Climate changes in Holy Land for World Council of Churches
Israeli treatment of representatives at airport ‘unacceptable’
WCC | May 9, 2016
After traveling to Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv in the last week for a climate justice meeting, World Council of Churches (WCC) staff and partners were detained or deported in a manner that WCC general secretary Rev. Dr Olav Fykse Tveit terms both unprecedented and intolerable.
“The WCC protests the excessive, unreasonable and wholly unwarranted treatment by the Israeli authorities of these representatives of WCC member churches and staff traveling to engage in discussions on climate change and environmental stewardship, at the invitation of and hosted by WCC’s member churches in the region,” he said.
Members of the WCC’s Working Group on Climate Change from as many as 13 countries reported they were held for hours of interrogation, including tough intimidation and detention in prison-like conditions for up to three days — a very difficult experience, Tveit said. “We react in different ways emotionally to experiences like this. For all of them, I think it was totally unexpected and very disturbing, for most of them shocking, as they have never experienced anything like this before.”
Although there have been small incidents in the past, there has been nothing approaching this level of intimidation, Tveit added.
The members of the Working Group on Climate Change had traveled to Israel in a spirit of ecumenical solidarity to address shared global challenges in environmental protection and climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Travelers were detained, interrogated and intimidated. Expressing his concern about the effect of such treatment on people, Tveit said he had no reason to believe there would be any problem for people traveling to this meeting, particularly since there have been other such meetings over many years, not only related to climate change but also to ecumenical relations, peacemaking and theological reflection. For many years, the WCC has drawn on resources and counterparts from both Palestine and Israel to promote peaceful relations and coexistence.
All traveling WCC participants from the WCC working group are safely out of Israel. The WCC called on the government of Israel for an apology as well as to desist its aggressive behaviour toward WCC member churches and staff in the future. “We believe that it is also in the interest of the government of Israel to address these very unpleasant incidents for future visitors to this country, and to prevent their recurrence,” said Tveit and added “We are ready to meet and discuss these issues.”
Attorney-client privilege denied to us, used by Feds to keep the law secret
PrivacySOS | May 9, 2016
How do you spell chutzpah? I submit an alternate spelling: O-B-A-M-A D-O-J.
How the Obama administration interprets the phrase “government transparency,” in three acts.
Act One: Secret Law
The Obama administration is trying to keep secret a 2003 Office of Legal Counsel memo outlining how federal intelligence agencies interpret “commercial services agreements” between telecoms and their customers. The memo, which the ACLU seeks in a FOIA lawsuit, likely outlines the government’s legal position on how intelligence agencies can access information held by telecommunications companies. Senator Ron Wyden, who from his position on the Senate Intelligence Committee has routinely warned Americans of unconstitutional intelligence activities, has said the government’s “opinion is inconsistent with the public’s understanding of the law, and should be withdrawn.”
Wyden has also publicly stated that the DOJ misled a federal court during its legal fight to keep the memo secret. In a March 2016 letter, Wyden wrote that a DOJ memorandum of law filed in the case contains a “key assertion” that is false. “This assertion appears to be central to the DOJ’s legal arguments,” Wyden wrote.
Now the DOJ has fired back at Wyden, asserting in a brief in the ACLU lawsuit that the Senator’s claims about this “key assertion” were “wholly erroneous” and “based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the law.” The Justice Department claims the administration can keep the legal memo secret because it is not “working law,” but rather confidential legal advice. According to the DOJ, even though an agency may rely on an Office of Legal Counsel memo “by acting in a manner that is consistent with the advice,” the memo doesn’t necessarily “establish agency policy,” meaning it’s not “working law”—which is subject to public disclosure—but instead confidential legal advice.
(As Wyden noted, the DOJ “isn’t denying that this opinion is inconsistent with the public’s understanding of the law”; instead, it’s arguing that the legal memo at issue doesn’t constitute law.)
