seems that both news organizations covered the crisis without ever mentioning the support given by the United States to the Saudis.  We are responsible— no one who actually covers the issue honestly bothers to deny that.  What they do instead is forget to mention it.

    The New York Times has done a better job and was recently praised by Mark Weisbrot on the Real News Network for acknowledging US complicity in war crimes while they are happening, something the Times rarely does, albeit in an editorial. But if you read the editorial in question, it is less than overwhelming in its honesty. Congress is praised by the New York Times editors and Trump is condemned, but the legislation was a toothless measure. It is a step forward but it was also a compromise. Nothing was actually done to stop American aid to the Saudis. Our complicity continues. Weisbrot points out that it might eventually lead to more debate and a final end of US complicity, but it hasn’t happened yet.

    And in a more recent story the New York Times follows the lead of the Post and 60 Minutes and simply omits US complicity, writing as though the crimes were all the fault of the Others, as we wring our hands wondering if they could be brought to justice.

    Meanwhile, Russiagate continues to outrage mainstream American liberals who are shocked, shocked, that an American President might be tied to Putin. Putin, you see, is a thuggish person. We can’t have our foreign policies dictated by such a person… though one wonders if Putin is the one telling Trump to pick fights with Iran, given that Iran and the Russians are aligned together in the Mideast.

    The Russiagate storyline is very confusing, until you realize it is being put forward by people who are studiously ignoring actual, out in the open, bipartisan Presidential collusion with one of the worst regimes on the planet as it murders children in Yemen.

    Note the outrage directed at Russia in the comments following this Times story. The thrust of the article is that Russian dissidents who despise Putin think Americans are being ridiculous concerning the meddling; but the Times readers will have none of it. How many of these people have been following the story in Yemen? How many question the push to war with Iran or wonder how that is supposed to tie in with Putin as puppet master? I don’t know, but I would bet there is little overlap between those who are outraged about US involvement in Yemen and those obsessed with Russiagate, because one story makes the other seem absurdly trivial.

    When you read liberals in comment threads or hear them in real life it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the simplest, most insultingly stupid forms of propaganda actually work. And they work on well educated liberals. The New York Times does from time to time condemn U.S. complicity in Yemen, but in a way that is almost certainly designed to minimize it or make it seem anomalous or tangential, just another bad thing Trump does. During the Obama era they reported concern on the part of some lawyers in the State Department that we could be complicit, but it was never given front page attention or a constant drumbeat of editorial outrage. Obama’s State Department spokesman defended the Saudis, claiming that their bombing of civilians was accidental, unlike what the Russians did in Syria. Lying about Saudi war crimes and our complicity didn’t merit any outrage in the New York Times. There is just enough honesty in the paper so they can say they covered the issue, but not enough to signal to their readers that the issue matters.

    Of course the readers shouldn’t need that signal. But obviously they do. A torrent of stories has convinced them that Russiagate is a moral outrage, the great issue of our time. Yemen is a sort of boutique issue, something you might mention once in a while and if so, you blame Trump or simply blame the Saudis. But nobody obsesses about it and nobody asks what form of moral or financial corruption has led us to this point or asked whether the whole political system seems designed to obfuscate our guilt when we participate in mass murder. It deserves the occasional story. Our killing of civilians in our own bombings receives some mention— the New York Times carried a great story on civilian casualties of airstrikes in Iraq a month ago which seemingly had no impact whatsoever.

    Then we go back to what really matters, which is Russiagate.

    It’s not exactly clear why it matters. What has Putin persuaded Trump to do? Is it a bad thing that we might not arm Syrian rebels? Should we be imposing a no fly zone in Syria and killing Russians and Syrians in the process? Did Putin stand in the way of America exerting its will in the world as God intended? Nobody spells it out. Or rather, it seems to change. Right now the moral outrage is that Trump interfered with US foreign policy before taking office. This is the sort of thing Republican usually say about liberal Democrats when they oppose some Republican war. I despise Trump, but when Flynn met the Russians on behalf of Israel he was acting like most of Congress, except it was the Russian factor that makes it outrageous. If liberals cared that much about the Israeli occupation they wouldn’t need Flynn’s Russian lobbying to be angry. And I seriously doubt we will see Israeli connections investigated. How many FBI guys would we need to do that?

