Justin Trudeau’s opponent would ban ministers from attending WEF
Free West Media | July 10, 2022
Pierre Poilievre, who will be running for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada later this year, said at a meeting in Calgary that he would ban ministers from attending the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland sits on the WEF’s Supervisory Board. Shadow Minister of Natural Resources Michelle Rempel Garner can also be found on the organisation’s website. She denied in an article that Canada was run by the WEF.
Earlier, WEF chief Klaus Schwab had boasted however that more than half of the Canadian cabinet was made up of Young Global Leaders of the WEF.
Poilievre thus indicated that he wanted to take Canada in a completely different direction. He is planning to take on Trudeau in the next election and defeat him.
“I have made it clear that I will ban my ministers in my cabinet from attending the World Economic Forum if I become prime minister,” he said at an earlier meeting. “Work for Canada. If you want to go to Davos, to that conference, buy a single ticket. You cannot be part of our government and pursue a policy agenda that is not in line with the interests of our people.”
Poilievre is running in the 2022 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election and is considered to be the frontrunner. He has supported those in the Canada convoy protest against vacccine mandates who were protesting peacefully and said the federal government had abused its power by invoking the Emergencies Act during the protest and proposed limiting its power and use to prevent it from being used similarly in the future.
Poilievre demonstrated his support for army reservist James Topp’s anti-mandate protest walk from Vancouver to their planned Canada Day freedom protest on Parliament Hill, by joining Topp, Paul Alexander, Tom Marazzo, a self-declared spokesperson for the Canada convoy protest and an ex-military officer, on June 30, 2022 in the final stage of Topp’s march to Ottawa.
India to boost Sakhalin-1 oil output
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JULY 10, 2022
After Sakhalin-2, Moscow also plans to nationalise Sakhalin-1 oil and gas development project by ousting US and Japanese shareholders. But Moscow will make an exception for India so that OVL which holds 20% stake will remain & continue to work. Moscow grapevine is that while Rosneft will continue to hold controlling share, more Indian companies may be inducted to replace US & Japan and thereby also ensure a sales market in India.
The Sakhalin-1 is located off the coast of Sakhalin Island in the Russian Far East. It comprises three offshore fields — namely, Chayvo, Odoptu, and Arkutun-Dagi. Until recently, the Sakhalin-1 project was operated by a Russian subsidiary of the American major ExxonMobil known as Exxon Neftegaz, which owns 30% of the shares. In addition, 20% is owned by the Russian state, 30% by the Japanese company Sodeco, and 20% by the Indian ONGC Videsh. Whereas Sakhalin-2 specialises in the export of liquefied natural gas, Sakhalin-1 is in the export of Sokol oil.
The capacity of Sakhalin-1 is quite impressive. There was a time before OPEC+ set limits on production level, when Russia extracted as much as 400,000 barrels per day, but the recent production level has been about 220,000 barrels per day. The abrupt departure of the Americans following the US sanctions against Russia has caused the production to plummet to just 10,000 barrels. Russians hope that with the replacement by more Indian companies, the production level can be restored to the previous level. Indeed, the hope is that Indian ONGC Videsh will pull up the production level of Sakhalin-1 project relatively quickly by bringing in own technologies.
The overall trend of nationalising the holdings of American, British, Japanese and European capital in Russia’s strategic sectors of economy is crystallising as the new policy — the Russian version of India’s AatmaNirbhar Bharat (“Self-reliant India” campaign.) Cleansing of the Russian economy, freed of Western capital, is expected to accelerate in the period ahead. India has seamless opportunities here to make investments and reap windfall profits. In strategic terms, India’s energy security will also be guaranteed for decades to come.
Moscow was well aware of the predatory character of Western capital in Russia’s oil sector — a legacy of the Boris Yeltsin era — but had to live with the exploitation as it didn’t want to antagonise other potential western investors. But that is history now. The souring of relations with the West to almost breaking point rids Moscow of such archaic inhibitions.
Indeed, the new policy to replace western capital from the commanding heights of Russian economy is not without risks, but Moscow is confident that it is on the right track and must do what it takes. Also, the decrease in production in the Sakhalin-1, unless addressed soon, may negatively affect the very characteristics of the oil fields in the Russian Far East, if the oil recovery factor decreases over time and a lot of oil is left to remain in the reservoirs.
The development of the fields had depended on Western equipment and technologies. Now Russia has lost both. On the other hand, the departure of the Americans will leave Russia with no easy route but to have its own technologies.
On balance, however, Americans stand to lose heavily too, as the production sharing arrangements dating back to the Yeltsin era had been forced out of the Russian government when it was in dire economic straits during the transition from the Soviet period and was in no position to negotiate optimal deals. Come to think of it, something like 262 such so-called production sharing agreements (PSAs) were squeezed out of the Russian government by western oil companies by the time Yeltsin retired.
After coming to power in 1999, President Vladimir Putin set about the mammoth task of cleaning up the Aegean stables of Russia’s foreign collaboration in the oil sector. The “decolonisation” process was excruciatingly difficult, but Putin pulled through it and got rid of as many as 260 (out of 262) PSAs. In fact, Sakhalin-1 and Sakhalin-2 are the very last remaining two PSAs harking back to post-Soviet Russia’s decade of humiliation under Yeltsin.
Any surprises why the Biden Administration hates Putin so much and wants him out of power in Moscow?
Legend is that when the Soviet Communist Party Secretary Nikita Khrushchev paid his pathbreaking visit to India in 1955, then Prime Minister Nehru, amongst other “talking points”, referred to Soviet Union’s great reservoir of expertise in the oil sector, while complaining that the West refused help for anything in India’s state sector.
The folklore is that Khrushchev instinctively reacted in positive terms to Nehru’s request for help and no sooner than his return to Moscow, deputed a famous Soviet expert / geologist to India to prospect for oil — whose fame was such that he could apparently smell oil lying untapped deep in the bowels of the earth! Thus was born the ONGC in 1956, which is now heading for Sakhalin Island on a similar mission!
‘Developing world to face wave of defaults’
Samizdat – July 10, 2022
Emerging nations, including El Salvador, Ghana, Egypt, Tunisia and Pakistan, will be challenged with a historic cascade of defaults as a quarter-trillion-dollar pile of distressed debts keeps exerting downward pressure on economies, Bloomberg is reporting.
“With the low-income countries, debt risks and debt crises are not hypothetical,” the World Bank’s Chief Economist Carmen Reinhart told the agency on Saturday. “We’re pretty much already there.”
Over the past six months, there’s reportedly been a doubling in the number of emerging markets with sovereign debt that trades at highly distressed levels, meaning yields that indicate investors believe default is a real possibility.
Another cause for major concern reportedly arises from a potential “domino effect” that commonly occurs when scared investors begin yanking money out of countries with economic problems similar to those defaulting nations had previously gone through.
In June, traders reportedly pulled $4 billion out of emerging-market bonds and stocks, marking a fourth straight month of outflows.
Probable defaults may be followed by political instability. Earlier this year, Sri Lanka was the first nation to stop paying its foreign bondholders, burdened by unwieldy food and fuel costs that fueled protests and political chaos.
“Populations suffering from high food prices and shortages of supplies can be a tinderbox for political instability,” Barclays has said, as quoted by Bloomberg.
‘Israel’ to close embassy in Eritrea after ambassador blocked
Press TV – July 10, 2022
Israeli prime minister Yair Lapid has approved the closure of the regime’s embassy in Eritrea as authorities in the Northeast African country have not been allowing the arrival of a diplomat from the occupied territories in the past two years.
Lapid, who is still serving as Israeli foreign minister, took the decision on Saturday to shutter the diplomatic mission in the Eritrean capital city of Asmara, after the local government had been delaying Ishmael Khaldi to take up the post despite his appointment.
According to Israeli media outlets, the embassy has remained empty in the aftermath of the Eritrean government’s decision, and many of its staffers are currently in their homes without doing any particular tasks.
The outlets added that the Tel Aviv regime spends tens of thousands of dollars per month on rent and other fees for the employees.
The last Israeli ambassador left Asmara in September 2018. Since then, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has sent a temporary administrator for the embassy from time to time.
Until April 2020, the head of the embassy’s security was the only Israeli representative in Eritrea, and his wife was responsible for the administrative work.
The Israeli foreign ministry then decided to evacuate the embassy in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The embassy has been abandoned ever since.
On July 5, 2020, the regime’s foreign ministry’s appointments committee appointed Ishmael Khaldi to serve as ambassador to Eritrea. The approval of his appointment was, however, delayed by Eritrean authorities.
Palestine’s official WAFA news agency, quoting the London-based online newspaper Rai al-Youm and other sources reported on August 1, 2021, that at least 14 countries including South Africa, Tunisia, Eritrea, Senegal, Tanzania, Niger, the archipelago of Qamar, Gabon, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Liberia, and the Seychelles had agreed to expel Israel from the 55-member African Union.
