Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

‘Kafkaesque’: CBS fires female staffer who MAY have leaked Epstein rant video of ABC anchor – report

RT | November 7, 2019

CBS has reportedly fired a female staffer formerly with ABC, suspecting her of having leaked the hot mic tape of anchor Amy Robach in which she complained about the channel spiking her interview with Jeffrey Epstein’s victim.

The unnamed employee was fired on Wednesday after ABC tipped off the (supposedly) rival network “as a courtesy” that its employee had possession of the Robach tape and may have leaked it to Project Veritas, Page Six reported on Thursday, citing sources inside ABC.

ABC chose to inform its competitor of the traitor in their midst after considering its options and realizing there was little it could do to her on its own, since the staffer had left ABC for CBS, the report said. Had she still worked at ABC, the leak would have been a “fireable offense.”

It’s not known if the staffer leaked the fateful clip to Project Veritas herself or merely passed it on to someone else who did. Either way, ABC has been “pursuing all avenues” to find the source of the leak since its publication on Tuesday rocked the network, a company spokesperson stated, adding that “we take violations of company policy very seriously.”

In the video, Robach laments that the network shelved her report on well-connected pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, featuring an interview with one of his most outspoken victims, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, three years ago.

“We had everything!” Robach said into a hot mic, noting the solid sourcing and a thoroughly juicy scoop implicating former president Bill Clinton, Britain’s Prince Andrew, and a slew of other powerful individuals. ABC shot back that the story lacked “enough corroboration” – though that hasn’t stopped them from airing dodgy stories in the past.

The firing of the (supposed) whistleblower incensed some who have been following the Epstein saga. Not only had ABC spiked the story, supposedly – as Robach claims in the tape – because its owners are part of a “network of people” implicated in the now-deceased financier’s crimes, but they had hounded the leaker out of her job. Whose side, many wondered, was the media actually on?

“This is no longer merely Orwellian. It’s Kafkaesque,” tweeted Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe, slamming the “credentialed” journalism establishment and its Big Tech boosters as “engaged in collusion and cover up.”

November 7, 2019 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | 9 Comments

Israel Admits to Losing Sophisticated Missile in Syria, Recovered by Russian Forces

By Khaled Iskef | 21st Century Wire | November 7, 2019

Israel has admitted to losing a missile from its air defense system after it landed in Syrian territory. The item was apparently recovered by Russian reconnaissance units, before being transferred to its experts.

According to Israeli media reports, the IDF missile known as “David’s Sling” landed inside of Syria in July of this year, and was recovered by the Russian army before being transferred to Moscow to examine its technology. The missile is produced by a joint venture between Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Raytheon.

Media sources pointed out that, “the rocket landed in Syrian territory after failing to intercept one of the Syrian missiles.” It should be noted also that those missiles were launched in response to an Israeli attack which was targeting sites in Damascus and its countryside.

Israel has asked Russia to return the missile.

The missile is one of the most sophisticated missiles within the wider “Iron Dome” defense array system, with which the IDF was using to intercept Russian-made SS21 missile being deployed by the Syrian army.

Israel did not clarify whether there is any Russian response on its request to return the IDF missile. Likewise, there has yet to be any official Russian comment on the subject.

Presumably, fears on the Israeli side would include the possibility that “fragments and parts of the missile to Iran or the resistance Palestinian Authority,” thus enabling them to access the advanced technology.

November 7, 2019 Posted by | War Crimes | | 2 Comments

Chile and the revolt against climate-change policies

By H. Sterling Burnett | American Thinker | November 6, 2019

Add Chile to the growing list of countries whose governments are suffering a backlash as average people, tired of elites forcing costly climate policies down their throats, take to the streets to protest higher energy costs.

Although, undoubtedly, many issues stoked the protests on the streets across Chile, the Washington Post rightly notes that what finally drove the public to take to the streets was the government’s decision to curry favor with international agencies by pushing expensive energy restrictions to fight purported climate change. As the Post states, “[T]he catalyst [behind the protests] was a proposal to raise public transport fares and energy bills. There is ample evidence from across the world that these will incite rebellion like nothing else — a point that those who hope to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions via a carbon tax should bear in mind.”

Climate alarmists at international agencies heaped praise on Chile’s government for its aggressive climate policies in recent years. The United Nations awarded former Chilean president Michelle Bachelet a Champion of the Earth prize in 2017 for rapidly replacing relatively inexpensive fossil fuels used for electricity with much more expensive wind and solar power.