    When you consider how much news coverage we have from organizations that pride themselves on their professionalism, a person from Neptune would find it remarkable that so many American liberals are so indifferent to the fact that we are complicit in a crime against humanity. This isn’t a secret. It isn’t something hidden in the ultra classified files of the NSA waiting for some Snowden to leak or for some British spy to uncover. There is just enough coverage so that no one somewhat interested in politics could deny knowledge, and yet it continues because we all know it just doesn’t matter that much. We may eventually stop helping the Saudis murder children, but there won’t be an investigation and something like it will happen again. Maybe the press is the way it is because it reflects the values of its readers

    We act this way because we are a superpower and we can squash people like bugs without serious consequence to ourselves if it happens to be convenient; and so this is what we do. The upper ten or twenty percent, the educated consumers of the liberal press, have up to this point benefited from the system in place. I don’t know how much of our GDP requires the murder of people overseas but obviously some powerful people benefit from US imperialism and this corrupts both our politicians and the mainstream press which does just enough reporting so they don’t look like total liars, but without ever digging too deeply into the rot that permeates the whole.

    For the educated liberal it is convenient to believe that whatever is really wrong can be identified with the Republican Party, so if we just win elections for the Democrats everything will be fine. Russiagate is utterly irresistible. Some bad foreigner helped the worst imaginable Republican. Liberals get to be liberal and wave the flag.

    Stories like what we or our allies do to Gaza or Yemen or other places contradict the narrative and make us uncomfortable, as it involves us all, so we ignore them the way people ignore the sexual abusers if acting against them would threaten their jobs. We should stop doing this. But it is hard to see what will make us stop doing this.

    Source Article from http://mondoweiss.net/2017/12/genocide-american-liberals/

    ‘We overstepped in that case’ — David Brooks offers another empty apology for supporting Iraq war

    “As usual, they’re not willing to admit it”

    Jonathan Cook points out why they can’t admit error, because it can not be spun as error, how come these people always err in the same direction, and why is there an unwillingness on the part of supporters of the Humanitarian and “Adavancement” Imperial narrative to examine the fundamental ideological premises they base this murderousness on..George Carlin is sadly missed, or even to explain how they can act outside the Law, as in the case of Palestine, Syria, etc…

    I mean now we can all agree that “headchoppers”, “salafists”, “terrorists”, “militants”, “Hamas” are loathsome and should be killed or at least “neutralised”, it surprises me that no one who believes this wants to, with deep context( context appears to be cryptonite to many “Liberal Progressives”), why they believe this, think what might happen if your regime spent 2.3 trillion on the humanities…it couldn’t hurt but I get the feeling nothing is going to help, after all Savages are a kind of solution and it is impossible to even imagine America without the freshly cut scalps of savages tucked in to her belt, its what you do.

    there can be no peace with superior people, because they are blind and are driven to dominate, so it’s going to kick off..it did a long time ago,

    “Loyal only to fair debate

    So let me address Whitaker’s allegations.

    1. Neither I nor Media Lens are “loyal supporters” of Hersh – or Assad. Whitaker is projecting. He has chosen a side in Syria – that of what he simplistically terms the “rebels”, now dominated by Al-Qaeda affiliates and ISIS, backed by an unholy alliance of Saudi Arabia, the US, Europe, Israel and Turkey. But not everyone who opposes the Islamic extremists, or Whitaker’s group of western interventionists, has therefore chosen Assad’s side.

    One can choose the side of international law and respect for the sovereignty of nation-states, and object to states fomenting proxy wars to destabilise and destroy other regimes.

    More than that, one can choose to maintain a critical distance and, based on experience, remain extremely wary of official and self-serving narratives promoted by the world’s most powerful states. Some of us think there are lessons to be learnt from the lies we were told about WMD in Iraq, or a supposedly imminent massacre by Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi in Benghazi.

    These examples of deception should be remembered when we try to assess how probable is the story that Assad wanted to invite yet more destructive interference in his country from foreign powers by gassing his own people – and to no obvious strategic or military advantage. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me three times, I should just admit I am a gullible fool.

    I and Media Lens (if I may presume to speak on their behalf as a longtime follower) are not arguing that Hersh’s account must be right. Just that it deserves attention, and that it should be part of the media / public discourse. What concerns us is the inadmissibility of relevant information to the public realm, and concerted efforts to stifle debate. Manufactured groupthink, it has been repeatedly shown, works to the benefit of the powerful, those promoting the destructive interests of a now-global military-industrial complex.

    Whitaker and the interventionists want only the official narrative allowed, the one that serves their murky political agenda; we want countervailing voices heard too. That doesn’t make us anyone’s loyalists. It makes us loyal only to the search for transparency and truth.”


    Source Article from http://mondoweiss.net/2017/12/overstepped-another-disaster/

    Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes