Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

DNI Nominee Intent on Getting to Bottom of Russiagate

By Ray McGovern – Consortium News – July 31, 2019

Shortly before President Donald Trump announced he had nominated Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) to replace Dan Coats as director of national intelligence, Ratcliffe made it clear he intends to hit the deck running on the “crimes” behind Russiagate.

“What I do know as a former federal prosecutor is it does appear that there were crimes committed during the Obama administration,” Ratcliffe told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo. Mincing few words, he claimed the Democrats “accused Donald Trump of a crime and then tried to reverse engineer a process to justify that accusation.”

It’s an extravagant claim. But it is also true, and the proof is in the pudding of which we should have a steady diet in the months to come.

Ratcliffe sounds partisan speaking of “crimes committed” under Obama. But there could well be documentary evidence to back it up. Some is classified. Trump has given Attorney General William Barr instructions to declassify what is necessary. Barr should be able to count on Ratcliffe, if he is confirmed by the Senate as DNI, to ride herd on those in the intelligence community with huge incentives to cover their tracks and those of their former bosses.

Ratcliffe: Justice will be done. (Fox News screenshot)

This may come as something of a shock to new readers of Consortium News because of the incessant drivel from corporate media “talking heads” for a full three years now. They are not likely to give up any time soon.

Ratcliffe on Where We Are Now

Ratcliffe told Bartiromo:

“The only place we can get the answers is from the Justice Department right now. The American people’s faith and trust has been shaken in our Justice Department, and the only way to get that back is for there to be real accountability with a very fair process. Again, I have supreme confidence in Bill Barr’s ability to deliver that and at the end of the day … as long as we know that the process was fair … justice will be done.”

If Ratcliffe means what he says, his remarks indicate that Barr (a former CIA official and relatively new-sheriff-back-in-town in his second stint as AG) should have in Ratcliffe a no-holds-Barred deputy sheriff, if he takes advantage of him. “Bill Barr has earned my trust already … that there will be a fair process, with John Durham and Michael Horowitz, to getting answers … and to provide accountability where it really belongs,” Ratcliffe said.

Barr has ordered John Durham, U.S. Attorney for Connecticut, to investigate how Russiagate got started. And Michael Horowitz, the Department of Justice Inspector General, is said to be almost ready to report on the roles of the DOJ and FBI in promoting the Trump-Putin “collusion” narrative.

Durham, however, twice essentially covered up for CIA misdeeds. The New York Times reported: “In 2008, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey assigned Mr. Durham to investigate the C.I.A.’s destruction of videotapes in 2005 showing the torture of terrorism suspects. A year later, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. expanded Mr. Durham’s mandate to also examine whether the agency broke any laws in its abuses of detainees in its custody.”

Durham: A good soldier, but with a new commander.

Abundantly clear in those days, however, was the reality that neither Mukasey nor Holder wanted Durham to deliver the goods on CIA people demonstrably involved in well documented death-by-torture of prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. Good soldier Durham uttered not a peep when Holder announced that the Department of Justice “declined prosecution because the admissible evidence would not be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.”

But Holder added this: “Our inquiry was limited to a determination of whether prosecutable offenses were committed and was not intended to, and does not resolve, broader questions regarding the propriety of the examined conduct.” The Times noted at the time that DOJ’s decision did not amount to “exoneration” of those involved in the prisoners’ treatment and deaths. Does that sound familiar?

Thus, judging from past experience, the question is not so much what Durham will come up with this time around when investigating folks from the same line of (intelligence) work. The more salient question is this: Will Durham’s role be limited by Deep State, gun-shy Trump, or will he be given the latitude to proceed with no-holds-Barred, so to speak.

Horowitz’s investigators, on the other hand, earlier discovered the extremely-damaging-to-the-Russia-gate-yarn text exchanges between senior FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and Horowitz decided to make them public in December 2017. First off the blocks the following day, the late Robert Parry, founder of this website, posted what turned out to be his last substantive article, “The Foundering Russia-gate Scandal.”

Horowitz’s investigators recently interviewed some formerly reluctant witnesses like Christopher Steele, who had been a paid informant of the FBI itself and whom the Clinton campaign later paid to assemble the infamous “dossier” on Trump’s alleged cavorting with prostitutes in Moscow and other scurrilous, since-disproven stories.

With the malleable nonentity Coats as DNI, and with top CIA officials trying to keep former CIA Director John Brennan out of jail (and shield their own derrieres), Barr has — until now — lacked a strong “deputy sheriff” with the requisite prosecutorial skills and courage to investigate the intelligence community to find out where the bodies are buried in Washington.

As soon as Ratcliffe is confirmed, Barr should have what he needs to close that gap and tackle full bore the intelligence part of the Deep State’s role in Russia-gate.

A Parvenu?

But how could Ratcliffe know anything, the corporate media asks, as they paint him as a newcomer, partisan ignoramus and focus on his lack of experience in foreign affairs. Sorry, Rachel Maddow, in case you haven’t noticed, the present focus is on affairs much closer to home. The “parvenu” label will not stick. Serving, as Ratcliffe has, on three key House committees —Intelligence, Judiciary, and Homeland Security — you can learn a whole lot, if you regard your responsibility as oversight, not overlook.

Brennan: Cold on Ratcliffe (White House photo)

Is there documentary evidence? Admittedly, it would seem a stretch to believe that Obama’s top intelligence and law enforcement officials — in “collusion” with the corporate media — would fabricate a Trump-in-Putin’s-pocket story line first to try to prevent Trump from being elected, and then emasculate him as incoming president. But, yes, there should be all manner of documentary evidence indicating that this is precisely what happened.

House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA) claimed in early April 2019, “They [the Democrats] have lied multiple times to the American people. All you have to do is look at their phony memos. They have had the full support of the media, 90 percent of the media in this country. They all have egg on their face.” The way things are now shaping up, we are likely to learn before too long whether the evidence supports Nunes’s accusations.

All the Naiveté That’s Fit to Print

The New York Times reported that many Republican Senators, who must vote on his confirmation, are “cool” to Ratcliffe:

“Democrats said on Monday that they were worried that Mr. Ratcliffe would do little to push back against the Justice Department’s review of the origins of the Russia inquiry, for which Mr. Trump gave Attorney General William P. Barr broad power to declassify relevant documents.”