The Chilean government’s climate policies are causing the country’s people to suffer. Chile’s electricity prices have risen 18% in just the past year — making Chile’s electricity costs the highest in all of South America. Before the riots, the government had announced that electricity prices would increase an additional 9% by the end of 2019, a plan it canceled in response to the violence in the streets.

The final straw for Chileans was the announcement of Metro fare hikes. The Metro is a critical source of mobility for the nation’s poor, and they revolted at the thought that even as coal, oil, and gas prices remained low, prices to ride the Metro were going up so the government could reap praise for running its transit system on wind and solar power. The people finally had enough! The protests and riots forced Chilean president Sebastián Piñera to announce that Chile would no longer host a U.N. climate conference, previously scheduled for December.

Chile’s travails are just the latest evidence of the public’s growing skepticism concerning the value of costly climate policies. Beginning in 2016, with the election of noted climate catastrophe skeptic Donald Trump as president of the United States, climate alarmist governments and movements have taken their lumps on the streets and at the polls.

In progressive Washington State, for instance, voters in 2016 and again in 2018 directly rejected referenda that would have imposed taxes on carbon dioxide to fight climate change.

Perhaps the most visible and violent rejection of policies to raise energy prices in the name of fighting climate change — prior to the Chilean riots — came in France in 2018. For months, protesters donning yellow vests took to the streets to protest scheduled increases in fuel taxes, electricity prices, and stricter vehicle emissions controls. French president Emmanuel Macron claimed that these increases were necessary to meet the country’s greenhouse gas reduction commitments under the Paris climate agreement. After the first four weeks of protest, Macron’s government canceled the climate action plan.

Similarly, in Ontario in 2018 and in Alberta in 2019, voters replaced their premiers who had supported Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau’s climate policies with global warming skeptics who announced they would rescind provincial carbon taxes and fight Trudeau’s federal carbon dioxide tax in court.

In August 2018, Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull was forced to resign over carbon dioxide restrictions he’d planned to implement to meet the country’s Paris climate commitments. His successor announced that reducing energy prices and improving reliability, not fighting climate change, would be the government’s primary energy goals going forward.

In March 2019, the Forum for Democracy (FvD), a fledgling political party just three years old, tied for the largest number of seats (12) in the divided Dutch Senate in the 2019 elections. On the campaign trail, Thierry Baudet, FvD’s leader, said the government should stop funding climate change programs, saying such efforts are driven by “climate-change hysteria.”

And in Finland, where climate policies were the dominant issue in the April 14 election, climate skepticism surged, with the Finns Party — the only party rejecting plans to raise energy prices and limit energy use — coming from way behind to win the second highest number of seats in Parliament.

The public is tuning out [in the face of] the ever more shrill headlines proclaiming that the end of the world is near due to climate change, saying “enough is enough” to high energy prices that punish the most vulnerable, but do nothing to control the weather. As the riots and elections show, politicians who ignore this message do so at their own peril.

H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D. (hburnett@heartland.org) is a senior fellow on energy and the environment at The Heartland Institute, a nonpartisan, nonprofit research center headquartered in Arlington Heights, Illinois.

November 7, 2019 Posted by | Economics, Science and Pseudo-Science | 1 Comment

Trump rejects Israel’s request to fund Palestine security forces

Press TV – November 7, 2019

US President Donald Trump has reportedly told his close assistants that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should pay millions of dollars in annual aid to the Palestinian Authority if he thinks Washington’s decision to cut it altogether was wrong.

New website Axios reported on Wednesday that Netanyahu had earlier this year asked the White House to resume transferring money to the Palestinian authority, citing concerns by Israeli experts that not doing so would affect the future of any attempts at “peace.”

Barak Ravid, a Channel 13 reporter in Israel, claimed that Tel Aviv made the request after it found out that the US State Department had discovered $12 million in funds earmarked for the Palestinians but not transferred to the PA.

Israel, which maintains security ties with the Palestinian Authority of President Mahmoud Abbas, asked Trump to hand over the money, a request he swiftly turned down.

“If it is that important to Netanyahu he should pay the Palestinians $12 million,” Trump said according to the report, citing the PA’s decision to cut ties with his administration in the wake of Washington’s 2017 recognition of Jerusalem al-Quds as the capital of the Israeli regime.

The Trump administration ended aid to the PA in January, just before the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act (ATCA), passed by Congress and then signed into law by President Donald Trump last year, came into force.

The legislation allows Americans to sue those receiving foreign aid from the US government in American courts over alleged complicity in “acts of war.”

