Poll shows minimal support for Labour Party’s call to ‘urgently review’ RT’s media license
‘Prefer to use my own judgement’
RT | July 30, 2020
A letter from Labour’s Shadow Culture Secretary Jo Stevens to communications regulator Ofcom demands that RT’s media license be reviewed, but a poll shows the party itself doesn’t want censorship, but to make their own decisions.
The poll, conducted by Labour Grassroots, finds only 26 percent of Labour supporters feel the party should pursue having the media outlet’s license reviewed by a third party.
While another 19 percent did not answer either way, 55 percent of the 620 respondents said no.
And though those 55 percent believe RT is biased, many commented that the bias makes them no different from other media outlets and there is still value in the coverage.
“I watch for the interviews. They are very balanced and fair. The interviewers ask a question, allow a full answer and then ask follow up questions. Very good and far better than the equivalent on the BBC,” one respondent said.
“I am sure that RT is careful not to cause too many ripples with the Russian government. But that also applies to the BBC and the British government,” added another.
Yet another said as a “big boy,” he preferred to make the decision about where he gets his news, rather than the government.
“I know RT is effectively state run. However, as a big boy I prefer to use my own judgement rather than having a media outlet censored.”
Of those polled, 68 percent also believe RT provides useful media coverage.
In Stevens’ letter to Ofcom, it was claimed that RT has dangerous “political influence.” The charge was based on a report by the Intelligence and Security Committee, which called out social media companies in the UK for “failing to play their part” in suppressing “disinformation” from RT.
The report claimed RT helped influence UK politics in favor of Russia, like interfering with the Brexit vote, but failed to give any examples.
Why the US really accuses Russia & China of weaponizing space
By Finian Cunningham | RT | July 30, 2020
Washington has made startling accusations that Russia & China “have already turned space into a war-fighting domain,” but what’s really going on is the US is attempting to distract from its own controversial space militarization.
There is also a sequence of events reflecting Washington’s increasingly hysterical hostility towards Russia and China in which all events are perceived through an obsessive American lens of “hybrid warfare.”
An additional factor is the intensified US demand to include China in arms control talks with Russia, which resumed this week.
The claim made against Russia and China by Christophe Ford, a State Department arms control envoy, comes against the backdrop of President Trump announcing the establishment of a new Space Force Command earlier this year. That move by the Trump administration flies in the face of decades-long advocacy at the United Nations by Russia and China to keep weapons out of space.
The 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty forbids weaponization in the outer atmosphere. Thus, America’s renewed efforts through its Space Force Command are arguably illegal. Allegations from Washington that Moscow and Beijing have turned space into a war-fighting domain appear to turn reality on its head.
Karl Grossman, a professor at the State University of New York who has written extensively on the subject, says that Russia and China have consistently advocated for the expansion of the existing UN treaty to ban not only the placement of weapons of mass destruction but also for a prohibition on any weaponization in outer space.
“The United States has repeatedly voted against this effort, essentially casting a veto at the UN,” Grossman said.
It would seem therefore that America’s claims are motivated by a need to obscure its own controversial militarization of the “final frontier.”
On July 15, the US and Britain accused Russia of testing an anti-satellite weapon in space. Moscow denied this, saying it was carrying out an in-orbit satellite “inspection” by another one of its own satellites. The US Space Force Command acknowledges it was a “non-destructive event” but nevertheless alleged it was an attempt by Russia to deploy a “bullet” in space.
“Inspection of satellites” could of course be a euphemism for gaining the capacity to spy on other nations’ space vehicles. The US is reportedly involved in developing the same kind of surveillance activity against foreign satellites. But for the Americans to accuse Russia of testing a space-based “anti-satellite weapon” seems to be a provocative stretch.
Notably, the report of the alleged Russian weapon test was followed immediately by sonorous statements hailing the establishment last year of the US Space Force “to deter aggression and defend the nation.”
Grossman says: “The new US Space Force is, I’d say desperately, trying to justify itself and thus its announcement that Russia conducted an anti-satellite weapons test needs to be considered in this context.”
But there is more to the sequence of events. Last week, on July 23, China launched its first rover to explore Mars. If the mission succeeds in landing on the Red Planet in seven months, it will be seen as a breakthrough achievement by China, putting the country on par with the US in space exploration. The Chinese launch came a week before NASA blasted off its new rover to Mars which is due to reach the planet in February around the same time as China’s.
