November 2016

Cancer, Cancer Everywhere ... But Not In The

Presidential Suite
activistpost.com
31 October 2016 / Janet Phelan
A recent cancer symposium, with a surgical focus, met in
Boston to discuss how surgical oncology is experiencing an
exciting evolution and the ways in which we treat cancer are
changing.
However, there are indications that the cure for cancer may
have already been found and that those who have it are
keeping it close to their chests.
In order to support this contention, which may be seen as
alarming and extreme, one must look at the rates of cancer
among the general population and compare these to the
rates of cancer deaths among world leaders.
And the latter is almost non-existent.
In the US, cancer is the second leading cause of death,
exceeded only by heart disease. According to recently
breaking news, Australia now lists cancer as its leading
cause of death. In the rest of the developed world, cancer is
near the top of the list. A recent list published by the World
Cancer Research Fund International shows that Denmark
leads the pack in terms of cancer rates. Indeed, the list of
the fifty countries with the highest cancer rates might lead
one to believe that cancer is a disease of prosperity.
Conspicuously absent from the list are countries in the Third
Worldin particular Africa.
Cancer will fell approximately of all those living in the
developed world. However, this particular manifestation of
the Grim Reaper gives world leaders a wide berth.
Since 1980, when the exiled Shah of Iran succumbed to
lymphatic cancer in Egypt, the deaths by cancer of those
leading their nations can be counted on the fingers of one
hand. And what is most telling about those on this short list
is where they stood on the political spectrum.

Hugo Chavez, the colorful and controversial President of

Venezuela between 1999-2013, was a Socialist and
prominent adversary of US foreign policy and neo-liberalism.
Before succumbing to cancer in 2013, Chavez made a much
publicized radio announcement in which he speculated that
the US government gave him cancer.
Chavez has been quoted as saying, Would it be so strange
that theyve invented the technology to spread cancer and
we wont know about it for 50 years? He is also quoted as
saying Fidel [Castro] always told me, Chvez take care.
These people have developed technology. You are very
careless. Take care what you eat, what they give you to eat
a little needle and they inject you with I dont know what.

Since his death Venezuela has crumbled into economic

chaos.
Vaclav Havel, who was the last president of Czechoslovakia
and the first President of the Czech Republic, is somewhat of
a more ambiguous character. While he is seen as being a
pivotal player in breaking up the Soviet bloc, and therefore
bringing what is popularly termed democracy to a formerly
Communist country, he may have also been serving US and
CIA interests, either unintentionally or otherwise.
In his period of political dissidence, prior to ascending to
power, Havel was imprisoned a number of times, the longest
incarceration being four years. As President, Havel was
instrumental in dismantling the Warsaw Pact and expanding
NATO into Eastern European countries. Havel died of lung
cancer in 2011 at the age of 75.
Jack Layton, the head of Canadas New Democratic Party,
succumbed to an unspecified, newly diagnosed cancer in
2011.
The NDP occupies the furthest left of Canadas political
spectrum. Indeed, there has never been an NDP head of
state in Canada.
So when the NDP swept the national parliamentary elections
in 2011, winning 103 seats, the NDP became Canadas
Official Opposition. Laytons tenancy as head of the
opposition was short lived, however. Layton succumbed to

cancer less than four months later, passing on in August of

2011. He had been committed to ousting the conservative
Harper government. Following Laytons death, the NDP
tumbled from its position and currently occupies third place
in Canadas parliament.
As Prime Minister of the tiny island of Barbados, David
Thompson could only marginally have been considered a
world leader. The population of Barbados is less than
300,000, mostly black. Barbados, also known as Little
England, is an independent state with the British monarch
as hereditary head of state.
Thompson was in office from 2008 until October of 2010,
when he passed away from pancreatic cancer, one of the
most deadly forms of the Big C.
Statistically, since cancer is listed as cause of death in
roughly of all deaths, one might logically expect that one
quarter of the US Presidents and one quarter of the US Vice
Presidents, to pick one example, would have cancer listed as
cause of death. With 44 Presidents and 47 Vice Presidents,
one might think that somewhere in the realm of 24 or so
might have succumbed to cancer.
However, there are none. Zero. Zilch. A search for cancer as
a cause of death for German, French or British leaders in the
past forty years produces only one name, that of former
French President Francois Mitterrand, who succumbed to
prostate cancer in 1996 at the age of 80. Mitterrand was the
first French President who was a Socialist and he led the
nation for fourteen years, as its longest serving President.
Since the 1972 throat cancer death of Edward VIIIwho
abdicated the throne in 1936no members of British royalty
have died of cancer.
In October of this year, the World Cancer Leaders Summit
will be convening in Paris, France. The announcement for this
Summit states that The World Cancer Leaders Summit
brings together global decision makers who can shape the
way our generation addresses the task of eliminating cancer
as a life threatening disease for future generations. Their
announcement also states, The Summit plays a pivotal role

in this portfolio of global events by ensuring that the 2020

targets detailed in the World Cancer Declaration are
appropriately recognised and addressed at the highest
political levels.
However, those at the highest political levels are often
seen as escaping repercussions for criminal behavior and
worse. The idea of the Teflon-coated political elite is an
idea that has now gained generalalbeit grimacceptance.
Given the probability that the cure may already exist, in light
of the unusual lack of incidence of fatal cancers afflicting the
powerful, one might want to ask the Summit if the world
leaders might be willing to share please?
Janet Phelan is an investigative journalist whose articles
have appeared in the Los Angeles Times, The San
Bernardino County Sentinel, The Santa Monica Daily Press,
The Long Beach Press Telegram, Oui Magazine and other
regional and national publications. Janet specializes in issues
pertaining to legal corruption and addresses the heated
subject of adult conservatorship, revealing shocking
information about the relationships between courts and
shady financial consultants. She also covers issues relating
to international bioweapons treaties. Her poetry has been
published in Gambit, Libera, Applezaba Review, Nausea One
and other magazines. Her first book, The Hitler Poems, was
published in 2005. She is also the author of a tell-all book
EXILE, (also available as an ebook). She currently resides
abroad.
http://www.activistpost.com/2016/10/cancer-cancereverywhere-not-presidential-suite.html
Voter fraud? Non-citizen can register to vote in
Arizona; officials, law enforcement investigating
31 October 2016 / Katie Conner / abc15.com
PHOENIX - An Arizona man, who is not a legal U.S. citizen,
admits he was able to register to vote.
ABC15 is not releasing his name, however he claims to have
lived in the U.S. for more than 25 years and has a green
card, a social security number and an Arizona driver license.

"I'm not a citizen but I am legal in this country," he said. "I

have a permanent resident alien card."
A few months ago the non-citizen says he was joking around
with a co-worker who was having problem registering to
vote.
"I was like, I bet I could do it as a non-citizen because we've
heard of all the things going on," he said.
He plugged in the required information including his name,
social security number and driver's license.
"The only thing I checked - that I shouldn't have -- was 'Legal
Citizen' but I assumed they were going to catch that," he
said.
However, no government agency caught it. A few weeks
later he received his voter registration card in the mail.
"It makes me really think the system is rigged," he said. "Not
towards a political party but that the system is broken. How
can it be 2016 and all these departments can't catch that I
lied on my registration?"
Out of disbelief, he contacted ABC15 to reveal the potential
problem.
"I wanted to see if the system really worked and it didn't," he
said. "I thought people should know about it."
ABC15 contacted the Maricopa County Recorder's Office who
was not aware of the problem.
A few days later, the man says an investigator called and
questioned him on how he was able to register to vote.
"He asked me 'Did you give them your correct social?' I said,
'Yes.' 'Did you give them your correct driver's license?' I said,
''Yes.'"
"He was shocked," he said. "He (the investigator) asked,
'What were you trying to accomplish with this?' I said, this all
really just started off as a joke and now it's really just more
of trying to prove a point that look you don't have to be a
citizen and you can register," he said,
When he asked if he would get in any trouble, the
investigator said, "I can't respond to that. Just don't pursue it
any further."
A few weeks later, he received his early ballot in the mail.

"It's just wrong," he said. "I wouldn't vote. I never intended

to vote. I know I am not a legal citizen but my wife is a
citizen. It makes me wonder - does her vote really matter?"
Spokesperson for Maricopa County Records Office Elizabeth
Bartholomew said this individual was able to register
because of a loophole in the system.
"We don't check citizenship based on a person's social
security, we check on their driver's license," said
Bartholomew.
"Any person who got a driver's license after 1996 had to
prove citizenship to the MVD. (The individual) had gotten a
driver's license in 1994 so he did not need to prove
citizenship. However, for some reason after 1996 he had to
get a new license reissued to him and he was never scanned
for citizenship at that point (the loophole)."
Bartholomew said regardless of the loophole, the individual
lied on a government form and falsely registered stating he
was a citizen - which is a Class 6 felony.
The Maricopa County Attorney's office confirms they are
investigating to see if charges are warranted.
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/centralphoenix/voter-fraud-non-citizen-able-to-register-to-vote-inaz-elections-law-enforcement-investigating

Good Deaths in Mosul, Bad Deaths in Aleppo

Consortiumnews
Exclusive: As the U.S.-backed offensive in Mosul, Iraq,
begins, the mainstream U.S. media readies the American
people to blame the terrorists for civilian casualties but the
opposite rules apply to Syrias Aleppo, reports Robert Parry.
26 October 2016 / Robert Parry / consortiumnews.com
Note how differently The New York Times prepares the
American public for civilian casualties from the new U.S.backed Iraqi government assault on the city of Mosul to free
it from the Islamic State, compared to the unrelenting

condemnation of the Russian-backed Syrian government

assault on neighborhoods of east Aleppo held by Al Qaeda.
In the case of Mosul, the million-plus residents are not
portrayed as likely victims of American airstrikes and Iraqi
government ground assaults, though surely many will die
during the offensive. Instead, the civilians are said to be
eagerly awaiting liberation from the Islamic State
terrorists and their head-chopping brutality.
Mosuls residents are hoarding food and furtively scrawling
resistance slogans on walls,
Times veteran war correspondent Rod Nordland about this
weeks launch of the U.S.-backed government offensive.
Those forces will fight to enter a city where for weeks the
harsh authoritarian rule of the Islamic State has sought to
crack down on a population eager to either escape or rebel,
according to interviews with roughly three dozen people
from Mosul.
Just getting out of Mosul had become difficult and
dangerous: Those who were caught faced million-dinar fines,
unless they were former members of the Iraqi Army or
police, in which case the punishment was beheading.
Graffiti and other displays of dissidence against the Islamic
State were more common in recent weeks, as were
executions when the vandals were caught.
The Times article continues: Mosul residents chafed under
social codes banning smoking and calling for splashing acid
on body tattoos, summary executions of perceived
opponents, whippings of those who missed prayers or
trimmed their beards, and destroying un-Islamic historical
monuments.
So, the message is clear: if the inevitable happens and the
U.S.-backed offensive kills a number of Mosuls civilians,
including children, The New York Times readers have been
hardened to accept this collateral damage as necessary to
free the city from blood-thirsty extremists. The fight to crush
these crazies is worth it, even if there are significant
numbers of civilians killed in the cross-fire.

And weve seen similar mainstream media treatment of

other U.S.-organized assaults on urban areas, such as the
devastation of the Iraqi city, Fallujah, in 2004 when U.S.
Marines routed Iraqi insurgents from the city while leveling
or severely damaging most of the citys buildings and killing
hundreds of civilians. But those victims were portrayed in the
Western press as human shields, shifting the blame for
their deaths onto the Iraqi insurgents.
Despite the fact that U.S. forces invaded Iraq in defiance of
international law and thus all the thousands of civilian
deaths across Iraq from the shock and awe U.S. firepower
should be considered war crimes there was virtually no
such analysis allowed into the pages of The New York Times
or the other mainstream U.S. media. Such talk was forced to
the political fringes, as it continues to be today. War-crimes
tribunals are only for the other guys.
Lust to Kill Children
By contrast, the Times routinely portrays the battle for east
Aleppo as simply a case of barbaric Russian and Syrian
leaders bombing innocent neighborhoods with no regard for
the human cost, operating out of an apparent lust to kill
children.
Rather than focusing on Al Qaedas harsh rule of east
Aleppo, the Times told its readers in late September how to
perceive the Russian-Syrian offensive to drive out Al Qaeda
and its allies. A Sept. 25 article by Anne Barnard and Somini
Sengupta, entitled Syria and Russia Appear Ready to Scorch
Aleppo, began:
Make life intolerable and death likely. Open an escape route,
or offer a deal to those who leave or surrender. Let people
trickle out. Kill whoever stays. Repeat until a deserted
cityscape is yours. It is a strategy that both the Syrian
government and its Russian allies have long embraced to
subdue Syrian rebels, largely by crushing the civilian
populations that support them.
But in the past few days, as hopes for a revived cease-fire
have disintegrated at the United Nations, the Syrians and
Russians seem to be mobilizing to apply this kill-all-who-

resist strategy to the most ambitious target yet: the rebelheld sections of the divided metropolis of Aleppo.
Again, note how the rebels are portrayed as local heroes,
rather than a collection of jihadists from both inside and
outside Syria fighting under the operational command of Al
Qaedas Nusra Front, which recently underwent a name
change to the Syria Conquest Front. But the name change
and the pretense about moderate rebels are just more
deceptions.
As journalist/historian Gareth Porter has written: Information
from a wide range of sources, including some of those the
United States has been explicitly supporting, makes it clear
that every armed anti-Assad organization unit in those
provinces [of Idlib and Aleppo] is engaged in a military
structure controlled by Nusra militants. All of these rebel
groups fight alongside the Nusra Front and coordinate their
military activities with it.
At least since 2014 the Obama administration has armed a
number of Syrian rebel groups even though it knew the
groups were coordinating closely with the Nusra Front, which
was simultaneously getting arms from Turkey and Qatar. The
strategy called for supplying TOW anti-tank missiles to the
Syrian Revolutionaries Front (SRF) as the core of a client
Syrian army that would be independent of the Nusra Front.
However, when a combined force of Nusra and non-jihadist
brigades including the SRF captured the Syrian army base at
Wadi al-Deif in December 2014, the truth began to emerge.
The SRF and other groups to which the United States had
supplied TOW missiles had fought under Nusras command
to capture the base.
Arming Al Qaeda
This reality the fact that the U.S. government is indirectly
supplying sophisticated weaponry to Al Qaeda is
rarely mentioned in the mainstream U.S. news media,
though one might think it would make for a newsworthy
story. But it would undercut the desired propaganda
narrative of good guy rebels fighting bad guy
government backed by ultra-bad guy Russians.

What if Americans understood that their tax money and U.S.

weaponry were going to aid the terrorist group
that perpetrated the 9/11 attacks? What if they understood
the larger historical context that Washington helped midwife
the modern jihadist movement and Al Qaeda through the
U.S./Saudi support for the Afghan mujahedeen in the 1980s?
And what if Americans understood that Washingtons
supposed regional allies, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar,
Turkey and Israel, have sided with Al Qaeda in Syria because
of their intense hatred of Shiite-ruled Iran, an ally of Syrias
secular government?
These Al Qaeda sympathies have been known for several
years but never get reported in the mainstream U.S. press.
In September 2013, Israels Ambassador to the United States
Michael Oren, then a close adviser to Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu, told the Jerusalem Post that Israel
favored Syrias Sunni extremists over President Bashar alAssad.
The greatest danger to Israel is by the strategic arc that
extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut. And we saw the
Assad regime as the keystone in that arc, Oren told the
Jerusalem Post in an interview. We always wanted Bashar
Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who werent
backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran.
He said this was the case even if the bad guys were
affiliated with Al Qaeda.
And, in June 2014, speaking as a former ambassador at an
Aspen Institute conference, Oren expanded on his position,
saying Israel would even prefer a victory by the brutal
Islamic State over continuation of the Iranian-backed Assad
in Syria. From Israels perspective, if theres got to be an
evil thats got to prevail, let the Sunni evil prevail, Oren
said.
But such cynical and dangerous realpolitik is kept from
the American people. Instead, the Syrian conflict is
presented as all about the children.
There is also little said about how Al Qaedas Nusra Front and
its allied jihadists keep the civilian population in east Aleppo
essentially as human shields. When humanitarian

corridors have been opened to allow civilians to escape,

they had been fired on by the jihadists determined to keep
as many people under their control as possible.
Propaganda Fodder
By forcing the civilians to stay, Al Qaeda and its allies can
exploit the injuries and deaths of civilians, especially the
children, for propaganda advantages.
Going along with Al Qaedas propaganda strategy, the Times
and other mainstream U.S. news outlets have kept the focus
on the children. A Times dispatch on Sept. 27 begins: They
cannot play, sleep or attend school. Increasingly, they
cannot eat. Injury or illness could be fatal. Many just huddle
with their parents in windowless underground shelters
which offer no protection from the powerful bombs that have
turned east Aleppo into a kill zone.
Among the roughly 250,000 people trapped in the insurgent
redoubt of the divided northern Syrian city are 100,000
children, the most vulnerable victims of intensified bombings
by Syrian forces and their Russian allies. Though the world is
jolted periodically by the suffering of children in the Syria
conflict the photographs of Alan Kurdis drowned body and
Omran Daqneeshs bloodied face are prime examples
dead and traumatized children are increasingly common.
This propagandistic narrative has bled into the U.S.
presidential campaign with Martha Raddatz, a moderator of
the second presidential debate, incorporating much of the
evil-Russians theme into a question that went so far as to
liken the human suffering in Aleppo to the Holocaust, the
Nazi extermination campaign against Jews and other
minorities.
That prompted former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to
repeat her call for an expanded U.S. military intervention in
Syria, including a no-fly zone, which U.S. military
commanders say would require a massive operation that
would kill many Syrians, both soldiers and civilians, to
eliminate Syrias sophisticated air-defense systems and its
air force.
Based on the recent Wikileaks publication of Clintons
speeches to investment bankers and other special interests,

we also know that she recognizes the high human cost from
this strategy. In one June 2013 speech, she said, To have a
no-fly zone you have to take out all of the air defense, many
of which are located in populated areas. So our missiles,
even if they are standoff missiles so were not putting our
pilots at risk youre going to kill a lot of Syrians. So all of a
sudden this intervention that people talk about so glibly
becomes an American and NATO involvement where you
take a lot of civilians.
Yet, during the campaign, Clinton has spoken glibly about
her own proposal to impose a no-fly zone over Syria, which
has become even more dangerous since 2015 when the
Russians agreed to directly assist the Syrian government in
fighting Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.
Also, left unsaid about such a U.S. intervention is that it
could open the way for Al Qaeda and/or its spinoff Islamic
State to defeat the Syrian army and gain control of
Damascus, creating the potential for even a worse bloodbath
against Christians, Shiites, Alawites, secular Sunnis and
other heretics. Not to mention the fact that a U.S.-imposed
no-fly zone would be a clear violation of international law.
Over the next few weeks, we are sure hear much about the
Islamic State using the people of Mosul as human shields
and thus excusing U.S. bombs when they strike civilians
targets and kill children. It will all be the terrorists fault,
except that an opposite set of journalistic rules will apply
to Aleppo.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the
Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and
Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book,
Americas Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as
an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com).
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/10/17/good-deaths-inmosul-bad-deaths-in-aleppo/

thesaker.is
Speech of President Putin at the Valdai Club

The Saker
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Colleagues, ladies
and gentlemen,
Allow me to greet you here at this regular meeting
of the Valdai International Club.
It is true that for over 10 years now this has been a platform
to discuss the most pressing issues and consider
the directions and prospects for the development of Russia
and the whole world. The participants change, of course, but
overall, this discussion platform retains its core, so
to speak we have turned into a kind of mutually
understanding environment.
We have an open discussion here; this is an open intellectual
platform for an exchange of views, assessments
and forecasts that are very important for us here in Russia.
I would like to thank all the Russian and foreign politicians,
experts, public figures and journalists taking part in the work
of this club.
This year the discussion focusses on issues of war
and peace. This topic has clearly been the concern
of humanity throughout its history. Back in ancient times,
in antiquity people argued about the nature, the causes
of conflicts, about the fair and unfair use of force, of whether
wars would always accompany the development
of civilisation, broken only by ceasefires, or would the time
come when arguments and conflicts are resolved without
war.
Im sure you recalled our great writer Leo Tolstoy here. In his
great novel War and Peace, he wrote that war contradicted
human reason and human nature, while peace in his opinion
was good for people.
True, peace, a peaceful life have always been humanitys
ideal. State figures, philosophers and lawyers have often
come up with models for a peaceful interaction between
nations. Various coalitions and alliances declared that their
goal was to ensure strong, lasting peace as they used
to say. However, the problem was that they often turned
to war as a way to resolve the accumulated contradictions,