To repeat: The government is arguing that even if agencies “rely” on an OLC memo and act “in a manner consistent” with its advice, it isn’t law. Instead, it’s private legal advice, which just so happens to be something the government can keep secret from the public.
Act Two: Limitless Surveillance
In April 2016, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) released parts of a November 2015 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) opinion about how the FBI, NSA, and CIA use information collected pursuant to Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act. (The FISA Amendments Act, signed into law in 2008, put congress’ stamp of approval on the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program.) Section 702 of that statute allows the intelligence agencies to warrantlessly wiretap Americans’ international communications, as long as Americans or people within the United States are not “targeted.” Part of that statute requires that the Attorney General and ODNI prepare annual reports, called “certifications,” to be reviewed by FISC judges. These certifications include information about how, why, and under what circumstances intelligence agencies “minimize” information about non-targets or US persons caught up in its dragnets.
The recently released November 2015 FISC opinion describes some of these minimization procedures in detail. Among them are procedures related to the capture, dissemination, and use of attorney-client privileged communications. The opinion reveals that the FBI can disseminate attorney-client privileged communications as long as the FBI’s lawyers approve it. The rules require the FBI to “advise recipients that the dissemination contains information subject to attorney-client privilege, that the information is being disseminated ‘solely for intelligence or lead purposes,’ and that it may not be further disseminated or used in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding without the approval of the AG or the Assistant AG for National Security.”
In other words: The US government allows itself to warrantlessly wiretap our international communications and even use our attorney-client privileged communications for intelligence purposes, as long as it doesn’t disclose to criminal defendants or courts that it has done so.
Act Three: Upside Down World
The US government refuses to disclose a legal memo that likely describes how intelligence agencies spy on our communications, claiming that the memo isn’t “working law” but instead constitutes “private” legal advice. Secret law is thereby justified by attorney-client privilege. In this case, the attorney and the client are one in the same: the executive branch.
At the same time, the government gives itself the power to warrantlessly wiretap, retain, disseminate, and use for intelligence purposes our attorney-client privileged communications—so long as the fact of agencies doing so never becomes public. Surveillance of attorney-client privileged communications is justified, as long as it remains secret.
Secret law, secret surveillance. Attorney-client privilege for government lawyers advising government agencies about government policy. No attorney-client privilege for ordinary people, who will likely never learn that the FBI or NSA has warrantlessly obtained their confidential communications.
Only in an upside down world could this administration choose this path, having called itself the “most transparent administration” in history.
4 members of Egyptian satire troupe Street Children referred to prosecution for ‘insulting the state’
Ahram Online | May 10, 2016
Four members of Street Children (Atfal Shawaree), a satirical performance art troupe, were referred Tuesday to a Cairo prosecution on accusations of inciting protests and publishing videos that insult state institutions, a judicial source told Ahram Online.
The artists were arrested on Monday and are being held at Cairo’s Sayeda Zeinab police station prior to the referral to Heliopolis prosecution.
On Sunday, the group’s sixth and youngest member, Ezz El-Din Khaled, 19, was ordered to be released on EGP 10,000 bail pending investigation into charges of inciting protests and publishing videos that insult state institutions.
Prosecution appealed the decision to release Khaled on Monday. The appeal was rejected on Tuesday and the 19-year-old was released.
Khaled was arrested from his home on Saturday evening.
The six-member performance group gained popularity among youths for their videos in which they that mock societal norms as well as the discourse of government officials and supporters.
Street Children released their first video in January 2016. The troupe’s last video was another satirical titled “Sisi is my president.”
Israeli occupation authorities ban female ex-detainee from going to university
Palestinian Information Center – May 10, 2016
NABLUS – Israeli occupation forces handed a letter to the 21-year-old Palestinian ex-detainee Asma al-Qadah banning her from going to university for five months which threatens her completion of university studies.
Islam al-Qadah told Quds Press that Israeli intelligence forces summoned his sister to be interviewed in Ariel settlement and handed her the ban order one month after her release after three months of administrative detention with no charge or trial.