It seems significant that Christophe Ford, the US arms control envoy, first made his announcement accusing Russia and China of weaponizing space the day after China’s historic Mars mission launch. Given the closely overlapping engineering shared by space rocketry and ballistic missiles, it could, therefore, be loosely argued that a Mars mission by China has military dimensions. (As would all American missions, if using the same tenuous reasoning.)
However, in the present context of rampant accusations against Russia and China of waging “hybrid war,” including everything from “meddling in elections to subvert US democracy” to “unleashing a virus pandemic to destroy American capitalism,” it is not hard to see how in Washington’s mindset events in space could be construed as yet more hybrid warfare. American paranoia is simply going extraterrestrial.
Another important factor in the sequence is the resumption of arms control talks this week in Vienna between the US and Russia. These negotiations are aimed at extending the New START accord limiting strategic weapons. Washington is pushing the Russian side to lever China into joining a new trilateral arms control agreement. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo admitted in a recent keynote speech that Washington was seeking Russia’s help in curbing China’s nuclear arsenal. Moscow has indicated that such a trilateral accord with China, considering its relatively smaller arsenal, is not relevant at this stage in bilateral negotiations between the US and Russia over New START.
The US warned it would bring up the issue of Russia’s alleged anti-satellite weapon at the arms control talks this week in Vienna.
It seems the US is using claims about space weaponization not only to distract from its own illicit program, but also to undermine Russia in arms talks as a way to pressure Moscow into accommodating Washington’s overbearing demands regarding China.
That does not augur well for a successful arms control agreement or for global security. A foreboding case, so to speak, of ‘watch this space’.
Finian Cunningham is an award-winning journalist. For over 25 years, he worked as a sub-editor and writer for The Mirror, Irish Times, Irish Independent and Britain’s Independent, among others.
Neither Trump Nor Biden Really Matter to China or Russia
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 30, 2020
Well, according to the Trump campaign, Democrat rival Joe Biden is the candidate whom Chinese leaders are rooting for to win the presidential election in November. “Beijing Biden” or “Sleepy Joe” would be a gift to China, so it goes.
In turn, trying to out-hawk the Republican incumbent, the Biden campaign paints Trump as being “soft” on China and having been “played” by Chinese counterparts over trade, the corona pandemic and allegations about human rights.
Biden, the former vice president in the previous Obama administrations, has vowed to impose more sanctions on China over allegations of rights violations. He claims to be the one who will “stand up” to Beijing if he is elected to the White House in three months’ time.
Last week, Biden declared he was “giving notice to the Kremlin and others [China]” that if elected to the presidency he would impose “substantial and lasting costs” on those who allegedly interfere in U.S. politics. That’s war talk based on worthless intel propaganda.
Trump meanwhile asserts that no-one is tougher than him when it comes to dealing with China (and Russia for that matter).
Given the Trump administration’s reckless policy of ramping up hostility towards China in recent months, that begs the question: how could a future Biden administration begin to be even more aggressive – short of going to war?
Relations between Washington and Beijing have plummeted to their worst levels since the historic detente initiated by President Richard Nixon in the early 1970s. The precipitous downward spiral has occurred under President Trump’s watch. So, how exactly could a prospective President Biden make the relationship more adversarial?
The truth is both Trump and Biden are equally vulnerable to domestic partisan criticism about their respective dealings with China. The belated high-handed approach that both are trying to project is pockmarked with risible hypocrisy.
The Trump campaign scores a valid point when it recalls how former Vice President Biden smooched and feted Chinese leaders with economic opportunities in the American economy.
Likewise, Trump stands accused of lavishing praise on Chinese President Xi Jinping while ignoring the impending coronavirus pandemic because Trump’s top priority was getting a trade deal with China.
The fact that both American politicians have U-turned with regard to China in such nasty terms must leave the authorities in Beijing with a deep sense of distrust in either of the would-be presidents.
Biden at one time waxed lyrical about his close relationship with Xi, but as his bid for the presidency heated up, Biden stuck the proverbial knife in the Chinese leader calling him a “thug”.
For his part, Trump previously referred to Xi as a “dear friend” while dining him with “beautiful chocolate cake” at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, but his administration has since slammed the Chinese leader as “authoritarian”. Trump’s racist slurs over the pandemic being “Kung Flu” and “Chinese plague” must give President Xi pause for disgust with the falseness.