Democrats don’t watch Fox News, but does the Gray Lady still harbor hope Ratcliffe might “push back” when he says he will push full steam ahead?

None of the leaking, unmasking, surveillance, DNC-hired “opposition research,” or other activities directed against the Trump campaign can be properly understood if one does not bear in mind that it was considered a sure thing that Hillary Clinton would become President, at which point high-risk, illegal activities undertaken to help her win would likely bring gratitude and perhaps a promotion, not an indictment. But Clinton lost.

Hillary: She hadda win, but didn’t.

After her loss, Comey himself gave the game away in his book, “A Higher Loyalty” — which amounted to a pre-emptive move motivated by loyalty-to-self and eagerness to secure a Stay-Out-of-Jail card. Comey wrote, “I was making decisions in an environment where Hillary Clinton was sure to be the next president …” [Emphasis added.] This would, of course, confer automatic immunity on key players who may now find themselves criminally referred to the Department of Justice.

Worse still, because they all were convinced a Clinton victory was a sure thing, the plotters did not perform due diligence to hide their tracks. And that largely accounts for the fact that there should be documentary evidence — probably even on not-yet-shredded paper, as well as on computer hard drives.

Given his seats on Intelligence, Judiciary, and Homeland Security, Ratcliffe has seen a lot more of them than most Congress members. In the Sunday interview, he named some of those allegedly engaged in illegalities:  former FBI Director James Comey, senior DOJ official Bruce Ohr, and opposition research guru Glenn Simpson. Also mentioned but unnamed were the Obama officials who Ratcliffe said committed a “felony” by leaking highly classified phone transcripts to use against Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump’s short-lived national security adviser.

But Now Running Scared

No one has more to fear from all this than ex-CIA Director Brennan. He eagerly awaited the final report from Mueller, whom Brennan has unctuously praised. Introducing Mueller to an audience at Georgetown University in June 2014, Brennan called him “a remarkable public servant as well as a great friend, a transformative leader, an outstanding partner to CIA, and a source of wise counsel to leaders across the intelligence community.”

In his testimony to the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees on July 24, Mueller avoided discussing some of the chicanery that bears Brennan’s fingerprints, but he surely failed to “exonerate” him, so to speak. To suggest that the selection of Ratcliffe to become DNI was unwelcome news to Brennan is to state the obvious. Brennan got up early on Monday and at 7:11 AM sent this characteristic tweet — about integrity and subservience, of all things:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has tweeted information from “a high-level source” that it was Brennan who “insisted that the unverified and fake Steele dossier” be given prominent attention in the Russia-gate story.

Paul has also said he thinks Brennan has been “a partisan” and “abused his office in developing the Trump investigation. I think it was done under false pretenses and done for political reasons.”

Paul has been a strong advocate of investigating the origins of Mueller’s probe, including the dicey question of how witting President Obama was of the Deep State machinations during the last months of his administration. Page did tell Strzok in a Sept. 2, 2016 text that the president “wants to know everything we’re doing.”

So What DID Obama Know?

If anyone knows how much Obama knew, it is one of his closest confidants: Brennan. And it was Obama, of course, who commissioned the misnomered “Intelligence Community Assessment” of Jan. 6, 2017, which Russia-gate aficionados have long regarded as Bible truth. As readers of Consortium News know, candidate Hillary Clinton and her supporters were wrong in saying the ICA was the product of “all 17” U.S. intelligence agencies. The leaders of only three — CIA, FBI, and NSA — signed on to it, plus DNI James Clapper.

Months later, Clapper admitted it was “handpicked analysts” from those three who wrote the report. It is a safe bet that Brennan, Clapper, and perhaps Comey picked the analysts. The ICA is such a shabby piece of work that many — including me — suspect that Brennan took a direct hand in writing it.

Ratcliffe would be well advised to take a priority look into the “Excellent Adventure” of that Intelligence Community Assessment as soon as he is confirmed as Director of National Intelligence, and before Brennan, Clapper, and Comey leave town for parts unknown.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. As a CIA analyst, he served under nine CIA directors and seven presidents, for three of whom he prepared and gave the morning briefing based on The President’s Daily Brief. In retirement, he co-created Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Deception | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Human Sacrifice: A Grand Old American Political Tradition

By Thomas L. Knapp – Garrison Center – July 31, 2019

On July 25, US Attorney General William Barr ordered the Federal Bureau of Prisons to update its execution protocol and schedule five executions starting this December.

Whether you support the death penalty or not — I don’t because I prefer limited government and the power to kill disarmed prisoners in cold blood and with premeditation is by definition unlimited government — it’s worthwhile to ask:  Why? More to the point, why now?

Politics, that’s why.

There’s a presidential election next year. US president Donald Trump’s re-election strategy, for lack of ability to grow his electoral “base,” is to keep that base energized and enthused so that they’ll turn out to vote instead of sitting at home catching up on re-runs of their favorite TV shows. And that base overwhelmingly supports capital punishment.

With this move Trump is quite literally throwing his supporters some red meat.

There’s nothing new about the idea. Indeed, the history of public human sacrifice for political purposes runs all the way back to ancient history in the Americas.

The last large-scale pre-Columbian example of the practice, that of the Aztecs, involved removing the beating heart of the victim atop a pyramid temple before flinging his or her corpse down the steps to the approval of a roaring crowd.

In this way, Aztec kings not only maintained support from their own populace through religious appeals, but kept smaller tribes too busy raiding each other (for sacrificial captives to be given to the Aztecs in tribute) to ally with each other against the Aztecs themselves.

If these five executions occur, they will be the first federal executions since 2003. There have only been three since 1963.

So, again, why? And why now?

Deterrence isn’t an answer that fits. Overall, violent crime (including murder) in the US has trended downward, not upward in recent decades (from 758 per 100,000 population in 1992 to 383 per 100,000 in 2017).

Neither is reducing the costs of incarceration. Of the more than 200,000 federal prisoners, only 61 are on “death row.” It’s unlikely that killing every last one of them would make a big dent in the Bureau of Prisons’ $7.3 billion annual budget.