Asma al-Qadah is a Bachelor student in the English Department. She serves as the cultural committee secretary at the student union council.
She is affiliated with the Islamic bloc, the student wing of Hamas Movement, in Beirzit University.
Israel may force Palestinians to raise Israeli flag on Nakba Day
MEMO | May 10, 2016
Culture and sports centres in Israel, including Arabic institutions, should be made to raise the Israeli flag on Nakba Day, a senior minister has said yesterday.
Israeli Culture and Sport Minister Miri Regev instructed the ministry’s Director General Yossi Sharabi to put together an initiative that would see institutions raising the Israeli flag, YnetNews reported.
The news site reported informed sources saying: “Personal judgment should not factor in here.”
If Regev’s proposal is approved by the Knesset, it would force Al-Midan Theatre in Haifa and the Doha Stadium in Sakhnin, whose population is predominantly Arab, to raise the Israeli flag.
Since she took office, Regev promised to promote the Israeli flag’s prominence.
Majd Atwan, 22, sentenced to 45 days imprisonment for Facebook postings
Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network – May 10, 2016
Majd Yousef Atwan, 22, a young Palestinian woman from Al-Khader village, Bethlehem, and a recent beauty school graduate, was sentenced by an Israeli Ofer military court to 45 days imprisonment and a 3,000 NIS ($794) fine for posting on Facebook, which the Israeli military occupation deemed “incitement.”
Atwan is one of approximately 150 Palestinians detained and imprisoned for social media postings, including the case of Dareen Tatour, a Palestinian poet from Nazareth being prosecuted for poetry posted online. She was arrested in a 2:00 am army raid on her family home on 19 April, which was invaded by occupation soldiers. She is one of 7,000 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails and nearly 70 women and girls.
Drone ‘kill list’ could leave MPs, military & spies ‘facing murder charges’
RT | May 10, 2016
Britain’s drone ‘kill list’ could leave politicians, pilots and intelligence personnel facing murder charges unless rules of engagement are quickly clarified, a parliamentary report has warned.
The joint committee on human rights warned on Tuesday that killing with drones outside warzones could lead to “criminal prosecution for murder or complicity in murder.”
The report also warned that the widely-used term “targeted killing” sounded “uncomfortably close to assassination“ and took the view that the UK pursues an active policy “to use lethal force abroad outside armed conflict” under the banner of “counter-terrorism.”
The committee acknowledged the likelihood of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) pursuing a case is slim, but said authorities in other countries may if their citizens are killed.
Chaired by Labour‘s Harriet Harman, the committee also said the UK owed it “to all those involved in the chain of command for such uses of lethal force to provide them with absolute clarity about the circumstances in which they will have a defense against any possible future criminal prosecution.”
The investigation began in August 2014 after it was announced a UK targeted drone strike had killed British Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) fighter Reyaad Khan in Syria.
The killing took place prior to December’s parliamentary vote on military action in the country. The US had developed a pattern of carrying out drone strikes in regions which are not official warzones such as Yemen and Pakistan, a trend which critics find worrying.
Harman’s panel said it is “vital that the legal line between counter-terrorism law enforcement and the waging of war by military means does not become blurred, leading to the use of lethal force in circumstances not permitted by law.”
Human rights NGO Reprieve warned on Tuesday the report highlighted some of the risks involved in an assassination policy.
Reprieve staff attorney Jennifer Gibson said “this is a wakeup call.”
She warned there is a “very real danger that the UK is following the US down the slippery slope of kill lists and targeted killings.”
“This is alarming, given the CIA’s secret drone war has killed hundreds of civilians and been described as a ‘failed strategy’ by [US President Barack] Obama’s own former head of defense intelligence,” she added.
While UK Prime Minister David Cameron acknowledged at the time that the Khan killing was a “new departure,” the government maintains it only uses such methods in cases where there is an “immediate” or “imminent” threat to the UK.
Egypt to try 67 people for assassinating top prosecutor
Press TV – May 9, 2016
Egyptian authorities have referred dozens of people to trial over the last year’s assassination of the country’s top prosecutor.