while war itself served as a means for establishing new postwar hierarchies in the world.
Meanwhile peace, as a state of world politics, has never
been stable and did not come of itself. Periods of peace
in both European and world history were always been based
on securing and maintaining the existing balance of forces.
This happened in the 17th century in the times of the socalled Peace of Westphalia, which put an end to the Thirty
Years War. Then in the 19th century, in the time
of the Vienna Congress; and again 70 years ago in Yalta,
when the victors over Nazism made the decision to set up
the United Nations Organisation and lay down the principles
of relations between states.
With the appearance of nuclear weapons, it became clear
that there could be no winner in a global conflict. There can
be only one end guaranteed mutual destruction. It so
happened that in its attempt to create ever more destructive
weapons humanity has made any big war pointless.
Incidentally, the world leaders of the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s
and even 1980s did treat the use of armed force
as an exceptional measure. In this sense, they behaved
responsibly, weighing all the circumstances and possible
consequences.
The end of the Cold War put an end to ideological opposition,
but the basis for arguments and geopolitical conflicts
remained. All states have always had and will continue
to have their own diverse interests, while the course of world
history has always been accompanied by competition
between nations and their alliances. In my view, this is
absolutely natural.
The main thing is to ensure that this competition develops
within the framework of fixed political, legal and moral
norms and rules. Otherwise, competition and conflicts
of interest may lead to acute crises and dramatic outbursts.
We have seen this happen many times in the past. Today,
unfortunately, we have again come across similar situations.
Attempts to promote a model of unilateral domination,
as I have said on numerous occasions, have led
to an imbalance in the system of international law and global

regulation, which means there is a threat, and political,

economic or military competition may get out of control.
What, for instance, could such uncontrolled competition
mean for international security? A growing number
of regional conflicts, especially in border areas, where
the interests of major nations or blocs meet. This can also
lead to the probable downfall of the system of nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction (which I also
consider to be very dangerous), which, in turn, would result
in a new spiral of the arms race.
We have already seen the appearance of the concept
of the so-called disarming first strike, including one with
the use of high-precision long-range non-nuclear weapons
comparable in their effect to nuclear weapons.
The use of the threat of a nuclear missile attack from Iran
as an excuse, as we know, has destroyed the fundamental
basis of modern international security the Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty. The United States has unilaterally seceded
from the treaty. Incidentally, today we have resolved
the Iranian issue and there is no threat from Iran and never
has been, just as we said.
The thing that seemed to have led our American partners
to build an anti-missile defence system is gone. It would be
reasonable to expect work to develop the US anti-missile
defence system to come to an end as well. What is actually
happening? Nothing of the kind, or actually the opposite
everything continues.
Recently the United States conducted the first test
of the anti-missile defence system in Europe. What does this
mean? It means we were right when we argued with our
American partners. They were simply trying yet again
to mislead us and the whole world. To put it plainly, they
were lying. It was not about the hypothetical Iranian threat,
which never existed. It was about an attempt to destroy
the strategic balance, to change the balance of forces
in their favour not only to dominate, but to have
the opportunity to dictate their will to all: to their geopolitical
competition and, I believe, to their allies as well. This is

a very dangerous scenario, harmful to all, including,

in my opinion, to the United States.
The nuclear deterrent lost its value. Some probably even had
the illusion that victory of one party in a world conflict was
again possible without irreversible, unacceptable,
as experts say, consequences for the winner, if there ever is
one.
In the past 25 years, the threshold for the use of force has
gone down noticeably. The anti-war immunity we have
acquired after two world wars, which we had
on a subconscious, psychological level, has become weaker.
The very perception of war has changed: for TV viewers it
was becoming and has now become an entertaining media
picture, as if nobody dies in combat, as if people do not
suffer and cities and entire states are not destroyed.
Unfortunately, military terminology is becoming part
of everyday life. Thus, trade and sanctions wars have
become todays global economic reality this has become
a set phrase used by the media. The sanctions, meanwhile,
are often used also as an instrument of unfair competition
to put pressure on or completely throw competition out
of the market. As an example, I could take the outright
epidemic of fines imposed on companies, including European
ones, by the United States. Flimsy pretexts are being used,
and all those who dare violate the unilateral American
sanctions are severely punished.
You know, this may not be Russias business, but this is
a discussion club, therefore I will ask: Is that the way one
treats allies? No, this is how one treats vassals who dare act
as they wish they are punished for misbehaving.
Last year a fine was imposed on a French bank to a total
of almost $9 billion $8.9 billion, I believe. Toyota paid $1.2
billion, while the German Commerzbank signed
an agreement to pay $1.7 billion into the American budget,
and so forth.
We also see the development of the process to create nontransparent economic blocs, which is done following
practically all the rules of conspiracy. The goal is obvious
to reformat the world economy in a way that would make it

possible to extract a greater profit from domination

and the spread of economic, trade and technological
regulation standards.
The creation of economic blocs by imposing their terms
on the strongest players would clearly not make the world
safer, but would only create time bombs, conditions
for future conflicts.
The World Trade Organisation was once set up. True,
the discussion there is not proceeding smoothly,
and the Doha round of talks ended in a deadlock, possibly,
but we should continue looking for ways out
and for compromise, because only compromise can lead
to the creation of a long-term system of relations in any
sphere, including the economy. Meanwhile, if we dismiss that
the concerns of certain countries participants in economic
communication, if we pretend that they can be bypassed,
the contradictions will not go away, they will not be resolved,
they will remain, which means that one day they will make
themselves known.
As you know, our approach is different. While creating
the Eurasian Economic Union we tried to develop relations
with our partners, including relations within the Chinese Silk
Road Economic Belt initiative. We are actively working
on the basis of equality in BRICS, APEC and the G20.
The global information space is also shaken by wars today,
in a manner of speaking. The only correct viewpoint
and interpretation of events is aggressively imposed
on people, certain facts are either concealed or manipulated.
We are all used to labelling and the creation of an enemy
image.
The authorities in countries that seemed to have always
appealed to such values as freedom of speech and the free
dissemination of information something we have heard
about so often in the past are now trying to prevent
the spreading of objective information and any opinion that
differs from their own; they declare it hostile propaganda
that needs to be combatted, clearly using undemocratic
means.

Unfortunately, we hear the words war and conflict ever more

frequently when talking about relations between people
of different cultures, religions and ethnicity. Today hundreds
of thousands of migrants are trying to integrate into
a different society without a profession and without any
knowledge of the language, traditions and culture
of the countries they are moving to. Meanwhile,
the residents of those countries and we should openly
speak about this, without trying to polish things up
the residents are irritated by the dominance of strangers,
rising crime rate, money spent on refugees from the budgets
of their countries.
Many people sympathise with the refugees, of course,
and would like to help them. The question is how to do it
without infringing on the interests of the residents
of the countries where the refugees are moving. Meanwhile,
a massive uncontrolled shocking clash of different lifestyles
can lead, and already is leading to growing nationalism
and intolerance, to the emergence of a permanent conflict
in society.
Colleagues, we must be realistic: military power is, of course,
and will remain for a long time still an instrument
of international politics. Good or bad, this is a fact of life.
The question is, will it be used only when all other means
have been exhausted? When we have to resist common
threats, like, for instance, terrorism, and will it be used
in compliance with the known rules laid down in international
law. Or will we use force on any pretext, even just to remind
the world who is boss here, without giving a thought about
the legitimacy of the use of force and its consequences,
without solving problems, but only multiplying them.
We see what is happening in the Middle East. For decades,
maybe even centuries, inter-ethnic, religious and political
conflicts and acute social issues have been accumulating
here. In a word, a storm was brewing there, while attempts
to forcefully rearrange the region became the match that
lead to a real blast, to the destruction of statehood,
an outbreak of terrorism and, finally, to growing global risks.

A terrorist organisation, the so-called Islamic State, took

huge territories under control. Just think about it: if they
occupied Damascus or Baghdad, the terrorist gangs could
achieve the status of a practically official power, they would
create a stronghold for global expansion. Is anyone
considering this? It is time the entire international
community realised what we are dealing with it is, in fact,
an enemy of civilisation and world culture that is bringing
with it an ideology of hatred and barbarity, trampling upon
morals and world religious values, including those of Islam,
thereby compromising it.
We do not need wordplay here; we should not break down
the terrorists into moderate and immoderate ones. It would
be good to know the difference. Probably, in the opinion
of certain experts, it is that the so-called moderate militants
behead people in limited numbers or in some delicate
fashion.
In actual fact, we now see a real mix of terrorist groups. True,
at times militants from the Islamic State, Jabhat al-Nusra
and other Al-Qaeda heirs and splinters fight each other, but
they fight for money, for feeding grounds, this is what they
are fighting for. They are not fighting for ideological reasons,
while their essence and methods remain the same: terror,
murder, turning people into a timid, frightened, obedient
mass.
In the past years the situation has been deteriorating,
the terrorists infrastructure has been growing, along with
their numbers, while the weapons provided to the so-called
moderate opposition eventually ended up in the hands
of terrorist organisations. Moreover, sometimes entire bands
would go over to their side, marching in with flying colours,
as they say.
Why is it that the efforts of, say, our American partners
and their allies in their struggle against the Islamic State has
not produced any tangible results? Obviously, this is not
about any lack of military equipment or potential. Clearly,
the United States has a huge potential, the biggest military
potential in the world, only double crossing is never easy. You
declare war on terrorists and simultaneously try to use some

of them to arrange the figures on the Middle East board

in your own interests, as you may think.
It is impossible to combat terrorism in general if some
terrorists are used as a battering ram to overthrow
the regimes that are not to ones liking. You cannot get rid
of those terrorists, it is only an illusion to think you can get
rid of them later, take power away from them or reach some
agreement with them. The situation in Libya is the best
example here.
Let us hope that the new government will manage
to stabilise the situation, though this is not a fact yet.
However, we need to assist in this stabilisation.
We understand quite well that the militants fighting
in the Middle East represent a threat to everyone, including
Russia. People in our nation know what terrorist aggression
means and know what the bandits in the North Caucasus
have done. We remember the bloody terrorist attacks
in Budennovsk, Moscow, Beslan, Volgograd and other
Russian cities. Russia has always fought terrorism in all its
forms, consistently advocating for truly unifying the global
communitys efforts to fight this evil. That is why we made
our suggestion to create a broad anti-terror coalition, which
I recently voiced in my speech at the United Nations.
After Syrias official authorities reached out to us for support,
we made the decision to launch a Russian military operation
in that nation. I will stress again: it is fully legitimate and its
only goal is to help restore peace. I am sure that the Russian
service members actions will have the necessary positive
effect on the situation, helping Syrias official authorities
create the conditions for subsequent actions in reaching
a political settlement and stage pre-emptive strikes against
terrorists that threaten our nation, Russia. Thus, we help all
nations and peoples who are certainly in danger if these
terrorists return home.
Here is what we believe we must do to support long-term
settlement in the region, as well as its social, economic
and political revival. First of all, free Syria and Iraqs
territories from terrorists and not let them move their
activities to other regions. And to do that, we must join all

forces the Iraqi and Syrian regular armies, Kurdish militia,

various opposition groups that have actually made a real
contribution to fighting terrorists and coordinate
the actions of countries within and outside of the region
against terrorism. At the same time, joint anti-terrorist action
must certainly be based on international law.
Second, it is obvious that a military victory over the militants
alone will not resolve all problems, but it will create
conditions for the main thing: a beginning of a political
process with participation by all healthy, patriotic forces
of the Syrian society. It is the Syrians who must decide their
fate with exclusively civil, respectful assistance from
the international community, and not under external
pressure through ultimatums, blackmail or threats.
The collapse of Syrias official authorities, for example, will
only mobilise terrorists. Right now, instead of undermining
them, we must revive them, strengthening state institutions
in the conflict zone.
I want to remind you that throughout its history, the Middle
East has often been an arena for clashes between various
empires and powers. They redrew boundaries and reshaped
the regions political structure to suit their tastes
and interests. And the consequences were not always good
or beneficial for the people living there. Actually, no one
even asked their opinion. The last people to find out what
was happening in their own nations were the people living
in the Middle East.
Of course, this begs the question: isnt it time
for the international community to coordinate all its actions
with the people who live in these territories? I think that its
long overdue; these people like any people should be
treated with respect.
The involvement in the process of political settlement
of the Muslim clergy, leaders of Islam and heads of Muslim
nations is crucial. We count on their consolidated position
and assistance, as well as their moral authority. It is very
important to protect people, especially youth, against
the destructive effects of the ideology of the terrorists, who
are trying to use them as cannon fodder, nothing more. We

need to distinguish clearly between genuine Islam, whose

values are peace, family, good deeds, helping others,
respecting traditions, and the lies and hatred that
the militants sow under the guise of Islam.
Fourth, we currently need to develop a roadmap
for the regions economic and social development, to restore
basic infrastructure, housing, hospitals and schools. Only this
kind of on-site creative work after eliminating terrorism
and reaching a political settlement can stop the enormous
flow of refugees to European nations and return those who
left to their homelands.
It is clear that Syria will need massive financial, economic
and humanitarian assistance in order to heal the wounds
of war. We need to determine the format within which we
could do this work, getting donor nations and international
financial institutions involved. Right now, Syrias problems
are being discussed at the UN and other international
organisations, and within the framework of interstate
relations. Its true that for now, we are not always able
to reach an understanding and it is painfully difficult
to abandon might-have-been expectations and unjustified
calculations, but nevertheless, there is some progress.
We see that contacts are being gradually established
between military departments within the anti-terrorist
operation framework, although not as actively and quickly
as we might like. Approval of the Russian-American
document on safety guidelines for the two countries military
aircraft flying missions over Syria is a serious step
in the right direction.
We are also close to starting an exchange of information with
our western colleagues on militants positions
and movements. All these are certainly steps in the right
direction. Whats most important is to treat one another
as allies in a common fight, to be honest and open. Only
then can we guarantee victory over the terrorists.
For all the drama of its current situation, Syria can become
a model for partnership in the name of common interests,
resolving problems that affect everyone, and developing
an effective risk management system. We already had this

opportunity after the end of the Cold War. Unfortunately, we

did not take advantage of it. We also had the opportunity
in the early 2000s, when Russia, the US and many other
nations were faced with terrorist aggression
and unfortunately, we were unable to establish a good
dynamic for cooperating then, either. I will not return to that
and the reasons for why we were unable to do this. I think
everyone knows already. Now, whats important is to draw
the right lessons from what happened in the past
and to move forward.
I am confident that the experience we acquired and todays
situation will allow us to finally make the right choice
the choice in favour of cooperation, mutual respect
and trust, the choice in favour of peace.
Thank you very much for your attention.
http://thesaker.is/18960/

rt.com
Palestinians demand UK apologize for 1917 Balfour
Declaration that helped create Israel
2 November 2016
A campaign by Palestinian activists demanding the UK issue
a formal apology for supporting the idea of a Jewish state in
the Middle East almost a century ago is gaining momentum
after the launch of a new parliamentary petition.
Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Jenny Tonge hosted the
launch at the House of Lords last Tuesday, where the plight
of the Palestinian people was blamed on the legacy of the
Balfour Declaration and wider British colonialism in the
region.
The activists, backed by the Palestinian diplomatic mission in
the UK, intend to push the British government in the run-up
to the documents centennial in November 2017. If the
petition currently pending approval reaches 100,000
signatures, parliament will have to consider debating the
subject.

The Balfour Declaration was a letter from British Foreign

Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild head of
the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland that
promised support for the idea of a Jewish homeland in
historical Palestine as long as the rights of existing nonJewish communities were not prejudiced.
Shortly after the letter was published, the Ottoman Empire
was defeated by allied powers in World War I and Britain
established mandate rule in the territory of historic Palestine,
previously ruled by the Ottomans.
Last Tuesdays event at Westminster proved controversial
after a video surfaced showing one audience member saying
Jews had agitated Adolf Hitler before the Holocaust, and
compared Israel to Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS, ISIL).
Just as the so-called Jewish state in Palestine doesnt come
from Judaism, the Islamic State in Syria is nothing with
Islam. It is a perversion of Islam just as Zionism is a
perversion of Judaism, the unidentified man said.
If anybody is anti-Semitic, its Israelis themselves, another
audience member said, to applause.
Israel condemned what it called a shameful gathering,
which gave voice to racist tropes against Jews and Israelis
alike.
Tonge was criticised for not appearing to challenge the
comments. She later said she did not hear the first mans full
rant. The Lib Dems decided to suspend Tonge, pending an
investigation into the event.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas also called
on the UK to apologize for the Balfour Declaration while in
New York last week.
We ask Great Britain, as we approach 100 years since this
infamous declaration, to draw the necessary lessons and to
bear its historic, legal, political, material and moral
responsibility for the consequences of this declaration,
including an apology to the Palestinian people for the
catastrophes, misery and injustice this declaration created
and to act to rectify these disasters and remedy its

consequences, including by the recognition of the state of

Palestine, Abbas told UN delegates.
This is the least Great Britain can do.
In a statement sent to Al Jazeera, a British Foreign and
Commonwealth Office spokesperson said the government
would not apologize for the 100-year-old document, but
recognized it was a sensitive subject for many.
The Balfour Declaration was a historic statement and one
that the UK Government will not be apologising for We are
focused on encouraging the Israelis and Palestinians to take
steps which bring them closer to peace, the FCO said.
https://www.rt.com/uk/364997-palestine-britain-apologybalfour/?
utm_source=browser&utm_medium=aplication_chrome&utm
_campaign=chrome

dailymail.co.uk
Waitrose ends use of GM animal feed on its farms
By Sean Poulter, Consumer Affairs Editor For The Daily Mail
Published: 01:58, 2 November 2016 | Updated: 02:32, 2
November 2016
Waitrose's meat, milk and eggs will no longer come from
animals fed a genetically modified diet.
The retailer is dropping GM soya feed on its farms in a huge
blow to the controversial 'Frankenfood' technology.
Critics of GM have hailed the decision as the 'beginning of
the end of the last large-scale use of GM crops in the UK'.
Waitrose is dropping GM soya feed on its farms in a huge
blow to the controversial 'Frankenfood' technology
Campaigners are now demanding that other stores follow
suit.
Most shoppers are in the dark about the fact that all the
major supermarkets feed their farm animals a diet of GM
soya and maize. Consumer research from the Food

Standards Agency has found shoppers believe this

information should be included on the packaging.
But successive governments and the supermarkets have
refused to deliver clear, honest labelling.
Waitrose is ditching GM soya imported from South America in
favour of conventional soya from Europe and other protein
sources.
The company said: 'Waitrose has become the first UK retailer
to introduce responsibly sourced non-GM soya for animal
feed from Europe, reducing its reliance upon South American
supply.'
All the major supermarkets effectively banned using GM
ingredients in their own-label foods in 1999 in response to
customer concerns about the impact on the environment
and human health.
When challenged, the supermarkets claim that it is too
difficult to make a change but Waitrose have proved that
simply isn't true
They also banned giving GM feed to their farm animals.
However, that changed three years ago when Tesco, Marks &
Spencer, Sainsbury's, the Co-op and others lifted the ban on
GM animal feed, claiming it was no longer possible to find
soya not genetically modified. The decision announced
yesterday by Waitrose shows this is not the case.
GM advocates, such as the former Tory food and farming
secretary, Owen Paterson, have seen the use of GM animal
feed on farms as a way of forcing the technology into the
high street and overcoming consumer suspicion.
The move by Waitrose means this tactic is now being
challenged. The retailer said the non-GM soya used on its
farms will now come from the Danube region. It is also using
other alternatives, such as clover for sheep and cattle, and
faba beans for pigs, chickens and ducks.
The first shipment of non-GM soya arrived in October and
went to Waitrose's dedicated pork supplier, Dalehead Foods.
Waitrose's meat, milk and eggs will no longer come from
animals fed a genetically modified diet. File image
The Soil Association, which backs organic farming, said it
marks the 'beginning of the end' for large-scale use of GM

crops in Britain. It added: 'This is the most significant move

in the UK against the use of GM crops since 1999, when
British supermarkets took the 70 per cent of processed food
that contained GM off their shelves.'
The association, with Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and
GM Freeze have opposed the hidden use of GM crops for
over 15 years.
Peter Melchett, of the association, said: 'GM soya from Latin
America is linked to rainforest destruction, so sourcing nonGM soya from the Danube region, and using more UK-grown
protein crops, is good for the climate, good for UK farmers,
and good for consumers. We expect other retailers to follow
Waitrose's lead.' GM Freeze's Liz O'Neill, said: 'When
challenged, the supermarkets claim that it is too difficult to
make a change but Waitrose have proved that simply isn't
true.'
Waitrose admitted it is not going completely GM-free, but it
is a huge step in that direction. The company is particularly
keen to stop taking GM crops from countries where huge
tracts of rainforest are cleared for the cultivation.
In an investigation published by the New York Times this
week, academics found GM farming in North America has not
accelerated increases in crop yields or led to an overall
reduction in pesticide use.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3895904/Waitroseends-use-GM-animal-feed-farms-Critics-hail-decisionbeginning-end-use-crops-UK.html

