Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

British Journalist’s Press Pass Could Be Revoked Over Comments for Russian Media

Sputnik – November 10, 2017

The Chief Editor of the UK magazine Politics First Marcus Papadopoulos told Sputnik on Thursday that he was affronted by the proposal to revoke his press pass to the UK parliament because of his regular appearance as an expert and analyst in Russian media.

On Thursday, The Times newspaper published an article in which two members of parliament from the Labour Party, Alison McGovern and John Woodcock, proposed that “Russian propagandist” Papadopoulos should be deprived of his press pass to the UK parliament. The politicians accused Papadopoulos of “spending much of his time on Russian and Iranian state broadcasters espousing ‘propaganda from a foreign power'”.

“This is an appalling and reprehensible attempt by British politicians and journalists to silence debate. At stake is here is freedom of speech in Britain… The allegations against me are utterly untrue and are politically motivated,” Papadopoulos said.

Papadopoulos noted that the Labour Party politicians who criticized him were “vehemently anti-Russian” and made such accusations because he had an opposite view on the UK and the US policy on Russia and Syria.

“The two Labour MPs in question, who made this baseless accusation, are on the right of the Labour Party — being heavily involved in the right-wing pressure group, Progress — and are vehemently anti-Russian and staunch supporters of the terrorist groups in Syria. That is the real reason for their complaint about me. Because I hold a diametrically opposed view of British and American foreign policy concerning Russia and Syria,” Papadopoulos said.

Papadopoulos added that McGovern and Woodcock were fierce critics of Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party leader, and are unpopular among the party’s members.

November 9, 2017 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | | 1 Comment

October 2017 report: 483 Palestinians seized by Israeli forces

Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network – November 7, 2017

Four Palestinian institutions that work on prisoners’ rights, the Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association, Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights, Palestinian Prisoners’ Society, and the Prisoners’ Affairs Commission, issued the below report on the arrests of 483 Palestinians by Israeli occupation forces in October 2017. English translation by Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network.

International law provides special protections to civilian populations under occupation. One aspect of such protection includes safeguards against arbitrary detention and other measures aimed at preserving and maintaining the human dignity of people inside and outside detention centers.

In violation of its most basic obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law, Israeli occupation forces continued their policy of arbitrary detention of hundreds of civilians from the occupied Palestinian territory in October 2017.

Arbitrary arrests and detention are serious phenomena that continue to be carried out by occupation authorities in various Palestinian governorates and affect all sectors of society, especially children and women.

Part 1: Statistics of arrests

(Note: the figures in this report are based on the monitoring and documentation by the institutions involved in its preparation.)

In October 2017, Israeli occupation forces arrested 483 Palestinians from the occupied Palestinian territories (OPT), including 125 children, eight women and four journalists.

According to the monitoring and documentation conducted by the four Palestinian institutions, the Israeli occupation authorities arrested 137 Palestinians from Jerusalem governorate, 80 from al-Khalil, 82 from Jenin, 52 from Ramallah and El-Bireh, 32 from Bethlehem, 28 from Qalqilya, 20 from Nablus, 15 from Tubas, 15 from Tulkarem, eight from Jericho, seven from Salfit and seven from the Gaza Strip.

In the context of the policy of administrative detention – imprisonment without charge or trial – the occupation authorities issued 86 administrative detention orders, including 35 new orders. Thus, the total number of Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails reached 6300, including 59 women, among them 11 minor girls. There are approximately 250 Palestinian children in Israeli jails and 450 Palestinians held without charge or trial under administrative detention.

Part 2: Detention of Children

The Israeli occupation courts in Jerusalem continue to issue sentences of house arrest againt Jerusalemite children, which deprives these children of their right to education. A child who has been sentenced to house imprisonment is forbidden from leaving the home, except for approved medical visits with their guardian and after informing the authorities. This forces parents to become jailers of their children, causing them deep pain.

Even more, the Israeli courts do not hesitate to issue sentences of imprisonment for children under 15 in the “sheltering center,” where eight Palestinian children are currently held. (Shadi Farrah, Adam Mohammed Sub Laban, Burhan Mohammed Abu Shaker, Ahmed al-Zaatari, Ali Ehab Alqam, Mohammed Ayman Abdel-Razaq, Yazan Mohammed al-Husseini and Mahmoud Naim Ashayer.)

Isolated Childhood

The mother of the child Shadi Farrah, 14, from Kufr Aqab in Jerusalem, said that he has been held in what the authorities call a “sheltering center” since his abdution by occupation forces along with fellow child prisoner Ahmad al-Zaatari about two years ago as they returned from school. The Israeli court later claimed that they were found to have a knife when searched. The occupation court held over 20 sessions in the trial of her son and he was considered the youngest prisoner in Israeli prisons.

She added that her son suffers from very difficult and complex psychological conditions in prison at his young age and needs psychological and moral support in particular as he is held in a “reform” institution accompanied by “criminal” prisoners.

Part 3: Arrests and allegations of “incitement” on Facebook

The phenomenon of the arrest of Palestinians for posting on Facebook under the pretet of “incitement” constitutes a new, punitive policy of the occupation authorities to bring as many children and young people as possible in prisons. Since the beginning of 2017, 220 Palestinians have been arrested and imprisoned on charges of publication of articles and opinions on Facebook and social media pages.

The Israeli military courts in the West Bank base these charges of “incitement” on Article 85 (1)(f) and (g) of the Defense (Emergency) Regulations of 1945, which forbids the authorship or possession of any illegal book, account, journal, publication or advertisement.

In the event that Palestinians from Jerusalem are convicted of incitement, the occupation bases its charges on Article 144, section (d)(2) of the Penal Code of 1977, where paragraph (a) stipulates that:

Publishing publications for the commission of an act of violence or terrorism, or in sympathy or encouragement for acts of violence or terrorism, or displaying support for such acts, and in accordance with the contents and circumstances of the publication, being that there is a real possibility that this publication would lead to acts of violence or terrorism, can result in imprisonment for 5 years.

During October 2017, the prisoner Abdel-Salam Jihad al-Masri, 23, from the village of Aqaba near Tubas, was transferred to administrative detention for four months after serving a sentence of three months imprisonment. Al-Masri was seized by Israeli forces on 1 August 2017 and accused of incitement for posting on his Facebook page. He was sentenced to 3 months imprisonment and a fine of 2,000 NIS ($500 USD) for incitement. On 17 October 2017, he was taken once more to the Israeli military court, sent back to prison and told that he was transferred to administrative detention for four more months, on the grounds that he is a threat to the security of the occupation state, ostensibly because of his writings on Facebook.

The occupation authorities claim that the imprisonment of activists on the basis of writing on social media is the only means to prevent a danger to the security of the occupation, but it seems to have become a clear means by the occupation of silencing voices and violating the right of expression, and to create new policies to serve as a tool of arrests and repression in order to deny Palestinian freedom of expression. Facebook is an electronic space that does not reflect factual acts. It is a space where writers express themselves poetically and emotionally. It is not acceptable for this to be used as an excuse to restrict freedom of expression or muzzle Palestinian voices. It is not an acceptable or reasonable conclusion for occupation courts to interpret Facebook posts as actual acts rather than writing on screens; it is a wrongful and unfair comparison.

Section 4: Legal Analysis

This report presents the legal protections under international humanitarian and human rights law to detainees, related to the types of Israeli violations during the reporting period and the legal rules that prohibit such violations, as follows:

1 – The arbitrary detention of Palestinian citizens violates the legal guarantees related to the prohibition of arbitrary detention in international human rights law, including article 9 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 9 and 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1976).

2 – The policy of administrative detention by the occupation state, in which detention is carried out on the basis of secret evidence and without any charge against the detainee, constitutes a direct violation of fair trial guarantees under the following legal principles:

a) It is contrary to Article 11 (1) of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that: “Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.”

b) It constitutes a grave violation of articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1976, which guarantees everyone the right to a fair trial, to be informed of the charges against them and to be able to defend themselves. (Note: The Occupying Power acceded to the ICCPR in October 1991, and shall be bound by it.)

c) The failure to disclose any charges against the person detained under the administrative detention order precludes every possibility of verifying the compliance of the occupying state with Article 78 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which states that “If the Occupying Power considers it necessary, for imperative reasons of security, to take safety measures concerning protected persons, it may, at the most, subject them to assigned residence or to internment.” It is impossible to verify whether this detention is permitted without knowing what the reasons have been and are.

d) Failure to inform the detained person of the charges against them constitutes a violation of Article 71 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which obliges the occupying power to report charges without delay. They also constitute a violation of article 10 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons in Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment of 1988, which requires the same.

3. The use of home imprisonment against children deprives them of going to school, which is harmful to their right to education, guaranteed under article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social of Cultural Rights of 1976. Denial of that right violates article 28 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1990.

4. The arrest of Palestinians for posting on social media is a violation of their freedom of expression under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Politicl Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Conclusions:

This report sustains a number of findings, through our analysis of the practices of occupation authorities and the reality of Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons, as follows:

1) The occupying forces are continuing their gross and systematic violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.

2) These Israeli violations have resulted in severe suffering for Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons.

3) The silence of the international community has encouraged the occupying power to increase their violations against Palestinian detainees.

4) The High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions have failed to fulfill their duties and have in fact encouraged the occupation authorities to escalate their violations.

Recommendations:

At the conclusion of the report, this series of recommendations is based on the above-mentioned facts and the systematic and gross violations of international humanitarian and human rights law by the occupying power, as follows:

Recommendations at the international level:

1) Formation of a fact-finding committee by the UN Human Rights Council on Israeli violations against detainees.

2) Activate the mechanisms of accountability by the international community towards the perpetrators of violations in fulfillment of its legal and ethical obligations.

3) The High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions must uphold their responsibilities and pressure the occupying power to respect international humanitarian law.

4) International contracting committees of the Conventions must activate their role to pressure the occupying state to respect the standards for prisoners’ rights.

Recommendations at the local level:

1) Activating local solidarity campaigns with Palestinian prisoners.

2) Media support for detainees through intensified media campaigns.

November 9, 2017 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | , , , , | 3 Comments

‘Kaspersky Lab in crosshairs since exposing US & Israeli spy agencies behind Stuxnet attack on Iran’

RT | November 10, 2017

The campaign to discredit Kaspersky Lab dates back to 2010 when the Russian based cybersecurity firm uncovered the origin of the Stuxnet malicious computer worm which ruined Iran’s civilian nuclear centrifuges, experts in the field told RT.

Kaspersky Lab, founded in Moscow in 1997, has been a world leader in cybersecurity for decades. The private company takes pride in working outside of any government’s sphere of influence when it comes to cyber espionage. Americans believe that US intelligence agencies consider the Russian firm a competitive challenge, the experts pointed out.

“Kaspersky is highly reputable. It has been operating for a couple of decades. It has 400 million users around the world, including until very recently the American government,” former MI5 analyst Annie Machon told RT. “So of course if they are doing it, other countries are going to do it to a competitor corporation around the world too. Obviously, the CIA would be interested in a very successful Russian based company that offers protection on the internet.”

“Kaspersky [has] one of the most successful security teams worldwide. Don’t forget that Kaspersky was the security firm that first of all discovered the NSA linked group of activities involved in cyber espionage activities worldwide,” Pierluigi Paganini, the head of cybersecurity at Grant Thornton Consultants, told RT.

The Russian company became one of the targets amidst the ongoing anti-Russian hysteria in the US, which centers around the unproven allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 US presidential elections. In September, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ordered all government agencies to stop using Kaspersky products and remove them from computers, citing “security risks.”

And while Kaspersky Lab is actively cooperating with the US authorities, on Thursday, WikiLeaks published a source code for the CIA hacking tool ‘Hive,’ which was used by US intelligence agencies to imitate the Kaspersky Lab code and leave behind false digital fingerprints. Exposing the CIA’s impersonation of Kaspersky Lab is just a part of WikiLeaks’ Vault 7 and 8 revelations which shed light on the CIA’s electronic surveillance methods and cyber warfare tools.

“What is important in this specific story is the complexity, the effort spent by the US intelligence to make hard the attribution. Kaspersky is the actual victim of these activities. There is a government agency, the CIA that conducted cyber espionage activities to also use false flag in its operation in order to make harder the attribution,” Paganini explained.

Kaspersky Lab remains one of the few companies in the world that can expose the CIA’s scheming, and that is why the Russian company is facing so much backlash, Machon believes.

“We have Kaspersky saying ‘We can do this-we can prove some of these hacks are not Russian, they are American’ when it comes to the presidential elections. And so they needed to discredit them, and I think that this new application of a virus at state level, a very aggressive virus that would discredit a very proven brand around the world it’s exactly what the Americans would want and the Israelis also would want,” the former MI5 operative pointed out.

The campaign against the Russian cybersecurity firm goes back to 2010; when Kaspersky Lab revealed the origin of the Stuxnet virus which the company said likely came from American and Israeli intelligence services, Machon told RT. The alleged American/Israeli cyber espionage operation was designed to target industrial control systems used in infrastructure facilities to affect their automated processes. Stuxnet reportedly ruined almost one-fifth of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges Tehran had been using to develop civilian atomic power.

“Stuxnet was deployed against the centrifuges that enriched the uranium and nobody knew where it came from. It seemed to be very weaponized at the state level. And it was actually Kaspersky that unveiled who had developed it. And it was American and the Israeli intelligence agencies,” Machon told RT. “So ever since then, it has sort of been daggers drawn between these two competing sides [Kaspersky vs CIA]. Kaspersky has been very much in crosshairs of both American and Israeli intelligence agencies.”

SEE ALSO:

November 9, 2017 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Russophobia, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , | 1 Comment

What Is Happening In Saudi Arabia? – Marwa Osman on The Corbett Report

Corbett Report Extras | November 9, 2017

The Lebanese Prime Minister has “resigned” on Saudi tv. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has rounded up a dozen other princes in the House of Saud in a startling move that threatens to upset the kingdom. Reports saying that King Salman will step aside for the crown prince abound. What the hell is happening? Joining us to help sort through the rubble of this incredible week is Marwa Osman, a political analyst and commentator in Beirut.

SHOW NOTES AND MP3: https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=24886

November 9, 2017 Posted by | Video | , , , , | 1 Comment

Trust is crucial to India-Russia defence ties

By M K Bhadrakumar  | Indian Punchline | November 9, 2017

The influential Russian daily Kommersant reported today on an intriguing development with ominous overtones for long-term India-Russia defence cooperation. It seems that Indian authorities gave access to a US Navy delegation of “well-trained technical specialists” to enter the top secret Russian nuclear submarine under the rubric “Project 9711″, which is on lease to Indian Navy within the framework of the so-called “special and privileged strategic partnership” between the two countries.

Apparently, the incident took place when the submarine was docked at the naval base at Vishakhapatanam while undergoing repairs. (The Indian Navy has christened the super secret Russian nuclear submarine as ‘Chakra’.) The Russian daily reported that this has been the second such serious breach of confidentiality that traditionally existed between Russia and India in defence cooperation with regard to the sharing of military technology with third parties.

In an earlier incident, a US Navy team was apparently allowed to visit the Russian-built aircraft carrier with the Indian Navy, Vikramaditya. Upon knowing about the security breach, the Russian side lodged a protest with the Indians. Obviously, that had no effect, as the latest incident involving the nuclear submarine suggests.

Unnamed Russian officials have described the Indian behavior as “outrageous.” According to Kommersant, the incident threatens to “seriously complicate negotiations both on the lease of the second nuclear submarine, and on other projects” in the field of military-technical cooperation between the two countries.

Given the high likelihood – nay, virtual certainty – that the Kommersant report is based on official Russian briefing, this must be taken as a warning from Moscow. Without going into details, Kommersant quoted Russian officials as pointing out that the incident involving the nuclear submarine is of a piece with several recent “unfriendly acts towards Russia” by the concerned Indian authorities.

It is unclear whether the paper was insinuating that such Indian behavior may be taking place without the knowledge of the political leadership in Delhi. If so, the Russian media leak could be intended to draw the attention of the Defence Ministry and the PMO. Of course, the officer corps of the Indian armed forces would have a fair share of lobbyists for American arms manufacturers. It is well-known that retired military officials have been retreading themselves at times as dalals of foreign vendors of weaponry eyeing the Indian market.

The Russian daily underscored that this whole string of incidents could have a very adverse impact on defense cooperation between the two countries, which has been successfully developing over the past five years. Interestingly, it disclosed that “specialized Russian structures are preparing retaliatory measures against their Indian partners. “Very difficult conversations are on the horizon, we have a lot of questions,” a source said. Some who spoke to Kommersant believe that, in particular, the negotiations on leasing the second nuclear submarine, which the Indian Navy planned to obtain from Russia, will be seriously complicated.”

The big question is whether the two governments are at the parting of ways as regards the sharing of cutting edge Russian military technology. At the level of the Indian political leadership, this is most certainly not the thinking. Prime Minister Modi himself is known to be a staunch believer in the raison d’etre of India-Russia strategic ties. It will be interesting to see how far India’s “natural partner” Donald Trump steps in to follow up on the US Navy team’s visit to INS Chakra. Will the Pentagon agree to lease to the Indian Navy a nuclear submarine?

There is already a cloud hanging low over the much-touted futuristic Russian-Indian collaboration to create a fifth-generation fighter aircraft. A concerted campaign has been appearing in India from time to time deliberately running down the project. (here and here.) Even foreign publications began floating the rumor that India wants to get out of the Russian deal. (National Interest, Diplomat ). The preference of lobbyists in Delhi seems to be for the American prototypes. But then, for backing out of the ‘Make in India’ venture, they must find some credible argument. Even with the best Indian ingenuity, this has not been possible so far. Funnily enough, TASS felt obliged to carry a report a few days ago (here) simply to set the record straight.

To be sure, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin’s expected visit to Delhi next month is invested with much importance. India-Russia defence cooperation has been traditionally based on great mutual trust and confidence. Therefore, the recent trends are disturbing. The Indian think-tankers and media analysts keep whining and complaining about Russian weapons going to China and Pakistan. On the other hand, some of them also happen to be lobbyists for the US interests. Testing times are ahead, for sure, as the US-Russian rivalry may also surface on the Indian strategic landscape. (See may earlier blog US strikes at India-Russia defence ties.)

November 9, 2017 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , | Leave a comment

House Leadership Pulls a Fast One for al Qaeda

By Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | November 7, 2017

House Concurrent Resolution 81 (H.Con.Res.81) is sponsored by Representatives, Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), Walter Jones (R-NC), Mark Pocan (D-Wisc.), Thomas Massie (R-KY), and 39 other lawmakers. The resolution commands an end to U.S. participation in the Saudi-led war in Yemen.

The sponsors of this resolution contend that such participation, which began in March 2015, was never authorized under the War Powers Act of 1973. Per the War Powers Act, any congressman can pose a legal challenge and is guaranteed a floor vote on the issue. This is known as a privileged resolution.

On November 1st, the night before the vote was scheduled to take place, House leadership swiftly pushed through a Rules Committee vote, denying the resolution’s privileged status. Thus, preventing the guaranteed floor vote.

What was their justification? Apparently, the House Rules Committee feels that the war in Yemen has yet to ‘rise to a level’ where the War Powers Act is applicable.

After preventing the vote on H.Con.Res.81, the House Leadership has said it shall permit a ‘compromise’ resolution on the war in Yemen. The debate, scheduled for the week of November 13th, will discuss the legality of U.S. involvement in the war. The vote will be non-binding.

Five peace activist groups, heavily engaged in promoting the resolution, said just after the Rules Committee vote:

“We remind the House leadership that under the War Powers Resolution of 1973,

“‘introduction of United States Armed Forces ’includes the assignment of member of such armed forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged…’

U.S. refueling of Saudi-UAE planes bombing Houthi targets in Yemen meets that definition.’”