Prosecutor General Nabil Sadek sent 67 people to the criminal court on Sunday, without mentioning the exact date of the trial.
Sadek said in a statement that all the defendants were members of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood movement, who “conspired” with members of the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas to assassinate Public Prosecutor Hisham Barakat in a bomb attack in the Cairo suburb of Heliopolis in late June 2015.
In March, Egyptian Interior Minister Magdy Abdel Ghaffar told a news conference in Cairo that both Muslim Brotherhood and Gaza-based Hamas were involved in the assassination.
The Hamas, however, has strongly rejected the allegation, calling it as “baseless.”
“Hamas calls on all parties in Egypt not to involve Palestinian factions in their internal differences,” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said in a press release on March 7, hours after Ghaffar’s comments.
There have been no credible claims of responsibility for the bombing that killed the 64-year-old state prosecutor just outside his house on June 29.
Erdogan Continues to Squeeze Power Into His Hands
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 10.05.2016
Erdogan’s dream to revive Turkey’s ‘lost status’ as the most powerful Muslim country cannot be materialized, he and his advisers seem to believe, without first fundamentally altering Turkey’s own political system and this alteration is, he believes, incomplete without making him powerful. Hence, Erdogan’s emphasis on ‘constitutionally’ introducing presidential form of government in Turkey to concentrate all power into his personality. It is ironic to see the emphasis on this system coming at a time when Erdogan himself is Turkey’s president. However, the power-drive he is riding is likely to cost Turkey a lot in terms of political stability. Already Turkey is facing enormous difficulties due to its bad policies on the external front; and now the reported rift between Erdogan and Turkey’s prime minister is going to add fuel to the fire. In simplest terms, resignation of Turkey’s PM has made Erdogan the head of state, of the government and, of course, the party. What a tremendous way of becoming the head of ‘everything’! Any yet Erdogan continues to claim that Turkey is a ‘democracy.’
While Erdogan’s current constitutional status supposes him to act in a ‘neutral’ manner, his extremely narrowly self-defined political behaviour tends to defy Turkey’s constitution in the most ridiculous way. Despite the fact that Erdogan had picked Davutoglu’s concept of ‘Neo-Ottomanism’ as a means to re-establish Turkey’s relations with the former territories of Ottoman Empire, stretching from the Middle East, North Africa to the Balkan and Black Sea regions, they seem to have developed serious differences with regard to the changes in domestic political system that should precede the implementation of this new foreign policy outlook. For Erdogan, this change in the foreign policy—a policy that is aimed at reviving Turkey’s position of power in the region— and the objectives it envisages cannot be effectively materialized unless a strong centre is created.
That Erdogan is squeezing power into his own hands is evident from the statement Davutoglu gave after the crisis talks with the president failed. He was reported to have said that one important reason for stepping down was a decision by the party’s executive (Erdogan) to take away his (prime minister’s) authority to appoint provincial party leaders.
However, this is not only the reason. The rift is deep-rooted in two different visions that both of them have with regard to taking Turkey out of crisis. While Davutoglu believed in the way of dialogue with the Kurds, Erdogan believed in creating a strong presidency. As such, While Davutoglu spoke of the possibility of resuming peace talks with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) if it withdrew armed fighters from Turkish territory, Erdogan said it was out of the question for the peace process to restart. Further disagreements took place after Davutoglu expressed opposition to the pre-trial detention of journalists accused of spying and academics accused of voicing support for the PKK.
For some, the reason for this crisis goes even deeper. The fact of the matter is that Erdogan had hand-picked his PM. Davutoglu did not, as such, have any strong base within the AKP’s structure. While this is yet another instance of how strong Erdogan continues to be and how explicitly he continues to defy his constitutional role, it also shows how creepy and fragile Turkey’s politics is becoming. This fragility is also showing its signs in some other aspects of polity too. The Turkish lira and the country’s stock market have fallen in recent days as investors shuddered at the prospect of a protracted leadership battle in a $720bn economy plagued by inflation, high foreign debt, a five-year long war on its border with Syria and a violent insurgency in its big cities.