The PA reportedly asked the funding stop to avoid possible costly lawsuits in the face of long-running accusations by Washington and Tel Aviv about providing funds to the families of convicted or slain individuals whom they regard as “terrorists.”

The PA argues that the payments are a form of welfare to help the families who have lost their main breadwinner to cope with their absence.

The US State Department alleges that the annual aid of around $60 million was paid to support Palestinian security forces who cooperate closely with their Israeli counterparts against Hamas and other Palestinian resistance groups in the West Bank

Since taking office, Trump has cut hundreds of millions of dollars of aid for Palestinians. This includes America’s entire support for the UN agency for Palestinian refugees as well as another $200 million earmarked for humanitarian programs in the West Bank and Gaza.

The cuts abruptly ended food assistance to 180,000 Palestinians on behalf of the World Food Program last year and defunded a number of health initiatives and hospitals.

Trump’s aid cuts have also brought to halt infrastructure projects, including water treatment facilities in the Gaza Strip.

November 7, 2019 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | 22 Comments

Deep State on the National Security Council: Colonel Vindman Is an ‘Expert’ With an Agenda

By Philip Giraldi | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 7, 2019

The current frenzy to impeach President Donald Trump sometimes in its haste reveals that which could easily be hidden about the operation of the Deep State inside the federal government. Congress is currently obtaining testimony from a parade of witnesses to or participants in what will inevitably be called UkraineGate, an investigation into whether Trump inappropriately sought a political quid pro quo from Ukrainian leaders in exchange for a military assistance package.

The prepared opening statement by Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, described as the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council (NSC), provides some insights into how decision making at the NSC actually works. Vindman was born in Ukraine but emigrated to the United States with his family at age three. He was commissioned as an army infantry officer in 1998 and served in some capacity in Iraq from 2004-5, where he was wounded by a roadside bomb and received a purple heart. Vindman, who speaks both Ukrainian and Russian fluently, has filled a number of diplomatic and military positions in government dealing with Eastern Europe, to include a key role in Pentagon planning on how to deal with Russia.

Vindman, Ukrainian both by birth and culturally, clearly was a major player in articulating and managing US policy towards that country, but that is not really what his role on the NSC should have been. As more than likely the US government’s sole genuine Ukrainian expert, he should have become a source of viable options that the United States might exercise vis-à-vis its relationship with Ukraine, and, by extension, regarding Moscow’s involvement with Kiev. But that is not how his statement, which advocates for a specific policy, reads. Rather than providing expert advice, Vindman was concerned chiefly because arming Ukraine was not proceeding quickly enough to suit him, an extremely risky policy which has already created serious problems with a much more important Russia.

Vindman apparently sees Ukraine-Russia through the established optic provided by the Deep State, which considers global conflict as the price to pay for maintaining its largesse from the US taxpayer. Continuous warfare is its only business product, which explains in part its dislike of Donald Trump as he has several times threatened to upset the apple cart, even though he has done precious little in reality. Part of Vindman’s written statement (my emphasis) is revealing: ”When I joined the NSC in July 2018, I began implementing the administration’s policy on Ukraine. In the Spring of 2019, I became aware of outside influencers promoting a false narrative of Ukraine inconsistent with the consensus views of the interagency. This narrative was harmful to US government policy. While my interagency colleagues and I were becoming increasingly optimistic on Ukraine’s prospects, this alternative narrative undermined US government efforts to expand cooperation with Ukraine.”

Alexander Vindman clearly was pushing a policy that might be described as that of the Deep State rather than responding to his own chain of command where it is the president who does the decision making. He also needs a history lesson about what has gone on in his country of birth. President Barack Obama conspired with his own version of Macbeth’s three witches – Rice, Power and Jarett – to overthrow the legitimate government of Ukraine in 2014 because it was considered to be too close to Moscow. The regime change was brought about by “mavericks” like the foul-mouthed neocon State Department officer Victoria Nuland and the footloose warmonger Senator John McCain. Vice President Joe Biden also appeared on the scene after the “wetwork” was done, with his son Hunter trailing behind him. Since that time, Ukraine has had a succession of increasingly corrupt puppet governments propped up by billions in foreign aid. It is now per capita the poorest country in Europe.

Washington inside-the-beltway and the Deep State choose to blame the mess in Ukraine on Russian President Vladimir Putin and the established narrative also makes the absurd claim that the political situation in Kiev is somehow important to US national security. The preferred solution is to provide still more money, which feeds the corruption and enables the Ukrainians to attack the Russians.

Colonel Vindman, who reported to noted hater of all things Russian Fiona Hill, who in turn reported to By Jingo We’ll Go To War John Bolton, was in the middle of all the schemes to bring down Russia. His concern was not really over Trump vs. Biden. It was focused instead on speeding up the $380 million in military assistance, to include offensive weapons, that was in the pipeline for Kiev. And assuming that the Ukrainians could actually learn how to use the weapons, the objective was to punish the Russians and prolong the conflict in Donbas for no reason at all that makes any sense.

Note the following additional excerpt from Vindman’s prepared statement: “… I was worried about the implications for the US government’s support of Ukraine… I realized that if Ukraine pursued an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play which would undoubtedly result in Ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has thus far maintained.”

Vindman’s concern is all about Ukraine without any explanation of why the United States would benefit from bilking the taxpayer to support a foreign deadbeat one more time. One wonders if Vindman was able to compose his statement without a snicker or two intruding. He does eventually go on to cover the always essential national security angle, claiming that “Since 2008, Russia has manifested an overtly aggressive foreign policy, leveraging military power and employing hybrid warfare to achieve its objectives of regional hegemony and global influence. Absent a deterrent to dissuade Russia from such aggression, there is an increased risk of further confrontations with the West. In this situation, a strong and independent Ukraine is critical to US national security interests because Ukraine is a frontline state and a bulwark against Russian aggression.”

The combined visions of Russia as an aggressive, expansionistic power coupled with the brave Ukrainians serving as a bastion of freedom is so absurd that it is hardly worth countering. Russia’s economy is about the size of Italy’s or Spain’s limiting its imperial ambitions, if they actually exist. Its alleged transgressions against Georgia and Ukraine were both provoked by the United States meddling in Eastern Europe, something that it had pledged not to do after the Soviet Union collapsed. Ukraine is less an important American ally than a welfare case, and no one knows that better than Vindman, but he is really speaking to his masters in the US Establishment when he repeats the conventional arguments.

It hardly seems possible, but Vindman then goes on to dig himself into a still deeper hole through his statement’s praise of the train wreck that is Ukraine. He writes “In spite of being under assault from Russia for more than five years, Ukraine has taken major steps towards integrating with the West. The US government policy community’s view is that the election of President Volodymyr Zelensky and the promise of reforms to eliminate corruption will lock in Ukraine’s Western-leaning trajectory, and allow Ukraine to realize its dream of a vibrant democracy and economic prosperity. The United States and Ukraine are and must remain strategic partners, working together to realize the shared vision of a stable, prosperous, and democratic Ukraine that is integrated into the Euro-Atlantic community.”

Alexander Vindman does not say or write that the incorporation of Ukraine into NATO is his actual objective, but his comments about “integrating with the West” and the “Euro-Atlantic community” clearly imply just that. The expansion of NATO up to Russia’s borders by the rascally Bill Clinton constituted one of the truly most momentous lost foreign policy opportunities of the twentieth century. The addition of Ukraine and Georgia to the alliance would magnify that error as both are vital national security interests for Moscow given their history and geography. Vindman should be regarded as a manifestation of the Deep State thinking that has brought so much grief to the United States over the past twenty years. Seen in that light, his testimony, wrapped in an air of sanctimoniousness and a uniform, should be regarded as little more than the conventional thinking that has produced foreign policy failure after failure.

November 7, 2019 Posted by | Deception | , , | 1 Comment

Maldives To Open Five New Underwater Airports This Year

By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | November 7, 2019

The Maldives are on track to open another five new airports this year:

image

https://maldives.net.mv/31166/maldives-to-open-five-new-airports-in-2019/

Which is all very surprising, because the experts in 1988 told us that the Maldives would all be under water by now:

ScreenHunter_5081 Nov. 07 12.03

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/102074798

And in 2006, our schoolchildren were being taught that sea levels were rising at 9mm per year, which would soon swamp the islands, where 80% of the land is less than a metre above sea level:

image

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/clips/zj23cdm

Despite being proved wrong before, scientists still insist on peddling the same old scare story:

ScreenHunter_5080 Nov. 07 12.02

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/islands-sea-level-rise-flooding-uninhabitable-climate-change-maldives-seychelles-hawaii-a8321876.html

The Maldive Government, along with the financiers, often Chinese or Arab, clearly don’t believe any of this, and are more than happy to invest millions in new airports and new resorts.

I know who my money would be on.

November 7, 2019 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | Leave a comment