Aletho News


5 reasons why US antimissiles in Europe threaten Russia

RT | May 12, 2016

Russia has opposed America’s plans to deploy antimissile systems close to its borders for decades. Washington says the system would not compromise Russia’s security, but Moscow sees a number of reasons why it does.

ABM sites in Romania and Poland could be converted to fire Tomahawks

The system deployed in Europe is called Aegis Ashore and is derived from a naval antiballistic missile system. The Standard Missile 3 interceptors are launched by a variant of Mk 41 VLS. The same vertical launch system is used by the US Navy to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles. Russian defense experts believe the launchers in Romania and Poland can be secretly converted to enable firing cruise missiles at targets in Russia. The US is banned from deploying Tomahawk missiles in Europe by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), which Moscow and Washington signed in 1987.

ABM sites will constantly monitor Russian airspace

To fire interceptors at ballistic missiles they must be targeted by a powerful radar station, and US sites in Europe have those. They can be used to monitor a large part of Russian airspace. The Russian military are not happy that NATO would get additional intelligence on movements of aircraft and missile tests. A similar concern is voiced by China, when it criticizes US plans to deploy the THAAD long-range antimissile system in South Korea to counter threats from Pyongyang.

ABM sites would counter Russian capabilities in a potential small-scale conflict

While the US is right in saying that the few interceptors placed in Europe would not stop a full-scale strategic nuclear missile attack by Russia, in a smaller-scale conventional conflict the European sites would undermine Russia’s ability to use warplanes and tactical missiles.

US-developed target missiles for ABM shield violate missile treaty, Russia says

The US has developed several rockets to serve as targets during tests of its national antiballistic missile technologies, including Hera, LRALT and MRT. Russia believes those missiles violate the spirit of the INF treaty, because if they had warheads, they would have been banned. The reasoning is not unlike the one the US uses, when it says that North Korea’s satellite launches are actually disguised tests of long-range ballistic missiles for Pyongyang’s military.

The US rejected all Russian suggestions to address Russia’s concerns

Over the decades Russia suggested a number of ways, which would have reduced the tension over American antimissile deployments. It offered alternative radar, which would monitor Iran, but not Russia. It suggested inspection mechanisms, which would allow the Russian military to ensure that no foul play was happening on the ABM sites. It suggested a new treaty, which would legally bind the US not to use the system against Russia. Washington rejected them all and said that verbal assurances were enough. Considering that Moscow was verbally assured that NATO would not expand eastwards after withdrawal from Eastern Germany and how things actually turned out, Russia’s skepticism is well-grounded.

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

Privacy bogeyman: Putin’s face invades London in campaign against controversial UK spy bill

RT | May 12, 2016

Warning Brits about the dangers of a new surveillance bill, UK campaigners have flooded London with sinister captioned portraits of Vladimir Putin. The choice of bogeyman however could be better, given the notoriety of Western global spying operations.

The posters and billboards which have been recently appearing all across the British capital, and also in newspapers, including the Guardian and The Telegraph, feature a very distinctive face with a caption that reads: “A government that spies on its citizens. What’s not to like?”

The Don’t Spy On Us Campaign, which is behind the billboards, is trying to warn British citizens about the danger of the UK governments’ Surveillance Bill currently going through parliament. If passed, it would give “government, intelligence agencies and police the kind of powers you would expect in an authoritarian regime,” the campaign said on its website.

The state will “snoop on our private communications and internet use,” collect and store “data about your emails, phone calls, texts and internet use,” while security agencies will be allowed to hack people’s computers and phones, campaigners stressed.

The Don’t Spy On Us Campaign, a coalition of several pro-privacy organizations, also launched an online petition urging the reformation of the surveillance bill. Photographs of Chinese and North Korean leaders were also used by campaigners, but drew less attention, RT’s Harry Fear reported from London.

“Of course, Putin’s face and the Russian brand, if you will, have resonance here in the UK given all of the demonizing in politics and the media,” Fear said. He noted however that “the British public on average knows a great deal about the American surveillance program, not the Russian or Chinese.”

Indeed many on the internet are puzzled by the choice of the Russian president as the face for the campaign, calling the whole affair “a bit peculiar.”

In particular, some mocked the campaigners’ choice of images, saying that faces of other leaders, such as US President Baraсk Obama or UK Prime Minister David Cameron would have been more suitable.

Mass surveillance practices by the US national Security Agency made headlines worldwide after they were unmasked by whistleblower, Edward Snowden, with the help of the Guardian, back in 2013.

“Some are saying that comparing the UK, perhaps, uncertain security state future to the American’s campaign and having Obama’s face instead of Putin’s face here may have been a more appropriate marketing and campaigning choice,” Fear said.


Brits blindly walking into Orwellian surveillance state, survey suggests

‘Privacy is not a privilege, it’s a fundamental human right,’ top privacy expert tells RT

Good chance spies are hoovering up your personal data in bulk, documents show

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Parliamentary Coups: the New Strategy of Latin America’s Right

By Pablo Vivanco – teleSUR – May 12, 2016

Like Honduras and Paraguay, Brazil’s elites used the legislature against Dilma Rousseff. Is Venezuela next?

For most, the decades of the 1970’s and 1980’s are regarded as a dark period for Latin America.

The majority of South American nations were taken over by brutal military juntas, while in Central America civil wars claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands. The armed forces in the region, often trained and financed by the United States, ruled through force and where civilian governments didn’t heed their agendas, these were ignored or overthrown.

Despite entailing the onslaught of disastrous neoliberal economic policies that exacerbated poverty and inequality, the 1990’s also ushered in an end to the military dictatorships in Latin America. Elected governments returned to Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay, while peace accords in Guatemala and El Salvador also meant that the militaries would see a diminished role in the politics of those countries (at least in theory).

Latin America did not solve its numerous problems, but a general consensus was arrived at — no coups or military regimes should be permitted again in the region.

Of course, this consensus began to break with the resurgence of Latin America’s left, beginning with the Bolivarian movement and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Even though he initially harbored very modest proposals for reforms, Venezuela’s ruling class almost immediately sought to topple Chavez’s government. In April 2002 they acted as Latin American elites had done in previous decades and enlisted the upper echelons of the military to stage a coup to remove Chavez. The results were predictable — Venezuelans revolted against the coup and its leaders and the region (except for the U.S. government led by George W. Bush), rejected the move.

The lesson: military coups make for bad PR.

As the decade and Latin America’s left advanced, the regional right adopted a different strategy to counter the trend. While in many countries the left was winning presidencies, in these countries the legislative branches remained largely under the control of traditional (and generally right-wing) parties. Far from providing checks and balances on the authority of the executive branch, opposition-controlled legislatures began to be used as the instrument to overthrow elected presidents.

The first test came in 2009, when Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was removed from office after calling for a non-binding referendum on changing the country’s constitution. The Honduran Congress had voted to remove Zelaya from office, and the country’s Supreme Court — dominated by figures connected to the previous military government — ordered his arrest. The Honduran military dutifully complied with their order, kidnapping Zelaya and forcing him onto a plane to Costa Rica.

Three years later, Paraguay’s parliament impeached President Fernando Lugo, a former bishop who ended 61 years of one-party rule in the country. The charges and process against Lugo were met with skepticism in Paraguay as well as in the region, prompting Paraguay to be suspended from the Mercosur pact.

The impeachment process against the president of Latin America’s largest nation mirrors the intentions of the coups of the 70’s and 80’s and the methods of those in the last decade. Despite the absence of evidence that could justify an impeach against Dilma Rousseff, a majority of Brazilian legislators — many of whom are implicated or being investigated in a massive corruption scandal — have approved removing her from the office she was elected to. The man who will fill the seat is one of those being investigated, but he faces no repercussions from his colleagues.

In neighboring Venezuela, the opposition-led National Assembly has the same objective and has initiated the “recall” clause in the country’s constitution in an attempt to oust Nicolas Maduro from the Miraflores presidential palace.

In all of these cases, the objective is not merely power, but what power facilitates. Since 1998, numerous left-leaning governments have been elected to redistribute wealth and decision-making power. Not only has this led to inequality and poverty being slashed, but the political dynamics in those countries have shifted and the region has become more unified and independent.

The new strategy to stem the Pink Tide builds from the same objectives as those employed by the dictatorships of Pinochet, Videla and others: stop the left from being able to implement its program. But while it uses one elected institution to subvert another, it should be clear that these maneuvers are no less undemocratic than their military predecessors.

Pablo Vivanco is Director of teleSUR English.

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

Panther Power: Afeni Shakur and the “New York 21”

By Lamont Lilly | Dissident Voice | May 10, 2016

On April 2, 1969, twenty-one members of the Harlem Chapter of the Black Panther Party were formally indicted and charged with 156 counts of “conspiracy” to blow up subway and police stations, five local department stores, six railroads, and the Bronx based New York Botanical Garden.

By the early morning hours of April 3, mass sweeps were conducted city wide by combat squads of armed police.  Law enforcement agencies ranging from the CIA, FBI, U.S. Marshalls and NY state police worked simultaneously to coordinate assaults on panther homes and community-based offices.  After numerous raids, ten panther men and two panther women were formally arrested, processed and quickly jailed.  To anyone who supported radical politics of the 1960’s, there was no doubt that the indictment of the Panther ‘New York 21’ was a political and racist frame-up to not only “disrupt, discredit and destroy,” but to utterly dismantle the Black Panther Party from the inside out.

The absurd and excessive nature of such charges were clearly mounted as a federal effort to pit chapters and regions against each other, in a manner that would totally paralyze panther party leadership. What these charges represented was a form of unprecedented legal repression, created as a structural alternative to break their stronghold, reputation and community base. For the panthers who fortunately  weren’t murdered or assassinated, exiled or imprisoned, the courts became a convenient and effective form of legal lynching, a straight-jacket beyond the walls—a robbery of valuable time and resources.

Each member of the ‘New York 21’ was held on $100,000 bail, totaling over $2.1 million. It was not until January of 1970 that the first panther was able to post bail. That panther was 22 year old Alice Faye Williams, better known as Afeni Shakur.

Self-Appointed, Black Anointed

indexIn a grueling and tedious trial, Afeni Shakur (facing 300 years of prison time) daringly chose to be her own attorney in court, partly because financial resources were already razor-thin. Afeni, however, meticulously conducted her own legal research, her own interviews, as well as in-court cross examinations – fully realizing that “she would be the one serving, not the lawyers.” She was the only panther who served as their own counsel.

Here was a small-framed impoverished black girl from the backwoods of Lumberton, North Carolina, staring down a full team of New York state prosecutors – outwitting a full cast of establishment-owned media outlets. Here was a single mother with no formal degree, going legally toe to toe with COINTELPRO.

Despite the odds, after all the surveillance, warrantless wiretapping, infiltration and frame-ups, not one shred of state’s evidence stood in court. In their undying efforts to “discredit,” it was revealed during the trial that the FBI had actually planted undercover infiltrators who, under oath, admitted their role as provocateurs.

Though the case of the Black Panther ‘New York 21’ was the longest trial in New York state history, on her own guts and wit, Afeni Shakur would successfully secure her freedom. No money. No attorney. No privilege. Pregnant with her second child, Tupac Amaru Shakur, what Afeni was able to do in that courtroom was nothing short of miraculous. Magical. Mind blowing.

On May 12 1971, after 2 years of legal proceedings, all 21 panthers were acquitted of their charges. The jury needed just a mere 45 minutes to see the truth.

Sister Soldier, Woman Warrior

indexAfeni Shakur may have hailed from the Black Panther Party’s, esteemed Harlem Chapter, but her roots were originally from the Black Belt South.  Viciously poor, but still mobile, her family moved to the Bronx when she was 11 years. Her inquisitive affection toward the Black Nationalist scene fit right in there.

Afeni first learned of the Black Panther Party at the corner of 125th and 7th Avenue while listening to party co-founder, Bobby Seale deliver a speech. A dedicated soldier from the very beginning, Afeni always placed principle over profit, the people above her own individual desire. Black Panther Party member and ‘New York 21’ co-defendant, Dhoruba Bin Wahad very warmly remembers Afeni as, “the type of person that worked hard, who would stay up all night to get leaflets done.”

Afeni was the kind of comrade who garnered respect from both the women and the men. As former Black Panther, Jamal Joseph stated, “Afeni taught me more about being a man, more than any other man or woman.” As the only high school member of the New York 21, Joseph very often, looked to Afeni for guidance and leadership.

The name Afeni was given to her by a community elder from South Carolina, a descendant of the Yoruba tradition who chose the name Afeni meaning, “lover of the people.” And love the people is exactly what Afeni did.  A dedicated community organizer, fearless warrior, activist, scholar, teacher, and real-life revolutionary, Afeni Shakur gave her life to the people, to the full embodiment of Black Power, people power, (and as the sisters say today) Black Girl Magic!

As we commemorate the mother of Hip Hop’s “Black Jesus,” let us not forget the Black woman general who indubitably blazed her own legacy, who literally offered her life as a gift to the people, who taught her son, Tupac Amaru to do the same.  Farewell to the Black woman general who just joined Malcolm, Harriet, Ida. All power to the people! Black Power!

Lamont Lilly is a contributing editor with the Triangle Free Press and Human Rights Delegate with Witness for Peace and organizer with Workers World Socialist Party. He has recently served as field staff in Baltimore, Ferguson, Oakland, Boston and Philadelphia. In February 2015, he traveled to both Syria and Lebanon with Ramsey Clark and Cynthia McKinney. Follow him on Twitter @LamontLilly.

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

UNASUR Head Says Rousseff Remains ‘Legitimate Leader’ of Brazil

The Secretary-General of the UNASUR Ernesto Samper spoke out against the impeachment efforts against Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff.

Ernesto Samper, secretary-general of the Union of South American Nations. Photo – UNASUR
teleSUR | May 12, 2016

Ernesto Samper, secretary-general of the Union of South American Nations, told teleSUR in an exclusive interview that Dilma Rousseff remained “the legitimate leader” of the Brazilian people and maintains “democratic legitimacy” by virtue of having been re-elected in 2014.

During a press conference Thursday, Samper said that the decision of the Brazilian Congress to initiate an impeachment trial against President Dilma Rousseff was “compromising the democratic governability of the region in a dangerous way.”

“What has happened in Brazil, is a parliamentary political majority is challenging the citizens’ majority that expressed themselves in a clear way in favor of Rousseff,” said Samper referring to the 2014 re-election of President Rousseff.

He stopped short of calling the impeachment trial of Rousseff a rupture of democratic order, which would have triggered the possible suspension of Brazil from the regional bloc.

He added that the efforts by Brazilian politicians to oust Rousseff via impeachment were of “a political character” and criticized the lower chamber for failing to provide Rousseff with room to defend herself.

Samper called on the upper chamber, which will now preside over her trial, to respect due process.

“In this new phase, we ask that the right to defense for President Rousseff be guaranteed,” said Samper.

The secretary-general of UNASUR said it was “not their place to comment on the interim government (of Michel Temer).”

During an earlier event Wednesday, Samper said the greatest risk to governance in the region were groups who “engage in political work without political responsibility.”

The impeachment effort against Rousseff was largely driven by political, media, and economic elites in Brazil.

The support of the Globo media conglomerate was essential in stirring up support for impeachment, providing disproportional coverage of corruption allegations against members of the Workers’ Party and granting widespread media attention to right-wing rallies calling for Rousseff’s ouster.

Elements of the country’s judiciary—including Sergio Moro, the judge who is presiding over the investigation into a corruption scandal—played a lead political role, which Rousseff’s supporters said were inappropriate for a judge.

The country’s Supreme Court also refrained from intervening and stopping the coup plot, despite the fact that Rousseff was being put on trial without having been found guilty of any crime.

The impeachment effort against the ousted Brazilian president is based on allegations she manipulated budget accounts, a deed committed by most of her predecessors and by some of the very senators who voted for impeachment efforts to proceed.

The UNASUR chief previously warned that a potential impeachment scenario would set a “dangerous” precedent by criminalizing standard government budget management practices.


Dilma Rousseff Calls for Mobilizations to Overturn Coup

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

Israel can commit crimes with impunity; condemn them at your peril


MEMO | May 12, 2016

Israel’s latest display of misplaced ire at the UN Security Council has provided a succinct illustration of how criticism of settler colonialism, even by Israeli NGOs, remains a cloistered subject. Following a presentation by Yesh Din, in which the NGO’s legal adviser Michael Sfard presented statistical information regarding Israeli settler terror, both Sfard and Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, retaliated against Venezuelan Ambassador Rafael Ramirez’s criticism of their country’s slow extermination policies.