This instability is, as a result of Davutoglu’s exit, likely to creep into Turkey’s relations with the West, particularly the EU, and damage it to a considerable extent. The reason why this is likely to happen is the rapport the Turkish PM had built with the EU and the deals he had made with regard to re-settlement of refugees.
Within the parameters of Turkey’s domestic politics, Davutoglu’s success in easing down Turkey’s relation with the EU meant—or it could be taken as such—that he was acquiring a relatively bigger stature than that of Erdogan—a sense that could have went against Erdogan’s push for presidential form of government.
It was this sense of ‘political status’ that was at the heart of problems between the PM and the President. And it is for this reason that Erdogan had to remind Davutoglu as well as Turkey’s public the true ‘hand-picked’ status of the prime minister. Addressing a group of local leaders on Wednesday, Erdogan was quoted as explicitly stating, “What matters is that you should not forget how you got to your post, what you should do there and what your targets are.” Given such an authoritarian stance, Davutoglu’s exit is going to put at risk Turkey’s ties with the West, which sees Erdogan with skepticism bordering on derision. Erdogan’s palace coup to ease out Davutoglu will only be seen in the West as a leap forward in the direction of authoritarianism.
Ironically, this is precisely what this development is all about. By paving the way for a more ‘sober’ and politically obedient and passive prime minister, Erdogan has underscored his own political power, putting himself in an ‘un-challengeable’ position, but indirectly also allowing Turkey to drift into experiencing an Ottoman-era type political tyranny. While Davutoglu dreamt of re-establishing Turkey’s relations with former territories of Ottoman Empire through his brain-child concept of ‘Neo-Ottomanism’, for Erdogan, this concept is incomplete without first turning his personality into the modern day ‘Sultan.’ Hence the question: will Turkey’s drift into ‘Ottomanism’ lead to its fall on the lines of the Ottoman Empire too? This question, as political behaviour of Erdogan and his team reveals, does not seem to have crossed their mind.
Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.
Russia slams Turkey’s ‘unconstructive role’ in latest round of Syria talks
Press TV – May 10, 2016
Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov has slammed Turkey’s “unconstructive role” in the latest round of indirect talks between the warring sides to the crisis in Syria.
He said Ankara influenced the main opposition group to withdraw from the negotiations.
Gatilov made the remarks in an interview with the Russian Izvestia daily published on Tuesday.
“It is a pity that the foreign players, and important regional [players such] as Turkey, continue to play an unconstructive role in this process,” Gatilov stated.
The Russian official said Turkey made the foreign-backed High Negotiations Committee (HNC) to suspend participation in the UN-brokered discussions.
Gatilov expressed Moscow’s opposition to the Saudi-backed HNC’s withdrawal from the Geneva talks. “We condemn their action and do not support.”
The peace talks, which began in Geneva, Switzerland, on April 13, were brought to a halt after the HNC walked out of the discussions in protest at what it called the Syrian government’s violation of a ceasefire in the Arab country.
Damascus dismissed the accusation, saying the truce was violated by foreign-backed militants.
The nation-wide cessation of hostilities, brokered by Moscow and Washington, was introduced in February in a bid to facilitate dialogue between rival parties in Syria.
However, renewed violence in recent weeks in some parts of Syria, especially the northwestern city of Aleppo, has left the ceasefire in tatters and torpedoed the peace talks.
Elsewhere in his remarks, the Russian deputy foreign minister highlighted a shift in Washington’s stance on the future of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, saying the issue is no longer a prerequisite for the peace negotiations.
Gatilov said it is up to the Syrian nation to decide the fate of President Assad.
On Monday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry held a phone conversation, during which they underlined the need for the continuation of discussions between the Syrian authorities and the opposition.
“Lavrov again pointed to the need for the anti-government formations oriented at Washington to separate from the terrorist groups as soon as possible and to thwart the replenishments to extremists through the territory of Turkey,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
The Donald’s Foreign Policy
It sure trumps Hillary
By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • May 10, 2016
Coming off a string of victories in the so-called Acela state primaries two weeks ago, GOP presidential candidate presumptive Donald J. Trump made what he described as a major foreign policy speech. Critics have blasted the effort as being short on details and long on generalities but, as ever, one’s perspective pretty much depends on what one expects or wants to hear. I admire Trump for two reasons. First is his uncompromising stance on illegal immigrants, which I fully support, and second is his willingness to challenge Republican orthodoxy on foreign policy by condemning the Iraq War and opposing nation building and military intervention overseas.
I wanted to hear two things on foreign policy: that Donald Trump is indeed committed to military non-intervention in other countries except in those rare instances where vital national interests are at stake and also that the United States would pursue a course of positive engagement with Vladimir Putin and Russia. I was not disappointed.
Trump actually used the words “peace” and “peaceful” a number of times, something that has been missing from GOP rhetoric for many years. He said that he would “view the world through the clear lens of American interests,” something that he went on to describe as “America First,” adding “Our goal is peace and prosperity, not war and destruction… war and aggression will not be my first instinct.” Paraphrasing John Quincy Adams, Trump concluded that “The world must know that we do not go abroad in search of enemies, that we are always happy when old enemies become friends, and when old friends become allies.”
Trump observed that there has been a fixation with policies that are both “foolish and arrogant” that have “led to one foreign policy disaster after another” in places like Iraq, Syria, and Egypt. “It all began with the dangerous idea that we could make western democracies out of countries that had no experience or interest in becoming a western democracy. We tore up what institutions they had and then were surprised at what we unleashed: civil war.”
This is all good common sense, lambasting the twin plagues of military intervention and democracy promotion, the two false idols that have respectively driven the foreign policies of the GOP and the Democrats. Trump’s comments in those specific areas could have been made by Ron Paul.
Trump went on to observe that “our actions in Iraq, Libya and Syria have helped unleash ISIS.” I would have added that the power vacuums that we have created actually gave birth to ISIS. Regarding Russia and China, he said “We desire to live peacefully and in friendship with Russia and China. We have serious differences with these two nations and must regard them with open eyes. But we are not bound to be adversaries. We should seek common ground based on shared interests…I believe an easing of tensions and improved relations with Russia…is possible.”
On the negative side, Trump took obligatory swipes at Iran and the nuclear agreement negotiated by the Obama Administration, but he did not say that he would seek to terminate the arrangement and the only line he drew was that “Iran cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapon,” far less vitriolic than the neocon and conventional Republican demand that Tehran not have the “capability” to do so, which is a threshold that has already been passed and which many have viewed as a carte blanche justification of an immediate attack by the U.S.
Regarding Israel, Trump engaged in the usual American politician speak regarding “the one true democracy in the Middle East” that also serves as a “force for justice and peace.” He also has stated that he would be “neutral” in negotiating peace between the Israelis and Palestinians and turned around to endorse continued expansion of Israeli settlements on Arab land. Hopefully he knows better about what is going on in the Middle East or will have advisers who know better and are not afraid to speak the truth. At least he didn’t invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to move in down the hall in the White House on Inauguration Day, which Hillary Clinton has de facto done.
And speaking of Hillary, comparing her record and promises with the Trump speech demonstrates the differences between the two. David Stockman has noted that Hillary “wants to use government to make government great again” while The Donald wants “to use government to make America great again.” Hillary is indeed the favorite candidate of the Welfare-Warfare State Leviathan, a monster that seeks to dominate overseas while simultaneously stripping Americans of their liberties at home.
Hillary’s record is one of unmitigated belligerency. She enthusiastically supported her President-husband’s devastation of the Balkans in the 1990s, a “police action” in which she repeatedly lied about being “under fire” when she arrived on a visit. And she also signed on to the invasions of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 carried out by the George W. Bush Administration.
As Secretary of State, Hillary was the driving force behind “surges” of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, in demanding the attacks on Libya and the overthrow of its leader and in the arming of jihadis in Syria to bring about regime change. Bombing Libya was indeed a Hillary project, initiated at her insistence in spite of misgivings by President Barack Obama. The Libyan fiasco led to government arsenals being looted with the weapons making their way to arm local militias and also to Islamic militants in Central Africa. It is widely believed that the four Americans killed in Benghazi in 2012 were killed while arranging for weapons transfers to the “moderate rebels” in Syria. If success as a diplomat is measured by the ability to destabilize entire regions, Hillary certainly takes center stage as the finest Secretary of State since Madeleine Albright, who famously declared that killing half a million Iraqi children through sanctions was “worth it.” Albright is currently regarded as Hillary’s closest foreign policy adviser.
Like several of the other women who have surrounded the president as top level advisers, Hillary is an enthusiastic advocate of the “R2P” doctrine, “responsibility to protect.” That means that the Washington can intervene in a foreign country even if that nation’s government in no way threatens the United States. The intervention is based on humanitarian grounds, allegedly to protect the local citizens against their own leaders, but it ironically and inevitably winds up killing mostly civilians in far greater numbers than would have otherwise been the case if there had been no military action. Libya and Syria are perfect examples of R2P on steroids.
Hillary has a team of strongly pro-Israel foreign policy advisers and she has frequently expressed her hostility towards Iran, which she has threatened to “obliterate.” One of her campaign videos includes “Iran seeks the destruction of Israel, Iran is a leading sponsor of terror in the region, Iran is flouting international law with its ballistic missile tests and its threats against our allies and partners.” None of the assertions are actually true.
Regarding the threat from Russia, Hillary has inevitably likened President Vladimir Putin to Adolph Hitler. She and her neocon acolyte Victoria Nuland were the driving forces behind cranking up the unrest in Ukraine, which eventually exploded into yet another pastel revolution that quickly became mired in corruption before dissolving into something approaching anarchy, which prevails to this day. She nevertheless wants to provide lethal arms to Kiev and also wants to expedite both Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO, even though it is a given that such action would provoke a major crisis with a nuclear armed and militarily quite capable Russia.
Hillary sees the conflict in Syria as an additional opportunity to confront Moscow, just like in the heady days of the Cold War, so she advocates a no-fly zone as a way for American and Russian flyboys to go head to head and is firm in her demand to replace Bashar al-Assad no matter what. She is one tough lady and she wants to make sure than everyone knows it. And of course her role model is Benjamin Netanyahu, who, she has promised, will be invited to join her in Washington as soon as her administration begins work in January.
So if one is concerned with foreign policy the choice between Donald and Hillary is no choice at all. Hillary may have the resume but it is essentially a bad one. If Trump does even a little of what he pledges to do he is a much better deal for the American people, as well as for most of the world, than is Hillary Clinton.
Featured Video
ASTRAZENECA FALLOUT AMIDST VACCINE WITHDRAWAL
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Why vaccines for children are Big Pharma’s holy grail – Part 1
By Serena Wylde | TCW Defending Freedom | October 18, 2023
James A Shannon, director of the US National Institutes of Health 1955-68, said: ‘No vaccination can be proven safe before it is given to children.’
When he made that statement, it was still possible in the US to sue vaccine manufacturers under tort law for vaccine-induced deaths and injuries, which is no longer the case.
Today the US has the world’s most aggressive vaccine schedule and ranks as the sickest country, with the highest infant mortality, in the developed world. The UK does not lag far behind.
Vaccines carry three separate areas of potential risk. Firstly, they artificially stimulate the immune system to produce antibodies, which temporarily inhibits another part of the body’s defence mechanism. In an infant, whose immune system is just developing, this high demand of energy can in some cases overwhelm its metabolic reserves, and cause brain inflammation. The brain is the highest energy-consuming tissue in the body, followed by the gastro-intestinal tract and the immune system.
Secondly, vaccines contain chemicals, metals and drugs. Thirdly, according to the former pharmaceutical R&D executive Sasha Latypova, traditional vaccines are consistently contaminated with plant and animal proteins which hyper-sensitise the body, especially in children, giving rise to allergies.
In the US in the 1970s there were three inoculations recommended for children… continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Aletho News- Fatal Post COVID-19 mRNA-Vaccine Associated Cerebral Ischemia
- Brussels should remember that Europeans are sovereign, not the EU treaties or the Eurocrats
- Georgian President Vetoes Foreign Agents Bill
- Moscow responds to latest EU ban on Russian media
- West ‘playing with fire’ – Moscow
- Labor strike in 10 California universities demands the right to protest for Palestine
- Over 600 mosques destroyed in Israeli onslaught on Gaza since Oct. 7
- ASTRAZENECA FALLOUT AMIDST VACCINE WITHDRAWAL
- Fauci aide allegedly boasted about ability to ‘make emails disappear’ including ‘smoking guns’
- US university president placed on leave for accepting demands of Palestine supporters
- If Americans Knew
- Israeli lawyers at Int’l Court of Justice out of touch with reality – Day 224
- The Israel-Affiliated Organization Leading the Backlash Against Student Protests
- The writing was on the wall for Israel’s torture of prisoners
- Not even the US government knows the US government line on Rafah
- Israeli anti-Zionist academic Ilan Pappe interrogated by FBI in Detroit
- Jewish billionaires secretly worked to shape U.S. public opinion on Israel’s war against Gaza
- As it defends its planned genocidal Rafah invasion before ICJ, Israel vows to “intensify” raids – Day 223
- New report shows Biden is going to extraordinary lengths to continue arming Israel
- Palestinians rally at historic villages in northern Israel
- Blinken Says Israeli Units Accused of Serious Violations Have Done Enough to Avoid Sanctions. Experts and Insiders Disagree.
- International Solidarity Movement
- Three martyred and five wounded in Tulkarem
- Dispatches from Palestine
- The Right to Resist Genocide by Land and By Sea
- Women Support Center in Nablus empowers women and girls, resists gendered violence and the Occupation
- Palestinian Family at Um Darit Harassed and Isolated
- Occupation Forces Targeted Series of Strikes Kills 7 Aid Workers in Gaza
- Israeli army and police escalate repression of human rights volunteers following Knesset hearing.
- Illegal Israeli Settlers Continue Attacks on Shepherds in Masafer Yatta
- Second Friday of Ramadan at Qalandia Checkpoint
- Deceptively “quiet” first week of Ramadan in Jerusalem: a result of restrictions at Qalandia checkpoint
- Richie Allen
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- No Tricks Zone
- Data Reveal That US Heat Wave Index, Japan Drought Coincide With Solar Activity
- New Study Finds An Extremely Low CO2 Climate Sensitivity For The Arctic And Antarctic
- U.N. Contributing Scientist: ‘Culling’ Human Population Could Avert Climate Catastrophe
- Using Nets On The Seafloor To Retrieve Seafood ‘Roughly The Same As Running 100 Coal-Fired Plants’
- New Paper: Global Warming Leading To HIMALAYAN COOLING, Preventing Glacial Melt!
- DNA Evidence Reveals Domestic Cats, Dogs, African Wildcats, Frogs Lived In The Arctic 9000 Years Ago
- -80°C: Antarctic Vostok Station Records “Extreme Winter Cold”…Not Even Winter Yet!
- The German E-Vehicle Nightmare, 2024 Q1 Sales Plummet 14%… “Graveyard” For Unsold Cars
- Newly Discovered 90,000-Year-Old Human Footprints Reveal How Much Higher Sea Levels Used To Be
- Germany’s Economic Bloodbath Worsens As Green Revolution Causes Economy To Bleed To Death
Aletho News 