Speaking which, if money was the problem, all five of the prisoners to be killed could as easily have been left to the justice systems of the states in which their crimes were committed and would have likely been sentenced to either death or life imprisonment without involving federal tax dollars in the first place.

The same is true regarding any moral “eye for an eye” imperative.  Handling this kind of crime, and this kind of criminal, was never supposed to be the federal government’s job.

That leaves politics. Trump is playing Montezuma in hopes of holding on to his adoring crowd.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org).

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Subjugation - Torture | , | 1 Comment

Trudeau ‘feminizes’ support for corrupt and repressive Haitian president

By Yves Engler ·July 31, 2019

38916d90c3f1953006d9ea10ec592854

Justin Trudeau and Jovenel Moïse

The Trudeau Liberals are attempting to “feminize” their support of an illegitimate government hated by the vast majority of Haitians. And Radio-Canada seems to have fallen for it.

After Radio-Canada published a story about nine of eighteen ministers in Jovenel Moïse’s newly proposed government being women, Haitian Canadian feminist Jennie-Laure Sully replied, “Haitians of all social classes have been demonstrating for more than a year demanding the resignation of the president and a change in the political system. But what does Radio-Canada talk about in this country? A cosmetic measure adopted by this fraudulently elected government accused of embezzlement and human rights violations. Gender parity in such conditions is a smokescreen (“poudre aux yeux”). Radio-Canada is doing identity politics of the lowest order while ignoring Canada’s role in maintaining corruption in Haiti.”

With little support among Haitians, Moïse needs good press in the two main countries sustaining his presidency. Recently he has been on a campaign to shore up his image in the US, publishing an op-ed in the Miami Herald and hiring a new Washington, DC, based lobbyist.

In presenting a gender balanced cabinet Moïse’s proposed Prime Minister, Fritz William Michel, deftly aligned with a stated foreign policy objective of Justin Trudeau. Along with praise for Moïse, Global Affairs Canada’s webpage about “Canada’s international assistance in Haiti” focusses on gender equity. At the top of the page, it lists a series of feminist goals under the heading of “To strengthen Haiti’s Government capacity to respond to gender equality issues.”

(In 2017 the Trudeau government launched a much-hyped Feminist International Assistance Policy, but their commitment to feminist internationalism is paper-thin. Since July 21, for instance, Ottawa joined Washington as the only country to vote against a UN Economic and Social Council resolution stating, “the Israeli occupation remains a major obstacle for Palestinian women and girls with regard to the fulfillment of their rights”; Canada signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the misogynist UAE; the Trudeau government was criticized by the chair of the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights Surya Deva for gutting their promise to rein in Canadian mining abuses abroad, which disproportionately affect women.)

Moïse has faced massive popular protests in recent months, including multiple general strikes. As I detail here and here, the only reason he remains in power is because of support from Washington, Ottawa and a number of other countries. Canada has provided financial, policing and diplomatic support to the unpopular government. In the latest indication of diplomatic backing, Canada’s ambassador in Port-au-Prince, André Frenette, met Moïse to discuss “bilateral cooperation” two weeks ago. The embassy also continues to support a police force responsible for countless abuses. On Sunday Global Affairs Canada’s Haïti account tweeted “congratulations” to police graduates who they trained in collaboration with the US.

On July 15 Solidarité Québec-Haïti #Petrochallenge 2019 activists interrupted a press conference by Minister of La Francophonie and Tourism Mélanie Joly to call on the Trudeau government to stop propping up a corrupt, illegitimate and murderous Haitian president. As this video shows, Joly was unable to respond to our simple question.

While the disruption was reported on by various media outlets, Radio Canada wasn’t interested. More than any other major media outlet, the French language public broadcaster has been the mouthpiece for Canadian imperialism in Haiti over the past 15 years. Unlike other outlets, Radio Canada covers Haitian affairs fairly regularly. But, it is almost entirely from the perspective of ‘Ottawa/Canada doing good’ in the impoverished nation.

Radio Canada largely failed to report on Canada’s role in planning the 2004 coup; destabilizing Jean-Bertrand Aristide’s government; building a repressive Haitian police force; justifying politically motivated arrests and killings; militarizing post-earthquake disaster relief; pushing the exclusion of Haiti’s most popular party, Fanmi Lavalas, from participating in elections.

When active with Haiti Action Montréal in the mid 2000s I experienced the politicized nature of the subject at Radio Canada. I called the news editor to inquire if they’d received our press release and instead of a yes/no we might/we can’t send anyone to cover the event that is usually part of this type of media outreach, the news editor somewhat angrily accused me of being an Aristide supporter, which was odd both because the event was focused on Canada’s role in Haiti and Aristide was elected by the country’s historically excluded.

In a 2008 article titled “Embedding CBC Reporters in Haiti’s Elitist Media” Richard Sanders describes Radio Canada’s participation in a Canadian government funded project to support media outlets that were part of L’Association Nationale des Médias Haïtiens (ANMH), which officially joined the Group of 184 that campaigned to oust Aristide. Sanders writes about Québec journalists sent to “train” Haitian reporters for a month, but who were in fact being “submerged in the propaganda campaigns of Haiti’s elite media.” Assistant program director for Radio Canada news, Guy Filion was one of the reporters who interned with ANMH. Even though ANMH outlets barred Haiti’s elected president from its airwaves in the lead-up to the coup, Filion described those who “formed the ANMH” as “pro-Haitian and they are pro neutral journalistic people … as much as it can be said in this country.” Filion also praised the media’s coverage of the 2006 election in which Aristide’s Lavalas was excluded. In a coded reference to Aristide supporters, Filion noted, “even thugs from [large slum neighbourhood] Cité Soleil were giving interviews on television!”

Radio-Canada’s reporting on gender parity in a proposed new government helps legitimate Trudeau’s support of Moïse. It puts a progressive veneer on a corrupt, repressive and unpopular president who is dependent upon Radio-Canada’s patron. It is yet another attempt to justify Canadian policy that sides with the interests of multinational corporations and a small elite over the needs of Haiti’s impoverished majority.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite | , | Leave a comment

Venezuela: Six Chavista Militants Killed in Fresh Rural Violence

By Ricardo Vaz | Venezuelanalysis | July 30, 2018

Caracas  – Six activists from the grassroots Revolutionary Bolivar and Zamora Current (CRBZ) were assassinated in Barinas State on Saturday.

The victims, including one pregnant woman, were part of the so-called Hugo Chavez Popular Defense Brigades organized by the CRBZ in Barinas, Tachira, and other states regularly plagued by landowner violence against campesinos.

No information is yet known about the assailants, with the CRBZ claiming in a statement that they had “military training.”

“We want to denounce to the country and the world the murder of six comrades, presumably by mercenaries paid by right-wing landowners in the region,” the group declared, before adding that the six would remain present “in every battle and in every day of struggle.”

The incident reportedly took place on Saturday morning as the Chavista militants were repairing a motorbike in the Ticoporo Reserve, Barinas State.

The killings sparked immediate outrage and shows of solidarity from Venezuelan and international activists alike, with participants in the Sao Paulo Forum demanding justice.

“On behalf of the Patria Grande movement [in Argentina] I want to express my solidarity and repudiate this action of landowners who want to subjugate campesinos,” said Silvana Broggi during the meeting currently taking place in Caracas.

Chavista popular movements likewise voiced their solidarity and cry for justice in a Twitter storm, with the hashtag “no more Chavista killings” (#NoMásChavistasAsesinados) becoming the top trend in Venezuela on Monday evening.

For his part, National Constituent Assembly President Diosdado Cabello said that paramilitary violence in the countryside was not something new and demanded an investigation into the assassinations.

“We strongly condemn this violence and demand a thorough investigation to find the culprits,” the Chavista leader said on Sunday, vowing that the crimes would not go unpunished. The Attorney General’s Office has yet to issue a public statement, though the CICPC investigative police has appeared on scene to gather evidence.

The Venezuelan countryside has seen a recent increase in targeted killings of campesinos in the context of escalating disputes over land rights. Landowner violence was one of the issues driving the Admirable Campesino March in July 2018 which saw dozens of campesinos march over 400 kilometers on foot to demand a meeting with President Maduro in order to change the state’s rural policies. A high-profile televised meeting took place, and Maduro ordered the creation of commissions to resolve land disputes and end impunity for rural violence.

However, campesinos have repeatedly denounced that little to no progress has been made, with several new campesino murders taking place since then. The continued setbacks have led campesino activists to return to Caracas and set up a vigil at the Land Institute to demand answers from authorities.

According to campesino groups, since the inauguration of Venezuela’s revolutionary land reform law in 2001, over 300 small farmers have been murdered by hired guns in the employ of large landowners. While in some cases the assassins have been convicted of their crimes, impunity continues with respect to the role of landed elites financing the killings.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture | | Leave a comment

Facebook defeats appeal in US claiming it aided Hamas attacks in Israel

MEMO | July 31, 2019

Facebook Inc on Wednesday defeated an appeal by American victims of Hamas attacks in Israel, who sought to hold the company liable for providing the group a social media platform to further its terroristic goals, Reuters reports.

The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”), a 1996 law regulating internet content, shielded Facebook from civil liability.

It also declined to consider the plaintiffs’ foreign law claims, noting that most plaintiffs, including relatives and estates of victims, said they were Americans living in Israel.

The plaintiffs originally sought $3 billion in damages from Facebook, for allowing Hamas to use its platform to encourage terrorist attacks in Israel, celebrate successful attacks, and generally support violence toward that country.

Their complaint described Hamas attacks against five Americans, four of whom died, in Israel from 2014 to 2016.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Facebook, based in Menlo Park, California, did not immediately respond to similar requests.

Wednesday’s decision is a fresh setback to efforts to hold companies such as Facebook and Twitter Inc liable for failing to better police users’ online speech. It upheld a May 2017 dismissal by US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in Brooklyn.

In seeking to overturn that dismissal, the plaintiffs said Facebook functioned as a matchmaker between Hamas and people receptive to its messages, and should not be immune from liability as a mere “publisher” of Hamas’ content.

Circuit Judge Christopher Droney, however, said it would turn the CDA “upside-down” to suggest that Facebook’s having become an “especially adept” publisher exposed it to liability.

He also refused to hold Facebook liable because its “friend” and content-based algorithms might have helped direct people interested in Hamas.

“Merely arranging and displaying others’ content to users of Facebook through such algorithms – even if the content is not actively sought by those users – is not enough to hold Facebook responsible as the ‘developer’ or ‘creator’ of that content,” Droney wrote.

Chief Judge Robert Katzmann, part of the three-judge appeals court panel, dissented from the algorithms discussion.

He said Congress did not consider how broadly to immunize social media companies, when it passed the CDA to regulate online pornography, and might rethink how to treat those accused of encouraging terrorism, propaganda and extremism.

“Over the past two decades the Internet has outgrown its swaddling clothes,” Katzmann wrote. “It is fair to ask whether the rules that governed its infancy should still oversee its adulthood.”

The US Department of State has designated Hamas a foreign terrorist organization since 1997.

The case is Force et al v. Facebook Inc et al, 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 18-397.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel sentences prisoners’ lawyer to 13 years behind bars

Tariq Barghouth, a prominent lawyer known for defending Palestinian prisoners held by Israel
MEMO | July 31, 2019

An Israeli court sentenced the lawyer of the PLO’s Prisoners’ Committee to 13 years, six months in prison on Tuesday, Quds Press has reported. Tariq Barghouth was arrested by the Israeli occupation forces on 27 February this year before undergoing harsh interrogation.

To put pressure on him in order to give what are said to be false confessions, the Israelis also arrested his wife and sister. The two women were released later.

Barghouth is one of the most prominent lawyers known for defending Palestinian prisoners held by Israel. He is currently in Nafha Prison in the south of Israel.

Meanwhile, the Israeli prison service has detained Shorouq Mohammed Al-Badan, 25, from Taqu village near the occupied West Bank city of Bethlehem. She has been given an administrative detention term of six months with neither charge nor trial.

The Prisoners’ Committee said that the occupation authorities arrested Al-Badan on 15 July during a night raid on her house. She was taken to the Etzion interrogation centre and then to HaSharon Prison for five day; she is now in Al-Damoun Prison.

Whilst in HaSharon, Al-Badan was held in a very small room which was extremely hot due to the prevailing high temperature. This led to her suffering from acute pain in her kidneys, presumably as a result of severe dehydration.

The Committee said that there are currently around 500 Palestinian prisoners being held under administrative detention orders inside Israeli jails, including nine who are on hunger strike in protest against their detention. Such orders can be renewed indefinitely.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture | , , , , | 1 Comment

Crimes in limbo: SDF commits horrific crimes against Syrians under the cover of the international coalition

Euro-Med | July 30,2019

The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor (Euro-Med) in a brief report today, shed light on numerous extrajudicial executions and other human rights violations carried out by the coalition-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) against civilians living in the eastern part of the country.

SDF continues to violate the rights of Syrians in the face of unjustifiable silence from the international community and continues to receive military and logistical support and air cover from the US-led international coalition forces, Euro-Med said.

The SDF was established in the city of Qamishli in northern Syria on the 10th of October 2015 to fight against the Islamic State. At that time, they defined themselves as “a unified national military force for all Syrians, Arabs, Kurds, Syriac, and all other components.” But the ethnic composition of the SDF forces suggests this is not the case, and it is in fact dominated by Kurdish forces. Currently, 70% of its troops are Kurds, while Arabs and other communities account for just 30%.

In their report, Euro-Med highlighted the continued suffering of thousands of Syrians in the cities of Raqqa and Deir al-Zour following the defeat of the Islamic State in the region and the takeover of the eastern part of Syria by the SDF.

The report authors were particularly concerned by some of the alleged recruitment practices of the SDF. It was alleged that the SDF had been undertaking forced recruitment of civilians in their battle against the Islamic State, even compelling children to fight in some cases.

Other atrocities committed by SDF forces that were brought to the attention of Euro-Med staff included the torture and extrajudicial killing of civilians. A video was recently leaked to the Al Forat Network by a member of the SDF that showed the torture and execution of two Arab youths in an SDF prison. It was alleged that the young men were killed because of their refusal to submit to the forced recruitment campaign.

Euro-Med staff later obtained a different video of a similarly appalling crime. It showed a member of the SDF torturing a girl and a man for refusing to go to a recruitment camp. The video also showed a different masked soldier beating the girl and the man after handcuffing them and insulting them.

The report also referenced a widely-circulated video clip from various social media sites that shows a member of the SDF executing a married couple just for walking past a wall marked with anti-Kurdish slogans.

Another video showed SDF fighters torturing two handcuffed civilians to try to extract the hiding places of Islamic State forces. The video shows one of the soldiers beating a detainee around the head with a plastic chair.

The report also accuses the SDF of preventing civilians forced from their homes by the Islamic State or those who escaped Islamic State-controlled areas from returning to their homes, while also detaining hundreds of civilians in prisons lacking even the most basic amenities.

According to information collected by the Euro-Med from local human rights organisations, the SDF tortured hundreds of displaced Syrians and imprisoned them in detention centres for days on end in the hope of extracting any information relating to the Islamic State.

The Euro-Med report also contains testimony from Syrian civilians suggesting an intentional policy on the part of the SDF to alter the demographic makeup of areas under their control. The SDF confiscated dozens of houses in villages they captured, before annexing them to “self-managed” status within the framework of their planned Kurdish federal territory.

Mohamed Imad, Euro-Med’s legal researcher, described recent events in eastern Syria Syria as a serious violation of the most basic legal rights guaranteed by international law. He added that the right to a dignified life, freedom of movement, safe living and access to basic services for Syrian civilians is guaranteed under multiple international agreements, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

“The human and legal violations and executions carried out by SDF members outside the framework of the law represent war crimes and crimes against humanity. They should be held responsible for their actions before the International Criminal Court,” Imad stressed.

Imad expressed his concern at the uncritical support of the SDF amongst the international community, which continued despite the obvious human rights violations being perpetrated by the opposition group.

The report concludes by calling on the United Nations Security Council to intervene urgently to halt the SDF atrocities. Euro-Med also called for an end to all material and logistical support for the SDF from the international community, as well as an end to all coordinated military operations.

Euro-Med also called on the United Nations to set up a special investigation into the atrocities in Eastern Syria and demanded that the perpetrators appear before the International Criminal Court to face justice for their war crimes and crimes against humanity.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

The Yemen Tragedy Further Fueled by the West and Its Allies

By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 31.07.2019

A most sophisticated demagogy, blatant falsifying of facts, impudent interpretation of events with everything going upside down, these are the thoughts that come to one’s mind when one reads another forgery concocted in the West. We mean the statement addressed to Iran calling for the termination of the actions which are allegedly destabilizing the situation in the Persian Gulf. The statement was made by the governments of the US, the UK and their satellites: the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia, on June 24, as reported by the US Department of State press service. In this manifesto, contrary to the obvious facts, the signatories held Iran responsible for the escalation of the situation in Yemen and the attacks on the oil tankers on May 12 and June 13, urging the Islamic Republic to start searching for a diplomatic solution. The intensity of this demagogy, as the saying goes, is beyond the scale.

Let us however, in a quiet fashion and on the basis of the obvious facts, consider the situation in the Persian Gulf area and ask several questions. Did Iran or the poor Yemen suffering a score of internal problems, indeed attack Saudi Arabia? Did the Houthis indeed create a so-called Arab coalition which has consistently bombed the Saudi cities and villages killing the civilians? By no means. It was the Saudis, namely the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud who took up the foreign policy responsibilities due to the old age and numerous diseases of his father, the King, and who gave the order sanctioning the rough intervention of Riyadh in internal affairs of the neighboring state of Yemen and the total bombing of the Yemen cities.

The leader of the Houthis and the President of the Supreme Revolutionary Committee (SRC) Mohammed Ali al-Houthi demanded the UN Secretary General to condemn the war crimes committed in Yemen. Among the crimes perpetrated by the coalition of the Arab countries (led by Saudi Arabia and supported by the countries of the West), the Houthi leader named the ruthless blockade of the Yemen people, the famine in the country, the ongoing air embargo, the blockade of the Red Sea ports, the mass murders (including those of children), the destruction of civil facilities targeted during the military attacks.

The UN strongly condemned the following Saudi air raid on the Yemen capital city of Sanaa which resulted in the death of many civilians, including five children; dozens of people were wounded. The head of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Henrietta Holsman Fore, speaking at the UN Security Council session, urged the international community to save the lives of the millions of Yemenite children. She emphasized that, since the beginning of the conflict in the country, according to official figures only, up to 10,000 children had been killed or wounded. According to the UN, the Saudi Air Force “aimed at the civilians systematically,” dropping bombs on hospitals, schools, weddings, funeral processions and even on the camps for the displaced persons escaping from bombing.

Representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) emphasized that the belligerents, Saudi Arabia in the first place, must respect the principles of international humanitarian law, which includes protecting the civilians during the hostilities. Millions of people in Yemen are currently on the verge of starvation, and the humanitarian organizations often have no opportunity to deliver the aid: food, medicines and fuel, to those in need. A major part of humanitarian cargo comes to Yemen through the ports of Al Hudaydah, As-Salif and Ras Issa, where the Houthis, following the Stockholm agreement, withdrew their troops from. However, representatives of the international organizations, whose activities have suffered consistent pressure exerted by the United States, for some reason or other, are not in a hurry to fulfill their obligations.

The international community’s condemnation of the Saudi crimes reached such a degree that the Deputy Minister of Defense of Saudi Arabia Khalid bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud had to hold a meeting with the special envoy of the UN Secretary General on Yemen Martin Griffiths. However, his stance was only limited to demagogical statements “about Riyadh‘s commitment to a political solution of the conflict in Yemen.”

And, probably, in order to ensure “the wellbeing of the Yemen people,” the Riyadh-led coalition declared the launch of a new attack on the positions of the Houthi insurgents in the province of Sanaa, in western Yemen. This information was made public by the Al Arabiya TV channel, referring to the military. The main targets for the new airstrikes include air defense facilities and missile warehouses belonging to the rebels. It is known that this province is densely inhabited; numerous cities and settlements are located there, and, therefore, the number of victims among the civilians will only increase. Such is the “commitment” of Saudi Arabia to the “wellbeing” of its neighbor and the “support” of a political solution of the ongoing conflict. Many politicians claim (for a good reason) that had there been no intervention of the Saudis in the internal affairs of Yemen, then this conflict would not have existed at all, nor would there have been all the numerous victims.

The international community does not pay due attention to the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, no sufficient financing is allocated for it, said the President of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) Francesco Rocca: “The problem is not in providing more (help), but in receiving financing (to have an opportunity) to provide more (help). It is a vicious circle, the Yemen crisis lacks financing. It is forgotten, it is being ignored.”

More fuel to the long-lasting Yemen conflict fire was added by D. Trump who extended the sanctions against Yemen for another year. The White House website comments as follows: “The actions and policy of several former members of the Yemen government and other persons continue to threaten the peace, safety and stability of Yemen. Among other things, they interfere with the political process and the implementation of the peace treaty of November 23, 2011 between the government of Yemen and the opposition.” Let us remind the reader that the state of emergency concerning Yemen envisaging a number of restrictions was imposed in May 2012.

A faithful ally of the US, the UK has been actively partaking in this murderous war as well by delivering to the Saudis aviation bombs (for good money, too) which are used to kill the civilians of Yemen. On March 27, 2015 the day after the first British bombs fell on Yemen, the then Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary Philip Hammond told the reporters that the UK “will support the Saudis in every practical operation, by involvement in the fighting.” Since then, the British bombs which have been actively used by the Saudi pilots during the raids on the Yemen territory have been regularly manufactured in three British cities: Glenrothes in Scotland, and Harlow and Stevenage in Southeast England. The bombs which leave the production line for the Saudis on a daily basis belong to the Raytheon UK and ВАЕ Systems.

As soon as this weapon was bought by Saudi Arabia, the UK began to participate in the Yemen slaughter even more actively. The Saudi military lack experience to use this modern and lethal weapon. Therefore, for this air war to go on and for the British government to do good business on the blood of Yemenites, under another contract, London provides what is known as the “on-site military services.” In practical terms, it means that some 6,300 British experts have been deployed on the advanced operational bases in Saudi Arabia. It is them, not the Saudi pilots and technicians, who perform necessary repairs of the planes day and night so that they could fly across the Arabian Desert to their targets in Yemen again. They also control the Saudis loading bombs onto the planes and installing fuses on the bombs.

Thus, the West, which has been doing good business on the Yemen blood, will go on with its impudent demagogical statements that Iran, not Saudi Arabia, is responsible for the Yemen tragedy. Even more so, since Riyadh is buying arms amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars from the US alone, thus supporting the American military and industrial complex and giving Donald Trump a chance to create new jobs in the US. However, no one in the West seems to care at whose expense and on whose blood the US prospers.

During his recent trip to Yemen, the British conservative Member of Parliament Andrew Mitchell visited a school in the capital where he was “welcomed” by children who chanted slogans. The politician asked the accompanying Yemenite to interpret and learnt that they meant “death to the Saudis,” “death to the Americans,” and the third slogan remained untranslated, but it is easy to guess that it meant: “death to the British.”

Viktor Mikhin is a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany won’t take part in US Strait of Hormuz initiative – FM

RT | July 31, 2019

Germany will refuse to take part in a US-led maritime mission in the Strait of Hormuz, Foreign Minister Heiko Maas announced. Maas said that there “cannot be a military solution” to the current crisis in the Persian Gulf.

Speaking in Warsaw, Poland on Wednesday, Maas said that Germany will turn down Washington’s request, which was revealed by the US Embassy in Berlin on Tuesday. The joint US, British, and French operation is aimed at protecting sea traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, and combating so-called “Iranian aggression.”

The mission was conceived following Iran’s seizure of the British-flagged Stena Impero oil tanker earlier this month, itself widely considered a tit-for-tat response to Britain’s seizure of an Iranian tanker off the coast of Gibraltar several weeks earlier.