Morgellons Found to Be Closely Linked With Lyme

Disease
1 November 2016 / Laurie Saloman / www.contagionlive.com
Morgellons disease has been a puzzle to practitioners for
many years. Sufferers exhibit colorful filaments that protrude
from their skin or nestle directly underneath it, resembling
textile fibers in their texture and hue. Frequently, this
unusual presentation led physicians to doubt that the
filaments could originate from inside the skin and sufferers

were traditionally thought to be delusional. Now, researchers

associated with the International Lyme and Associated
Diseases Society (ILADS) have examined the results of
several recent studies and concluded that not only do
Morgellons filaments originate inside the skin, but the
disorder is also closely linked to Lyme disease.
According to Raphael B. Stricker, MD, a San Francisco
physician and ILADS member, histological studies
demonstrate that the filaments are comprised of keratin and
collagen, proteins found in body tissues. These proteins
appear to arise from cells located in multiple layers of the
skin along with those of hair follicle roots; some of the fibers
are actual hairs. Staining the different colored filaments has
revealed them to be human tissue and dispelled any notion
that the fibers contain materials normally found in clothing
or other substances.
Dr. Stricker says that in multiple studies, tissues taken from
Morgellons patients consistently show infection with various
kinds of Borrelia spirochetesmainly Borrelia burgdorferi,
the bacteria thats present in Lyme disease. As many as
98% of Morgellons patients have evidence of Lyme disease
and/or an associated tick-borne infection, says Dr. Stricker.
In fact, Morgellons sufferers commonly experience joint pain,
fatigue, and neuropathy, all known symptoms of Lyme
disease. Most Lyme sufferers, however, never develop
Morgellons: two studies have put that figure at only about
6%.
Why do a handful of people who contract Lyme go on to
develop Morgellons? Scientists arent sure. Possibly [it has
to do with] the strain of the Lyme spirochete, and probably
some genetic factors," said Dr. Stricker. There also may be
hormonal and immune system factors at play. Most Lyme
disease patients who develop Morgellons have been infected
with Lyme for some time and are experiencing symptoms
indicating a chronic form of the disease, although certain
Morgellons patients develop their fibrous extrusions and

other symptoms shortly after being bitten by a tick and/or

experiencing the typical bullseye rash that may arise within
a few days or weeks from such a bite.
Dr. Stricker also notes that Morgellons sufferers often do
have psychiatric symptoms, including prior diagnoses of
bipolar disorder, ADD, OCD, and schizophrenia. This
complicating factor can make it difficult for a Morgellons
patient to have his or her symptoms taken seriously.
However, he notes in his report that hundreds of peerreviewed articles have found a connection between Lyme
disease and similar tick-borne conditions and mental
illnesses such as depression, bipolar disorder, hallucinations,
and paranoia. Its possible, then, that even if a person is
experiencing psychiatric problems as a result of a tick-borne
bacterial infection, the delusion that fibers are growing out
of his or her skin is, in fact, not a delusion at all.
http://www.contagionlive.com/news/morgellons-found-to-beclosely-linked-with-lyme-disease

yournewswire.com
Insider: FBI Gave Emails To WikiLeaks To Prevent
Clinton Coup
About Baxter Dmitry (377 Articles)
The emails released by WikiLeaks were leaked by
brave members of the US intelligence community in
an effort to expose Hillary Clintons corruption and
stop her being elected, according to State
Department insider Steve Pieczenik.
The Clintons have initiated a silent coup in their bid for
power, Pieczenik claims, explaining that the White House,
judiciary, CIA, FBI, Loretta Lynch and James Comey have all
been co-opted through political cronyism.

But Piecezenik, a State Department veteran who has served

in seven administrations, claims there is mutiny within the
intelligence community and a counter-coup is in operation.
In order to stop this coup we in the intelligence community
have informally got together and with their permission I am
starting to announce that we have initiated a counter-coup
through Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.
Pieczenik was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under
Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance and James Baker, and served
the administrations of Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald
Reagan and George H.W. Bush as deputy assistant secretary.
He is a legitimate insider with connections in all departments
and agencies.
FBI Mutiny
His claims might explain the unprecedented and mysterious
actions by the FBI on Tuesday. The FBI Vault silently and
unexpectedly made documents relating to the investigation
into Hillary Clinton available to the public documents that
were not due to be declassified until 2041.
We can finally stop blaming Russians. Pieczenik states clearly
that US intelligence brave men and women in the FBI, CIA
and wider intelligence community submitted the emails to
Julian Assange and WikiLeaks in order to thwart the second
American revolution.
This counter-coup is working against Hillary Clinton and her
campaign. Their goal is a peaceful transition of power away
from the corrupt Clintons. Something had to be done to
save the republic, he explains.
http://yournewswire.com/fbi-emails-wikileaks-clinton-coup/

Fury over 'out of touch' judges who defied 17.4m

Brexit voters
Judges ruled Brexit could not be triggered
without a Westminster vote

The Lord Chief Justice and two colleagues were

branded 'out of touch'

They were accused of putting Britain on course

for a 'constitutional crisis'

By James Slack, Political Editor For The Daily Mail

Published: 23:38, 3 November 2016 | Updated: 09:02, 4
November 2016
MPs last night tore into three 'out of touch' judges for ruling
that embittered Remainers in Parliament should be allowed
to frustrate the verdict of the British public.
The Lord Chief Justice and two senior colleagues were
accused of putting Britain on course for a full-blown
'constitutional crisis' by saying Brexit could not be triggered
without a Westminster vote.
The judgment by Lord Thomas a founding member of the
European Law Institute, a club of lawyers and academics
aiming to 'improve' EU law throws into chaos Mrs May's
timetable for invoking Article 50 in March next year.
'Out of touch': The judgment by the Lord Chief Justice
(pictured) and two senior colleagues throws into chaos Mrs
May's timetable for invoking Article 50 in March next year
Senior MPs led by an ex-justice minister said it was an
outrage that an 'unholy alliance' of judges and embittered
Remain backers could thwart the wishes of 17.4million Leave
voters.
They warned that Mrs May could be forced to hold an
election early next year if the courts did not back down.
Leave campaigners said the judges had 'declared war on
democracy'. On an 'declared war on democracy'.
On an extraordinary day of drama:
Brexit Secretary David Davis warned judges and MPs
not to defy the will of the British public

Gloating Remainers took to social media to boast about

a victory for 'democracy';

MPs predicted the chaos could delay Brexit by up to a

year;

Judges left the door open to the taxpayer being saddled

with a hefty legal bill for costs;

A group of pro-Remain Tory and Labour MPs met to plot

how the ruling could be used to force Mrs May to reveal
more about her broad negotiating aims;

Scotland's first minister Nicola Sturgeon threatened to

join the legal action in her own bid to frustrate Brexit;

Brexiteers pointed out that a 9million taxpayer-funded

leaflet sent to every home clearly stated that the
referendum result would be followed directly by
ministers;

Bookmakers shortened the odds on a 2017 general

election to 2/1.

The row exploded yesterday morning when a panel led by

the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas, ruled that Mrs May
cannot trigger Article 50 the formal two-year process for
leaving the EU without a vote by Parliament.
This is despite a clear commitment by the Government
during the referendum to enact the public's verdict without
delay. A furious Number Ten vowed to challenge the
'disappointing' decision in the Supreme Court next month.
The Prime Minister (pictured last night) was today told she
does not have the power to trigger Article 50 to start the
two-year Brexit process and must seek Parliamentary
approval
'This is about process not politics': Gina Miller's victory
speech
JUDGE WHO IS A FOUNDER MEMBER OF EURO LAW
CLUB
Lord Chief Justice John Thomas was a founder of the
European Law Institut
The judge who has threw a spanner in the works yesterday
is, professionally at least, a committed Europhile.
Lord Chief Justice John Thomas was a founder of the
European Law Institute, a club of lawyers and academics
aiming to improve EU law.

He was also president of the European Network of Councils

for the Judiciary for two years.
But Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, the most senior judge in
England and Wales, has also been critical of European
judges.
In 2014, he spoke out in favour of Parliaments right to
decide which crimes were so serious an offender should
never go free and criticised Strasbourg judges for saying
such sentences breached the European Convention on
Human Rights.
As a High Court judge, the 69-year-old refused Wikileaks
head Julian Assanges appeal against extradition to Sweden
and radical cleric Abu Hamzas attempt to avoid extradition
to the US.
He was also once accused of trying to silence a High Court
judge who had championed the institution of marriage. In
2013, he rebuked Sir Paul Coleridge for bringing the
judiciary into disrepute after speaking out in favour of
traditional marriage and describing the devastating impact
of family break-up on children.
Lord Thomas has a record of displaying short-tempered
impatience over the tricks of immigration lawyers.
When a Bangladeshi students lawyers made two last-minute
applications to keep him in the country on the eve of his
deportation, the judge described it as an intolerable waste
of public money, an abuse of the courts, and totally without
merit, and threatened lawyers who acted in the same way in
the future with vigorous action.
Educated at Cambridge, he also attended the University of
Chicago. He married an American, Elizabeth, and they have
a grown-up son and daughter.
In 2011 he and his wife banked 1million when they
swapped their 2.6million five-bedroom home for a
1.6million townhouse close to the Thames.
He has spoken up in favour of freedom of the Press and he
beat Lord Justice Leveson to become the Lord Chief Justice.
Supreme court judges were left in no doubt what was at
stake. Mr Davis said that if yesterday's verdict was upheld
a full Act of Parliament would be required to trigger Brexit.

This would allow MPs or peers to table amendments that

would allow them to dictate the terms of Brexit or even halt
the process altogether. Mr Davis said heading down this path
would be a huge mistake.
The outpouring of rage against the High Court's shocking
'judicial activism' was so strong at Westminster that there
were calls for a review of the way senior judges are
appointed.
Whitehall sources also revealed that the judges gave the
Government barely an hour's notice of their bombshell
verdict. Usually, ministers can expect an overnight warning.
The case was brought by British citizens Gina Miller, a
business woman, pictured outside the High Court after the
landmark ruling today
Insiders said Mrs May and the ministers in charge of Brexit
had all been enraged. They now hope the Supreme Court will
see sense. It will hear Mrs May's appeal from December 7
with a verdict highly unlikely before Christmas.
Ex-attorney general Dominic Grieve a leading Remain
campaigner claimed this could delay her pledge to start
the two-year process for quitting the EU in March 2017. One
minister claimed the delay could take up to a year. The High
Court's verdict hinged on an interpretation of British
constitutional law. Government lawyers said that, in the
wake of the June 23 referendum result, Mrs May had
prerogative powers to trigger Article 50 without a vote by
MPs.
But the panel of judges yesterday declared: 'The
Government does not have power under the Crown's
prerogative to give notice pursuant to Article 50 for the UK to
withdraw from the European Union.'
9MILLION TAXPAYER-FUNDED LEAFLET SAID OUR
DECISION WAS FINAL
MPS last night accused judges of failing to read the 9million
taxpayer-funded publicity leaflet that stated the referendum
result would be followed directly by ministers.
Sent to every household before the referendum, the
pamphlet stated clearly: This is your decision. The
Government will implement what you decide. Despite this,

the High Court ruled the referendum was merely advisory

and could not be activated without Parliamentary approval.
Former Cabinet minister Iain Duncan Smith said the leaflet
had been clear, while Tory MP John Redwood said: I cannot
believe the judges failed to read the leaflet. Parliament was
passing the decision to the people.
Implying Remainers had changed their tune, Tory MEP Daniel
Hannan said: Did any Remainers disassociate themselves at
the time from this [leaflets] statement?
They added that triggering Article 50 would fundamentally
change UK people's rights and that the Government cannot
change or do away with rights under UK law unless
Parliament gives it authority to do so.
Condemnation of the verdict which few had expected was
swift and devastating. MPs pointed out that it had been
brought by embittered Remainers and a wealthy fund
manager, who had formed an 'unholy alliance' with the
judiciary.
If the Government's appeal is not successful, an Act of
Parliament will be required to trigger Article 50. This would
allow MPs or the unelected House of Lords to put down
amendments delaying Article 50, insisting Britain must stay
in the single market, or block its passage altogether.
Ex-justice minister Dominic Raab said: 'On 23 June the British
people gave a clear mandate for the UK Government to
leave the EU. This case is a plain attempt to block Brexit by
people who are out of touch with the country and refuse to
accept the result.'
He added: 'An unholy alliance of diehard Remain
campaigners, a fund manager, an unelected judiciary and
the House of Lords must not be allowed to thwart the wishes
of the British public. It would trigger a constitutional crisis if
the Supreme Court upheld this vague and undemocratic
verdict'.
Iain Duncan Smith, the former Work and Pensions Secretary
said the judges had precipitated 'a constitutional crisis
literally pitting Parliament against the will of the people'.
Ukip's Nigel Farage said: 'I now fear that every attempt will
be made to block or delay the triggering of Article 50. If this

is so, they have no idea of the public anger they will

provoke.'
Leading Leave campaigner Douglas Carswell MP said:
'Shocking judicial activism these judges are politicians
without accountability.'
FORMER FENCING CHAMP
Legal history: Sir Terence Etherton
Master of the Rolls Sir Terence Etherton is no stranger to the
cut and thrust of politics.
He qualified for the 1980 Moscow Olympics as part of the
British fencing team but boycotted the games in protest
against the USSRs invasion of Afghanistan.
The 65-year-old, who took his role as the second most senior
judge last month, made legal history a decade ago as the
first openly gay judge to be made a Lord Justice of Appeal.
In 2014, he and his partner, solicitor Andrew Stone, took part
in the first Jewish ceremonies at a UK synagogue to convert
a civil partnership into marriage.
In legal circles, Sir Terence has been described as the
epitome of a modern judge. He served for two years as
chairman of the Law Commission the Governments legal
reform body where he was credited with suggesting
enlightened ways of updating laws.
Last year, he was hailed for striking a blow to tax dodgers
by ruling against investors including Sir Alex Ferguson who
took part in a scheme to shelter money from HMRC.
BLAIR'S PAL BILLED YOU 3M
Treasury: Lord Justice Sales
The panels third judge, Lord Justice Sales, came from the
same chambers as Tony Blair and once billed taxpayers more
than 3million. He defended the Blair government in a 2005
court challenge over the decision not to hold a public inquiry
into the Iraq war.
Sir Philip Sales charged taxpayers 3.3million in six years
during his tenure as Mr Blairs First Treasury Counsel a
lawyer who represents the UK government in the civil courts.
His appointment in 1997 had caused consternation in legal
circles because he was only 35.

He had been a barrister at 11KBW, the same chambers as Mr

Blair and then-lord chancellor Derry Irvine, leading to claims
of cronyism.
The 54-year-old studied at both Oxford and Cambridge and
was called to the Bar in 1985. In 2009, the same year Sir
Philip stopped being First Treasury Counsel, Londons
Evening Standard revealed he had charged up to 619,000 a
year for fighting the governments corner.
He was made a QC in 2006, a High Court judge in 2008 and
an Appeal Court judge in 2014.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3903436/Enemiespeople-Fury-touch-judges-defied-17-4m-Brexit-voters-triggerconstitutional-crisis.html

independent.co.uk
Jeremy Corbyn has said Labour may block Brexit by
voting against Article 50
6 November 2016 / Alexandra Sims
Labour will block the UKs exit from the European Union if
the Government is unable to guarantee access to the single
market, Jeremy Corbyn has said.
The opposition will join forces with Tory Remain supporters
and other parties to prevent Article 50 from being triggered
if this trade access is not assured, the Labour leader told
the Sunday Mirror.
Mr Corbyn suggested Prime Minister Theresa May, who has a
slim Commons majority, would be forced into an early
general election if she fails to meet Labours Brexit bottom
line.
The Government is appealing a High court ruling ordering
that Ms May must seek MPs approval to trigger Article 50.
A coalition of anti-Brexit campaigners took the case against
the Government. Their lawyers told the court, that
constitutional law establishes that only parliament can take
away rights of British citizens, and some rights would be lost
upon losing EU citizenship.

Mr Corbyn said: "The court has thrown a big spanner in the

works by saying Parliament must be consulted.
"We accept the result of the referendum. We are not
challenging the referendum. We are not calling for a second
referendum. We're calling for market access for British
industry to Europe."
What experts have said about Brexit
He added that in the event of a snap general election, the
Labour party would be ready for it.
"If the Government calls an election, we're ready for it," he
said. "We have the members, the organisation and the
enthusiasm. We welcome the challenge.
"It would give us the chance to put before the British people
an alternative economic strategy for this country."
Mr Corbyns comments come after Ms May was urged to take
action to calm the backlash sparked by the controversial
High Court ruling on the process for leaving the EU.
A number of politicians have said the Prime Minister must
make clear that the independence of the judiciary was
fundamental to democracy, describing the media tirade
against the court decision as chilling and outrageous and
"inciting hatred.
Three High Court Justices were subjected to what one MP
described as a number of hysterical [newspaper] headlines
on Friday after the ruling.
The Justice Secretary Liz Truss has also come under fire for
failing to defend the integrity of the judiciary after judges
were branded enemies of the people by Brexiteers.
Ms Truss spoke out after being put under pressure from
barristers, but only went as far as saying independence from
the judiciary is the foundations upon which our rule of law is
built.
Richard Burgon, Labours shadow justice minister, said it was
Ms Trusss job to defend the integrity of the judiciary.
Respecting the EU Referendum result is the right and
democratic thing to do. Strong views were expressed by both
sides, he said.
Brexit: Tory MP Stephen Phillips resigns citing 'irreconcilable
differences'

Judges in the High Court are there to interpret the law

regardless of their personal views and that it what they have
done.
The Bar Council said: "The independence of the judiciary is
the foundation upon which our rule of law is built and our
judiciary is rightly respected the world over for its
independence and impartiality.
"In relation to the case heard in the High Court, the
Government has made it clear it will appeal to the Supreme
Court. Legal process must be followed."
Since the backlash after the court ruling a Conservative MP
and supporter of the Leave campaign has resigned with
immediate effect, citing irreconcilable policy differences
with the Prime Minister.
Ms May has vowed to continue Brexit plans, insisting the
Government must get on with the job of withdrawing the
UK from the European Union.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremycorbyn-labour-block-article-50-theresa-may-cannotguarantee-single-market-access-brexit-a7400266.html

rinf.com
The Oil-Gas War Over Syria, in Maps
Eric Zuesse
Eric Zuesse
Turkeys Anadolu News Agency, though government-run, is
providing remarkably clear and reliable diagrammatic
descriptions of the current status of the U.S-andfundamentalist-Sunni, versus Russia-and-Shia-and-NONfundamentalist-Sunni, sides, in the current oil-and-gas war in
the Middle East, for control over territory in Syria, for
construction of oil-and-gas pipelines through Syria supplying
fuel into the worlds largest energy-market: Europe. Russia is
now the dominant supplier of both oil and gas, but its ally
Iran is a Shiite gas-powerhouse that wants to share the
market there, and Russia has no objection. Qatar is a Sunni
gas-powerhouse and wants to become the main supplier of

gas there, and Saudi Arabia is a Sunni oil-powerhouse, which

wants to become the major supplier of oil, but Saudi oil and
Qatari gas would be pipelined through secular-controlled
(Assads) Syria, and this is why the U.S. and its
fundamentalist-Sunni allies, the Sauds, and Qataris, are
using Al Qaeda and other jihadists to conquer enough of a
strip through Syria so that U.S. companies such as
Halliburton will be able safely to place pipelines there, to be
marketed in Europe by U.S. firms such as Exxon. Iran also
wants to pipeline its gas through Syria, and this is one
reason why Iran is defending Syrias government, against
the U.S.-Saudi-Qatari-jihadist invasion, which is trying to
overthrow and replace Assad.
Here are the most-informative of Anadolus war-maps:
The first presents the effort by many countries to eliminate
ISIS control over the large Iraqi city of Mosul. A remarkably
frank remark made in this map is An escape corridor into
Syria will be left for Daesh [ISIS] so they can vacate Mosul
an admission that the U.S.-Saudi-Qatari team want the
ISIS jihadists who are in Mosul to relocate into Syria to assist
the U.S.-Saudi-Qatari effort there to overthrow and replace
the Assad government:

The second is about the Egyptian governments trying to

assist the Syrian governments defense against the SaudiU.S.-Qatari invasion of Syria, at Aleppo, where Syrias Al
Qaeda branch is trying to retain its current control over part
of that large city. The Saud family are punishing the Egyptian
government for that:

Here is Russias proposed gas-pipeline, which would enable

Russia to reduce its dependence upon Ukraine (through
which Russia currently pipelines its gas into Europe).
Obama conquered and took over Ukraine in February 2014
via his coup that overthrew the democratically elected
neutralist Ukrainian President there:

In addition, there is the following map from oil-price.com:

That map shows the competing Shia (Russia-backed) and
Sunni (U.S.-backed) gas-pipelines into Europe the central
issue in the invasion and defense of Syria.
On 21 September 2016, Gareth Porter headlined The War
Against the Assad Regime Is Not a Pipeline War, and he
pointed out some errors in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.s account
that had been published under the headline Syria: Another
Pipeline War. Porter argued: Its easy to understand why
that explanation would be accepted by many anti-war
activists: it is in line with the widely accepted theory that all
the US wars in the Middle East have been oil wars about
getting control of the petroleum resources of the region and
denying them to Americas enemies. But the pipeline war
theory is based on false history and it represents a
distraction from the real problem of US policy in the Middle
East the US war states determination to hold onto its
military posture in the region. Porter ignored the key
question there, as to why the US war state has a

determination to hold onto its military posture in the

region. Opening and protecting potential oil-gas-pipeline
routes are important reasons why. Clearly, Kennedys
documentation that the CIA was trying as early as 1949 to
overthrow Syrias secular government so as to allow to the
Sauds a means of cheaply transporting their oil through
Syria into Europe, remains unaffected by any of the
objections that Porter raised to Kennedys article. The recent
portion of Kennedys timeline is affected, but not his basic
argument.
Furthermore, any military strategist knows that the US war
state is intimately connected to the U.S. oil-and-gas
industries, including pipelines (oilfield services) as well as
marketing (Exxon etc.). And Porter got entirely wrong what
that connection (which he ignored) actually consists of: it
consists of U.S. government taxpayer-funded killers for those
U.S. international corporations. Here is how Barack Obama
put it, when addressing graduating cadets at West Point,
Americas premier military-training institution:
Russias aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves
capitals in Europe, while Chinas economic rise and military
reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising
middle classes compete with us, and governments seek a
greater say in global forums. And even as developing
nations embrace democracy and market economies, 24-hour
news and social media makes it impossible to ignore the
continuation of sectarian conflicts and failing states and
popular uprisings that might have received only passing
notice a generation ago.
It will be your generations task to respond to this new
world. The question we face, the question each of you will
face, is not whether America will lead, but how we will lead
not just to secure our peace and prosperity, but also
extend peace and prosperity around the globe.
He was saying there that Americas military is in service to
U.S.-based international corporations in their competition
against those of Russia, Brazil, China, India, and anywhere
else in which rising middle classes compete with us. Those
places are what Gareth Porter referred to as Americas

enemies. Economic competitors are enemies. Obama

thinks that way, and even a progressive journalist such as
Porter doesnt place into a skeptical single-quotation-marksurround, the phrase Americas enemies when that phrase
is used in this equational context. On both the right (Obama)
and the left (Porter), the equation of a government and of
the international corporations that headquarter in its nation
the treatment of the military as being an enforcement-arm
for the nations international corporations is simply taken
for granted, not questioned, not challenged.
RFK Jr. was correct, notwithstanding some recent timelineerrors. Syria is Another Pipeline War, and Obama is merely
intensifying it. (On 9 November 2015, I offered a different
account than RFK Jr. provided of the recent history the
Obama portion of the longstanding U.S. aggression
against Syria; and it links back to Jonathan Marshalls
excellent articles on that, and to other well-sourced articles,
in addition to primary sources, none of which contradict RFK
Jr.s basic view, Syria: Another Pipeline War.).
Another portion of Porters commentary is, however, quite
accurate: Americas Defense (or mass-killing-abroad)
industries (such as Lockheed Martin) are not merely servants
of the U.S. government, but are also served by the U.S.
government: the US war states determination to hold onto
its military posture in the region is protection of the major
market the Middle Eastern market for U.S. Defense
products and services. Its not only Americas firms in the oil,
gas, and pipelines, industries, which benefit from Americas
military; it is also Americas firms in the mass-killing
industries, that do.
To the extent that the public (here including Barack Obama
and Gareth Porter) do not condemn the presumption that
the business of America is business, or that a valid
function of U.S.-taxpayer-funded military and other foreignaffairs operations is to serve the stockholders of U.S.
international corporations, the hell (such as in Syria) will
continue. Gareth Porter got lost among the trees because he
failed to see (and to point to) that forest.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most

recently, of Theyre Not Even Close: The Democratic vs.
Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRISTS
VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
http://rinf.com/alt-news/editorials/oil-gas-war-syria-maps/

Missing CEO Of CLINTON FOUNDATION ERIC

BRAVERMAN Appears To Be In FBI Custody. Missing
Arms Dealer MARK TURI Who Was The BENGHAZI
FALLGUY Possibly Dead.
Missing CEO Of CLINTON FOUNDATION ERIC
BRAVERMAN Appears To Be In FBI Custody. Missing
Arms Dealer MARK TURI Who Was The BENGHAZI
FALLGUY Possibly Dead.
by IWB Published November 10, 2016 Updated November
10, 2016
by Pamela Williams
I have been keeping up with missing CEO Eric Braverman of
the Clinton Foundation. It was first reported that he had
taken refuge at the Russian Embassy in New York seeking
asylum. He had been exposed in one of the WIKILEAKS
Podesta emails as a mole within the Clinton Foundation.
Chelsea Clinton had hired Braverman to clean house, but the
old crew at the Foundation resented him being there. Bill
Clintons handler Doug Bandsuch a creepwanted him
out. He later resigned and was teaching at Yale, or he was
supposed to do that. As far as I can see he had a meeting
on October 30, 2016, but he did not attend the meeting. His
last tweet was on October 12, 2016
(https://twitter.com/eric_braverman/with_replieshttps://twitte
r.com/eric_braverman/with_replies).
Braverman wed Neil Brown, who also became involved with
the Benghazi arms dealbear with me here, as this is a
complicated story. It is not clear to me if Braverman knew

of this before he married Brown. There are so many ins and

outs in the Benghazi story.
http://rabidrepublicanblog.com/is-eric-braverman-terrifiedfor-his-life/
But one thing that is very clear is Braverman did not know
what he was stepping in to when he was hired by Chelsea
Clinton to clean house at the Foundation.
Doug Band, Bill Clintons right had man, did not want
Bravermans intrusion into the criminal empire he had
helped to build.
Eric Braverman, this report notes, is a current lecturer in the
practice of government at Yale University who previously
served as a partner at the US-based global consulting firm
McKinsey & Companyand who, in 2013, became the CEO
of the Clinton Foundation until his abrupt, and unexplained,
leaving this known money laundering criminal organization
this past December (2015) just prior to Hillary Clinton
announcing her candidacy for president.
Eric Braverman was made the CEO of the Clinton Foundation
in 2013, this report explains, after Hillary Clintons daughter,
Chelsea, declared war on this criminal enterprise after
stunning details emerged showing her father, former
President Bill Clinton, had raised over $1 billion though the
foundation to rebuild 100 villages in India, but only spent
$53 million with him and his wife, Hillary Clinton, pocketing
the rest.
Braverman eventually went to NBC News and spoke with
someone there about what he had found at the Foundation,
telling them to follow the money. When WIKILEAKS
dropped the Podesta emails, the world could see, as
Braverman saw, Podesta knew Braverman was the mole
inside the Foundation, or at least he was before resigning.
At that point, Braverman disappeared, and the talk was he
was seeking asylum at the Russian Embassy in New York.
However, there was doubt in some circles this was true.
As I was following the story very closely, eventually I found
the following which made more sense to me:

http://westernsentinel.com/kremlin-turmoil-clintonfoundation-ceo-requests-urgent-immediate-asylum/
Last week, we reported the disappearance of former CEO of
the Clinton Foundation Eric Braverman. Intel provided
suggested that he fled the country fearing for his life,
seeking asylum in Russia.
That was nine days ago, and there has still been no word
from (or sightings of) Eric Braverman.
However, a new source within the intelligence community
suggests that was misinformation intentionally spread
through social media by several sources, and in fact, he is
being held in protective custody by the FBI in exchange for
his testimony against Hillary Clinton.
In an email exchange, Neera Tanden the president of CAP,
warned John Podesta to keep tabs on Doug Band who she
thought was the insider who told NBC to follow the money
and the find the real HRC scandal.
John Podesta quickly wrote back to identify the real source as
former Clinton Foundation CEO Eric Braverman which
shocks Tanden who replies, Holy Moses.
This was in Wikileaks Email 25357:
Of course, when Braverman heard of the above leak, he
must have realized he had to do something, or he would end
up in the CLINTON DEADPOOL. For all we know this could be
true now.
There is a man on YouTube who has been following the Eric
Braverman story, along with the story of a missing arms
dealer named Marc Turi. If you remember, Turi was set up as
the fall guy for the Benghazi arms deal by Obama and
Clinton. The DOJ was to prosecute Turi, but he went to Fox
News and told his story. Eventually the DOJ dropped the
case. However, Turi was a very bold man, as he threatened
to drop a bombshell on Clinton. Now he has disappeared,
too. It is believed he could be a part of the CLINTON
DEADPOOL.
http://pmnightlynews.com/index.php/2016/11/04/newsources-eric-braverman/

The Obama administration is moving to dismiss charges

against an arms dealer it had accused of selling weapons
that were destined for Libyan rebels.
Lawyers for the Justice Department on Monday filed a motion
in federal court in Phoenix to drop the case against the arms
dealer, an American named Marc Turi, whose lawyers also
signed the motion.
The deal averts a trial that threatened to cast additional
scrutiny on Hillary Clintons private emails as Secretary of
State, and to expose reported Central Intelligence Agency
attempts to arm rebels fighting Libyan leader Moammar
Qadhafi.
Government lawyers were facing a Wednesday deadline to
produce documents to Turis legal team, and the trial was
officially set to begin on Election Day, although it likely
would have been delayed by protracted disputes about
classified information in the case.
A Turi associate asserted that the government dropped the
case because the proceedings could have embarrassed
Clinton and President Barack Obama by calling attention to
the reported role of their administration in supplying
weapons that fell into the hands of Islamic extremist
militants.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/marc-turi-libyanrebels-hillary-clinton-229115?
nothingtoseehere&ICID=ref_fark
The above video was published on November 9, 2016 by
George Webb. Webb is very knowledgeable on Benghazi and
the whole Clinton Foundation. He has made a series of
videos on missing Eric Braverman, Marc Turi, Benghazi, and
the Clinton Foundation. These videos are a wellspring of
information, and I hope everyone who reads this report will
watch the video, too.
The below site is a wellspring of information on Benghazi,
Marc Turi, and Hillary Clinton. I do not see how Clinton is
going to get away from what she has done. However, the
latest is that Obama is going to pardon her. Yet, I feel
eventually Benghazi will catch up to her. I just pray that Eric
Braverman and Marc Turi have not ended up in the CLINTON

DEADPOOL. I hope after reading this report, some attention

will be called to Braverman and Turi.
Most of our readers know that we were in Libya for 100 days
during the illegal Clinton/NATO war against that country and
that we were captured by Clintons Al Qaeda mercenaries,
sentenced to death only to escape by 3 miracles. Recently
there has been a lot of media covering Marc Turi, the man
Hillary Clinton hired to figure a way to sneak weapons into
Libya to arm her Al Qaeda mercenaries against the embargo
by the UN. The plan was to run the arms through Qatar to
wash the proof of where they had come from, well just so
happens the Libyans Coast Guard captured some of the gun
runners and they confessed everything.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/11/arms-dealersays-administration-made-him-scapegoat-on-libya-dealingsto-protectclinton.htmlhttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/11/arm
s-dealer-says-administrati
As proven by Marc Turis most recent interview with Fox
News, the Clinton plan was to run guns through Qatar thus
the proof is in the video these are Clintons illegal arms
being supplied to radical Islamic terrorists, ending up in the
hands of Al Qaeda, ISIS, Ansar Al Sharia, LIFG and other
radical groups.
This act alone makes Hillary Clinton a war criminal and a
traitor to the USA.
http://libyanwarthetruth.com/video-proof-hillary-clintonarms-al-qaeda-mercenaries-rebels-libya-2011

http://investmentwatchblog.com/missing-ceo-of-clintonfoundation-eric-braverman-appears-to-be-in-fbi-custodymissing-arms-dealer-mark-turi-who-was-the-benghazifallguy-possibly-dead/

Death of a dynasty that was rotten to its core: After

40 years of sex, lies and scandals, the Clintons are to
leave public life beset by a crushing humiliation
People had simply grown tired of the Clintons,
writes Richard Pendlebury

They emerged from scandal after scandal with

their ambitions intact

But then, the Clintons always came with an awful

lot of baggage, as this list of controversies
proves . . .

By Richard Pendlebury for the Daily Mail

Published: 01:24, 10 November 2016 | Updated: 17:35, 10
November 2016
Almost 40 years after Bill and Hillary Clinton first entered
American public life, they are to leave it beset by crushing
humiliation.
There will be no first female U.S. President this time.
History will not be made by a wife following her two-term
husband into the Oval Office. There will be no dynasty, no
President Hillary Clinton.
Why did they think they deserved otherwise?
A zombie marriage killed long ago by Bills philandering was
cynically reactivated to boost her White House ambitions.
Trump called her crooked Hillary. She certainly warranted
the adjective toxic. She was chilly and aloof; the technocrat
personification of Americas East Coast liberal elite that Rust
Belt America and beyond had grown to despise.
In the end, too many people had simply grown tired of the
Clintons emerging from scandal after scandal with their
ambitions intact. But then, the Clintons always came with an
awful lot of baggage, as this list of controversies proves . . .
Travelgate
The first whiff of scandal to surround the Clintons began with
the 1993 sacking of the seven employees in the White House
Travel Office, soon after Bill had become President.

These staffers were replaced by a commercial travel firm

from Little Rock, Arkansas.
Critics claimed the changes were ordered by the Clintons so
that their cronies in one case a cousin could take over
the multi-million dollar business of White House travel
arrangements.
A claim that Hillary had been instrumental in securing the
firings something she had denied seemed to be
confirmed by an internal White House memo unearthed in
1996.
A cover-up was alleged. In 2000, an official report on
Travelgate decided that while some of Mrs Clintons
statements were factually false and that she had played a
role in the sackings, there was insufficient evidence to
support the laying of criminal charges against her.
She was able to continue her ultimately successful bid for a
seat in the U.S. Senate.
The Whitewater affair
Whitewater was the key financial scandal of the Clinton
presidency. Neither Bill nor Hillary were prosecuted after
three inquiries failed to find sufficient evidence to link them
to the criminal conduct of others but two of their
associates and a partner in her law firm were jailed.
Another crony had to resign as Arkansas governor. Along the
way, Mrs Clinton became the first-ever First Lady to have
been subpoenaed to give evidence, and a close aide was
found dead. The Whitewater investigation by independent
counsel Kenneth Starr would also expose Bill Clintons hectic
sex life to the scrutiny of the world.
So what was it all about? In 1978, Bill was Arkansas attorney
general and running for state governor. That year he and
Hillary joined another couple, James and Susan McDougal, to
borrow $203,000 to buy 220 acres in the Ozark mountains
on which to build holiday homes. A company called the
Whitewater Development Corporation was founded for the
project.

Mr McDougal, who was briefly employed as an adviser by

Clinton when he became governor, left politics to buy a
bank. This bank lent Mrs Clinton $30,000 to build a show
house on the Whitewater land.
In 1982, McDougal also bought a small finance company
called Madison Guaranty. The firms struggles and failure
would be central to the ensuing furore.
Along the way Mr McDougals firm hired Hillary Clintons law
firm and raised funds for her husbands political war chest. In
1989, Madison Guaranty collapsed. The federal government
had to bail it out using $60 million of public money. Mr
McDougal was indicted on fraud charges but acquitted.
The matter did not end there, however. With Bill Clintons
election to the White House in 1992 interest in and
allegations about Whitewater only increased.
In 1993, shortly after he had filed three years worth of
Whitewater tax returns for the Clintons, deputy White House
counsel Vince Foster was found dead in a Washington area
park. Police ruled it suicide.
But there was speculation that persons unknown had
removed files from Fosters office shortly after his body was
found.
James and Susan McDougal were subsequently charged with
bank fraud and jailed. Arkansas governor Jim Tucker was
convicted of fraud and given probation. The states assistant
attorney general Webster Hubbell, also drawn into the affair,
was jailed for an unrelated fraud.
Hillary was accused by a New York Times columnist of being
a congenital liar.
In 1996, prosecutor Starr would subpoena her to answer
questions about her law firm. But while she had to appear
before a grand jury, and President Clinton had to give
videotaped evidence to the Whitewater trials, both escaped
criminal proceedings.
But hardly scot-free. The collateral damage to both their
marriage and his reputation was huge.
The Arkansas assaults

In 1999, Juanita Broaddrick, a nursing home administrator,

alleged that she had been raped by Bill Clinton in 1978 when
he was Arkansas attorney general.
She would not speak about the incident again until January
this year, when she tweeted: I was 35 years old when Bill
Clinton, Ark. Attorney General raped me and Hillary tried to
silence me. I am now 73 . . . it never goes away.
She subsequently appeared on a panel at one of the
presidential debates with Donald Trump and other alleged
Clinton victims.
Mr Clintons predatory approach to young females was first
described by Paula Jones, an Arkansas state employee. She
alleged that in 1991, aged 24, she had been sexually
propositioned by the then governor Clinton in a Little Rock
hotel room. He also exposed himself, she said.
In 1994, with Clinton by then in the White House, Ms Jones
filed a claim for sexual harassment against him and
demanded $750,000 in damages. The case dragged through
the civil courts until November 1998, when the President
settled for the amount she had demanded. There was no
apology.
By then the affair had spun way out of Clintons control. In
the course of the Jones litigation, her legal team had tried to
establish that the Presidents alleged behaviour was part of a
pattern.
Among those subpoenaed was one Monica Lewinsky, a
former White House intern.
She would initially deny in evidence any relationship. But the
later Lewinsky testimony which centred on an infamous
semen-stained dress and Bill Clintons pitiful semantics
about what did and did not constitute sex, would lead to his
impeachment.
Zippergate and Monica Lewinsky
In his deposition for the Paula Jones lawsuit, Clinton flatly
denied sexual relations with the then 22-year-old
Californian Lewinsky.
Whitewater investigator Starr was informed otherwise by key
witness Linda Tripp. He decided that the President had
committed perjury. Later, before a grand jury, the President

claimed that he thought sexual relations did not include

oral sex.
Clinton also made a humiliating televised statement,
admitting to a not appropriate relationship with the intern.
A stone-faced Hillary stood by his side.
In fact, Miss Lewinsky would say that sex acts had taken
place on nine occasions, including in the Oval Office,
between 1995-97.
Clinton was impeached in December 1998 on charges of
perjury and obstruction of justice.
As the nation held its breath the President was acquitted at
trial before the U.S. Senate. He would still be punished,
however. A judge found Clinton in civil contempt of court in
relation to his misleading testimony in the Paula Jones case.
He was fined and ordered to pay costs. In January 2001 the
Arkansas Bar Association suspended President Clintons
licence to practise for five years.
Wealth and the Clinton Foundation
Mired in legal fees from their run-ins with prosecutors, the
Clintons set about making money from their White House
years. And how they have succeeded. Private speeches for
banks and other corporations at $250,000 a time have
earned them a fortune, put at $150 million.
Much of this wealth has been poured into the family charity,
the Clinton Foundation, which was established in 1997. Bill,
Hillary and their daughter Chelsea are all directors and the
foundation has been used as a vehicle for a number of global
philanthropic projects.
But it has also come under fire for poor accounting, alleged
cronyism and conflicts of interest, and has laid the Clintons
open to accusations of undue influence by wealthy donors.
Mrs Clinton reportedly pulled in $22 million in advances for
her memoirs. Tax returns showed the Clintons 2014 income
at $28 million.
The epithet Learjet liberals aimed at the Clintons and
their ilk is not meant to be flattering. It suggests a
disconnect with the American people that Donald Trump was
only too successful in exploiting.

The Benghazi attack

On September 11, 2012, the American ambassador to Libya
and three of his countrymen died during an assault by
militants on the isolated U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Mrs
Clinton, then Secretary of State, was accused by opponents
of failing to protect U.S. installations and personnel. She
knew the attacks were coming, they said, and did nothing.
The matter became a political football during Mrs Clintons
bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. She had to
testify before a House committee investigating the attack,
but it failed to find a smoking gun which would damage her
credibility as a leader.
But during the investigation another highly embarrassing
matter concerning private emails came to light which would
be seized upon by the Trump camp.
Once again she would be cleared of serious wrongdoing, but
only at the 11th hour. The damage done to her campaign by
this was possibly fatal, say some analysts.
The private emails
It emerged that while Secretary of State, Mrs Clinton had
been using a vulnerable private email server to send
classified information. This was at best reckless, at worst
criminally negligent.
In July, the FBI announced it would not recommend criminal
charges. While she had been extremely careless, it looked
as if Mrs Clinton was in the clear.
Then came the bombshell. Ten days before polling day, FBI
director James Comey sent a letter to Congress to say that
his bureau was reviewing yet another tranche of Clinton
emails related to her use of the private server. Trumps
people seized gleefully on this as evidence of poor judgment.
On Sunday, however, Comey said the FBI had given the
emails a clean bill of health. But many Democrats feel that
by then the damage had been done in the eyes of the
voters. The Clinton dream of a White House dynasty was
over.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3922140/Deathdynasty-rotten-core-40-years-sex-lies-scandals-Clintonsleave-public-life-beset-crushing-humiliation.html

Finian CUNNINGHAM | 09.11.2016 | OPINION

Montenegro: NATOs Latest Plaything for Baiting
Russia
You could hardly get a more sensational headline this week
than this: Montenegro says it foiled Russian-backed plan to
kill PM Djukanovic. The dramatic news followed
the announcement last Sunday by the countrys chief
prosecutor that an attempted coup carried out allegedly
by Russian nationalists had been foiled during last months
parliamentary elections.
Providing no evidence to support the shock claim, chief
prosecutor Milivoje Katnic alleged that a powerful
organization comprising some 50 Russian, Serbian and
Montenegrin nationalists had plotted to crash the elections
held on October 16 and trigger a coup by assassinating longtime prime minister Milo Djukanovic.
The alleged coup was claimed to have been busted by
Montenegrin authorities on the day before the election. Now
the same authorities have concluded that the plot was
hatched from inside Russian territory.
Without disclosing the identities of those individuals
allegedly detained, the official version lacks credibility.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed the accusations
of Russian interference in Montenegro. While Montenegrin
opposition political parties lambasted the claims as gross
propaganda aimed at furthering premier Djukanovics proNATO, pro-European Union agenda.
It is obvious that the special prosecutor has become a
servant of the [ruling] Democratic Party of Socialists, said
Milutin Dukanovic, leader of the opposition Democratic Front,
as quoted by news outlet RFE.
Indeed, since Milo Djukanovic announced accession plans to
the US-led NATO military alliance nearly a year ago, his

government has met with stiff opposition among

Montenegros tiny population of around 620,000.
Many Montenegrins recall that their country was bombed by
NATO only 16 years ago when it was still part of Serbia
arising from the former Yugoslavia. In 2006, Montenegro
became independent from Belgrade, but memories are
scarred by NATOs aerial bombardment in which thousands
of people were killed during a campaign that served US-led
Western interests to dismember the Balkans into proWestern states. These states have since bolstered the
expansion of NATO forces towards Russias borders.
Today, Montenegro finds itself as the latest springboard for
NATO aggression against Russia.
It seems more than a coincidence that only three days
before Montenegro made its grave accusations of Russian
subversion,
NATO
deputy
general
secretary
Rose
Gottemoeller had reportedly visited the country, vowing that
it would be elected as the 29th member of the military
alliance by as early as 2017.
Montenegros accession to NATO must be approved by each
of the alliances member states. Their votes seem assured in
light of the latest claims about Russian aggression.
Russia has long expressed its official disapproval of yet
another eastward expansion towards its borders. And
Moscow has openly lent its political support to opposition
parties within Montenegro which are against NATO
membership.
The Djukanovic government claims that Moscow is
bankrolling opposition parties claims which Moscow and
the internal parties flatly deny. The latter say that allegations
of Moscow sponsorship are simply dirty tricks by Djukanovic
to discredit legitimate opposition to his NATO ambitions.
Ahead of the election last month, the ruling party was
apprehensive of the results. Deep disaffection among
Montenegrins arises not just over plans to join NATO, but
also from grievances with perceived cronyism and corruption
around the prime minister. There are widespread suspicions
that Djukanovic and his inner-circle have been bought off by
NATO interests.

Opposition parties make the plausible claim that the alleged

coup was announced the day before the elections on
October 16 in order to push electoral support for Djukanovic
and his government. As it turned out, the ruling party was
not able to win a convincing majority in order to form the
next administration. For the past few weeks, it has been
trying to cobble together a coalition from among opposition
parties.
The latest bombshell by the chief prosecutor concluding
that there was a Russian-backed element in the coup
attempt is seen as a cynical ploy by Djukanovic to sway
some of the opposition to repudiate Moscow and to embrace
a coalition with his party.
That outcome would then pave the way for the country to
proceed with plans to finalize NATO membership.
This tawdry charade cuts both ways too. Not only does NATO
obtain another chess piece in its long-term aggressive game
towards Russia. The alliance also fuels its rather empty tank
with more propaganda.
The day after Montenegro made its claims about Russian
subversion and a bid to assassinate the premier no less
NATO announced that it was going ahead with the biggest
reinforcement of defenses since the end of the Cold War.
Jens Stoltenberg, NATO secretary general, told British media
that 300,000 alliance troops were being put on high alert.
We have seen Russia being much more active in many
ways, said Stoltenberg, with a wan vagueness that makes
him sound more secretary than general.
Last month, NATO chiefs agreed to boost rapid reaction
forces stationed in eastern Europe and the Baltic states. As
Stoltenberg told British media: There are a large number of
people in the armed forces of NATO allies. We are looking
into how more of them can be ready at shorter notice.
And lo and behold, thanks to its Montenegro partner, NATO
acquires a timely excuse to justify a massive escalation of
forces near Russia. What would normally be evinced as
flagrant aggression towards Russia can now be justified as
collective NATO defense.

Western official claims of Russian expansionism since the

Georgian-Ossetian conflict in 2008 and the Ukraine crisis in
2014 have always been prone to sound canned and corny
from a lack of evidence. So too are Western claims of
Russian warplanes and warships marauding near the
territories of Europe. As are claims that Russia is about to
invade the Baltic region.
It must be excruciatingly frustrating for NATO planners to
find credible justifications that they can present to the
Western public for their multi-billion-dollar military
escalations and reckless warmongering towards Russia.
Last
week,
British
media
were
saturated
with
outlandish claims made by MI5 spymaster Andrew Parker
accusing Russia of threatening state security and sowing
division in Europe. Such bogeyman stories are in danger of
sounding ridiculous and the purveyors of such yarns
appearing equally absurd.
But then hold on what relief! along comes tiny
Montenegro with news of a dastardly plot by Russia to
overthrow the government and murder its prime minister.
And so the whole charade goes on with renewed pace. The
crony leaders of Montenegro get to stay in power to milk the
country even more, NATO seems assured of another
stepping stone to intimidate Russia with, and the US-led
alliance gets away with the supreme crime of aggression
under the guise of defending allies.
Oh what a lovely little plaything er, partner Montenegro
has turned out to be for NATO.
http://www.strategicculture.org/news/2016/11/09/montenegro-nato-latestplaything-baiting-russia.html

UK inaugurates massive military base in Bahrain

Thu Nov 10, 2016 4:45PM
The UK has officially opened a massive naval base in
Bahrain, the first time in four decades that London is
opening such a facility in the Persian Gulf region.

Britains Prince Charles inaugurated the Naval Support

Facility (NSF) in the Bahraini capital of Manama on Thursday,
marking the 200th anniversary of mutual relations with the
Arab kingdom.
London plans to make the NSF its second busiest center of
operations for the Royal Navy after Portsmouth, allowing its
warships to resupply and undergo repair in the region
without having to return to the UK.
Over the past few months, the UK navys advanced Type 45
warships deployed to the Persian Gulf have been forced to
return home because of their inability to cope with the warm
waters of the region.
The NSF will host around 600 military forces and warships
tasked with patrolling the surrounding waters.
The UKs Royal Air Force (RAF), which has been using
Bahraini air bases for over 90 years, is the UK militarys
other element of presence in the region.
In his visit to London last month, Bahrains monarch King
Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifah called for closer ties between the
two kingdoms as he met with Queen Elizabeth, Prime
Minister Theresa May and other British officials.
He also invited May to the upcoming (Persian) Gulf
Cooperation Council summit, which would be held in
Manama next month.
The UKs willingness to expand ties with Bahrain comes at a
time when the repressive regime is under international
pressure to end its years-long crackdown on a popular
uprising.
Since 2011, the year that saw the eruption of peaceful antiregime protests in Bahrain, the UK has sold 55 million dollars
worth of arms to the Al Khalifah regime.
Scores of people have been killed and hundreds of others
injured or arrested in the Bahraini crackdown on the antiregime activists, who have been holding protests on an
almost daily basis since February 14, 2011.
The UK has also provided training and intelligence to
Bahraini security forces, who have been aided by their Saudi
counterparts in their violent crackdown.

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2016/11/10/493027/UK-militaryBahrain-Prince--Charles-NSF
Richard Branson's Virgin Care wins 700million
contract to run more than 200 NHS services
It is the first time a for-profit firm will run a
council's social care for adults

The new seven-year contract is believed to be

Virgin Care's largest deal

It is understood the company would reinvested

any profit it makes

Unions, social work leaders and staff have all

raised their concerns

By Hannah Al-othman For Mailonline

Published: 01:50, 11 November 2016 | Updated: 02:04, 11
November 2016
Billionaire Richard Branson's healthcare group has been
awarded a 700million contract to run NHS services - the
first time a for-profit firm will deliver a council's social care
for adults.
Health bosses on the board of the NHS Clinical
Commissioning Group (CCG) for Bath and North East
Somerset yesterday voted unanimously in favour of the deal
with Virgin Care.
Councillors on Bath and North East Somerset Council then
cemented their decision by approving the proposal in a vote
yesterday evening.
The private company is now set to run or oversee more than
200 health care and social care services in the area.
The deal marks the first time a council's core adult social
work services will be delivered by a for-profit private firm.
Earlier this year Virgin Care was awarded a 126million
contract to take over services at hospitals in Kent.

However, the new seven-year contract is thought to be the

financially-largest deal the company has ever won from a
single authority.
But it is understood Virgin Care would reinvest any profit it
makes.
Dr Ian Orpen, clinical chair of the CCG said: 'Following
extensive consultation with local people and a very rigorous
procurement process, the board is assured that Virgin Care is
the right organisation to deliver the personalised and
preventative care that local people have asked for.
'The board would like to thank all of the service users, carers
and subject matter experts who dedicated so much of their
time and experience to assessing the bids.
'We fully endorse their recommendation and we sincerely
hope the elected members of the council will do the same
when they meet this evening.'
Since 2006 Virgin Care has treated more than five million
people via more than 250 NHS and social care services that
it runs or oversees.
Virgin Care will run three statutory services - adult social
care, continuing healthcare and children's community health
- from April 2017 onwards.
Unlike in children's services, there are no laws preventing
councils from delegating statutory adult social work
functions to profit-making providers.
Bath's adult social care services are currently run by Sirona
Care, a not-for-profit social enterprise, which spun out of the
council's social services in 2011.
Virgin Care was selected over a rival bid from a consortium
of local services led by Sirona Care.
Unions, social work leaders and staff affected have all raised
concerns over the move.
Lewis Carson from Unison said the union's members were
opposed to a profit-making firm taking over services.
He said: 'We're fighting to oppose the contract. We have
concerns about what this means for staff conditions and
service delivery.

'From past experience we know staff terms and conditions

can be targeted for savings.
'Our members are passionate about the care they deliver
and there are a lot of unanswered questions about what this
will mean in terms of teams, workloads and day-to-day work.
'We're extremely concerned.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3926008/RichardBranson-s-Virgin-Care-wins-700million-contract-run-200-NHSservices-Bath-North-East-Somerset.html
independent.co.uk
Student Finance loans 'illegal and unenforceable',
says top lawyer
Rachael Pells Education Correspondent
Government student loans are illegal and unenforceable,
a top lawyer has said, arguing that graduates must be
reimbursed for signing misleading contracts at extortionate
interest rates.
Students graduating from university this year face rates of
4.6 per cent on government loans, which cover tuition fees,
living costs and repayable grants.
Concerns have been raised about the soaring cost of the
loans, which could leave graduates paying out more than
100,000 double the amount initially borrowed - according
to independent analysts.
But Estelle Clarke, a former City lawyer and fair loans
campaigner, has argued that the government loans are sold
deceptively, tying students into contracts with rates that are
closer to 6.6 per cent.
This is because the 4.6 per cent rate cited is compounded
monthly, meaning every month unpaid charges are added on
to the original loan.
Extortionate funding costs and unfair terms are forced upon
students in unknown agreements which break the law, she
said. If students ask to negotiate, they meet a brick wall.
Writing for The Independent, Ms Clarke argued that the
recent High Court ruling on Brexit could in fact provide hope
for campaigners against exploitative student loans, due to

old and highly specialised laws of Equity that protect

consumers from unconscionable agreements.
Ms Clarke said: Students are being taken for a ride with
their student financing. In the UK, laws of Equity protect
people from being exploited by unconscionable
agreements like these.
"The recent Article 50 Judgment restated Equitys priority
and governments acceptance of this.
Students also have legislative protection from extortionate
credit bargains, she explained, which loans have become.
That is why student loans are no longer legal, in whole or in
part.
Students in England are said to leave university faced with
some of the highest debts the world owing significantly
more than their US, Australian and Canadian peers.
When introduced in 1998, government student loans were
relatively fair, said Ms Clarke. Since then, they have
changed so much they have become illegal: tested in court,
theyd be ruled unenforceable.
On top of this, hidden amongst students expenses is a
hefty portion of investor profit: student loans are lining the
pockets of third party fat cats, said Ms Clarke.
High Court rules Government cannot trigger Article 50
without parliamentary approval
Impoverished students use their loans to pay returns to the
wealthy, at ruinous cost, without even knowing they are
doing so.
Last year Simon Crowther, a civil engineering student at
Nottingham University, made headlines for contesting the
legality of his student loan in an open letter to his MP.
He was in the first wave of students faced with 9,000
tuition fees and prompted a number of similar complaints
from students who claim they were mis-sold their loans.
The government needs to act before it has a national
scandal on its hands, Ms Clarke added, Theresa May must
repay students the amounts they overpaid David Camerons
government.
Student loans should have interest removed or charges
capped at 1.25 per cent, not compounding. Loan agreements

should be given to students so they know what they are

signing.
When such reforms are done and investor profit stops being
students responsibility, student loans will start being legal.
Last month it was revealed that more than 300,000
graduates had received refunds from the government-owned
Student Loans Company after being wrongly overcharged in
their loan repayments.
A spokesperson for the Department for Education said:
Interest rates are linked to RPI to ensure that student
funding remains sustainable in the long term. There is
extensive information and support to help borrowers
understand the loan terms, and they must sign a declaration
that they have done so.
As the OECD has recognised, our student funding system is
sustainable with a relatively high threshold before borrowers
have to repay their loan.
"It removes financial barriers for anyone hoping to study with
outstanding debt written off after 30 years. Graduates enjoy
a considerable wage premium over non-graduates and repay
their loans in line with income - at a rate of 9 per cent of
earnings above 21,000.
http://www.independent.co.uk/student/studyabroad/news/student-finance-loans-brexit-article-50-illegaland-unenforceable-says-top-lawyer-a7410261.html

al-monitor.com
Is this the beginning of the end for the Iran deal?
Posted November 9, 2016
Many wonder whether President-elect Donald Trump will take
action to kill the Iran nuclear deal. Here, Trump makes his
way through a crowd after addressing a Tea Party rally
against the deal at the US Capitol in Washington when he
was trying to win the Republican presidential nomination,
Sept. 9, 2015. (photo by REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/)
Author: Julian Pecquet

Advocates of the nuclear deal with Iran are convinced the

pact is in mortal danger following Republican Donald Trumps
upset election.
Deal skeptics on Capitol Hill have already prepared a raft of
bills that have a far better chance of making it into law with
the threat of a White House veto now out of the way. But the
president-elect himself can just as easily send what hes
called a disastrous deal to the dustbin of history by simply
refusing to sign off on sanctions relief.
Thats why I find it so hard to believe that the deal
survives, said Richard Nephew, a former State Department
sanctions official who now heads the program on Economic
Statecraft, Sanctions and Energy Markets at Columbia
University. At some point, [Trump] will have to make an
affirmative decision to support its implementation.
Under the deal, the United States isnt scheduled to provide
additional sanctions relief until October 2023, well into a
second Trump term. But the deal does require the president
to periodically extend waivers on sanctions that remain on
the books, as long as Iran abides by its obligations under the
deal.
Iranian officials rushed to reassure the world that they
remain wedded to the deal. Iranian President Hassan
Rouhani told his Cabinet after Trumps election that the deal
cannot be overturned by one governments decision.
But skeptics abound.
Tyler Cullis, a policy associate with the National Iranian
American Council (NIAC), said Tehran is all but certain to test
an incoming Trump administration.
You cant forget that Iran tends to do dumb things that
ignite political firestorms here in Washington, Cullis said.
Indeed, just hours after Hillary Clinton conceded defeat, the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) announced that
Iran had exceeded its threshold for heavy water allowed
under the deal. While relatively minor, such a violation could
imperil the deal if a Trump administration dismantles the
State Department and National Security Council teams that
were put in place to prevent disagreements between the two
longtime foes from spiraling out of control.

As much as I hear people say, Well, [Trump] wont kill the

deal on Day One, can anyone seriously think that hes going
to allow his Treasury secretary or his secretary of state to
issue those waivers? Nephew told Al-Monitor. And think
about who those people will be. Can anyone seriously think
theyre going to do it?
A Trump administration is also unlikely to reassure foreign
banks that they can do some business with Iran without
falling short of the deal. Already, Iran has been complaining
that it is not seeing the promised benefits from the deal
because the international financial system is wary of US
regulators.
Then theres Congress.
Lawmakers have introduced a rash of Iran sanctions bills
ahead of the election, both to score points with voters back
home and to put political pressure on the Obama
administration not to go too far with sanctions relief. Cullis
said he now expects the incoming, Republican-controlled
Congress to introduce less extreme legislation that may not
blatantly violate the deal but could irretrievably harm it.
The pro-Israel lobby AIPAC will thread that needle, Cullis
predicted. And then youre going to have a bill thats going
to be very tough for Democrats to vote against.
Theoretically, the defeat of deal foes Mark Kirk, R-Ill., and
Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., helps provide Democrats with a
firewall to defeat problematic Iran bills (most bills need 60
votes to pass, and the Republicans will have 52 Senate seats
if they win a Dec. 9 run-off in Louisiana). On the flip side,
deal opponent Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is taking over as
minority leader, adding to advocates distress.
I think youre going to see a much more measured
approach from Republicans to knock a hole in it, Cullis said.
And if a bill like that passes, its certainly the case that a
President Trump will not spurn it, and he will sign it. It will
cause immense damage to the sustainability of the nuclear
deal.
One such bill is S. 3267 from Senate Foreign Relations
Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., which has garnered seven cosponsors, including Democrats Robert Menendez of New

Jersey and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. AIPAC has lobbied

for the bill, which would notably grant the incoming
administration new power to designate Iranian entities and
individuals for cyber, ballistic missile and other non-nuclear
sanctions.
A Trump administration will be less reluctant to utilize those
authorities, Cullis said. Its a strange thing to say, but I
think Donald Trump will be one of the more sane voices in a
Trump Cabinet.
Potential candidates for the secretary of state post include
former Ambassador to the UN John Bolton, who publicly
advocated bombing Irans nuclear installations during last
years negotiations. Cullis sees Trump outsourcing much of
his administrations Iran policy to his Cabinet, potentially
empowering such hard-liners.
Iran's behavior has become significantly worse since the
#IranDeal, Bolton tweeted last week, adding, "Another
reason why we can't have a third term of Obama's
administration.
While the Trump administration will likely put pressure on
Congress to pass more sanctions bills, Nephew predicted the
reverse will also happen: Lawmakers touting their freshly
passed bills to their constituents will likely demand that the
Republican president use new powers given to him against
Iran.
Ironically, deal advocates are latching on to Trumps past
inconsistencies for slight comfort.
In a CNN interview last summer, he lamented the stupidity
of the nuclear pact and said the United States should
double up and triple up the sanctions and have them come
to us. In a September 2015 interview, however, he clarified
that he would not rip up the pact upon taking office. We
have a horrible contract, but we do have a contract, he told
MSNBC.
In that same interview, the president-elect took issue with
US businesses being shut out of the Iranian market under
the deal.
You see Russia selling missiles, and Germanys involved,
Trump said at the time. Everybodys involved now with Iran

selling them stuff. Were probably [going to] be the only ones
that wont be selling them anything.
Cullis said NIAC and others have floated the idea of trying to
get Obama to open up Iran to US businesses during his last
days in office as a way to appeal to Trump the businessman.
But Nephew said doing so would take too long and not be in
keeping with Obamas stated desire for an orderly transition.
Nephew said the election offers Trump and Republicans a
chance to prove they could have negotiated a better deal.
But he predicted that the more likely scenario will see the
United States and Iran revert to a dangerous game of
chicken rather than getting Iran to give up its nuclear
program.
Rouhani is supposed to be elected in May, Nephew said. If
he were to agree to that, he would not just not be elected,
he would probably be shot.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/11/us-irandeal-foes-trump-election-policy.html?
utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campai
gn=20161110&bt_ee=+tfFyVIjadLZHEpk3Nfq4sSTeuz2Rr4T1
BEnsjmQLQWG2M8Tmd2IvP2PQUeU8rRc&bt_ts=147880323
6887

North American GM crops not showing higher yields

than conventional crops in Europe
Thursday, November 10, 2016 by: Amy Goodrich
(NaturalNews) If the recent projections published in the
latest report from the Population Reference Bureau (PRB)
turn out to be correct, the world's population will continue to
grow at a relatively high pace. With the planet's population
expected to reach 9.9 billion by 2050, which is a 33 percent
increase from the estimated 7.4 billion now, many look to
Monsanto's long-standing promise to help meet the food
demands of these added billions.
With the promise of increased yields and protection from
pests and diseases in mind, GM crops have become a

widespread feature of modern agriculture in the United

States and Canada. However, Europe was not fooled 20
years ago by the deceptive promises of the GMO industry,
and for the most part rejected GMO products.
An extensive examination by the New York Times that
compared results on the two continents, using independent
data as well as scientific and industry research, revealed
something interesting.
GMO technology has fallen short of its promise
Using United Nations data, the analysis found little evidence
that the introduction of these "Frankenfoods" in the U.S. and
Canada has improved the yield beyond those seen in
conventional crops grown in Europe. Michael Owen, a weed
scientist at Iowa State University, said that while the industry
had long claimed that GMOs would "save the world," they
still "haven't found the mythical yield gene."
Also, since the introduction of GM crops almost two decades
ago, the use of pesticides to kill insects and fungi has
decreased by one-third in the U.S., but the use of herbicides,
which are actually far more pervasive, has risen by a
whopping 21 percent. The increased use of these chemicals
has led to weed resistance problems which have pushed
overall usage up.
Compared to one of Europe's biggest non-GMO producing
countries, France, where the use of insecticides and
fungicides has fallen by 65 percent and herbicide use has
decreased by 36 percent, GMO foods seem rather pointless.
Long story short, the promise of the GMO industry to
increase crop yields to feed the world's fast-growing
population, while reducing chemical use, doesn't appear to
make any sense. On the contrary, non-GMO crops appear to
fare better, without adding fears about the harmful effects
GMO foods may have on our health and the environment.
While there hasn't been much research done on the long-

term effects of consuming GMO crops, increased use of toxic

chemicals to kill insects, fungi or weeds is definitely a reason
for concern. Some of these commonly used chemicals have
been linked to developmental delays and cancer.
In the industry's defense, Robert T. Fraley, the chief
technology officer at Monsanto, said that The Times had
cherry-picked its data to reflect poorly on the industry. He
added that every farmer is a smart businessman and
wouldn't pay for a technology that doesn't meet its promise.
According to him, biotech tools have clearly driven yield
increases.
The future of farming
As time has revealed, however, GMOs will not make the
world a better place. In fact, increased use of these
Frankenfoods is polluting the environment and our body with
harmful toxins.
The only beneficiary of the increased use of GMO seeds and
pesticides is the biotech industry. As reported by The Times,
it is a win for the industry on both sides. The same greedy
companies that produce and sell the genetically modified
seeds also provide the chemicals needed to spray the GMO
crops.
If you want to avoid GMOs, buy fresh organic produce
whenever possible, or opt for homegrown. Even if you only
have a balcony or small garden, that shouldn't stop you from
growing your own.
Sources for this article include:
NYTimes.com
PRB.org
http://www.naturalnews.com/055957_GMO_Monsanto_crop_y
ields.html

The Bill Clinton-Loretta Lynch meeting even worse

than we thought
It now appears that the FBI has been investigating the Bill
and Hillary Clinton Foundation for more than a year. This
casts the informal meeting last summer on an airplane
between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch in an even worse light
than before. As one reader puts it:
It would seem rather inappropriate [for Attorney General
Lynch] to be meeting with someone without staff if the
person is not just the husband of a subject of an FBI
investigation, but actually a subject (or head of a subject)
under FBI investigation.
Indeed.
Keep in mind too that, according to multiple reports, the
Justice Department has been pushing back hard against the
FBI investigation of the Clinton Foundation. For example,
when agents on the Foundation case sought emails
contained on non-government laptops that had been
searched as part of the Clinton email case, prosecutors in
the Eastern District rejected the request.
As Andy McCarthy has pointed out, the Eastern District of
New York was headed by Loretta Lynch until she became
Attorney General less than two years ago. The prosecutors
who said no to the FBI were Lynchs people.
When Lynch met with Bill Clinton, she would have known
that the email investigation was just about over, but that the
Clinton Foundation investigation was ongoing. If they
discussed DOJ activities on the Clinton front, as Bill surely
desired to, its likely that both investigations came up.
In any event, the existence of the Foundation investigation
makes the appearance of impropriety even more glaring.
Just after news of the airplane meeting broke, Lynch said
that she would defer to James Comeys determination on
whether to prosecute in the email case. She should now bow
out of any role in determining the course or outcome of the
Clinton Foundation investigation.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/11/the-billclinton-loretta-lynch-meeting-even-worse-than-wethought.php

President-Elect Donald J. Trump Announces New

Implementation Phase of Presidential Transition Team
November 11, 2016 Making News
For Immediate Release
Friday, November 11, 2016
Media Contact: Media@ptt.gov
PRESIDENT-ELECT DONALD J. TRUMP
ANNOUNCES NEW IMPLEMENTATION PHASE OF
PRESIDENTIAL TRANSITION TEAM
Vice President-Elect Mike Pence Named Presidential
Transition Team Chair; Immediately Institutes Vice Chairs of
Presidential Transition Team Executive Committee,
Additional Presidential Transition Team Members And Staff
Leadership For Transition Team
(New York, NY) - President-elect Donald J. Trump today
announced that Vice President-elect Mike Pence will serve as
Chairman of the Presidential Transition Team, and that Dr.
Ben Carson, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, Former
Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Newt Gingrich,
Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, USA (Ret.), Former New
York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions
will join the teams Executive Committee as Vice Chairs.
President-elect Trump also announced that the following
leaders will join the Presidential Transition Team Executive
Committee:
Congressman Lou Barletta
Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi
Congressman Chris Collins
Jared Kushner
Congressman Tom Marino

Rebekah Mercer
Steven Mnuchin
Congressman Devin Nunes
Anthony Scaramucci
Peter Thiel
Donald Trump Jr.
Eric Trump
Ivanka Trump
RNC Chairman Reince Priebus
Trump Campaign CEO Stephen K. Bannon
Together this outstanding group of advisors, led by Vice
President-elect Mike Pence, will build on the initial work done
under the leadership of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to
help prepare a transformative government ready to lead
from day one, stated President-elect Donald J. Trump. The
mission of our team will be clear: put together the most
highly qualified group of successful leaders who will be able
to implement our change agenda in Washington. Together,
we will begin the urgent task of rebuilding this nation specifically jobs, security and opportunity. This team is going
to get to work immediately to Make America Great Again.
President-elect Donald J. Trump today also announced that
Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions, Rick Dearborn,
will join the Presidential Transition Team as Executive
Director.
Richard Bagger, Executive Director of the Presidential
Transition Team during the preparation phase, will return to
the private sector but will remain with the Team as an
Advisor, as will preparation phase General Counsel Bill
Palatucci.
Joining Dearborn on the Presidential Transition Teams Staff
Leadership lineup are:
Kellyanne Conway, Senior Advisor
David Bossie, Deputy Executive Director

Stephen Miller, National Policy Director

Jason Miller, Communications Director
Hope Hicks, National Press Secretary
Dan Scavino, Director of Social Media
Don McGahn, General Counsel
Katie Walsh, Senior Advisor
The Vice President-elect has tapped his three senior
advisors, Nick Ayers, Josh Pitcock, and Marc Short, to work
alongside him in this process.
President-elect Trump will bring about fundamental change
in Washington, and these are the right people to make that
happen, added Vice President-elect Pence. This team of
experienced leaders will form the building blocks of our
Presidential Transition Team staff leadership roster, and will
work with elected officials and tireless volunteers to prepare
our government for the transfer of power on January 20th.
https://www.greatagain.gov/news/president-elect-donald-jtrump-announces-new-implementation-phase-presidentialtransition-team.html

Trumpelection:PriebusandBannon
givenkeyroles

1 hour ago

From the section US Election 2016

Share
Image copyright AFP Image caption Reince Priebus is seen as
a bridge-builder with the rest of the party
14 November 2016 / BBC Online

Trump elected

The hotel developer who became president

Trump presidency: Your questions answered

What will President Trump do first?

Full results
USPresidentelectDonaldTrumphasawardedkeyrolesinhisincomingteamtoatopRepublicanparty
officialandarightwingmediachief.
ReincePriebus,chairmanoftheRepublicanNationalCommittee(RNC),willbehischiefofstaff.
Inthisrole,hewillsetthetoneforthenewWhiteHouseandactasaconduittoCongressandthe
government.
StephenBannon,fromtheBreitbartNewsNetwork,willserveasMrTrump'schiefstrategist.
MrBannonsteppedasideasexecutivechairmanofBreitbartacombativeconservativesitewithananti
establishmentagendathatcriticsaccuseofxenophobiaandmisogynytoactasMrTrump'scampaign
chief.
Meanwhileinthepresidentelect'sfirstinterview,withUSbroadcasterCBS,MrTrumpsaid:

He would deport or jail up to three million illegal

migrants with criminal links

Future Supreme Court nominees would be "pro-life" meaning they oppose abortion - and defend the
constitutional right to bear arms

He will not seek to overturn the legalisation of same-sex

marriage

He will forgo the president's $400,000 salary, taking $1

a year instead

MeetPresidentTrump'spossiblecabinet
ThenewssiteDonaldTrumpdoesn'thate

Media captionTrump's deportation figures: Are they true?

'Truly an honour'
Inastatementreleasedbyhiscampaign,MrTrumpdescribedMrPriebusandMrBannonas"highly
qualifiedleaderswhoworkedwelltogetheronourcampaignandledustoahistoricvictory".
MrPriebus,44,actedasabridgebetweenMrTrumpandtheRepublicanpartyestablishmentduringthe
campaign.
HeisclosetoHouseSpeakerPaulRyan,afellowWisconsinite,whocouldbeinstrumentalinsteeringthe
newadministration'slegislativeagenda.

Breitbart man
Duringtheelectionrace,MrBannon,62,sawitashisaimto"bolsterthebusinesslikeapproachofMr
Trump'scampaign".

Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Mr Bannon

stepped down from the helm of Breitbart to become Donald
Trump's campaign CEO
Aformernavalofficer,investmentbankerandHollywoodproducer,MrBannontookoveratBreitbartin
2012,whenhepromisedtomakeitthe"HuffingtonPostoftheright".
Breitbartislinkedtothealternativerightmovementoraltrightwhichtendstorejectbothleftwing
ideologyandmainstreamconservatism.
Themovementoftenemphasisesfreespeechandtherighttooffend.Opponentscallitracist,antiSemitic
andsexist.

Who is Stephen Bannon?

Executive Chairman of Breitbart news, the most widelyread conservative news and opinion site in America.
The website is denounced by critics as a hate-speech
site

A graduate of Georgetown University and Harvard

Business School, former US Navy officer and investment
banker at Goldman Sachs

Conservative documentary film-maker who produced

films celebrating Reagan, Sarah Palin and the Tea Party

Seen as in conflict with the traditional Republican

establishment and has been called a racist and rightwing extremist by some members of his own party

"IwanttothankPresidentelectTrumpfortheopportunitytoworkwithReinceindrivingtheagendaofthe
Trumpadministration,"MrBannonsaidonSunday.
"Wehadaverysuccessfulpartnershiponthecampaign,onethatledtovictory.Wewillhavethatsame
partnershipinworkingtohelpPresidentelectTrumpachievehisagenda."
DemocratCongressmanAdamSchiffcalledMrBannon'sappointment"unsurprisingbutalarming"."His
altright,antiSemitic&misogynisticviewsdon'tbelonginWH,"hetweeted.

Analysis by Anthony Zurcher, BBC News, Washington

ThemanwhobuilthiscampaignrailingagainstTheEstablishmenthaschosenthechairoftheRepublican
NationalCommitteetobehischiefofstaff.Itdoesn'tgetmuchmoreestablishmentthanReincePriebus.
IftherearecluestobegleanedfromMrTrump'sfirstpersonneldecisionsaspresident,it'sthathe'sopting
foraveteranpartyhandtomanagetheWhiteHousealthoughhe'skeepinganoutsiderdevilonhis
shoulderinsenioradviserStephenBannon,formerheadofthebombthrowingBreitbartNews.
BringingMrPriebusandMrBannonunderthesameroofshouldcreatesomeinterestingtension.If
correctlyharnessed,theenergycouldprovidedrivetothenascentTrumpadministration.Ifthingsgo
wrong,itcouldteartheplaceapart.

Regardlessofhowitworksout,MrPriebus'selevationtothispowerfulpositionrepresentstheculmination
ofawinninggamblefortheWisconsinite.WhilemanyinhispartywereurginghimtoabandonMrTrump
wheneverhiscandidacyappearedonthevergeoffoundering,hecommittedquietly,behindthescenesto
rightingtheship.
Itoftendidn'tseempossible,buthesucceededandnowhehasaWhiteHouseofficetoshowforit.
ElectedchairmanoftheRNCin2011,MrPriebushasactedastheparty'sspokesmanandchieffundraiser.
Hesaiditwas"trulyanhonour"tojoinMrTrumpintheWhiteHouseaschiefofstaff.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-37970146

Britaintodeploybatteriesofhigh
precisionlongrangemissilesonRussians
borderforthefirsttimesincetheCold
War

The long range rockets are set to be moved to

Estonia next year

Amid fears President Vladimir Putin could be

planning to invade country

Around 800 UK troops will deploy to Estonia as

part of a 15-nation force

ByMarcNicol,DefenceCorrespondentForTheMailOnSunSunday
Published:01:38,13November2016|Updated:08:57,13November2016

BritainistodeploybatteriesofhighprecisionlongrangemissilesonRussiansborderfor
thefirsttimesincetheColdWar.
ThelongrangerocketswillbemovedtoEstonianextyearamidfearsRussianPresident
VladimirPutincouldbeplanningtoinvadethecountry.
TherocketsarepartofahugemilitarybuildupbyNATOcountriesinordertodefend
theBalticStates.
Around800UKtroopswilldeploytoEstonianextyearaspartofa15nationforce,
includingsoldiersfromtheUS,FranceandDenmark.
BritainistodeploybatteriesofhighprecisionlongrangemissilesonRussiansborderforthefirsttime
sincetheColdWar(filephoto)

TheGuidedMultipleLaunchRocketSystems(GMLRS)fireasmanyas12missilesper
minuteandarecapableofblowingupRussiantanksoverarangeofupto45miles.
The200lbwarheadsareguidedtowardstheirtargetsbyGPSandarefiredfrommissile
launchersboltedontoarmouredvehicles.Atleast25RoyalArtillerysoldiersare
expectedtodeploytoEstoniatooperatetheGMLRSsystems.
TherocketswereusedwithdevastatingresultsinAfghanistanfrom2007toblastopen
Talibanbunkers.Some410missileswerefiredatthejihadistunnelnetworksin
HelmandProvinceduringthecampaign.
BritainsGMLRSsystemswillbecomplementedinEstoniabyaUKforceofdrones,
RAFTyphoonjetsandChallenger2tanks.
ConcernsforthesecurityofEstoniaandotherBalticStateshavegrownfollowingtheUS
PresidentialElection.DuringthecampaignDonaldTrumpchallengedaNATOArticle5
principlethatthealliancewilldefendanymembersfrommilitaryaggression.
PresidentElectTrumpsuggestedthatinthefutureUSprotectionfortheBalticStates
woulddependonthesecountriesmeetingNATOdefencespendingtargets.
Lastnight,formerBritishArmycommanderGeneralSirRichardShirreff,anexperton
Russianaffairs,toldTheMailonSundaythathebelievedthatitwouldbenecessaryfor
hundredsofUKtroopstoremaininEstoniafortheforeseeablefutureinabidtothwart
Russianaggression.
Hesaid:Unlessitisapermanentforcethenitisnotcredible.The800strongUK
deploymentisastart,butjustthat.IwouldalsoliketoseeBritaintakingtheleadinthe
protectionoftheBalticStates,inparticularafterBrexit.NATOasawholemustmakea
statementthatitiswillingandcapableofdefendingthesecountries.
IfearthatunlessPresidentElectTrumpreaffirmstheUSscommitmenttoArticle5that
Russianwillexploitthissituation,absolutelycertainlyitwill,andthiscouldinclude
RussianadventurismintheBalticStates.
BecauseuntilnowtheonethingthathassecuredEuropeandefencesincetheformation
ofNATOhasbeenthetotalcertaintythatwhicheverPresidentiselectedtotheWhite
HousetheUSwillcometotheaidofanothermemberofthepact.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3931076/Britaindeploy-batteries-high-precision-long-range-missiles-Russians-border-time-Cold-War.html

apnews.com

PutinwithdrawsRussiafrom
InternationalCriminalCourt

17 November 2016 / APNews.com / Nataliya Vasilyeva

MOSCOW(AP)RussianPresidentVladimirPutinsignedadecreeWednesdaytowithdrawRussiafrom
theInternationalCriminalCourt,whichrulesonsuchgravechargesasgenocideandcrimesagainst
humanity.
Russiain2000signedtheRometreatythatestablishedtheHaguebasedcourtbutneverratifiedit.
Putin'sdecree,publishedontheKremlin'swebsite,comesadayaftertheU.N.GeneralAssembly'shuman
rightscommitteeapprovedaresolutioncondemningRussia's"temporaryoccupationofCrimea"and
blamedRussiaforrightsabusessuchasdiscriminationagainstsomeCrimeanresidents,suchasTatars.
RussiaannexedCrimeainMarch2014fromUkrainefollowingahastilycalledreferendum,amovethatled
tocripplingWesternsanctions.AseparatistinsurgencyeruptedineasternUkrainethefollowingmonth,
backedbyRussia.
TheICConMondayissuedapreliminaryreportwhereitdescribedwhathappenedinCrimeaas"an
internationalarmedconflictbetweenUkraineandtheRussianFederation."
Hisspokesman,DmitryPeskov,explainedthewithdrawalby"nationalinterests"andarguedthatsince
RussianeverratifieditWednesday'sdecreewasjustaformality.PeskovalsodismissedtheICC's
accusationsofan"armedconflict"inCrimea,arguingthatCrimeajoinedRussiaafteralegitimatepopular
vote.
Russia'sforeignministryinsistedinastatementthatRussiawantseveryoneimplicatedingrave
internationalcrimestofacejusticebutexpressedfrustrationoverthecourt'sworkinrecentyears.
"Thecourthasunfortunatelyfailedtomatchthehopesonehadanddidnotbecomeatrulyindependentand
respectedbodyofinternationaljustice,"theministrysaid,addingthatintheICCs'14yearsofwork"only
fourverdicts"havebeenpassedwhile$1billionwasspentonexpenses.
JusthoursbeforeRussia'sannouncement,theU.N.humanrightschiefmadeaspiriteddefenseoftheICC,
entreatingcountriesnottoleaveit.SeveralAfricannationshaverecentlyannouncedplanstoleavethe
treaty.
___
JameyKeateninGenevacontributedtothisreport.

https://apnews.com/546f70e94e78497b9d5427b5f95e18a8

rt.com

BilllegalizingJewishsettlerhomeson
privatePalestinianlandgetsinitial
parliamentaryapproval
17November2016
TheIsraeliparliamenthasinitiallyapprovedacontroversialbillthatseekstolegalizehundredsofJewish
settlementsintheWestBank.
TheproposalwasbackedintheKnessetonWednesday,with58MPsvotinginfavorofthebilland50
againstit,AFPreported.Tobecomelaw,theproposalmustpassthreemorevotesinparliament.
Yet,theinitialbackinghasrisenconcernsintheWest,asthevotemarksavictoryforthepowerfulpro
settlementmovementinPMBenjaminNetanyahu'scoalitiondespiteinternationalcommunitylargely
opposingthesettlements.
"Thiswouldrepresentanunprecedentedandtroublingstepthat'sinconsistentwithpriorIsraelilegal
opinionandalsobreaklongstandingIsraelipolicyofnotbuildingonprivatePalestinianland,"AFPcited
USStateDepartmentspokeswomanElizabethTrudeauassaying.

Netanyahuinitiallyopposedthelegislation,butvotedinitsfavoronWednesday.
Lastweek,atopadvisertoAmerica'snewPresidentelectDonaldTrumpsaidthatthe45thpresidentdidn't
supportthegeneralpositionintheWestthatseesJewishsettlementsonthePalestinianlandasanobstacle
topeace.
"Thetwosidesaregoingtohavetodecidehowtodealwiththatregion,butit'scertainlynotMr.Trump's
viewthatsettlementactivityshouldbecondemnedandthatitisanobstacletopeace,"JasonGreenblatttold
Israel'sArmyRadio.
AlthoughIsrael'ssettlementactivityintheWestBankisdeemedillegalbytheinternationalcommunity,on
SundayanIsraeliministerialcommitteeunanimouslyapprovedadraftbilltoallowsettlerstoremainin
homesbuiltonprivatePalestinianland.
Theproposedlegislationthatmightapplytoanestimated2,000to3,000Jewishsettlerhomes,statesthat
theIsraeligovernmentcouldusethelandinexchangeforcompensationintheformofeithermoneyor
alternativelandplots.
Followingtheministerialdecision,Israel'sDefenseMinisterAvigdorLiebermanwarnedthat"themost
importantthingistocoordinateourpositionswiththenewAmericanadministration.""Thisisthefirst
timethatarightwinggovernmentinIsraelhasaRepublicanpresident,andaRepublicanmajorityinthe
SenateandCongress,thereforewecannotcreatefactsonthegroundandembarrasstheincoming
administration,everythingmustbeagreedandcoordinated,"hesaidinastatement,asquotedbytheTimes
ofIsrael.
Palestinianofficialshavedenouncedthebill,sayingitwouldleadto"catastropheintheregion."
SpokesmanforPalestinianpresidentMahmudAbbas,NabilAbuRudeinasaidthePalestinianleadership
wouldraisetheissueattheUNSecurityCounciland"allotherinternationalorganizations,"AFPreported.

EXCLUSIVE: Jeremy Corbyn's brother Piers gives a

speech alongside a notorious Holocaust denier and a
9/11 conspiracy theorist
By Jake Wallis Simons, Associate Global Editor
10:46, 13 Nov 2016, updated 14:12, 14 Nov 2016
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3906394/JeremyCorbyn-s-brother-Piers-gives-speech-alongside-notoriousHolocaust-denier-9-11-conspiracy-theorist.html#comments
Corbyn was welcomed to the stage by disgraced academic
Nicholas Kollerstrom, who was disowned by UCL for denying
the Holocaust
He appeared alongside Ian Fantom, a 9/11 conspiracy

theorist who was wearing a T-shirt saying '9/11 and 7/7 were
staged'
Kollerstrom's books on Holocaust denial were openly on sale
at the event
Corbyn was pictured laughing and joking with the two men
In his speech, he claimed that man made climate change
was a 'lie' and later suggested that the 9/11 attacks may
have been staged
Piers Corbyn has appeared on stage alongside a notorious
Holocaust denier and a leading 9/11 conspiracy theorist to
give a speech claiming that man made climate change is a
'lie' promoted for profit by a global elite.
Corbyn stood beside conspiracy theorist Ian Fantom, who
was wearing a T-shirt saying '9/11 and 7/7 were staged'.
Books by the Holocaust denier, Nicholas Kollerstrom, were
openly on sale at the event.
Corbyn did not object to the T-shirt or offensive books when
they were brought to his attention, and was pictured joking
with the two men before and after his speech.
Responding to questions from the audience, the 69-year-old
weather scientist later said he believed that the official
explanation for the 9/11 attacks was problematic.
He opened the talk with a reference to his brother, Jeremy,
the Labour leader, and referred to him several times
throughout the hour-long session that was attended by about
50 people.
Im not going to talk about politics, as you well know, but
beyond that I am my brothers brother. He used to be my
brother, now Im his brother, he said.
Piers Corbyn, left, is welcomed to the stage by disgraced
academic Nicholas Kollerstrom, right, a notorious Holocaust
denier who was disowned by University College London in
2008

Piers Corbyn, left, is welcomed to the stage by disgraced

academic Nicholas Kollerstrom, right, a notorious Holocaust
denier who was disowned by University College London in
2008
Corbyn, left, takes questions from the audience alongside Ian
Fantom, right, a prominent 9/11 conspiracy theorist, who
was wearing a T-shirt saying 'non-violent extremist' on the
front
Corbyn, left, takes questions from the audience alongside Ian
Fantom, right, a prominent 9/11 conspiracy theorist, who was
wearing a T-shirt saying 'non-violent extremist' on the front
The back of Fantom's shirt displayed the slogan, '9/11 and
7/7 were staged', leaving both Corbyn and the audience
under no illusion about the nature of his controversial beliefs
The back of Fantom's shirt displayed the slogan, '9/11 and
7/7 were staged', leaving both Corbyn and the audience
under no illusion about the nature of his controversial beliefs
Holocaust denier Kollerstrom, left, and Corbyn, right, chat to
members of the audience
Holocaust denier Kollerstrom, left, and Corbyn, right, chat to
members of the audience
Corbyn, left, is deep in discussion with Fantom, right, as they
prepare for the event
Corbyn, left, is deep in discussion with Fantom, right, as they
prepare for the event
Corbyn, left, and Fantom, right, share an intimate moment
while setting up the stage
Corbyn, left, and Fantom, right, share an intimate moment
while setting up the stage
Kollerstrom's book denying the Holocaust was openly on sale
at the event where Corbyn was a keynote speaker
Kollerstrom's book denying the Holocaust was openly on sale
at the event where Corbyn was a keynote speaker
A member of the audience browses Kollerstrom's books
about Holocaust denial
A member of the audience browses Kollerstrom's books
about Holocaust denial

The event, which took place on Tuesday night at St Saviours

church in Pimlico, London, was organised by the Keep Talking
Group, a small organisation devoted mainly to 9/11
conspiracy theories. Corbyn was the keynote speaker.
One of the organisers, Nicholas Kollerstrom who has called
the Holocaust a primal myth that never happened and
claimed that the gas chambers were used only to kill bugs
introduced Corbyn, calling him a unique British scientist.
Kollerstrom's book, Breaking The Spell: The Holocaust, Myth
And Reality, was openly on sale in the hall.
The disgraced academic, who was stripped of his Honorary
Fellowship by University College London (UCL) in 2008 after
publishing an article entitled 'The Auschwitz Gas Chamber
Illusion', was pictured signing books before the speech.
Also on stage was the Keep Talking Groups founder, Ian
Fantom, who had invited Corbyn to take part in the event.
His group aims to prove that 9/11 and 7/7 were set-ups, and
he has called David Cameron every bit as bad as Adolf
Hitler.
Fantom appeared alongside Corbyn wearing a T-shirt saying
9/11 and 7/7 were staged on the back, and non-violent
extremist on the front a reference to a phase used by
Cameron to criticise conspiracy theorists.
In his speech, the well-known 9/11 Truther recommended a
play called I.S.I.S., which promotes the idea that the World
Trade Centre attacks were staged and features a character
referred to as Gay Jew Brad.
He said: Ten years ago, when my association turned on me
as the press has just turned on Trump and the British press is
turning on Putin I realised that you are judged not by the
quality of your research but entirely on whether other people
like the results.

He then drew a parallel between his own work and that of

Corbyn, saying that the scientist had passed the Galileo
test because he stood up to authority in denying climate
change.
Also for sale was a book by Kollerstrom, 69, entitled How
Britain Initiated Both World Wars, and another exploring the
idea that Paul McCartney died on 9/11 of 1966 and was
replaced by an impostor.
When the controversial T-shirt and books were brought to
Corbyn's attention during questions from the audience, he
said:
Sometimes its better not to [express my] views in public.
But I think the stuff about 9/11 is pretty unbelievable. I know
a lot of scientists who think so.
'In fact, I was invited over to America at one point, in fact to
talk about climate, but there was a second agenda they had
on to talk to me about 9/11, you know. Theres stuff [in the
official explanation] that makes no sense to a rational mind.
In a statement given to MailOnline after the event, Fantom
said that Corbyn had been 'set up by the press in order to
smear his brother', and that the 'distortion and manipulation'
was coming from 'the Israel lobby'.
Corbyn talks to members of the audience after his wellreceived speech in Pimlico, London
Corbyn talks to members of the audience after his wellreceived speech in Pimlico, London
James Thring, a conspiracy theorist with links to former Ku
Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke, who has campaigned for
the release of Holocaust denier David Irving, was in the
audience

James Thring, a conspiracy theorist with links to former Ku

Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke, who has campaigned for
the release of Holocaust denier David Irving, was in the
audience
James Thring, a conspiracy theorist who has links with
former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke and has
campaigned for the release of Holocaust denier David Irving,
was pictured at the event.
When he took the floor, Corbyn delivered a rambling lecture
in which he argued that the notion of climate change had
been fabricated by a global elite in order to enrich
themselves and control the world.
This is the agenda of the globalisation story backed by the
climate change authorities, he said. You see, the climate
change, its an ideology used to promote globalisation and
the super-profits of Wall Street.
In response to a round of applause, he smiled and made the
peace sign with his fingers, a gesture that he repeated a
number of times during the event.
He added: Any scare story will be used by someone to make
money, whether its true or not. The CO2 one is false, and
its been used to make a lot of money.
Kids have been brainwashed, thats for sure.
In a statement to MailOnline, Corbyn said: I and anyone
have the freedom to attend or not any public meeting I am
invited to irrespective of who else may be present unknown
to me without fear of Stasi style spying or reportage.
He added that this was the first time he had been involved
with the group and its controversial organisers.
However, he stood by his belief that 'there are certain
(expertly reported) problems with what we are told [about

9/11] as indeed there are many problems with what we

hear from the White House'.
Corbyn, the older brother of Labour leader Jeremy, was a
squatters rights campaigner in the Seventies and served as
a Labour councillor in the late Eighties. He left the party in
2002, but supported his brothers leadership campaign in
2015.
Jeremy Corbyn was engulfed in a similar scandal last year
when MailOnline revealed that he had attended two or
three events hosted by Paul Eisen, a prominent Holocaust
denier, and may have made a donation to his group.
PIERS CORBYN STATEMENT IN FULL
I speak to a very wide range of organisations across the
political, business and international spectrum who invite me
to talk about weather and climate; my attendance does not
in any way imply, or is ever taken to imply, I support
anything they or their members do or think.
I was invited by Ian, no-one else, convener of the Keep
Talking' organisation which entertains a wide range of
speakers and my attendance was never suggested to imply
agreement or not with any view he or anyone involved or
present may have.
In my presentation and in public questions through the chair
of the meeting I explained why we at WeatherAction.com
strongly find that the idea of man made climate change fails.
I was asked an irrelevant question about 9/11 and
nevertheless said there are certain (expertly reported)
problems with what we are told as indeed there are many
problems with what we hear from the White House! Some in
the audience appeared to want my comments for reasons
known only to themselves, on a number of other matters
which were not relevant and so were ignored by the chair
and not taken.

On my brother I support his leadership of the Labour Party

100 per cent and while we agree on most things we do not
expect to agree with each other on everything, even
football! I object to attempts to damage Jeremy by indirect
association with people with whom I may accidentally have
been present at the same meeting in Pimlico or anywhere. I
and anyone have the freedom to attend or not any public
meeting I am invited to irrespective of who else may be
present unknown to me without fear of "Stasi style" spying
or reportage.
What anything the attendee you describe as Nick or anyone
else there thinks on any matter is nothing to do with me any
more than the religious views of others present on the bus
home.

wkbw.com

Trumpwalksbacksomecampaign
promisesinmeetingwithNewYork
Times
23 November 2016 / Alex Hider
DuringameetingwithreportersandeditorsoftheNewYorkTimesonTuesday,PresidentelectDonald
Trumpappearedtobeopentocompromiseonanumberoftheissuesheraisedthroughouthiscampaign.
PertweetsfromTimesreportersintheroomwithTrump,thePresidentelectconcededthathumansmay
havehadahandinclimatechange,reiteratedthathisadministrationwouldnotseekchargesagainst
politicalrivalHillaryClintonandappearedtobackoffclaimsthathewouldopenuplibellawsagainst
journalists.
Trumpalsoformallydisavowedsupportfromthealtrightandhategroupsthatseemtohavebeen
emboldenedbyhiswin.
OfcourseIdisavowandcondemnthem,hesaid,accordingtoTimesreportersintheroom.
Trumpalsoaddressedconcernsabouthistopadviser,SteveBannon,theformerCEOofBreitbarta
conservativenewswebsitethatissaidtobeaplatformforthealtright.
IfIthoughthewasaracistoraltrightoranyofthethings,thetermswecoulduse,Iwouldn'teventhink
abouthiringhim,"hesaid.
AsforBreitbartitself,Trumpcalledthewebsitejustapublication.

PartofthehourlongmeetingbetweenthePresidentelectandthenationssecondlargestnewspaperwas
spentdiscussingclimatechange.Inthepast,Trumphastweetedthatglobalwarmingisahoaxperpetuated
bytheChinese.ButonTuesday,Trumpseemedtobacktrackfromhisoldertweets.
Ithinkthereissomeconnectivity.Some,something.Itdependsonhowmuch,"hesaid,accordingto
Timesreporters.
Trumpimpliedthattheeconomywouldcomefirst,sayingthatheiskeepinginmindhowmuchitwould
costourcompanies.
HoursafteraTrumpaidesaidthathisadministrationwouldnotseekchargesagainstHillaryClinton,the
Presidentelectconfirmedthosesentimentsinhisownwords.
ItsjustnotsomethingIfeelverystronglyabout,hesaid.IdontwanttohurttheClintons,Ireally
dont.Shewentthroughalotandsufferedgreatlyinmanydifferentways.
Duringanationallyteleviseddebate,Trumpsaidhewouldappointaspecialprosecutortolookinto
ClintonsuseofaprivateemailserverduringhertimeasSecretaryofState.
TrumpbeganthemeetingbyexpressinghisdisappointmentwiththecoveragehehasreceivedbytheTimes
throughouthiscampaign.
IthinkIhavebeentreatedveryrough,hesaid,accordingtoTimesreporters.Iwillsays(coverageby)
theTimesistheroughestofall.
Trumpwentontosaythatwhilehefeelsunfairlytreated,hehopestoimprovehisrelationshipwiththe
paper.
TrumpsmeetingwiththeTimescamehoursafterhetweetedthatthemeetinghadbeencancelledafterthe
timeschangedthetermsofthemeeting.TheTimesrefutedtheclaimsinastorypublishedTuesday
morning.
Trumphasbeencriticalofthepapersincebeingelectedearlierthismonth.Nineofhistweetssincehis
electionhavebeencriticaloftheTimes,farmorethananyothermediaoutlet.
AlexHiderisawriterfortheE.W.ScrippsNationalDesk.FollowhimonTwitter@alexhider.

http://www.wkbw.com/news/national/trump-disavows-altright-walks-back-climate-change-claims-in-meeting-withnew-york-times

'AtwarwithRussia:EUParliament
approvesresolutiontocounterRussian
mediapropaganda
Published time: 23 Nov, 2016 12:22Edited time: 23 Nov,
2016 21:07
MEPs in Strasbourg have voted on a non-legislative
resolution which calls for the EU to respond to information
warfare by Russia. RT and Sputnik news agency are alleged

to be among the most dangerous "tools" of "hostile

propaganda."
TheEUParliament'sresolutiondemonstrates"politicaldegradation"inregardtothe"ideaofdemocracy"
intheWest,RussianPresidentVladimirPutinsaidonWednesday,commentingonthevote.
Putinpointedoutthatwhile"everyonetriestolecture"Russiaondemocracy,Europeanlawmakers
themselvesresorttoapolicyofrestrictions,"whichisnotthebestway"todealwithanyissues.
"Thebestapproachisanopendiscussion,inwhichbrightandsolidargumentstosupportone'spointof
viewshouldbepresented,"Putinsaid.
AddingthathehopestheWesternmoveto"counterRussianpropaganda"won'tleadtoseriousrestrictions,
thepresidentcongratulatedRTandSputnikjournalistsontheirwork.
IntheWednesdayvote,304MEPssupportedtheresolutionbasedonthereportEUstrategic
communicationtocounteractpropagandaagainstitbythirdparties,with179votingagainstitand208
abstaining.
WrittenbyaPolishmemberoftheEuropeanConservativesandReformists(ECR)group,AnnaFotyga,the
reportallegedthatMoscowaimsto"distortthetruth,provokedoubt,dividetheEUanditsNorthAmerican
partners,paralyzethedecisionmakingprocess,discredittheEUinstitutionsandincitefearand
uncertaintyamongEUcitizens."
ThereportsuggeststhatMoscowprovidesfinancialsupporttooppositionpartiesandorganizationsinEU
memberstates,causingdisintegrationwithinthebloc.
Atthesametime,Russiaisaccusedof"informationwarfare,"withsuchentitiesasRTTVchannel,
Sputniknewsagency,RossotrudnichestvofederalagencyandtheRusskiyMir(RussianWorld)fund
allegedtobeamongitsmostthreateningpropaganda"tools."
ThedocumentplacesRussianmediaorganizationsalongsideterroristgroupssuchasIslamicState(IS,
formerlyISIS/ISIL).
Thereportalsomentionssome"socialmediaandinternettrolls"fromRussiawhoarethoughtto
"challengedemocraticvalues."
ItcalledfortheestablishmentofmeasurestotackletheperceivedRussianpropagandathreat,bymeansof
"investinginawarenessraising,education,onlineandlocalmedia."Italsosuggestsstrongercooperation
betweentheEUandNATO"onstrategiccommunication."
SputnikhasalreadyappealedtotheUN,theOrganizationforSecurityandCooperationinEurope(OSCE)
andanumberofinternationaljournalists'organizationsandNGOs,includingReportersWithoutBorders,
totakemeasurestostopwhatitconsiderstobeinterferenceintofreedomofspeechintheEU.
"Theresolutionhitsstraightatanumberofrespectedmedia,includingSputnikagency,andhasanaimto
stoptheiractivityintheEU.Moreover,theresolutionbluntlycontradictstheEU'sownhumanrightsand
freedomofpressnorms,"readsthelettersignedbySputnikEditorinChiefMargaritaSimonyan.
Duringtheparliamentarydebatethatprecededthevote,MEPscampaigningfortheresolutionsaidtheEU
was"atwarwithRussia,onacollisioncoursewitheachothertravelingfasterthanajetfighter,"andthat
withanalleged"aimtosplitEurope,theKremlinforcesitsinformationintoourcountries."
"Thereportisunjustified,it'snotobjectiveandisonesided,"GreekIndependentMEP,NotisMariastold
RT,addingthatthetotalnumberoflawmakerswhovotedagainsttheresolutionorabstainedfromvoting
showsthat"themajorityoftheMEPsinthishousedonotactuallyaccept"it.Manyofthosewhosupported
thedocumentarefromeasternEurope,Mariassaid,whilethoserepresentingthesouthernpartofthebloc
eitherabstainedorvotedagainstit.
"Ifindthattheresolutionisgoingthewrongway,becauseweneedtohavebetterrelationswithRussia,
whichisbetterfortheEuropeaneconomy,forsecurityandthisisthenewtrendintheUnitedStatesthat
wehavetotakeintoaccount,"headded.

BeforetheWednesdayvote,thedocumenthadbeencriticizedbysomeMEPs,whocalleditboth"insane"
and"ridiculous."TheEU"desperatelyneedsanenemy,beitRussiaoranyother,"thatitcanblameforany
ofitsownfailures,FrenchMEPJeanLucSchaffhauesertoldRT.SpanishMEPJavierCousoPermuysaid
"itfostershysteriaagainstRussia,"whileBritishMEPJamesCarvernotedthereportis"worryingly
reminiscentoftheColdWar."
TheRussianauthoritieshavealwaystreatedforeignmediaworkinginRussiawithrespect,andhavenever
discriminatedagainstjournalistsfromothercountries,RussiasForeignMinistryspokeswomanMaria
ZakharovasaidinaninterviewwithRossiya1TVchannel.
MoscowhasneverpreventedanyonefrommakingreportsfromRussiabasedontheircontentsand
ideology,thediplomatsaid,addingthatitnowmightbeforcedtoactaccordinglyandrespondtotheEUs
movesifRussianjournalistsareoppressedintheWest.Itsnotourchoice,andwedontwanttofuel
tensions,shesaid.
MoscowearliersaiditwouldbeforcedtotakereciprocalstepstotheEUlawmakers'"unfriendlyactions."
HavingcalledtheMEPs'move"cynical,"theRussianFederationCouncilmemberoninternationalaffairs,
IgorMorozov,saidthatEuropeanlawmakers"shouldbeawarethattheirunfriendlyactions"wouldcausea
"verytoughresponse"fromMoscow.

https://www.rt.com/news/367922-eu-resolution-russianmedia/

yournewswire.com

21GoalsOfTheIlluminatiAndThe
CommitteeOf300
In1993Dr.JohnColemanrippedthelidofftheIlluminatitheconspiratorialgroupthatknowsno
nationalboundaries,isabovethelawofallcountriesandcontrolseveryaspectofpolitics,commerce,
religion,industry,banking,insurance,mining,andeventhedrugtrade.
Dr.ColemanattemptedtodemystifythesecretiveorganizationbylistingandexplainingtheIlluminatis21
mostimportantgoals.
Nearly25yearsafterthelistwaswritten,the21goalsmakeforchillingreading.In2016manyofthegoals
havebeenfulfilled,andtherestareloomingonthehorizon.
1.ToestablishaOneWorldGovernment/NewWorldOrderwithaunifiedchurchandmonetarysystem
undertheirdirection.TheOneWorldGovernmentbegantosetupitschurchinthe1920sand30s,forthey
realizedtheneedforareligiousbeliefinherentinmankindmusthaveanoutletand,therefore,setupa
churchbodytochannelthatbeliefinthedirectiontheydesired.
2.Tobringabouttheutterdestructionofallnationalidentityandnationalpride,whichwasaprimary
considerationiftheconceptofaOneWorldGovernmentwastowork.
3.Toengineerandbringaboutthedestructionofreligion,andmoreespecially,theChristianReligion,
withtheoneexception,theirowncreation,asmentionedabove.

4.Toestablishtheabilitytocontrolofeachandeverypersonthroughmeansofmindcontrolandwhat
ZbignewBrzezinskicalledtechonotronics,whichwouldcreatehumanlikerobotsandasystemofterror
whichwouldmakeFelixDzerzinhskisRedTerrorlooklikechildrenatplay.
5.Tobringabouttheendtoallindustrializationandtoendtheproductionofnucleargeneratedelectric
powerinwhattheycallthepostindustrialzerogrowthsociety.Exceptedarethecomputerandservice
industries.USindustriesthatremainwillbeexportedtocountriessuchasMexicowhereabundantslave
laborisavailable.Aswesawin1993,thishasbecomeafactthroughthepassageoftheNorthAmerican
FreeTradeAgreement,knownasNAFTA.UnemployablesintheUS,inthewakeofindustrial
destruction,willeitherbecomeopiumheroinand/orcocaineaddicts,orbecomestatisticsintheelimination
oftheexcesspopulationprocessweknowoftodayasGlobal2000.
6.Toencourage,andeventuallylegalizetheuseofdrugsandmakepornographyanartform,which
willbewidelyacceptedand,eventually,becomequitecommonplace.
7.TobringaboutdepopulationoflargecitiesaccordingtothetrialruncarriedoutbythePolPotregime
inCambodia.ItisinterestingtonotethatPolPotsgenocidalplansweredrawnupintheUSbyoneofthe
ClubofRomesresearchfoundations,andoverseenbyThomasEnders,ahighrankingStateDepartment
official.ItisalsointerestingthatthecommitteeiscurrentlyseekingtoreinstatethePolPotbutchersin
Cambodia.
8.TosuppressallscientificdevelopmentexceptforthosedeemedbeneficialbytheIlluminati.Especially
targetedisnuclearenergyforpeacefulpurposes.Particularlyhatedarethefusionexperimentscurrently
beingscornedandridiculedbytheIlluminatianditsjackalsofthepress.Developmentofthefusiontorch
wouldblowtheIlluminatisconceptionoflimitednaturalresourcesrightoutofthewindow.Afusion
torch,properlyused,couldcreateunlimitedandasyetuntappednaturalresources,evenfromthemost
ordinarysubstances.Fusiontorchusesarelegion,andwouldbenefitmankindinamannerwhich,asyet,is
notevenremotelycomprehendedbythepublic.
9.Tocause,bymeansofA)limitedwarsintheadvancedcountries,B)bymeansofstarvationand
diseasesintheThirdWorldcountries,thedeathofthreebillionpeoplebytheyear2050,peopletheycall
uselesseaters.TheCommitteeof300(Illuminati)commissionedCyrusVancetowriteapaperonthis
subjectofhowtobringaboutsuchgenocide.ThepaperwasproducedunderthetitleGlobal2000
ReportandwasacceptedandapprovedforactionbyformerPresidentJamesEarlCarter,andEdwin
Muskie,thenSecretaryofStates,forandonbehalfoftheUSGovernment.UnderthetermsoftheGlobal
2000Report,thepopulationoftheUSistobereducedby100millionbytheyearof2050.
10.Toweakenthemoralfiberofthenationandtodemoralizeworkersinthelaborclassbycreating
massunemployment.Asjobsdwindleduetothepostindustrialzerogrowthpoliciesintroducedbythe
ClubofRome,thereportenvisagesdemoralizedanddiscouragedworkersresortingtoalcoholanddrugs.
Theyouthofthelandwillbeencouragedbymeansofrockmusicanddrugstorebelagainstthestatusquo,
thusunderminingandeventuallydestroyingthefamilyunit.Inthisregard,theCommitteecommissioned
TavistockInstitutetoprepareablueprintastohowthiscouldbeachieved.TavistockdirectedStanford
ResearchtoundertaketheworkunderthedirectionofProfessorWillisHarmon.Thisworklaterbecame
knownastheAquarianConspiracy.
11.Tokeeppeopleeverywherefromdecidingtheirowndestiniesbymeansofonecreatedcrisisafter
anotherandthenmanagingsuchcrises.Thiswillconfuseanddemoralizethepopulationtotheextent
wherefacedwithtoomanychoices,apathyonamassivescalewillresult.InthecaseoftheUS,anagency
forCrisisManagementisalreadyinplace.ItiscalledtheFederalEmergencyManagementAgency
(FEMA),whoseexistenceIfirstenclosedin1980.
12.Tointroducenewcultsandcontinuetoboostthosealreadyfunctioningwhichincluderockmusic
gangsterssuchastheRollingStones(agangstergroupmuchfavoredbyEuropeanBlackNobility),andall
oftheTavistockcreatedrockgroupswhichbeganwiththeBeatles.
13.TocontinuetobuildupthecultofChristianFundamentalismbegunbytheBritishEastIndia
CompanysservantDarby,whichwillbemisusedtostrengthentheZionistStateofIsraelbyidentifying
withtheJewsthroughthemythofGodschosenpeople,andbydonatingverysubstantialamountsof
moneytowhattheymistakenlybelieveisareligiouscauseinthefurtheranceofChristianity.

14.TopressforthespreadofreligiouscultssuchastheMoslemBrotherhood,Moslem
Fundamentalism,theSikhs,andtocarryoutmindcontrolexperimentsoftheJimJonesandSonofSam
type.ItisworthnotingthatthelateKhomeiniwasacreationofBritishMilitaryIntelligenceDiv.6,
MI6.ThisdetailedworkspelledoutthestepbystepprocesswhichtheUSGovernmentimplementedto
putKhomeiniinpower.
15.Toexportreligiousliberationideasaroundtheworldsoastoundermineallexistingreligions,
butmoreespeciallytheChristianreligion.ThisbeganwiththeJesuitLiberationTheology,that
broughtanendtotheSomozaFamilyruleinNicaragua,andwhichtodayisdestroyingElSalvador,now25
yearsintoacivilwar.CostaRicaandHondurasarealsoembroiledinrevolutionaryactivities,instigated
bytheJesuits.Oneveryactiveentityengagedinthesocalledliberationtheology,istheCommunist
orientedMaryKnollMission.Thisaccountsfortheextensivemediaattentiontothemurderoffourof
MaryKnollssocallednunsinElSalvadorafewyearsago.ThefournunswereCommunistsubversive
agentsandtheiractivitieswerewidelydocumentedbytheGovernmentofElSalvador.TheUSpressand
thenewmediarefusedtogiveanyspaceorcoveragetothemassofdocumentationpossessedbythe
SalvadorianGovernment,whichprovedwhattheMaryKnollMissionnunsweredoinginthecountry.
MaryKnollisinserviceinmanycountries,andplacedaleadingroleinbringingCommunismtoRhodesia,
Moambique,AngolaandSouthAfrica.
16.Tocauseatotalcollapseoftheworldseconomiesandengendertotalpoliticalchaos.
17.TotakecontrolofallforeignanddomesticpoliciesoftheUS.
18.TogivethefullestsupporttosupranationalinstitutionssuchastheUnitedNations,theInternational
MonetaryFund(IMF),theBankofInternationalSettlements,theWorldCourtand,asfaraspossible,
makelocalinstitutionslesseffective,bygraduallyphasingthemoutorbringingthemunderthemantle
oftheUN.
19.Topenetrateandsubvertallgovernments,andworkfromwithinthemtodestroythesovereign
integrityofthenationsrepresentedbythem.
20.Toorganizeaworldwideterroristapparatus[AlQaeda,ISIS,ISIL,etc.]andtonegotiatewith
terroristswheneverterroristactivitiestakeplace.ItwillberecalledthatitwasBettinoCraxi,who
persuadedtheItalianandUSGovernmentstonegotiatewiththeRedBrigadeskidnapersofPrimeMinister
MoroandGeneralDozier.Asanaside,Dozierwasplacedunderstrictordersnottotalkwhathappenedto
him.Shouldheeverbreakthatsilence,hewillnodoubtbemadeahorribleexampleof,inthemannerin
whichHenryKissingerdealtwithAldoMoro,AliBhuttoandGeneralZiaulHaq.
21.TotakecontrolofeducationinAmericawiththeintentandpurposeofutterlyandcompletely
destroyingit.

Baxter Dmitry
http://yournewswire.com/21-goals-illuminati-committee-of300/

halturnershow.com

WikiLeaks'DeadMan'sSwitch'Appears
tohavebeentriggered!
Hal Turner

Details
Sunday, 16 October 2016 20:06
Written by Hal Turner

WikileaksjustissuedseveralTHREATENINGTweets,"AttentionJohnKerry"(SecretaryofState)calling
eachTweeta"PreCommitment"withwhatappeartobeDigitalHashtags.(Asshownabove)Update
9:19PMIjustspoketotheEcuadorianEmbassyinLondon(seebottom)
AdigitalHashtagisusedtoidentifyafileorsetoffilestomakecertainitisoriginalandhasnotbeen
altered.Ifsomeonewastoalterthefileorsetoffiles,thealteration,howeverminor,wouldalterthe
DigitalHashtagforever.
ThesecondTweet:
ForWikileakstohavepostedthreeTweetscontainingDigitalHashtagsaddressedtoJohnKerryis
extremelyominous...perhapsevenforSecretaryKerry.
Thereiswidespreadspeculationthatthefiles"willbethepoliticalendofsomeone...ormanysomeone's.
.."andapparently,Kerryknowswhatthehashtagsmean.Thefirstissaidtobedirectly
Thereisalsowidespreadspeculationthatsomethingmaybe"up"withapossibleUSgovernmentaction
againstWikileaks,andtheyareshowingtheUSthey"havethegoods"toprotectthemselves.

TheTweetsmakereferencetoveryspecificthings.ThefirstTweet,referencesJohnKerry.Thesecond
TweetreferencesEcuador.ThethirdTweetreferencesUKFCO(UnitedKingdom,Foreignand
CommonwealthOffice)
ThethirdTweet"
Withregardtothemeaningof"precommitment"weofferthefollowingguidance:
"Precommitmentisastrategyinwhichapartytoaconflictusesacommitmentdevicetostrengthenits
positionbycuttingoffsomeofitsoptionstomakeitsthreatsmorecredible.Anypartyemployinga
StrategyofDeterrencefacestheproblemthatretaliatingagainstanattackmayultimatelyresultin
significantdamagetotheirownside.Ifthisdamageissignificantenough,thentheopponentmaytakethe
viewthatsuchretaliationwouldbeirrational,andtherefore,thatthethreatlackscredibility,andhence,it
ceasestobeaneffectivedeterrent.Precommitmentimprovesthecredibilityofathreat,eitherbyimposing
significantpenaltiesonthethreateningpartyfornotfollowingthrough,or,bymakingitimpossibletonot
respond."
"Incryptography,acommitmentschemeallowsonetocommittoachosenvalue(orchosenstatement)
whilekeepingithiddentoothers,withtheabilitytorevealthecommittedvaluelater.Commitment
schemesaredesignedsothatapartycannotchangethevalueorstatementaftertheyhavecommittedtoit:
thatis,commitmentschemesarebinding.Commitmentschemeshaveimportantapplicationsinanumber
ofcryptographicprotocolsincludingsecurecoinflipping,zeroknowledgeproofs,andsecurecomputation.
Awaytovisualizeacommitmentschemeistothinkofasenderasputtingamessageinalockedbox,and
givingtheboxtoareceiver.Themessageintheboxishiddenfromthereceiver,whocannotopenthelock
themselves.Sincethereceiverhasthebox,themessageinsidecannotbechangedmerelyrevealedif
thesenderchoosestogivethemthekeyatsomelatertime."

UPDATE 7:53 PM EDT -TheuniquesetsofnumberspreviouslythoughttobeHashtagsareNOT!TheyareDECRYPTION

KEYSforcertainfiles;passwordsifyouwill.ThismeansthatWikileakshasjustgiventheentireplanet
thedecryptionkeysforthreesetsoffiles,1onJohnKerry,1onEcuadorandathirdontheUKForeign
andCommonwealthOffice(FCO).
Thisisa"deadman'sswitch"...itmeansthatWikileaksoritsEditorJulianAssangearein
directdangerorAssangemaybedead.
Byissuingthesedecryptionkeys,theyareannouncingthatthefilesarealreadydistributedandthe
worldwillbetoldWHEREtofindthosefilesifsomeonedies.OncetheworldistoldWHEREto
downloadthosefiles,thedecryptionkeyscanbeusedbyliterallyANYONEtogetallthedeepsecrets
inside.
Ifitisadeadman'sswitch,thenJulianAssangemayalreadybedeadorincustody.Thereleaseofthe
EncryptionpasswordswouldbePARTOFtheDeadMan'sswitch.We'llexplain:
ThedecryptionkeysareanautomatedmessageinthecaseofsomeonelikeAssangebeingunableto
regularlyprovehe'saliveandwell.It'susuallysetupwheretheymustloginsomewhereatapreset
interval,say,onceaday.Thispreventsthetriggeringoftheswitch.
Ifsomethinghappenstothem,thesystemautomaticallysendsoutcodestoencryptedfilesalreadyinthe
handsoffriends,thepress,othergovernments,etc.Inthiscase,ifitisadeadman'sswitch,thesystem
didnotreceivetheregularloginandusedAssange'sTwittercredentialstosendoutthedecryption
codes.TheproofwillbeifweseeAssangeagain,orhearthathe'sdead/hospitalized/captured.
Otherwise,hecouldjustbepreppingforsomeoneelsetoreleasethenextbatchofleaks.We'reprettysure
therearepowerswhoaretryingtocutoffhisaccesstotheinternet.Theymayhavedonesoandthe
automatedDeadMan'sSwitchhasbegunitstask.
Ifthat'sthecase....ifAssangeisdeadorincustody....thentheDeadMan'sSwitchwillcontinueits
automatedprocessingand,ultimatelyrevealtotheworldwhatWikileakshasthusdoingsevereharmto..
.somebody....

UPDATE 9:17 PM EASTERN U.S. TIME:

IjustspokewiththeEcuadorianEmbassyinLondon.AmanwhoidentifiedhimselfonlyasaSecurity
GuardansweredthePressOfficetelephone.Iidnetifiedmyselfandhetoldmeheisnotallowedtospeak
tothePress,thatIwouldhavetocallbackinthemorning.SOIaskedsimply"IsJulianAssangestill
there?"
Hereplied"Thatisconfidentialinformation,Iamnotallowedtospeakwithyou."Astrangereplysince
theentireworldknowshe'sbeenthereforfiveyears.
RUMINT:Alowlevelintelligenceguy(NOTCIA)hassaidtheObamaAdministrationstrongarmed
EcuadorintoTurningAssangeoverforExtradition.HealsoclaimsthatAssangehasrefusedtogo,
threateningtoKILLHIMSELFifthetrytotakehimout.
TheIntelguysaid"In12hours,JulianAssangewilleitherbeinajailcellordead."

http://halturnershow.com/index.php/news/world-news/360wikileaks-dead-man-s-switch-appears-to-have-beentriggered