Therefore the War Powers Act, clearly applies to the war on Yemen.

The House leadership is lying to the American people, supporting the continuation of the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, violating the War Powers Act, and attempting to prevent Congress from stopping yet another illegal and unconstitutional war.

Conservatively, since the beginning of 2017, at least 10,000 people have been killed in this war. The heroic and indispensable Yemeni journalist Nasser Arrabyee has said the toll could be as high as 60,000 deaths.

The Saudis are ruthlessly bombarding the Yemenis and their civilian infrastructure. The coalition wants to cripple the people of Yemen to the point of submission. Their end goal is to force Yemen’s civilians to stop supporting the northern tribesmen if only to alleviate their suffering.

U.S. involvement is most critical to the Saudi effort in this war. The U.S. military is training Saudi Arabian forces. The U.S. is refueling the coalition’s warplanes not just in the air with tanker sorties, but also on its bases peppered throughout the region.

As of February, according to an article written by Oriana Pawlyk for Military.com :

“Saudi Arabian coalition jets bombing Houthi rebel sites in Yemen increasingly turn to U.S. Air Force tankers for refueling support almost two years after the conflict began. Since April 2015, the Air Force has logged 1,778 tanker sorties for the operation, Air Forces Central Command spokeswoman Capt. Kathleen Atanasoff told Military.com on Tuesday. That includes 1,069 over the past year, an increase of 360, or 50 percent, from the 709 in the previous period. ‘These operations are ongoing, with aircraft refueling occurring daily,’ Atanasoff said in an email. The service’s tankers such as KC- 135 Stratotankers and KC-10 Extenders participated in 7,564 refueling ‘events’ with coalition aircraft, with ‘about 54 million pounds of fuel off-loaded in support of Saudi operations in Yemen,’ Atanasoff said.”

Donald Trump, doing his best Barack Obama impression, has been more than happy to sell the Saudis hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons to continue their genocide. These include planes, ships, rockets, precision-guided bombs, cluster bombs, etc. American defense contractors, particularly Lockheed Martin and Boeing, are likewise more than happy to rake in their handsome profits from Yemen’s destruction. With Jared Kushner playing the role of matchmaker for Mohammed bin Salman and Marillyn A. Hewson (CEO of Lockheed), the profits will surely escalate.

However, the Saudis have another powerful ally in this war, al Qaeda. This certainly makes the upcoming debate on Yemen a great opportunity for the House to finally get around to discussing the legality of high treason. Or more specifically, fighting another war for al Qaeda.

In addition to the coalition’s sadistic air campaign, Yemini civilians are threatened and attacked on the ground day in and day out by Sudanese mercenaries, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and a local Islamic State affiliate. All of whom support the coalition.

In an article published in The Hill, Gareth Porter and retired Col. Lawrence Wilkerson (former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s Chief of Staff) said:

“U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials have regarded AQAP as even more of a foreign terrorist threat to the United States than ISIS. It mounted efforts to bring down U.S. airlines three times between 2009 and 2012, and nearly succeeded twice.  But the Saudi/UAE war in Yemen has made them the most powerful indigenous armed group in southern Yemen, with more money, arms and territorial control than ever before. The Saudi-led coalition and the forces of the Saudi backed former regime have allied openly with AQAP and even fought alongside them. As a result of the war AQAP is now poised for the first time to compete for national power in Yemen.”

See the map below of the military situation in Yemen as of this July for an idea of just how much territory AQAP has consolidated. The areas shaded white are controlled by AQAP, the pink areas are controlled by Hadi-loyal forces, and the green areas are controlled by the Houthi/Saleh alliance:

This is further evidence that U.S. involvement in the Saudi war is illegal. When asked for a justification for U.S. involvement in the Saudi/UAE war, both Barrack Obama and Donald Trump’s administrations have cited the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). That AUMF permits military action only against those entities who perpetrated the attacks on 9/11. In other words, military action is only permitted against al Qaeda. Yet, this war is being fought on behalf of al Qaeda against their enemies, the Houthis.

Indeed, Asher Orkaby made the point in Foreign Affairs that, “far from being aligned with extremists, the Houthi movement has repeatedly clashed with the Islamic State and AQAP”. So, in addition to the fact that this war was never authorized under the War Powers Act, it is also clearly not covered under the current AUMF.

Since the Obama administration, this is at least the third major conflict wherein the U.S. has found itself aligned with, fighting along side, arming, and/or supporting al Qaeda. This was official policy notably during the regime change operation in Libya and in the failed regime change operation in Syria. It is very important to note that if things had gone to plan in Syria, al Qaeda would have almost certainly taken Damascus.

Neoconservatives are now calling for a new AUMF to explicitly define ‘the enemy’ more broadly as proponents of so called, ‘radical Islam’. The ‘radical Islam’ handle is a red herring callously promoted by the fake news establishment. It is meant to dumb down and obscure the realities of these conflicts for domestic audiences. The cynical neoconservatives are pleased to have Americans view all Arabs and Muslims as one homogenous and terrifying collective. Most Americans are designedly oblivious to the differences between Sunnis, Shiites, and other branches of Islam. It is in the interests of the War Party for American voters to see such radically opposed groups as Daesh and Hezbollah as cut from the same cloth. This is obviously done in order to prevent rational discussion of these conflicts from ever taking place. For if the American people were well informed of the consequences of U.S. policy abroad, especially in the Middle East, they would probably not even passively support their regime’s policies.

In 2013, popular sentiment from people of all political stripes helped to prevent Obama’s would have been Iraq-style invasion of Syria. I believe one of the primary reasons for this was the effectiveness of the famous ‘I will not fight for al Qaeda in Syria’ social media campaign undertaken by active military personnel. Americans do not want to support and subsidize al Qaeda in Syria, Libya, Yemen, or anywhere else for that matter. The reason these horrific policies persist is not the peoples’ apathy, it’s their ignorance.

This is a particularly indefensible war, even by U.S standards. If they choose to, this is a war the American people can end. The establishment is certainly not comfortable publicly debating and defending their Yemen policy. Exposing the realities of this conflict and ending the war in Yemen could trigger an anti-war domino effect. Not since the Vietnam War has there been more fertile soil for an American anti-war movement.

Please continue to call your Congressmen and women and tell them to vote against the war on November 13th. Give them some good talking points for the debate. Please share, retweet posts from Yemenis on the ground, post news items, write blog posts, write articles, and speak your mind about the war in Yemen on social media. Do not be afraid to talk about the U.S.-Saudi/AQAP alliance. We have the truth on our side.

November 9, 2017 Posted by | Islamophobia, Militarism, Solidarity and Activism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

Hezbollah MPs urge Riyadh to stop meddling in Lebanon

Press TV – November 9, 2017

The parliamentary bloc of Hezbollah has called on Saudi Arabia to stop interfering in Lebanon’s domestic affairs after Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced his resignation while on a trip to Riyadh.

In a televised statement on Thursday, Hezbollah lawmaker, Hassan Fadlallah, said the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc supported President Michel Aoun’s refusal to accept the resignation as long as it was not “voluntary.”

Fadlallah further underlined the need to preserve security and stability in Lebanon.

Hariri’s announcement in a televised speech from Saudi Arabia on Saturday has rattled Lebanon. Unidentified Lebanese authorities told Reuters on Thursday that Saudi authorities had ordered him to quit and were holding him in detention.

“When he went (to Saudi Arabia) he was asked to stay there and ordered to resign. They ordered him to read his resignation statement and he has been held under house arrest since,” said a senior Lebanese politician close to Hariri.

“Lebanon is heading towards asking foreign and Arab states to put pressure on Saudi Arabia to release Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri,” the official added.

Following Hariri’s resignation, Saudi Arabia’s Minister of State for Persian Gulf Affairs Thamer al-Sabhan said the Lebanese government would “be dealt with as a government declaring war on Saudi Arabia” because of what he described as aggression by Hezbollah.

The Lebanese people, he said, “must choose between peace or aligning with Hezbollah.”

Saudi Arabia accuses the Lebanese government of declaring war on the kingdom because of “aggression” by Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is represented in the Lebanese parliament and in the national unity government formed by Hariri last year.

The resistance group has played a critical role in the Syrian military’s counter-terrorism operations over the past few years.

Hezbollah’s achievements have raised worries in Saudi Arabia, which has long supported Takfiri groups wreaking havoc in the region.

November 9, 2017 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 1 Comment

‘Cold day in hell before ICC goes after US for committing Afghanistan war crimes’

RT | November 9, 2017

The ICC prosecutor’s decision to pursue a probe into alleged war crimes in Afghanistan is “completely political” and won’t amount to anything, law professor Francis Boyle believes. He said it will be a “cold day in hell” before any Americans are prosecuted.

The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, announced last week that her request to launch an investigation had been handed over to a pre-trial court. She said that if her request is granted, the probe will focus “upon those most responsible for the most serious crimes committed in connection with the situation in Afghanistan.”

However, Francis Boyle, an international law professor at the University of Illinois, told RT that while Bensouda is likely to get approval for the investigation, the move is simply a “propaganda stunt.” He added that Bensouda has no desire to go after any Americans who committed war crimes.

“You have to understand, this is all political,” said Boyle. He noted that the African country of Burundi has already pulled out of the ICC, and South Africa has voiced the same intention.

“So she’s in a position and the court is in a position that almost all of Africa is going to pull out of the ICC because the only people in the dock over there are black, tin-pot dictators from Africa,” Boyle said. He called the court a “Western, racist, imperial tool” which is being used against Africa.

Because of this, the so-called “white man’s court” will not be going after Americans, Boyle said. “It will be a cold day in hell” before we see Bensouda doing so, he added. Boyle noted that the ICC has “never gone after the Americans, the NATO states, Britain, Israel, despite clear-cut jurisdiction to do so.”

Boyle went on to accuse the US government of committing a Nuremberg crime against peace by “invading Afghanistan and attacking it and blowing them back to the Stone Age and killing a million Afghans.” He added that “I doubt very seriously Bensouda is going to deal with any of that.”

“The United States illegally and criminally invaded Afghanistan and attacked and destroyed them… and then they set up all these torture campus over there, they’ve been torturing these poor people forever. And at a minimum, the United States has probably killed a million Afghanis [sic] since October 2001,” he said.

“The Americans should have been investigated a decade ago at least,” said Boyle, who filed an ICC complaint against former US President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, among others, in 2010, over their policy of “extraordinary rendition perpetrated upon about 100 human beings.” He added that “the American government knows full well they’ll be able to sabotage her [Bensouda], stop her. Nothing’s going to come of it.”

However, Boyle predicted that Bensouda would likely come back with a verdict that it was actually the Taliban who was responsible for crimes. “Or she might apportion blame, but that’s ridiculous too…if you read all the United Nations reports of human rights violations coming out of Afghanistan, they all blame the Taliban. And it’s a joke.”

Although the ICC statement doesn’t name specific parties that would be subject to the investigation, a report released by the prosecutor’s office last year said there is “reasonable basis” to believe crimes were committed by US military forces deployed to Afghanistan, and in secret detention facilities operated by the CIA. It also points the finger at the Taliban and Afghan government forces.

Boyle noted that although the US can technically be prosecuted by the court – despite not being a member – the ICC “pretty much do what they’re told to do,” citing money received from Europe, Japan, and South Korea, as well as the influence of America.

Meanwhile, the United Nations mission in Afghanistan said earlier on Thursday that at least 10 civilians may have been killed in an airstrike in the north city of Kunduz last week, despite a US military investigation stating that no evidence of civilian deaths had been found.

Boyle previously served on the board of Amnesty International USA and drafted legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, which was signed into law after being unanimously approved by both chambers of the US Congress.

Read more:

US spent $5.6 trillion on wars since 9/11 – study

‘Main creator of terrorism is US war on terror, not terrorists’

November 9, 2017 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , | 2 Comments