That Germany would refuse to assist the American-led mission is no surprise. Washington’s request was the subject of intense debate in Berlin, with opposition parties on the left and right pressuring Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition government into saying no.

“We have to avoid further escalation in the Strait of Hormuz,” Maas said on Wednesday. “That has always been our position.” Compared to the United States and some of its allies, Germany has enjoyed relatively cordial relations with Tehran since the 1970s.

Germany remains party to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal), a landmark agreement that granted Iran sanctions relief in exchange for a curb on its nuclear weapons program. The United States unilaterally withdrew from the deal last year, precipitating the current standoff with Tehran.

Despite Germany’s refusal to join the US-led mission, some politicians in Berlin remain open to another kind of deployment. “The alternative is a European mission, if necessary without the British, if they decide for the US,” Norbert Roettgen, a member of Merkel’s CDU party, told German media on Tuesday.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 3 Comments

US poised to renew anti-Iran nuclear sanctions waivers in blow to hawks: Report

Press TV – July 31, 2019

The US is reportedly expected to extend waivers from sanctions that allow the remaining signatories to a 2015 nuclear deal to continue their nuclear cooperation with Tehran, in what would be a blow to ardent Iran hawks in the White House.

Citing six unnamed officials, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that US President Donald Trump had in an Oval Office meeting last week sided with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin who backed renewing the waivers that the hawks want eliminated.

The US State Department last extended the sanctions waivers in May and the expected renewal will give five Iranian nuclear projects another 90 days of immunity.

The sources further said Mnuchin had prevailed over the objections of US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton — two staunch sponsors of economic pressure and tough action against Iran.

Mnuchin “argued to Trump that if the sanctions were not again waived as required by law by August 1, the United States would have to sanction Russian, Chinese and European firms that are involved in projects inside Iran that were established as part of the 2015 nuclear deal,” the officials added.

The five programs include modifying the heavy water reactor in Arak, converting the Fordow enrichment facility as well as fuel exchanges at the Bushehr nuclear power plant and the Tehran research reactor, The Washington Post reported.

It also quoted a senior official in the Trump administration as saying that Washington’s goal of ending the waivers still remained.

“We still have the goal of ending these waivers,” he said. “These waivers can be revoked at any time, as developments with Iran warrant. But because of the Treasury Department’s legitimate concerns, we’ve decided to extend them for now.”

Daryl Kimball, president of the Arms Control Association, said that the nuclear projects should be saved for their intrinsic value as Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran was not going to work anyway.

“It’s in the US national and international security interest to extend these waivers to allow these projects, which were designed to make Iran’s nuclear programs more proliferation-resistant,” he said.

The US launched the “maximum pressure” against Iran after pulling out of the 2015 multilateral accord — officially named the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — and re-imposing the sanctions it had lifted under the agreement.

Analysts believe the rift in the White House on the issue and the broader Iran policy is the root cause of Trump’s mixed signals, which have often switched between belligerent rhetoric and overtures to Tehran.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Aletho News | , | 5 Comments

Texts Between British, US Intel Officials Reveal UK Link in Whipping Up Russiagate Hysteria – Report

Sputnik – July 31, 2019

UK and US claims about ‘Russian meddling’ in the Brexit referendum and the 2016 US presidential election are nothing new, with recently appointed UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson saying he has “no evidence of Russian interference” in Brexit, and President Trump repeatedly accusing opponents of using Russiagate to try to stage a ‘coup’ against him.

An unnamed ‘informed source’ has told The Guardian that in 2016, now retired FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe and his British counterpart Jeremy Fleming, then serving as deputy director general of the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), exchanged a series of texts about possible Russian interference in the Brexit vote, and alleged collusion between the Trump presidential campaign and the Kremlin.

Butting In on Brexit

According to the newspaper’s source, McCabe and Fleming were surprised by the results of June 2016 EU referendum, and indicated this sentiment in their back and forth texts, with US officials said to have called the referendum results a “wake-up call” about the success of alleged Russian efforts to meddle in UK politics.

The claims run contrary to statements made by Boris Johnson, who, during his tenure as foreign secretary, said that he saw “no evidence’” of any successful Russian meddling in Britain’s democratic process, or the Brexit referendum. Moscow similarly dismissed the meddling claims, saying those who made them have offered zero substantiated evidence.

Following the referendum, UK lawmakers asked authorities to investigate the scale of alleged Russian meddling, with media reporting on massive troll farm operations on Facebook and Twitter reportedly trying to influence the vote by posting pro-leave messages from fake users. However, last month, Facebook said that there was “absolutely no evidence” that Russia swayed the 2016 vote in any way, reiterating statements the company has been making since 2017. In 2018, Twitter also challenged claims of a Russian troll influence campaign, reporting that just some 49 accounts thought to originate in Russia posted tweets about Brexit ahead of the vote, making up just 0.005 percent of accounts tweeting about the referendum.

Trump Collusion Claims

According to The Guardian’s source, after the Brexit vote, the McCabe-Fleming texts turned to talk of Russian meddling in the US election, with one text from August 2016 referring to a meeting between members of the FBI and MI5 to discuss “our strange situation,” in reference to the alleged collusion situation.

The off-again-on-again messages, most of them cryptic and avoiding reference to any specific details, are “new insights into the start of the FBI’s Russia investigation, and how British intelligence appears to have played a key role in the early stages,” the newspaper suggested.

The FBI opened a secretive counterintelligence operation codenamed ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ into possible links between the Trump campaign and Russia in July 2016, at the same time that the senior FBI and GCHQ officials were supposedly exchanging their texts, with that investigation soon rolling over into the Mueller probe.

Claims about possible Trump-Russia collusion finally collapsed in April 2019, after special counsel Robert Mueller released a 448-page report following a two year investigation, showing that he could find no evidence that anyone from the Trump campaign knowingly colluded with any Russians. As with the Brexit case two years earlier, the ‘evidence of Russian meddling’ presented in the report again boiled down to alleged Russian troll farms; however, these claims by Mueller were themselves debunked for being misattributed, and grossly ineffective, given, for example, that the so-called trolls posted over half of the messages supposedly aimed at influencing the US election in Russian.