On July 22 that year, Israel attained observer status at the AU after nearly 20 years of lobbying.
Making the move official, Israeli ambassador to Ethiopia, Burundi and Chad Aleli Admasu presented his credentials to Moussa Faki Mahamat, the chairman of the African Union Commission, at the bloc’s headquarters in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa.
Experts say Israel’s observer status is largely seen as part of Tel Aviv’s continued campaign to normalize ties in Africa.
Pro-Palestine language is typically featured in statements delivered at the AU’s annual summits. Palestine already has observer status at the African Union.
Biden regime lets Israel off the hook in the case of Palestinian-American journalist’s death

By Robert Inlakesh | Samizdat | July 10, 2022
The US State Department’s press release on Washington’s investigation into the killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh has sparked outrage and triggered accusations of a whitewash.
Almost two months after the murder of the veteran Al-Jazeera reporter, Washington announced that an investigation by the US Security Coordinator (USSC) had concluded that Israeli gunfire was “likely responsible.” However, the statement asserted that the evidence was inconclusive and it could not say that Israeli forces were to blame, contradicting various other reports which had concluded the opposite. The US government also claimed that there is “no reason to believe” that the killing was intentional and instead was likely “the result of tragic circumstances,” to which Israel’s top human rights group B’Tselem responded by calling the investigation a “whitewash.”
“We are incredulous,” the family of Abu Akleh said in a statement of their own, in which they decried the State Department’s press release. What is perhaps most concerning about the State Department’s statement is its contradictory nature; it calls for accountability on the one hand, whilst simultaneously disagreeing with other reports that indicate Israeli guilt and making a poorly-substantiated assessment of intent. If the US government’s investigation cannot conclude Tel Aviv’s guilt or prove an Israeli soldier fired the shot, then how can it conclude that the “likely” culprit did not intend to kill Abu Akleh?
According to a CNN investigative report, Abu Akleh was killed in a “targeted attack by Israeli forces,” implying that the evidence suggested the killing was indeed intentional. The claim made by the Israeli government, that a firefight had occurred in the minutes leading up to the murder, was seemingly debunked by the Washington Post’s own investigation into the incident. This is important because the Israeli military’s argument as to why they say the shooting was unintentional is based upon their claim that Israeli soldiers were likely trying to fire at Palestinian militants. Furthermore, according to the Washington Post, “Abu Akleh and other journalists identified as press would likely have been visible from the IDF convoy’s position.”
The New York Times also conducted its own investigation, in which it “showed that there were no armed Palestinians near her when she was shot” and debunked the Israeli government’s claims as to how many bullets were fired in the journalist’s direction. The New York Times also stated that “the bullet that killed Ms. Abu Akleh was fired from the approximate location of the Israeli military convoy, most likely by a soldier from an elite unit.” The United Nations’ probe likewise came to conclusions “consistent with many findings out there that the shots that killed her came from Israeli Security Forces.”
The other troubling element surrounding the US investigation has been the White House’s flip-flopping on its approach to achieving justice. When news first broke of Abu Akleh’s death on May 11, State Department spokesperson Ned Price stated that “the Israelis have the wherewithal and the capabilities to conduct a thorough, comprehensive investigation,” and seemed to indicate that a US inquiry would not be necessary. Later, however, it was reported that Israel would not conduct an investigation into the killing, and then a statement from an IDF military lawyer suggested that if an Israeli soldier were to be found responsible for firing the fatal shot, they would not be guilty of any criminal misconduct “absent further evidence.”
The above information also has to be paired with the fact that Israel’s Foreign Ministry and various political figures distributed a video of Palestinian gunmen, following the killing, claiming that Palestinians had been responsible for the crime. The video that was being shared around was quickly debunked by B’Tselem, which proved through an on-the-ground investigation that the Palestinian gunmen shown in the video could not have possibly fired the kill shot. Then-Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett claimed that it was likely Palestinians who were responsible, later altering his rhetoric when it became more difficult for him to defend the claim.
To rub salt into the wound, after Israeli forces had harassed the family of Abu Akleh, police violently assaulted the pallbearers at the slain journalist’s funeral in Jerusalem. Making things even worse, it appeared that the Israeli police doctored footage from the scene of their attack, to make it appear as if Palestinians had thrown objects at the police, prior to the assaults on mourners.
The USSC has not provided any clarity on how it was able to draw the conclusions it did. Investigations from the UN, various human rights groups, CNN, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and others, all point to Israeli guilt, but none were able to determine the exact intention of the Israeli soldier who fired the bullet. The US assertion that there is no evidence to suggest the attack was intentional contradicts multiple eyewitnesses who say it was. If the US investigation relied on claims that Israeli soldiers were engaged in firefights with Palestinian militants (likewise contradicted by the investigations mentioned above), then their conclusion is questionable. Above all, the USSC’s judgment of intent has now given Israel a convenient excuse to sweep the killing of an American citizen under the rug. Some may call it a whitewash, but what it really looks like is the US siding with Israel once again over the lives of its own people.
Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the occupied Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’.
Lies, lies, lies

By John Ellwood | TCW Defending Freedom | July 10, 2022
WHILE the public has been distracted by beer, cake and sleaze, our politicians have been consistently lying about their ruinous policies.
Here are the first 20 lies (there are many more):
They lied about Covid
They lied about the ‘vaccine’
They lied about the side effects
They lied about Covid passes
They lied about lockdowns
They lied about the pandemic
They lied about the consequences
They lied about their contracts with Big Pharma
They lied about Russia
They lied about Ukraine
They lied about carbon dioxide
They lied about the ‘climate emergency’
They lied about ‘green’ energy
They lied about heat pumps
They lied about electric vehicles
They lied about Brexit
They lied about immigration
They lied about taxation
They lied about their attack on agriculture
They lied about the influence of the WEF/Gates/all the rest
When the contenders for Downing Street open their mouths, remember the quote ‘Why is this lying b*stard lying to me?’
Joe Biden and Other Politicians, not Coronavirus, Caused Children’s Educations to Suffer

By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | July 7, 2022
President Joe Biden declared Tuesday at Twitter: “Due to the pandemic, kids are behind in math and reading.” This is yet another example of politicians’ blame shifting we have seen throughout the coronavirus scare. Kids in America have fallen behind in their educations during the coronavirus scare, but not because of coronavirus. They have fallen behind because of coronavirus crackdown actions supported by Biden and many other politicians in the name of protecting students, teachers, and staff at schools from coronavirus that did not improve safety but did interfere with students’ ability to learn.
Since early on in the coronavirus scare it was known that children tended to be in miniscule danger from serious sickness or death from coronavirus. It was also known that, at schools, teachers and other adults tended not to get coronavirus from students. Yet, most American politicians with control over education policy did not say that “for the children” schools would be kept open and continue operating normally, something that was done in other countries and a few places in America without problems. Instead, as politicians are apt to do, they used the “for the children” plea as an excuse to wreak havoc. They shut down schools, then replaced them to some extent with dysfunctional attempts at virtual education, and ultimately reopened the schools in an absurd and menacing manner.
Many schools, when they finally reopened, had all kinds of mandates that made the schools insufferable. The mandates, while failing to protect people from coronavirus, did carry health dangers of their own. Mask mandates, obsessive disinfecting of surfaces at schools and even of children’s hands, enforcement of “social distancing,” the presence of ubiquitous plastic barriers separating people, coronavirus testing, and pressure or even mandates for students to take experimental coronavirus “vaccine” shots were among the nasty changes confronting students at their “new normal” schools. Students found themselves trudging through a real life version of a dystopian novel.
No wonder students’ learning suffered through the coronavirus scare. Learning was not high on the priority list of many politicians rushing to exercise their new powers. And, due to government pressure and bad choices by people in charge, the situation was similarly awful at many private schools as at government schools.
Fortunately, this dark cloud of politicians harming student’s educations in the name of countering coronavirus does have a silver lining, though only for a small subset of students. “Enough is enough,” decided some parents along the way of witnessing the school closures, the dysfunctional virtual learning efforts implemented to replace regular school, and the dystopian “new normal” schools that ultimately came into being. These parents took their children’s educations into their own hands, moving their children to homeschooling. The result is that many more children now than before the coronavirus scare are free from the politicians’ harmful meddling, whether undertaken in the name of protecting children from phantom coronavirus danger or accomplishing other objectives at variance with advancing the math and reading skills Biden mentioned at Twitter. It is a safe bet that most of these new homeschooling parents will do a much better job than the schools they left behind at making sure their children’s educations serve their children’s needs and interests.
Copyright © 2022 by RonPaul Institute
Twitter Just Lost Its Last Chance To Remain Relevant

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | July 9, 2022
After months of drama, it would appear the fate of social media giant Twitter has been decided, and the result is an inevitable path to the internet graveyard.
Many people will question the notion that Twitter could ever actually bite the dust, but they are probably unfamiliar with the company’s dismal performance as of late. The reality is, Elon Musk’s potential buyout was their last chance to stay afloat; now that Musk has exited the deal, they face a continued and steady decline into irrelevance like many other Big Tech companies before them.
While it’s possible that Musk’s decision is merely a play for a reduced sale price, it’s probably safe to assume there is not going to be a purchase anytime soon. This sets a chain of events in motion that bode very poor for Twitter given their track record the past couple of years, but first let’s consider the current situation.
While the initial argument from Twitter execs will be that Musk “waived” his rights to change the original deal and thus he is required to buy regardless, his waiver does not extend to his rights to review Twitter’s claims about their user base. The deal itself was predicated on Twitter giving honest assessments of the percentage of users that are actually bots (fake accounts). Twitter initially claimed that bots only made up around 5% of users; it would appear that Musk has discovered this to be false, and this is the position his lawyers have asserted through the SEC.
If it turns out that a large portion of Twitter is actually fake, then Musk surely has grounds to terminate the deal. A waiver against changing the deal does not negate the original requirements of the deal according to his legal council, and this makes perfect sense.
But why is Twitter so desperate to force Musk to buy when they were so resistant before, to the point that they were willing to use a “poison pill” maneuver to dilute his shares and prevent him from gaining a majority of holdings? Why are they so insistent when most of the company was up in arms only a month ago, frothing and raging over the chance that free speech might become policy on the platform? We have to look at the company’s financial health before Musk’s purchase announcement as well as what is likely to happen now that he has dumped it.
In truth, Musk could have saved the company from a slow but accelerating implosion. Twitter’s stock has been a relatively poor performer for a few years. In 2020 at the onset of the covid pandemic, it saw a massive jump along with most other Big Tech companies on the assumption that user rates would increase along with the covid lockdowns. This did not really happen.
In Fall of 2021 their stock value began to falter, with the price plunging by more that 50% just before Elon Musk announced his majority share interest.
In April, Twitter admitted that the company “might” have been overcounting its users. People with multiple accounts had those accounts linked together, but Twitter was still counting them as separate users. They indicated that up to 2 million users were created through secondary accounts (which means there are probably many millions more that they have not found or admitted to). On top of this and the bot issues, Twitter user base was in decline anyway.
In 2019, Twitter abandoned its original method of counting users and moved to a new metric which “discounted the loss of bot accounts.” This spurs the question that is now at the core of Musk abandoning the sale: How many users on Twitter are actually fake?
In February, despite the change in its metrics, Twitter announced its user numbers had still fallen short. On top of this, the company suffered a net income loss of $1.4 billion in 2020 and a loss of $221 million in 2021. After stock declines, the only thing left for Twitter was user growth, and they didn’t have it.
Musk’s possible purchase of the company lifted share prices at a time when the platform was nearing the edge of the Big Tech abyss – The moment when a website goes the way of Myspace. With their reputation in the gutter after consistent censorship of conservatives and alternative media sources, the alienation of their user base was becoming a real problem. The platform was now known as nothing more than a “blue checkmark” cult hangout for the extreme political left; in other words, not an inviting place for anyone without pronouns in their bio. Musk moving in revitalized public interest in the company, if only for a short time.
Despite their rabid distaste for free speech, Twitter needed Musk. In order to meet Musk’s demands for user data, they dumped their entire server in his lap, maybe to bury him in so much information that sifting through it would take too long to discover anything out of order. The mainstream media actually crowed about the tactic, applauding Twitter’s action as a way to stick it to Musk.
However, they did not seem to consider the implications of ALL of Twitter’s data now in the hands of outside interests. If there is fraud at Twitter against its shareholders, then it will eventually be known. Maybe this is all that Musk wanted in the first place.
What happens next in terms of the deal is unclear. No doubt court proceedings will go on for years, but Twitter likely doesn’t have that much time. Musk dropping out of the sale will result in an immediate drop in stock price and perhaps even a violent devaluation. The question among shareholders will be this: “What did Musk discover in his analysis of Twitter user accounts? Did he find an immense number of bots?”
People will err on the side of caution and sell their shares while they can.
It’s a lose/lose situation for Twitter, because as they push the issue in court there will be discovery. In discovery all the data will be laid bare, and if Twitter is actually a hollow company with huge fake user numbers then the public is going to hear about it. Their share prices will collapse even further, there will be an SEC investigation and many lawsuits. Even if large corporate interests like Blackrock or Vanguard stepped in to shore up stock prices, none of these companies have the social influence to encourage wider buying from individual investors. They would have to take increasing losses to save a company that cannot be saved.
The result could be the expedited death of the platform.
Whether or not you like Elon Musk is not important. What’s important is the exposure of one of the biggest social media conglomerates in the world to incredible scrutiny. Twitter’s web influence has been waning for some time, but they still hold a measure of power over the flow of information within our culture. Perhaps a reckoning is at hand, and maybe the public will get a peek behind the curtain of the Big Tech empire to see how things REALLY operate.
EU Climate Plan Doomed Unless Sanctions Against Russia Lifted: Lawmaker

Samizdat – 09.07.2022
The controversial EU green transition plan, also known as Fit for 55, which was designed to reduce the bloc’s greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030, is unfeasible unless sanctions against Russia are lifted, a EU lawmaker from the Freedom Party of Austria, Roman Haider, told Sputnik.
“They don’t know how to save their unrealistic and dangerous Fit for 55 strategy without canceling the sanctions against Russia,” Haider said.
On Wednesday, the European Parliament backed EU regulations designating nuclear and gas energy as environmentally sustainable economic activities, saying that private investment in gas and nuclear projects may play a role in the green transition process.
This decision by the European Parliament signaled that EU governments are facing a stark reality, recognizing that more time and more realistic goals are required to transform the energy infrastructure in Europe, Haider said. Meanwhile, the Freedom Party of Austria has repeatedly raised the issue of impractical goals set as benchmarks for the EU and warned of grave consequences for the European and Austrian economy should the Fit for 55 plan be fully implemented, he noted.
“This package is a massive threat to businesses in Europe. It makes Europe even more dependent on imports and drives the price spiral further upwards. It destroys jobs, promotes the impoverishment of Europeans and is massively harmful to the environment. In short, Fit for 55 is a serious threat to Europe,” Haider warned.
Haider stressed that to achieve carbon neutrality by 2040 and meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement, Austria would have to cut emissions by 95% over the next 18 years, as a recent study shows that the country’s CO2 emissions in 2021 reached 1990 levels.
At the same time, the reality of the current energy market volatility has forced some EU countries, including Austria, to consider resuming the use of coal, which is the dirtiest fossil fuel, Haider added.
Austria’s state-owned Verbund AG was recently ordered to prepare the mothballed Mellach coal-fired power plant for emergency operation. It comes just two years after Austria became the second European country to completely eliminate coal from its energy production system.
Family of Shireen Abu Akleh asks to meet with Biden

Raşid Necati Aslım/Anadolu Agency
MEMO | July 9, 2022
The family of slain Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh has accused the United States of providing impunity for Israel over her killing and asked to meet President Joe Biden in person during his trip to Israel next week, reports Reuters.
In a letter to Biden posted on Twitter on Friday, the family said the administration simply adopted the Israeli government’s conclusions over her death, which it described as extrajudicial killing while falling short of its own stated goal of ensuring full accountability.
“Your administration’s engagement has served to whitewash Shireen’s killing and perpetuate impunity,” said the letter, signed by her brother Anton Abu Akleh on the family’s behalf.
“It is as if you expect the world and us to now just move on. Silence would have been better.” The family asked to see all the information the administration has collected on the issue.
Abu Akleh was killed on May 11 during an Israeli raid in the occupied West Bank town of Jenin under bitterly disputed circumstances.
Last month the United Nations human rights office said evidence suggested Israeli military fire had killed Abu Akleh while she stood with other reporters and was identifiable as a journalist.
The State Department on Monday said she was likely killed by gunfire from Israeli positions but it was probably unintentional and independent investigators could not reach a definitive conclusion about the origin of the bullet that struck her.
Palestinian officials criticized the report and maintained she had been deliberately targeted by an Israeli soldier. Israel denied this.
In his first Middle East trip as president on July 13-16, Biden is expected to meet separately with Palestinian and Israeli leaders. The Abu Akleh case will be a diplomatic and domestic test for new Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid.
A group of 24 US senators in Biden’s Democratic Party last month urged him to ensure direct U.S. involvement in the investigation of Abu Akleh’s killing.