At the end of day, can either of these presidential candidates be trusted to pursue principled U.S.-China relations going forward? The toxic anti-China campaigning by both indicates a level of puerile treachery which foreshadows no possible return to any kind of normalcy.
One distinction perhaps between Trump and Biden is the latter is promising to repair relations with Western allies to form a united front against China. To that end, a hawkish confrontational policy under Biden may have more impact on U.S.-China relations than under Trump. Trump has managed to alienate European allies with his broadsides over trade tariffs and NATO spending commitments. Although Trump’s Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has recently urged “an alliance of democracies” to confront China, that rallying call is likely to fall on deaf ears with European allies irked by Trump’s brash style. Biden on the other hand could bring a more unified Western policy of hostility towards Beijing (and Moscow) by affecting a more appeasing attitude towards Europe. In that way, Biden would be more preferred by the Pentagon and foreign policy establishment than Trump, just as Hillary Clinton was in 2016.
However, it is doubtful that Beijing is paying too much attention to what either candidate is saying or posturing at. If both of them can flip so much from talking softly to shouting loud anti-China profanities then their individual characters may be deemed malleable and unscrupulous. Both have shown a shameless streak in stoking anti-China bashing for electioneering gain. Trump pulled that trick last time out in 2016 when he railed against China for “raping America” only for him to discover “deep friendship” with Xi following that election. Now he has reverted to hostility out of self-serving calculation to whip up anti-China sentiment among voters. And Biden is apt to do the very same.
Forget about such fickle personalities when it comes to reading U.S. policy towards China. Beijing will be looking at the longer trajectory of how U.S. policy turned towards a more militarized approach with the “Pivot to Asia” under the Obama-Biden administration in 2011. Indicating how Deep State continuity transcends Democrat or Republican occupants of the White House, the next major indicator was in the Pentagon planning documents of 2017 and 2018 under Trump which labelled China and Russia as “great power rivals”. The American “ship of state”, it may be concluded, is therefore set on a collision course with both Beijing and Moscow in terms of ramping up a confrontational agenda. Who sits in the White House scarcely matters.
For Trump and Biden to trade barbs about which one is “softer” on China or Russia is irrelevant in the bigger picture of U.S. imperialist ambitions for global dominance. The logic of a waning American empire and the concomitant inherent belligerence to compensate for the perceived loss of U.S. global power are the issues to follow, not whether Trump or Biden clinch the dog-and-pony race to the White House.
Israeli Colonists Steal Palestinian Water Tanks And Tents In Northern Plains
IMEMC News | July 30, 2020
A group of fanatic Israeli colonists, illegally squatting on stolen Palestinian lands, invaded Wednesday Khirbat Samra Bedouin community, in the West Bank’s N Plains, before stealing water tanks, tents, and equipment.
Mo’taz Bisharat, a Palestinian Authority official in charge of the Jordan Valley file, stated that the colonists stole sheds, tents, water tanks, and kitchenware from the families in the village, and fled the area.
Bisharat added that the colonists stole three water tanks, each with the capacity of 1.5 cubic meters, and kitchenware, owned by five Palestinian Bedouin families.
He added that the colonists also stole five tons of wheat and fodder and four tents used by the families.
The official stated that, while such assaults are frequent, usually targeting livestock, lands, and shepherds, the latest assault is a serious violation and escalation as it is targeting the families in their own dwellings, their tents where they reside.
Israel to Demolish Palestinian Village in West Bank, Displacing 200 People
Palestine Chronicle | July 30, 2020
The Israeli occupation authorities are set to demolish an entire Palestinian village near Jenin, in northern West Bank, displacing over 200 people, the Palestinian news agency WAFA reported.
Mahmoud Amarneh, head of the Farasin village council, told WAFA that Israeli occupation forces raided the village this morning and handed out 36 demolition orders for the entire structures and water wells in the village where 200 people live.
Amarneh added that the military warned the residents that the demolition will take place in the coming days.
According to Amarneh, the Israeli occupation government wants to take over the village in order to expand illegal settlements built in that area.
The village has a 200-year old well and several ancient buildings, he said, urging international intervention to prevent Israel from committing a massacre in the village.
Who Are You Gonna Believe?
By Steve Sailer • Unz Review • July 29, 2020
From the NYT opinion page:
Help Me Find Trump’s ‘Anarchists’ in Portland
The president has his politically driven narrative. And then there’s reality.
By Nicholas Kristof
Opinion ColumnistJuly 29, 2020, 4:23 p.m. ET
PORTLAND, Ore. — I’ve been on the front lines of the protests here, searching for the “radical-left anarchists” who President Trump says are on Portland streets each evening.
I thought I’d found one: a man who for weeks leapt into the fray and has been shot four times with impact munitions yet keeps coming back. I figured he must be a crazed anarchist.
But no, he turned out to be Dr. Bryan Wolf, a radiologist who wears his white doctor’s jacket and carries a sign with a red cross and the words “humanitarian aid.” He pleads with federal forces not to shoot or gas protesters.
“Put your gun barrels down!” he cries out. “Why are you loading your grenade launchers? We’re just standing ——”
And then they shoot.
Dr. Wolf, an assistant professor at Oregon Health Sciences University, helps at a medic stand operated by volunteers from the medical school. Could they be radical-left anarchists? No, they’ve imposed order on the anarchy of the street by establishing qualifications for field medics and a hierarchy among them, so that any badly injured protester will immediately get the right kind of care.
See, they are organized so they can’t anarchists!
Also, they are anarchists so they can be an organization, and thus they are not liable under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization law!
Accomplishing all this while tear gas is swirling and impact munitions are whizzing by, without even asking for insurance cards — that seems the opposite of what fanatical anarchists might do.
Maybe the rioting anarchists were in front of the crowd, where there are discussions about Black Lives Matter? I found musicians and activists and technicians, who were projecting a huge sign on the wall of a nearby building — “Fed Goons Out of PDX” — that seemed a bit geeky for anarchists.
Oh, wait, there was a man using angry language about the federal “occupation” and calling it “abhorrent.” Lots of protesters don’t seem to like him, so could he be a crazed anarchist rioter?
Oops, no, that’s just Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler, sputtering after being tear-gassed by the feds.
Listen up, people, we at the New York Times spent the last six years telling you in excruciating detail about the menace posed by the radical right. If the radical left were important, wouldn’t we have, you know, gotten around to mentioning them? So, logically, they don’t exist.
Taliban say will free Afghan government inmates before Eid al-Adha
Press TV – July 30, 2020
The Taliban militant group says it will release the remaining Afghan government prisoners before Eid al-Adha (the Feast of Sacrifice) as a “goodwill gesture.”
Suhail Shaheen, a spokesman for the Taliban’s office in Qatar, said in a statement on Twitter on Thursday that the militant group had decided to release the 1,000 prisoners before Eid al-Adha, which marks the culmination of the annual Hajj pilgrimage.
Shaheen called on the Afghan government to complete the release of the 5,000 Taliban prisoners that has been underway in a gradual format as part of a prisoner swap between the two sides.
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said on Tuesday that his government would soon complete the release of the 5,000 Taliban prisoners in order to demonstrate its commitment to peace.
He also said negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban militant group were expected to begin “in a week’s time,” following the completion of the prisoner exchange.
The prisoner swap has been an Afghan government obligation under a deal between the United States and the Taliban that was struck in February. The Afghan government, which was not a signatory to the accord, was required to release up to 5,000 Taliban prisoners. The militants, for their part, were obliged to free 1,000 government captives.
The exchange has been regarded as a first step toward broader talks between the government and the militants. Its implementation had faced hurdles since the deal was signed.
The deal envisages a complete withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan, and the Taliban pledged not to attack American and other foreign forces. They made no such pledge in relation to the Afghan government and people.
The Taliban on Tuesday declared a three-day ceasefire for the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha, starting Friday. Kabul welcomed the announcement with a note of caution.
The truce announcement has been welcomed by the public and officials in Afghanistan and they have called for a lasting ceasefire in the war-ravaged country.
The militants declared a similar three-day ceasefire at the end of the holy fasting month of Ramadan in May. That truce prompted widespread relief across Afghanistan, but it was short-lived, with the militants resuming deadly attacks straight afterwards.
Official data shows that bombings and other assaults by the Taliban have surged 70 percent since the militant group signed the deal with the United States.
The Syrian Army Is Appointing on “Aleppo – Lattakia” Highway – Idlib Battle Is Approaching
M4 International Highway
By Khaled Iskef | American Herald Tribune | July 28, 2020
The field developments return to the front of the Syrian events, after the cautious calm that lasted for several months in the north of the country coinciding with the implementation of the Russian-Turkish agreement on conducting joint patrols on the “M4” road known as “Aleppo-Lattakia” highway.