According to Haaretz, Ramirez challenged the UN Security Council to ponder the information, asking: “What does Israel plan to do with the Palestinians? Will they be disappeared? Is Israel trying to impose a ‘final solution’ on the Palestinians in the West Bank?”

Right-winger Danon — who has advocated punitive attacks on the civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip — promptly resorted to the clichéd “anti-Semitism” accusation: “These are blunt anti-Semitic statements coming from the Venezuelan ambassador towards the Jewish nation.”

According to Yesh Din’s lawyer, the Venezuelan ambassador’s use of the phrase ‘final solution’ is “offensive, angering and completely incorrect.” Sfard made this claim despite telling the Security Council: “Yesh Din vigorously and unequivocally condemns all human rights violations and all international law infractions. There can be no justification for attacks on civilians no matter who the perpetrators are and whatever the identity of the victim is.”

According to YNet news, the Israeli delegation demanded immediate condemnations following Ramirez’s remarks, and was gratified by the US, Britain and France issuing — predictably — “decisive” statements. Danon also called on Ramirez to apologise for his use of the phrase “final solution” with its obvious connotations with the Holocaust; his apology was met by a demand for a more public version.

Israel thrives upon the blatant contradiction of committing human rights violations openly and without remorse, while resenting criticism of such illegal actions. Furthermore, this episode at the UN is evidence of the cycle of hypocrisy plaguing such organisations which are, allegedly, standing up for Palestinian rights; they fail to act on the evidence, no matter how strong it is, and this exposes their allegiance to the colonial state of Israel as well as the terrorism of its illegal settlers. However, the tactic has now been perfected to project blame elsewhere to the point where logical condemnation of colonial violence is deemed to be offensive, but the violence itself isn’t. This is despite the fact that Israel is adhering publicly to the implementation of Zionism’s ideological goal of “Greater Israel” by continuing its territorial expansion, ethnic cleansing and — yes — slow extermination of the Palestinian population.

Ramirez’s comments expose Israeli state terror, incorporating historical memory and exposing a colonial cycle that has not yet reached its completion. Israel has applied various forms of human rights violations against Palestinians, all geared towards a system that leaves no recourse, thus isolating Palestinians and creating a perpetual implosion. State policies reflect impunity while Israeli ministers such as Naftali Bennett have spoken openly about “disappearing” Palestinians. Hence, nothing in Ramirez’s speech can be construed to be within any context other than that of the reality on the ground. If anything, the Venezuelan’s words portray an awareness that is common to both Palestine and South America, both having experienced colonial and imperialist violence.

Nobody should take offence at what was said by the ambassador from South America. The incident should be seen as an educational experience of how the interpretation of colonial violence through time has navigated the perpetually-changing circumstances and, as a response, carved out a niche that encourages selective remembrance and memory of genocide in order to allow for a new form of genocide to be carried out within the framework of the ambiguities of international law. As Rafael Ramirez has found to his cost, Israel is allowed to commit genocidal crimes with impunity; it is those who condemn them who have to apologise.

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Outrage as Ukrainian witch-hunt site leaks personal info of ‘terrorist-collaborating journalists’

RT | May 12, 2016

Governments, NGOs and journalists across the globe have condemned a leak of personal data of more than 4,000 media staff, accused by pro-Kiev activists of “collaborating with terrorists” for their reporting from war-torn eastern Ukraine.

The names on the list include people working for respectable outlets, such as news agencies AFP, AP and Reuters, broadcasters BBC, CNN, CCTV, Deutsche Welle and Al Jazeera, newspapers, including the New York Times, Gazeta Wyborcza and Kyiv Post, news websites Vice News and Daily Beast and many others. RT journalists are on the list too.

“This is a very alarming development which could further endanger the safety of journalists, who report on issues of public interest and they should not be harassed for doing their job,” said OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatović.

Some of the journalists, whose data was leaked, have complained they have started to receive threats.

“After being accused of ‘working for the terrorists’ and having their personal data, phone numbers and emails made public, they started receiving phone calls and emails with threats, and some Ukrainian politicians have called for these journalists to be labeled ‘enemies of Ukraine’ and to prevent them from working in the country completely,” an open letter, from Kiev-based journalists representing local and international media, stated.

“We are aware that details of staff accreditation from a wide range of media organizations – including the BBC – have been hacked. We have taken immediate and appropriate action to protect privacy and security,” said the BBC.

Publication was condemned by a number of governments, international organizations and media organizations. EU envoy to Ukraine Jan Tombinski said that while the leak was published by a privately-run website, he held the Ukrainian authorities accountable for endangering journalists and said the database should be blocked.

The website that leaked the personal data is called Mirotvorets (Peacekeeper). It purports to be fighting separatism and terrorism and publishes personal data of anyone its contributors consider enemies of Ukraine. Mirotvorets was founded in January 2015 by Georgy Tuka, who now serves as a deputy to the minister responsible for dealing with rebel-held areas and refugees. Among its high-ranking supporters is Anton Gerashchenko, an MP and aide to the interior minister. The website’s partners include the Security Service of Ukraine and the country’s Interior Ministry.

The project has caused controversy in the past. At least two Ukrainian public figures, writer Oles Buzina and former lawmaker Oleg Kalashnikov, were killed days after their home addresses were published by Mirotvorets. Last year, Gerashchenko called for leaking the personal data of Russian soldiers and officers taking part in the counter-terrorism mission in Syria, so that Islamic State sympathizers could find and kill them.

The latest leak includes data of journalists and NGO employees, who have been given accreditation by the de facto authorities of the rebellious eastern Ukrainian regions over the past two years. Gerashchenko said the data was obtained as a result of a hack, at least a month before publication.

The Interior Minister’s aid praised “patriot hackers” for exposing “a powerful propaganda machine that has an impact on par with the propaganda by [Nazi Germany’s] Goebbels or Stalin” and demanded more budget money to fight it.

Accompanying the leak, which was first posted on May 7, but widely disseminated this week, was a statement claiming “these journalists are cooperating with the militants of a terrorist organization.”

Derek Monroe, independent reporter and writer, who has received death threats from people unhappy with his reporting on the Ukraine crisis, told RT that serious measures should be undertaken in order to protect journalists, as the information can now “trickle down everywhere” and “once it’s comes out of the box, it’s very hard to put back.”

“What happened in Kiev is not only illegal, but is an outrage,” Monroe said.

Investigative journalist Russ Baker said the fact that journalists might nowadays “by definition” be regarded as enemies points towards a significant growth of extremism.

“The situation in the Ukraine is particularly striking because the fact that these people even think that a journalist going to an area makes them an enemy just indicates how extremism has risen to a rather staggering level. Journalists always go to war-zones, they always go to places where there is conflict, and to think that by definition that makes them unfair or somebody that needs to be threatened is pretty staggering,” Baker told RT.

Read more:

Top Ukraine official backs idea ‘to help ISIS take revenge on Russian soldiers in Syria’

Personal details of murdered journalist & ex-MP found posted on Ukrainian ‘enemies of state’ database

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

US Congress Wants New Federal Agency to Fight Russian, Chinese ‘Propaganda’

Sputnik – May 12, 2016

A dozen members of the US House of Representatives have introduced a new bill proposing the creation of an entire agency meant to ‘counter Chinese and Russian propaganda’, The Washington Examiner reported.

The ‘Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act’, the political news publication explained, would create a new federal agency reporting to the State Department called the Center for Information Analysis and Response.

The center, The Washington Examiner added, “would analyze ‘government information warfare’ and ‘disinformation efforts’, and work to ‘expose and counter’ those operations when they are directed against US national security.”

The legislation, a bipartisan effort coauthored by Congressmen Adam Kinzinger and Ted Lieu, claims that Russia and China are “us[ing] disinformation and other propaganda tools” to undermine US initiatives around the globe.

“As Russia continues to spew its disinformation and false narratives, they undermine the United States and its interests in places like Ukraine, while also breeding further instability in these countries,” Kinzinger said, introducing the bill to Congress on Wednesday.

For his part, Congressman Lieu added that “from Ukraine to the South China Sea, foreign disinformation campaigns do more than spread anti-Western sentiments – they manipulate public perception to change the facts on the ground, subvert democracy and undermine US interests. In short, they make the world less safe.”