The Democrats’ collusion claims took another hit last week during Mueller’s testimony to Congress, and his failure to provide any grounds to revive the Russiagate claims.

McCabe’s Conflict With Trump, UK’s Role in Russiagate

A spokesman for McCabe declined to comment on The Guardian’s piece. The official temporarily served as Trump’s acting director of the FBI for several months in 2017, after James Comey’s dismissal. McCabe was fired in 2018 by then Attorney General Jeff Sessions after being charged with making unauthorised releases of information to the media, and of misleading agents who questioned him about it. McCabe has since proposed that Trump’s cabinet suspend the president from office over his alleged obstruction of justice and work “on behalf of Russia against American interests.” Trump and his allies have blasted such proposals as a call for a “coup” against the elected president.

Since his reported communications with McCabe in 2016, Fleming has been promoted, and now serves as director of the GCHQ.

The UK’s activity in the early stages of the Trump-Russiagate investigation has been put under the spotlight in recent months after it was reported that the so-called Steele dossier, created by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, was vetted by MI5 and MI6 ahead of its release. Steele made a variety of bizarre claims about Trump’s suspected ties with Russia, including allegations that Russian intelligence had compromising information on him, forcing him to do their bidding. That report was thoroughly discredited by US media shortly after its release.

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Deception, Russophobia | , , , | 4 Comments

California Dreaming and Erosion “Crises”

clip_image002

By Jim Steele | Pacific Tribune | July 24, 2019

California’s spectacular coastline attracts tourists from around the world. Headlands of granite or basalt resist erosion, defiantly jutting out into the sea. Pocket beaches form where focused wave energy bites into softer sandstones and uncemented stream sediments. Relentless waves undermine and steepen cliffs bordering 70% of California’s shoreline. Over hundreds and thousands of years, natural erosion sculpted our awe-inspiring undulating coast.

But beauty is in the eye of the beholder – likewise the magnitude of a “coastal crisis”. The Los Angeles Times recently published ‘California coast is disappearing under the rising sea. Our choices are grim’. They inaccurately painted natural erosion as a recent crisis due to CO2 induced climate change. However, California’s erosion “crisis” must be understood within a greater timeframe.

Since the end of the last ice age, sea level has risen 400 feet. Over 18,000 years, San Francisco’s regional coastline marched 25 miles inland, advancing 7 feet a year – more than twice California’s average. My beautiful home town of Pacifica was featured in that Times’ article because it lost several homes unfortunately built on loosely cemented sand and gravel deposited 100,000 years ago when sea level was 20 feet higher. Although the ocean’s landward march has slowed over the past 5000 years, northern Pacifica’s fragile coastline still retreated by over 7 feet per year between 1929 and 1943. Despite a warming world, the average rate of cliff retreat then markedly declined since 1943.

clip_image004

The ill-fated Ocean Shore Railway, initiated in 1905, foreshadowed California’s erosion problems. To give tourists awesome views, tracks were laid on a ledge dug into steep coastal cliffs. But landslides were common, and costly repairs forced the railway to close. Today, only 25% of the railway ledge built by 1928 still exists. Undeterred, designers of California’s scenic Pacific Coast Highway hoped to give automobile travelers similar breath-taking views. Again, landslides were common. Only 38% of the highway constructed by 1956 still remains. Geologists tell us such landslides constantly altered California’s modern coastline for hundreds of years.

There are few straight lines in nature. Our coastlines undulate. Likewise, our climate oscillates, and coasts erode episodically. Between 1976 and 1999 (the warm phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation), California experienced more frequent El Niños. Over 70% of California’s 20th century disappearing coastline eroded during El Niño events. El Niños bring more storms and more destructive waves. El Niños bring more rains that saturate soils and promote landslides. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation then switched to its cool phase. It brought more La Niñas and more drought, but fewer winter storms and less erosion. In 1949, also a time of less erosion, Pacifica’s government believed homes setback 65 feet from the edge of a bluff would be safe. They never suspected a single El Niño event would move the cliff edge 30 feet landward 50 years later.

There are some who see human structures as a blight on California’s natural coastline. In response to natural erosion, they suggest we abandon the coast. They argue California’s only choice is “managed retreat” versus “unmanaged retreat”. Although well engineered seawalls can protect homes and businesses, some environmentalists called seawalls a coastal “crisis”. California’s Coastal Commission recently pledged seawalls will “only be permitted if absolutely necessary”. But the Commission’s policy only fosters a mishmash of emergency fixes. Randomly armored properties deflect destructive waves downstream, accelerating erosion in a neighbor’s unprotected property. Coastal cities must construct well-engineered sea walls, without any gaps.

Because sea walls prevent erosion, the Commission ill-advisedly fears local beaches will be lost if denied locally eroded sand. The Times parroted that belief writing, ‘for every constructed seawall, a beach is sacrificed’. But is that true? San Francisco’s O’Shaughnessy sea wall built in 1929 prevents erosion of the fragile sand dunes supporting Golden Gate Park. Yet SF’s north ocean beach continues to grow. Without a seawall, San Francisco’s south ocean beach rapidly eroded, and threatened infrastructure now requires a sea wall.

Sources of beach sand fluctuate, and simplistic sea wall analyses are very misleading. Sand is stored and transported to beaches in many ways. Streams and rivers supply the most sand needed to nourish a beach, but mining SF bay’s sand has deprived nearby coastal beaches. Furthermore, ocean oscillations shift winds and the direction of currents that transport sand. Beaches grow for decades then suddenly shrink. Although some argue our beaches face a rising sea level “crisis”, archaeologist determined that despite more rapidly rising sea levels 5000 years ago, many California beaches grew when supplied with adequate sand.

Lastly, it’s interesting to note scientists suggested Pacific islands also face an erosion crisis due to rising sea levels. But the latest scientific surveys determined 43% of those islands remained stable while land extent of another 43% has grown. Only 14% of the islands lost land. So, I fear exaggerated crises only erode our trust in science.

Jim Steele is director emeritus of the Sierra Nevada Field Campus, SFSU and authored Landscapes and Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism

July 31, 2019 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment