During the 1950s Solomon Asch conducted and published a series of experiments that demonstrated the degree to which an individual’s own opinions are influenced by those of a majority group.
Demonstrating how a “normal” human being can be pressured into unusual behavior by people they deem as authority figures, or by the consensus of opinion around them.
JERUSALEM — According to figures released by the Prisoners’ and Freed Prisoners’ Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) on Sunday, the state of Israel has imprisoned more than 50,000 children since the occupation of Palestine’s West Bank began in 1967. The PLO report, which was cited by Middle East Monitor, also noted that around 17,000 of those child arrests had occurred since the year 2000. The report used the UN definition that states that a child is any person younger than 18 years of age. However, Israel’s government has defined children younger than 16 as children, while applying the UN definition to Israeli children.
The PLO report — titled “Child Detention… Facts and Statistics… Effects on the Reality and Future of Palestinian Childhood” — was made public as the head of the PLO Prisoner committee, Abdul Nasser Ferwaneh, gave testimony to the 5th European Union conference in support of prisoners. In delivering his report and testimony, Ferwaneh noted that the rate of child imprisonment by the Israeli state had nearly doubled, averaging around 700 children imprisoned annually from 2000 to 2010 but rising to around 1,250 between 2011 and 2018.
Defense for Children International Palestine (DCIP), citing data from the Israeli Prison Service (IPS) and Israeli army temporary detention facilities, recently reported that 414 Palestinian children were imprisoned by Israeli military courts in just the first two months of 2019.
An apartheid system with kangaroo courts
Since 1967, Palestinian children have been subjected to Israeli military law while Israeli settlers living in illegal West Bank settlements are governed by Israel’s civilian criminal legal system. Aside from the fact that subjecting two different populaces in the same area to two different legal systems is a clear manifestation of apartheid, Israel is the only country in the world that automatically tries children in military courts, courts that lack basic fair trial guarantees and have a near-automatic conviction rate. In addition, many Palestinian children are arbitrarily detained, or imprisoned without charge.
Most Palestinian children tried in military court are accused of throwing stones — which, as of 2015, can carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. No Israeli child has ever been tried in an Israeli military court.
Children in detention in Israeli jails are often subjected to various forms of abuse, including “slapping, beating, kicking and violent pushing” as well as verbal abuse, according to prisoner-rights group Adameer. Adameer has also noted that Palestinian children are sometimes threatened with rape in order to extract confessions, which are often written in Hebrew — a language most Palestinian children can’t read or understand.
Obaida Akram Jawabra, a 15-year-old who has already been arrested twice by Israel, told DCIP that in prison “[Israeli] soldiers would beat me in places that would leave no marks so there wouldn’t be evidence on my body that I could use to testify against them.” Figures released by DCIP claim that 75 percent of Palestinian child prisoners report being subjected to physical violence while in prison and 62 percent report being subjected to verbal violence.
The majority of Palestinian children in detention are unable to receive family visits, since nearly 60 percent of all child detainees are transferred from the West Bank to Israeli prisons upon conviction. This practice, which violates the Fourth Geneva Convention — coupled with restrictions on Palestinians’ freedom of movement in the West Bank and the long delays in issuing permits for entry to Israel — prevents the vast majority of West Bank Palestinian families from visiting their imprisoned children.
While Israel’s government often touts itself as the “only democracy” in the Middle East, it is also the only government in the entire world that detains children through military courts with a near 100 percent conviction rate, something that even Saudi Arabia does not do. Israel’s practice of imprisoning Palestinian children is a clear violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by Israel in 1991, as it routinely robs thousands of children of their right to a safe childhood.
Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism.
… GretaThunberg has stated repeatedly that her strike will continue “until Sweden is aligned with the Paris Agreement.” Therefore, by her own statements, this is the singular, overall purpose and goal of the strike. The foundation of the Paris Agreement is the expansion of nuclear, the financialization of nature, further privatization at an unprecedented scale, “large scale CO2 reduction” (carbon capture storage), a desperate attempt to revitalize economic growth, and more market “solutions” that will further perpetuate our multiple crises. Therefore, the Thunberg campaign is in part to create a demand upon governments across the globe to align with the Paris agreement. (A demand to obtain what the ruling classes have already decided to unleash on us, our planet, and all life.) As adherence to the Paris Accords is a running theme in the mainstream NGO movement, the marketing campaign is helped along by 350.org, Avaaz, WWF, Greenpeace, in tandem with the UN (“Changing Together”), the World Bank (“Stepping Up“)[2], and more recently, the World Economic Forum (WEF). … Read full article
Astrophysicist / Weather Forecaster Piers Corbyn explains the differences between his ideas and those of the CO2 crowd.
Corbyn says; “There is No Such Thing as Man-Made Climate Change”.
He also mentions auto-compression and the work of Nikolov & Zeller.
Related works in the literature;
Principles, T., Nikolov, N., & Zeller, K. (2011). Unified Theory of Climate, poster session at the World Climate Research Program; http://www.wcrp-climate.org/conference
2011/
Nikolov, N., & Zeller, K. (2017). New insights on the physical nature of the atmospheric greenhouse effect deduced from an empirical planetary temperature model. Environment Pollution and Climate Change, 1(2), 112.
Holmes, R. I. (2017). Molar Mass Version of the Ideal Gas Law Points to a Very Low Climate Sensitivity. Earth Sciences, 6(6), 157.
Robinson, T. D., & Catling, D. C. (2014). Common 0.1 [thinsp] bar tropopause in thick atmospheres set by pressure-dependent infrared transparency. Nature Geoscience, 7(1), 12-15.
A brilliant student, at 18 Piers Corbyn went to Imperial College of London, where he earned a first class BSc degree in physics in 1968. He commenced postgraduate research there into superconductivity, but then went into student representation and politics for some years. Then in 1979 he returned to postgraduate study at Queen Mary College, University of London, where he earned a MSc in Astrophysics in 1981.
The former editor of Time / former Undersecretary of State for Public Policy thinks the US government propagandizing its own citizens is just fine and dandy. And where did he deliver these remarks? At the CFR, of course! Shocking, I know.
What is really happening in Gaza’s Great Return March demonstrations? The mainstream media will tell you many things, but what is the truth?
Robert Inlakesh takes on Ben Shapiro and the mainstream media’s take on what is happening in the Gaza Strip and explains the context that they leave out of their analysis.
U.S. Congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) tell Israeli billionaire campaign donor Haim Saban how devoted they are to Israel.
The panel is at the 2018 national convention of the Israeli American Council. Pelosi, who is Speaker of the House announces that she will name Israel partisans to chair top committees.
The crowd, composed of Israeli citizens, roars its approval at the two powerful American politicians.
The four-day conference was at the Diplomat Beach Resort in Hollywood, Florida. The next one is Dec. 5-8, 2019 at the same location.
Steve Bannon is probably the most unpopular character as far as progressives and liberals are concerned. People who like to see themselves at the Left side of the political spectrum regard Bannon as a vile hateful character as well as a rabid antisemite. Yet, symptomatically or even tragically, those who detest Bannon shy away from tackling his populist mantra. This is rather concerning considering the fact that Bannon has proven to be a shrewd political tactician and even a kingmaker. It is probably Bannon who carries the prime responsibility for Trump’s successful presidential campaign. Those who are fearful of Bannon revert to name-calling: they slalom in between his ideas with the hope that no one notices. They do their best to avoid anything that may evoke thinking or resemble reasoning. It is not a secret that those who currently claim to advocate social justice are apparently too fearful to engage with substance but they fail to do so in the name of social justice.
In the following film review Eve Myktyn tells us about Alison Klayman’s The Brink. Mykytyn went to the film hoping to learn more about Bannon but it seems she left the cinema knowing more about Klayman’s phobia of the man. If those who call themselves progressives want to sustain relevance, sooner or later they will have to engage in a proper intellectual exchange as name calling, misquoting and crude editing tactics do not do justice to social justice.
Steve Bannon may well be, as he is often called, the ‘architect of evil.’ But Alison Klayman’s mystifying documentary, The Brink, which sets out to “[use] Bannon’s own words and behaviors to reveal his hypocrisy and expose the danger he poses to liberal democracy” fails to show Bannon as hypocritical or dangerous.
The film begins with Bannon talking about a journey he made to World War II’s concentration camps. He notes that the Birkenau concentration camp was built using the finest of German engineering and wonders how ordinary Germans could get together and plan such a site. Perhaps Klayman felt that she couldn’t cut this otherwise disconnected scene because it showed Bannon to be an anti Semite, although he was simply musing about how a concentration camp came to be built. Is any question about any aspect of the Holocaust verboten? Apparently so,The Forward interprets Bannon’s remarks as: “rhapsodiz[ing] about the precise engineering of one of the most evil thing humans have ever created, the Birkenau extermination camp.”
Instead, of engaging with Bannon’s avowedly nationalist politics, much of the film is devoted to a fly-on-the-wall view of Bannon’s daily routine. Bannon eats and drinks (a combination of Red Bull and a disgusting mess of green ‘diet’ juice), speaks at rallies, poses for photos, meets with nationalist leaders in Europe, touts his propaganda movie, and texts and talks endlessly on the phone: so much film time is devoted to the quotidian aspects of Bannon’s life that the shrewd and divisive political operative is reduced to boring.
Klayman attempts to score a point by asking Bannon where he is, so that she can report that he is on an airfield for private planes. Is Bannon’s not particularly luxurious private plane, filled with his allies and journalists really relevant to the larger debate?
The film follows Bannon to Toronto where he appears for a formal debate with David From on the proposition that the “future of western politics is populist, not liberal.” This is finally the real debate. Is it ‘country first’ or do we have a responsibility to all without regard to borders? The debate can be found here (the first 10 minutes of chatter can be skipped): the exchange between two articulate men whose views are antithetical to each other is well worth the time. Tellingly, The Brink does not show the debate, instead we see the effects that Bannon’s presence evokes. The protests outside the debate are portrayed as huge and scary, inside Bannon gently confronts hecklers, whose poor behavior he comically attributes to an ‘ex-wife.’ That’s it. The Brink apparently feels no need to counter Bannon’s views or even better, simply show From’s effective dissent.
When the film does allow Bannon to articulate his thesis, it is in a brief scene in which Bannon is speaking to a rally. In it, Bannon states that the benefits of citizenship should be distributed only to citizens, without regard to race, religion or sexual preference. This is the core of the populist nationalist movement that helped elect Donald Trump and has scored victories in Britain, France, Belgium and Sweden. Bannon’s current project is to knit together like-minded counter globalists from Europe and the United States.
The Brink’s opposition to nationalist populism is left to Guardian reporter Paul Lewis who accuses Bannon of using “anti-Semitic tropes,” then interrupts Bannon’s denial. Bannon insists that there’s nothing nefarious about using the term “globalist” or criticizing George Soros for the NGOs he funds. Vogue claims Bannon uses the term globalist “with a wink and a nod… as a stand-in for Jews.” Bannon’s movement is opposed to globalism. Is there a non anti Semitic way to oppose globalism?
Just in case anyone failed to understand the intended message, the film ends with a stirring homage to the current crop of new representatives with the background picture of Washington, DC lit in rainbow hues. Apparently, a diverse group of new congressmen and women is a refutation of Bannon and what he stands for, too bad that The Brink fails to explain why that may be so.
With the Mueller investigation over and the Russiagate DOA, George Papadopoulos, former Trump campaign energy adviser, told RT he hopes the truth about the alleged deep state conspiracy will soon come out.
Lamenting the “disinformation” encircling the Trump campaign and Russia over the past three years, Papadopoulos explains that the only reasons the Trump team ever wanted to work with Russia were to stabilize Syria and Ukraine – and “to assure that Russia and China do not align in this devastating geopolitical alliance which will probably have many unpredictable consequences for the US in Europe and in Asia.”
But they never even got a chance to make any Russian connections, Papadopoulos says, adding that he was contacted by Israeli, Australian, and American intelligence – all of whom were interested in his “high-level connections in the Middle East” – but no Russians.
“It goes to the core of how corrupt the Mueller investigation really was, into supposed Russian interference when no one on the Trump campaign and the transition team was even dealing with Russians,” Papadopoulos said. “I’ve never met a Russian… official in my entire life, and somehow I find myself in the middle of a fake Russian conspiracy!”
The Mueller investigation zeroed in on Papadopoulos’ contact with Joseph Mifsud and Alexander Downer, both of whom the media portrayed as “Russian intermediaries” but whom Papadopoulos believes were working with the FBI, “dropping information in my lap that I did not want regarding Hillary Clinton’s emails in the hands of the Russians.” Papadopoulos even went so far as to report Downer to the FBI “because I thought he was spying on me.”
“The truth is going to be out there” when Trump declassifies the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) documents, Papadopoulos predicts. “It’s probably going to show the Obama administration, with the aid of both the Australian government and the UK government, were coordinating and laying various traps for the Trump campaign to essentially undermine us and that’s what they did for the last two years.”
Papadopoulos, who calls himself “Patient Zero of the Russian conspiracy,” was the first Trump affiliate to be indicted under the Mueller investigation and served 14 days in prison for making false statements to the FBI.
I met journalist and friend Rafiq Lutf and cameraman Abdul-Mun’aim Arnous in January 2018 and I was honoured when Rafiq asked me to work with him on his film project, The Veto.
As Dr Shaaban said to me in August 2016, “Western propaganda is paid for in Syrian blood”. This is true. The horrifying bloodshed and loss of life in Syria could never have happened without the colonial media manufacturing consent for another illegal war against a Sovereign nation.
The Veto tracks the evolution of the propaganda campaign waged by Western media against Syria. From Baba Amr in Homs 2011/2012 until the modern day “propaganda construct” – the NATO-member-state funded White Helmets.
It honours Russia and China’s vetoes that have consistently defended Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in the UN.
George Orwell said “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” Western media has been tasked with writing the history of the Syrian conflict to serve the aggressors in the US Coalition of terrorism. As Dr Shaaban also told me:
“The US alliance and its media are focusing on our history, material history, cultural history, identity, our army. Any power that keeps you as an entire state, or any statesman that represents strength or unity will be demonized and destroyed.”
The Veto exposes the criminal intentions of Western media and it archives the progression of the propaganda war waged by the West against Syria. Syrians are writing the history of the Syrian conflict because Syria and her allies have courageously resisted the Imperialist machine.
As Rafiq has said so eloquently “ we are the Veto” and we must use it against the Industrial Media Complex in the West.
Syria’s history belongs to the Syrians and Syria’s final victory must ensure that Western media is never again given the power to destroy a nation, divide its people and promote international terrorism both military and economic.
On November 8, 2016, Vladimir Putin won the US presidential election by getting his Manchurian Candidate, Доналд Трумп, into the White House as the crowning achievement of a decades-long plan to use pee tape kompromat and real estate deals that never happened to get a reality TV star installed in the Oval Office.
Mind-controlling the US public with hundreds of dollars of Facebook Jesus memes, this modern-day Czar carefully rigged the election by (not) hacking into any voting systems and by (not) hacking into the DNC servers, revealing that the DNC had rigged the election against 27 Dollars and in favour of Why Aren’t I 50 Points Ahead, You Might Ask.
And Saint Mueller was on the job commanding an army of 40 agents, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants, 500 witnesses 230 communication records and a partridge in a pear tree, so we all knew that the walls are closing in.
The media admitted that the story was mostly bullshit, but that’s OK because we’re living in a post-truth world and democracy dies in darkness.
The #Resistance spent years supporting disgraced attorneys, deranged liars and anyone else who would support their narrative, but that’s OK because votes only count when your candidate wins.
And after two years of investigation, Mueller delivered a report that brought some “troubling news . . . our president is not a Russian asset,” but that’s OK because everyone knows Trump is a Russian agent anyway, so who needs that stupid Mueller guy?
And now President Putin and his orange cheeto puppet are laughing all the way to the brink of nuclear war in the Cold War 2.0 cheered on by the neo-neocons and their neolib friends and made possible by a neo-mccarthyist purge of dissenting voices.
If you doubt any part of this story you are a no good, dirty, treasonous, alt-right Russian bot troll who deserves to be censored from the internet forever.
If you love truth, sunshine, ice cream, rainbows, kitty cats and the 4th of July then you will never question any part of this story.
EVER.
This message has been brought to you by the Friends of the DNC, MSMBS, The Rachel Maddow Retirement Fund, Clinton For 2020 and the CIA.
Excerpt from a speech by former Republican Congressman Paul N. “Pete” McCloskey, Jr. on “Israel, the Anti Defamation League and Free Speech.”
McCloskey has had a long history of service to the United States: as a U.S. Marine, an environmentalist, and an opponent to unnecessary wars.
McCloskey was born and raised in California, graduating from Stanford University.
During Korean War service with the Marine Corps, he earned the Navy Cross, the Silver Star and two Purple Hearts.
From 1967 to 1983 he served as a U.S. congressman. He was co-chairman of the First Earth Day, 1970.
He was an early opponent of American involvement in the Vietnam War, and the first Republican in Congress to call for the impeachment of President Nixon. In 1972 he was an unsuccessful candidate for the Republican party presidential nomination.
A documentary about McCloskey, narrated by Paul Newman, can be seen at: https://iakn.us/2FkMqTQ
The video above is from a speech he gave in 2000 at a conference for the Institute of Historical Review.
By the 1980s the ADL’s main purpose was no longer to try to stop anti-Semitism and bigotry, but instead to discredit any voice that was hostile to the policies of Israel – and not only to discredit people who spoke out against Israel, but to deny them a forum.
McCloskey describes the ADL’s work in spying on Americans.
For more about McCloskey’s contentious relationship with the pro-Israel lobby, see former Illinois Congressman Paul Findley’s book, “They Dare to Speak Out.” (A documentary about Findley is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBsrV… )
“Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda,” is the fourth vaccine-related documentary by Dr. Andrew Wakefield. It tells the story of an intentional infertility vaccine program conducted on African women, without their knowledge or consent.
While it’s been brushed off as a loony conspiracy theory for years, there’s compelling evidence showing it did, in fact, happen, and there’s nothing to prevent it from happening again. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News
Aletho News 