The reopening of the road from Raqqa, through Aleppo, to Lattakia, is now at the forefront of Syrian army’s next strategic goals, though the beginning of the “M4” highway starts in the eastern side of the country, specifically from the areas controlled by the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces. The past days have witnessed huge Syrian military movements towards this highway in a sign that the Syrian forces are ready to start military action and open the road, which if it occurs, will have a significant positive impact on trade movement throughout the country in light of the circumstances due to the procedures of the blockade imposed by Washington.
Speaking of the field in the Syrian north, it is certain that Turkey did not succeed in fulfilling its obligations to the Russians about isolating terrorist organizations and keeping them out of the way, as the Russian and Turkish sides, shortly after the battle to secure Aleppo and reopen the M5 “Aleppo – Damascus” International highway, agreed that the militants should move away / 6 / kilometers to the north and south of the “M4”, knowing that the distance outside the control of the Syrian army, which links Aleppo to Lattakia, is estimated to be 60 kilometers.
The end of September 2020 was scheduled to be the Russian deadline for the Turks to implement their obligations, but the terrorist operation carried out by “Khattab Al-Checheni Brigades” targeting a Russian patrol on the road with a suicide operation, accelerated the launch of the military operation, which is expected to be early next month according to private sources. The Syrian army’s build-up and preparations have been completed, with confirmed information of the arrival of modern Russian weapons to the Syrian army, in addition to the army’s ongoing targeting of armed points on Hama and Idlib countryside axes, such as Kansafra, Al-Fateira, Kafr Ouid, and several villages of Jabal Zawiya.
If launched, the military operation is expected to be swift and decisive in case the Turkish side does not interfere directly or take any step that would hinder it in northern Syria. It is noteworthy that the military operation of the Syrian army had stopped after securing Aleppo city in the west and reopening the international highway, the main connection between the south and center of the country to the north.
Khaled Iskef is a journalist working for Almayadeen TV.
Iraq’s anti-terror fighters will never surrender to US: PMU chief
Press TV – July 30, 2020
The chairman of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) or Hashd al-Sha’abi has highlighted the role of the counter-terrorism force in defending the Arab country against the Daesh Takfiri terror outfit, stressing that it will never give in to the US.
Speaking on Wednesday, Falih al-Fayyadh described the PMU as an Iraqi military institution that is one of the main arms of the country’s national defense system.
The group, he added, abides by the strategy of the national army in its counter-terrorism response.
Fayyadh further said that the PMU is the manifestation of the Iraqi nation’s will, and that those rejecting the anti-terror group are actually seeking to weaken Iraq.
Hash al-Sha’abi made many sacrifices to defend Iraq and would in no way capitulate to the US or any other party, he added.
The PMU is an Iraqi government-sponsored umbrella organization composed of around 40 factions of volunteer counter-terrorism forces, including mostly Shia Muslims besides Sunni Muslims, Christians and Kurds.
In the early days of the Daesh’s reign of terror, PMU fighters played a major role in reinforcing the Iraqi army, which had suffered heavy setbacks against the Takfiri elements.
In November 2016, the Iraqi parliament voted to integrate the PMU into the military in amid US efforts to sideline the group.
Elsewhere in his remarks, Fayyadh referred to the US assassination of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the PMU’s second-in-command, and called for the continuation of the path pursued by the commander.
Muhandis was killed, alongside top Iranian anti-terror commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, in a fatal US drone strike ordered by President Donald Trump near Baghdad airport on January 3.
Two days later, the Iraqi parliament unanimously approved a bill, demanding the withdrawal of all foreign military forces led by the United States from the country.
The PMU leader emphasized that the Iraqi parliament’s decision is fundamentally linked to the assassination operation, and that the government’s position is in line with that of the legislature on the expulsion of American troops.
Daesh’s back is broken and its self-proclaimed caliphate is destroyed, he said, noting that the Takfiri group’s resurgence in Iraq as an effective force is no longer possible.
Iraq cooperates with all its neighbors, especially Syria, in the fight against terrorism, and attaches great importance to its historical relations with Damascus, Fayyadh pointed out.
He also said that Iraq’s ties with Iran are at their best, adding that Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi’s recent visit to Tehran and his meeting with Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani shows the depth of bilateral bonds.
Iranian military advisers — led by General Soleimani — aided Iraqi Armed Forces on Baghdad’s request to reverse Daesh’s gains and ultimately liberate their entire homeland in December 2017.