Kinzinger emphasized that a new federal agency to fight this threat would give Washington “a unique opportunity to respond to further manipulation by encouraging the free flow of truthful information,” which “can prevent conflict and ensure future stability.”

If the bill is approved and the agency is created, the Center for Information Analysis and Response will see US ‘information officers’ dispatched to promote an “independent press” in countries “deemed vulnerable to foreign propaganda and disinformation campaigns.” The agency will also be tasked with ‘exposing’ and countering information operations directed against US interests by creating an alternative narrative.

It’s unclear how exactly the new agency will be able to help Washington’s global propaganda and counter-propaganda effort. The Broadcasting Board of Governors already receives over than $750 million annually for funding of broadcasters including Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, and other media across the Middle East and Latin America. When taking account of additional contributions from private individuals including George Soros and his Open Democracy Foundations initiatives, it’s unclear how much more the State Department can really squeeze out of its anti-Russian and anti-Chinese propaganda machine.

Read more:

Building the Echo Chamber: Is There Free Press in the US?

Huxley’s Brave New World Nightmare is Becoming a Geopolitical Reality

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | | 1 Comment

Dieudonne Barred by Free Speech Loving Canada!

Penny For Your Thoughts | May 11, 2016

Of course, I’m being completely facetious. The only speech that is acceptable here is state approved speech- And Canada hates freedom, anywhere. Anywhere at all. That’s why Canada is a NATO member, killing people globally, particularly in the Middle East/Asia area in order to redraw borders for their latest insane episode of playing global overlord alongside the US and the UK. Canadians need to wake up to the reality.

Dieudonne blocked from entry by Canada Customs:

Canada Customs allowed George Bush into the nation years ago. Despite thousands and thousands protesting across the nation- And that man is a real criminal. The blood soaked kind. Dick Cheney was ok for Canada too. Real criminals? Canada let’s them in. And wines & dines them!

But not Dieudonne. A comedian. No blood or torture or mass death on his hands.

As mentioned  in my earlier post, Will Free Speech Loving Canada allow Dieudonne to Perform at His Sold Out Shows?, the Jewish Lobby, you know the one that doesn’t exist and is powerless,  here in Canada, had Dieudonne in their sights… They were locked and loaded, looking for another kill. Another trophy for their collection of rights denied to the non Judiac masses.

And gloating all the while!

Dieudonne Barred from Entering Canda.

Canadian border services agents in Montreal sent comedian Dieudonné M’bala M’bala back to France.

 It also came in the wake of more than two weeks of pressure on Ottawa by Jewish groups to keep Dieudonné from entering Canada

Early news items regarding Dieudonne’s Canadian visit were very clear, very clear, that it was the ‘usual suspects’ that were gunning for the comedian. The media marched in lockstep and the dumbed down masses believe that this man is a “criminal” Any law can be made to turn anyone into a ‘criminal’ ya bunch of dunderheads!

So, I shake my head in disgust at the level of control a small minority of persons exerts on everyone else in this nation.

I laugh at a Mayor who says “When you promote hatred, you promote social division,” speaking of the comedian Dieudonne, but not about the Jewish lobby here in Canada.

– A lobby that stomps regularly on the rights of others. – Those who had chose to see Dieudonne were deprived of their right to be entertained as they saw fit

– A lobby that cries wolf far too often. Dieudonne being just the most recent case

– A lobby that has the ear of (or a lot of dirt on) way too many politicians in this country.

– A lobby that promotes hatred and division by demonizing/smearing others the lobby does not approve of

-A lobby whose very existence is for the express purpose of social division.   Looking after the interests of the followers of Judaism and their interests ONLY- That is social division Denis Coderre!!!

When the interests of one group supersede and/or impede on the interests of everyone else, that is socially divisive.

Bnai Brith looking to Ban Dieudonne from entering Canada

“B’nai Brith in Montreal is trying to block the entry into Canada of French comedian Dieudonné”

Canadian Jews Opposed to French Comedian’s Planned Performances

Jewish groups in Canada are mobilizing against the controversial French comedian Dieudonné M’bala M’bala,

The Jewish Lobby didn’t hide their goal or agenda. It was right out in the open.

May 12, 2016 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment