text:
Trump Foreign Policy: Doing the Same Thing and Expecting a Different Result
By Ron Paul | December 3, 2018
After a week of insisting that a meeting with Putin on the sidelines of the G20 meeting in Argentina was going to happen, President Trump at the last minute sent out a Tweet explaining that due to a Russia/Ukraine dispute in the Sea of Azov he would no longer be willing to meet his Russian counterpart.
According to Trump, the meeting had to be cancelled because the Russians seized three Ukrainian naval vessels in Russian waters that refused to follow instructions from the Russian military. But as Pat Buchanan wrote in a recent column: how is this little dispute thousands of miles away any of our business?
Unfortunately it is "our business" because of President Obama's foolish idea to overthrow a democratically-elected, pro-Russia government in Ukraine in favor of what his Administration believed would be a "pro-Western" and "pro-NATO" replacement. In short, the Obama Administration did openly to Ukraine what his Democratic Party claims without proof the Russians did to the United States: meddled in a vote.
US interventionism in Ukraine led to the 2014 coup and many dead Ukrainians. Crimea's majority-Russian population held a referendum and decided to re-join Russia rather than remain in a "pro-West" Ukraine that immediately began discriminating against them. Why would anyone object to people opting out of abusive relationships?
What is most disappointing about President Trump's foreign policy is that it didn't have to be this way. He ran on a platform of America first, ending foreign wars, NATO skepticism, and better relations with Russia. Americans voted for this policy. He had a mandate, a rejection of Obama's destructive interventionism.
But he lost his nerve.
Instead of being the president who ships lethal weapons to the Ukrainian regime, instead of being the president who insists that Crimea remain in Ukraine, instead of being the president who continues policies the American people clearly rejected at the ballot box, Trump could have blamed the Ukraine/Russia mess on the failed Obama foreign policy and charted a very different course. What flag flies over Crimea is none of our business. We are not the policemen of the world and candidate Trump seemed to have understood that.
But now Trump's in a trap. He was foolish enough to believe that Beltway foreign policy "experts" have a clue about what really is American national interest. Just this week he told the Washington Post, in response to three US soldiers being killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan, that he has to keep US troops fighting in the longest war in US history because the "experts" tell him there is no alternative.
He said, "virtually every expert that I have and speak to say if we don't go there, they're going to be fighting over here. And I've heard it over and over again."
That is the same bunkum the neocons sold us as they lied us into Iraq! We've got to fight Saddam over there or he'd soon be in our streets. These "experts" are worthless, yet for some reason President Trump cannot break free of them.
Well here's some unsolicited advice to the president: Listen to the people who elected you, who are tired of the US as the world's police force. Let Ukraine and Russia work out their own problems. Give all your "experts" a pink slip and start over with a real pro-American foreign policy: non-interventionism.
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Militarism	| Afghanistan, Ukraine, United States | Leave a comment
Revolution in Ukraine? Yes, please! Revolution in France? Rule of law!
By Danielle Ryan | RT | December 3, 2018
When violent protests shook Kiev in 2013, Western analysts and leaders quickly threw their support behind the anti-government 'revolution' — but after weeks of Yellow Vest protests in France, the reaction has been very different.
While Western governments and commentators denounced the Ukrainian government of Viktor Yanukovych and urged that he give in to protesters' demands five years ago, this time around, they are denouncing the French protesters and urging President Emmanuel Macron, whose popularity stands at about 25 percent, to stand firm against dissatisfied citizens.
Western media coverage has also differed drastically with reports describing French protesters as rioters, while Ukrainian protesters were described as revolutionaries. The contrasting reaction has prompted many to ask the question: If a so-called revolution is allowed to happen (and even applauded) in Ukraine, why not in France?
French police have cracked down on the 'Yellow Vest' protesters in bloody clashes, during which water cannons and tear gas were deployed to disperse huge crowds, who responded by throwing stones at officers. The extent of the chaos has even caused officials to mull imposing a state of emergency and prompted concerns that protest movement could spread to countries like Germany and the Netherlands. Worried government officials and French and European political commentators have eagerly called for the "rule of law" to be respected and for violent protesters to respect French institutions.
In Kiev, however, when protesters set fire to cars, defaced public property and attacked police officers, they were held up as heroes. Law and order was of little concern to Western media which wholeheartedly supported the Maidan movement. Similarly, when anti-government protests kicked off in Syria in 2011, Western leaders and commentators advocated the swift overthrow of the government and provided moral (and material) support to anti-government rebels during the subsequent civil war that ripped the country apart.
During a visit to Argentina for the G20 Summit last weekend, Macron vowed that he would "not concede anything" to the "thugs" who want "destruction and disorder." His unwillingness to cave in the face of a mass protest movement, however, has not prompted any calls for him to step down and respect the will of the people, as happened in Ukraine and Syria.
On Twitter, well-known French political commentator and media personality Bernard-Henri Lévy, lashed out at the Yellow Vest protesters, accusing them of "playing with fire" and saying that all that matters is respect for French institutions and the democratically -elected president.
Lévy's followers, however, were quick to remind him that his reaction to protests in Ukraine were quite different. Lévy, who was in Ukraine during the Euromaidan movement, actively promoted it, giving speeches and tweeting enthusiastically about the protests. When Yanukovych was overthrown, he described it as a "a historic defeat of tyranny."
As the protests raged on for the third week, other Twitter users mocked the patronizing Western reaction to anti-government movements in other regions, with one suggesting that perhaps hundreds of Arab experts could get together at fancy conferences to attempt to decipher the causes of this fascinating 'European Winter' movement.
Another said it was about time that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani called on Macron to exercise "restraint" and ensure that the "freedom of expression and demonstration" are respected in France.
Sarcasm aside, it looks very much like violent revolutions and regime change are only a good enough solution to crises in countries far away from the centres of Western power and influence and led by uncooperative governments. When the rumblings of revolution are felt in Paris, where Macron remains committed to upholding a neoliberal and West-centric world order, it's a different story entirely.
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Progressive Hypocrite	| Bernard Henri Lévy, France, Ukraine | Leave a comment
Ukraine's Proposal to Have NATO Warships in Azov Sea Finds Receptive Audience in US
By Alex GORKA | Strategic Culture Foundation | 03.12.2018
The Ukraine's goal has always been to internationalize the situation in the Azov Sea. President Poroshenko's recent call for other countries' involvement was immediately rejected by German Chancellor Angela Merkel but it found a receptive audience in the US. On Nov.30, the US Senate unanimously approved a non-binding resolution condemning what it calls "Russia's recent attack on Ukrainian vessels in the Kerch Strait". The document says nothing about the Ukrainian vessels violating Russia's territorial waters and not responding to multiple warnings by its Coast Guard. No doubt the US Coast Guard would not hesitate to prevent a foreign vessel from crossing America's sea borders.
Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), a co-author of the bill and a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, believes Russian President Vladimir Putin is "testing the West." In his interview with CNN, he said "I would love to see a multinational freedom of navigation operations into the Kerch Strait – into the Sea of Azov. We need to have a presence there. We need to probably do more military exercises." The US FY2018 defense policy bill authorized the administration to provide Ukraine with air and coastal defense systems as well as littoral-zone and coastal defense ships.
Hardly can anything be more provocative than the idea of international drills in the area. The Azov Sea is too shallow for warships to operate. The only vessel to do it is the US littoral combat ship (LCS) but its lacks firepower. The vessel is known to have too many flaws It is one of the projects to gobble up much money with little efficiency produced in return. Anyway, it cannot stay in the Black Sea for more than 21 days in accordance with the 1936 Montreux Convention.
The 2003 Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch states the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch are the internal waters of Russia and Ukraine and specifies no precise borders. A naval vessel can cross the Kerch Strait to enter the Azov Sea only for a port call upon an invitation of one side and with the consent of the other. No military exercises are possible without Moscow's approval. It's not about taking measures to prevent other countries from coming to the Azov Sea, but rather making them comply with the international agreement in force.
The last thing the Black Sea region needs is another provocative exercise that could spark a fire there at any moment. Complying with the Incidents at Sea Agreement (INCSEA) is of crucial importance. It already prevented an armed conflict that was very likely during the 1973 Yom Kippur War.
The adoption of the resolution is part of a bigger picture. Just a few days ago the bill dubbed Stopping Russia Nuclear Aggression Act was introduced in Congress to endanger the future of arms control because it contains provisions unacceptable for Russia. The authors know well that signed into law it would kill any hope for maintaining restrictions on arms race. True, the US GDP is much larger but Russia's defense programs are more efficient. Moscow gets a bigger bang for its buck. Unlike the US, Russia is not shouldering the heavy burden of the national debt exceeding the national gross domestic product.
One bill under consideration is aimed at erosion of arms control that has been considered to be the pillar of the country's national security. The other is fraught with provoking the US Navy into a conflict that has no relation whatsoever to the country's interests and would take place in the area situated far away from the continental United States. US lawmakers introduce one draft law after another to bring closer a conflict with the country that Henry Kissinger, a foreign policy veteran, views as «an essential element of any new global equilibrium». Hopefully, the members of US Congress will make a thorough assessment of consequences before they vote.
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Militarism	| Incidents at Sea Agreement, Russia, Ukraine, United States | 1 Comment
Moscow Comments on Media Reports About UK Psychological Warfare Units in Ukraine
Sputnik – 03.12.2018
MOSCOW – The United Kingdom seems to be seeking to expand its military presence in Ukraine in the run-up to the March presidential election in the country, the Russian Embassy in London said, commenting on media reports about the UK psychological warfare units allegedly stationed in Ukraine.
On Sunday, BBC News Russian reported that 1,200 servicemen of the British Army's 77th Brigade, a top-secret unit that deals with electronic and psychological warfare, are currently stationed in Ukraine. According to the broadcaster, the UK servicemen in Ukraine have three main areas of activities: carry out military tasks on the Internet, as well as psychological and information operations.
"Earlier, we had information about the [United Kingdom] dispatching its military experts to train the Ukrainian military to conduct special operations against civilians of Donetsk and Lugansk. Now it turns out that the UK presence has expanded through, as BBC reports, conducting psychological and information operations in this country. As we see, it all happens in the run-up to the presidential election in Ukraine," the embassy said in a statement on Sunday.
If the information is correct, the new units represent a "new element of a large-scale UK military presence in Ukraine," the embassy noted.
"Once, the United Kingdom supported the coup in Kiev and the coming to power of the so-called 'government of the winners' in violation of the country's constitution. Now we are witnessing a special operation, whose scale and consequences are yet to be assessed," the embassy added.
The British army's 77th Brigade is a combined regular and army reserve unit responsible for using "legitimate non-military levers" as a means "to adapt behaviors of the opposing forces."
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Deception	| UK, Ukraine | Leave a comment
Mueller Withheld "Details That Would Exonerate The President" Of Having Kremlin Backchannel
By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | December 3, 2018
It appears that special counsel Robert Mueller withheld key information in its plea deal with Trump's former attorney, Michael Cohen, which would exonerate Trump and undermine the entire purpose of the special counsel, according to Paul Sperry of RealClearInvestigations.
Cohen pleaded guilty last week to lying to the Senate intelligence committee in 2017 about the Trump Organization's plans to build a Trump Tower in Moscow – telling them under oath that negotiations he was conducting ended five months sooner than they actually did.
Mueller, however, in his nine-page charging document filed with the court seen by Capitol Hill sources, failed to include the fact that Cohen had no direct contacts at the Kremlin – which undercuts any notion that the Trump campaign had a "backchannel" to Putin.
On page 7 of the statement of criminal information filed against Cohen, which is separate from but related to the plea agreement, Mueller mentions that Cohen tried to email Russian President Vladimir Putin's office on Jan. 14, 2016, and again on Jan. 16, 2016. But Mueller, who personally signed the document, omitted the fact that Cohen did not have any direct points of contact at the Kremlin, and had resorted to sending the emails to a general press mailbox. Sources who have seen these additional emails point out that this omitted information undercuts the idea of a "back channel" and thus the special counsel's collusion case. –RCI
Page 2 of the same charging document offers further evidence that there was no connection between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin; an August 2017 letter from Cohn to the Senate intelligence committee states that Trump "was never in contact with anyone about this [Moscow Project] proposal other than me," an assertion which Mueller does not contest as false – which means that "prosecutors have tested its veracity through corroborating sources" and found it to be truthful, according to Sperry's sources. Also unchallenged by Mueller is Cohen's statement that he "ultimately determined that the proposal was not feasible and never agreed to make a trip to Russia."
"Though Cohen may have lied to Congress about the dates," one Hill investigator said, "it's clear from personal messages he sent in 2015 and 2016 that the Trump Organization did not have formal lines of communication set up with Putin's office or the Kremlin during the campaign. There was no secret 'back channel.'"
"So as far as collusion goes," the source added, "the project is actually more exculpatory than incriminating for Trump and his campaign." –RCI
The Trump Tower Moscow meeting – spearheaded by New York real estate developer and longtime FBI and CIA asset, Felix Sater, bears a passing resemblance to the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between members of the Trump campaign and a Russian attorney (who hated Trump), and which was set up by a British concert promotor tied to Fusion GPS – the firm Hillary Clinton's campaign paid to write the salacious and unverified "Trump-Russia Dossier."
British concert promotor and Fusion GPS associate Rob Goldstone
"Specifically, we have learned that the person who sought the meeting is associated with Fusion GPS, a firm which according to public reports, was retained by Democratic operatives to develop opposition research on the president and which commissioned the phony Steele dossier" –Washington Post
In both the Trump Tower meeting and the Trump Tower Moscow negotiations, it is clear that nobody in the Trump campaign had any sort of special access to the Kremlin, while Cohen's emails and text messages reveal that he failed to establish contact with Putin's spokesman. He did, however, reach a desk secretary in the spokesman's office.
What's more, it was Sater – a Russian immigrant with a dubious past who was representing the Bayrock Group (and not the Trump Organization), who cooked up the Moscow Trump Tower project in 2015 – suggesting that Trump would license his name to the project and share in the profits, but not actually commit capital or build the project.
Felix Sater, FBI and CIA asset, real estate developer, ex-con
Sater went from a "Wall Street wunderkind" working at Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, to getting barred from the securities industry over a barroom brawl which led to a year in prison, to facilitating a $40 million pump-and-dump stock scheme for the New York mafia, to working telecom deals in Russia – where the FBI and CIA tapped him as an undercover intelligence asset who was told by his handler "I want you to understand: If you're caught, the USA is going to disavow you and, at best, you get a bullet in the head."
The Moscow project, meanwhile, fizzled because Sater didn't have the pull within the Russian government he said he had. At best, Sater had a third-hand connection to Putin which never panned out.
Sources say Sater, whom Cohen described as a "salesman," testified to the House intelligence panel in late 2017 that his communications with Cohen about putting Trump and Putin on a stage for a "ribbon-cutting" for a Trump Tower in Moscow were "mere puffery" to try to promote the project and get it off the ground.
Also according to his still-undisclosed testimony, Sater swore none of those communications involved taking any action to influence the 2016 presidential election. None of the emails and texts between Sater and Cohen mention Russian plans or efforts to hack Democrats' campaign emails or influence the election. –RCI
As Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch noted of Mueller's strategy: ""Mueller seems desperate to confuse Americans by conflating the cancelled and legitimate Russia business venture with the Russia collusion theory he was actually hired to investigate," said Fitton. "This is a transparent attempt to try to embarrass the president."
The MSM took the ball and ran with it anyway
CNN, meanwhile, said that Cohen's charging documents suggest Trump had a working relationship with Putin, who "had leverage over Trump" due to the project.
"Well into the 2016 campaign, one of the president's closest associates was in touch with the Kremlin on this project, as we now know, and Michael Cohen says he was lying about it to protect the president," said CNN's Wolf Blitzer.
Jeffrey Toobin – CNN's legal analyst, said the Cohen revelations were so "enormous" that Trump "might not finish his term," while MSNBC pundits said that the court papers prove "Trump secretly interacted with Putin's own office."
"Now we have evidence that there was direct communication between the Trump Organization and Putin's office on this. I mean, this is collusion," said Mother Jones's David Corn.
Adam Schiff, the incoming Democratic chairman of the House intelligence committee, said Trump was dealing directly with Putin on real estate ventures, and Democrats will investigate whether Russians laundered money through the Trump Organization. –RCI
As Sperry of RealClearInvestigations points out, however, "former federal prosecutors said Mueller's filing does not remotely incriminate the president in purported Russia collusion. It doesn't even imply he directed Cohen to lie to Congress."
"It doesn't implicate President Trump in any way," said former independent counsel Solomon L. Wisenberg. "The reality is, this is a nothing-burger."
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering	| CIA, CNN, FBI, MSNBC, Robert Mueller, United States, Wolf Blitzer | Leave a comment
Why Can the CIA Assassinate People?
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | December 3, 2018
Given that we have all been born and raised under a regime that has the CIA, hardly anyone questions the power of the CIA to assassinate people. The CIA's power of assassination has become a deeply established part of American life.
Yet, the Constitution, which called the federal government into existence and established its powers, does not authorize the federal government to assassinate people.
If the proponents of the Constitution had told the American people that the Constitution was bringing into existence a government that wielded the power to assassinate people, there is no way that Americans would have approved the deal, in which case they would have continued operating under the Articles of Confederation.
Under the Articles, the powers of the federal government were so weak, it didn't even have the power to tax, much less the power to assassinate people. That's because our American ancestors wanted it that way. The last thing they wanted was a federal government with vast powers.
In fact, the purpose of the Constitutional Convention was simply to amend the Articles of Confederation. During the 13 years of operating under the Articles, problems had arisen, such as trade wars between the states. The convention was intended to fix those problems with amendments to the Articles.
Instead, the delegates came out with an entirely different proposal, one that would call into existence a federal government that had more powers, including the power to tax.
Americans were leery. The last thing they wanted was a powerful central government. They had had enough of that type of government as British citizens under the British Empire. They believed that the biggest threat to people's freedom and well-being lay with their own government. They believed that if they approved a federal government, it would become tyrannical and oppressive, like other governments had done throughout history.
They were especially concerned with the power of the government to murder people, including citizens. They knew that state-sponsored murder was the ultimate power in any tyrannical regime. When a government can kill anyone it wants with impunity, all other rights are effectively nullified. And our ancestors were sufficiently well-versed in history to know that tyrannical regimes were notorious for killing their own citizens, especially those people who challenge, criticize, or object to the tyranny.
The proponents of the Constitution told Americans that they had nothing to be concerned about. The Constitution wasn't calling into existence a government with general powers to do anything it wanted. Instead, by the terms of the document that would be calling the federal government into existence, its powers would be limited to the few powers that were enumerated within the document. Thus, if a power wasn't enumerated, it didn't exist and, therefore, couldn't be exercised. Since the Constitution wasn't giving the federal government the power to murder people, it couldn't exercise that power.
On that basis, our American ancestors approved the deal, but only on the condition that the Constitution would be immediately amended after approval with a Bill of Rights. To make sure that federal officials understood that they didn't have the power to murder people, the Fifth Amendment was enacted. It prohibited the federal government from killing people without first according them due process of law. It's worth noting that the protections of the Fifth Amendment are not limited to American citizens. The Amendment prohibits the federal government from murdering anyone, including people who are not U.S. citizens.
What is due process of law? It's a phrase that stretches all the way back to Magna Carta in 1215, when the barons of England forced their king to acknowledge that his powers over them were limited. Magna Carta prohibited the king from killing British citizens in violation of the "law of the land," a phrase that evolved over the centuries into "due process of law."
Essentially, due process means notice and hearing. It says to the government: "You cannot kill anyone unless you first give him formal notice of the particular criminal offense that you are claiming warrants killing him." Then, after notice, there has to be fair trial in which the accused has the right to be heard. The Sixth Amendment ensured that people would have the right of trial by jury because our ancestors didn't trust judges or tribunals.
And so it was that the American people lived in a society for more than 150 years in which the federal government lacked the power to assassinate people, which is really just a fancy word for murder. A governmental assassination is the state-sponsored killing of a person without notice and trial — that is, without due process of law.
The situation changed after World War II, when the federal government, in a watershed event, was converted from a limited-government republic into what is known as a "national-security state," a type of governmental system that is inherent to totalitarian regimes. U.S. officials maintained that the conversion was necessary in order to confront the Soviet Union, a communist state, which itself was a national-security state. The idea was that in order to defeat the Soviet Union in the Cold War, it would be necessary for the United States to adopt, temporarily, its same type of national-security state system.
In 1947, the CIA was called into existence as part of this new national-security state. President Truman, the president who was responsible for the federal government's conversion to a national-security state, intended for the CIA to be strictly an intelligence-gathering agency. But someone slipped a bit of nebulous language into the law that called the CIA into existence, which the CIA seized upon to justify the adoption of omnipotent powers, including the power to assassinate people with impunity, so long as the assassination was to protect "national security." Needless to say, the CIA had the omnipotent power to make that determination.
As monumental as the conversion to a national-security state was, it was not done through a constitutional amendment. The Constitution continued to be the supreme law that governed the operations of the federal government, including the CIA. Thus, since the Constitution did not give the federal government the power to assassinate people and since the Fifth Amendment expressly prohibited the federal government from assassinating people, the U.S. Supreme Court and the rest of the federal judiciary had the responsibility to declare the CIA's power to assassinate people unconstitutional.
Unfortunately, however, in a national-security state power is everything and especially omnipotent power. Recognizing that as a practical matter, there would be no way that the federal judiciary could keep the CIA from assassinating people in the name of protecting "national security," the federal courts went silent or even supportive.
In 1989 the Cold War ended. Yet, we still have a national-security state and we still have a CIA with the power to assassinate people, including Americans. Why is that?
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular	| CIA, Human rights, United States | 1 Comment
Chile: Mapuche Leaders Meet, Call For Demilitarization
teleSUR | December 2, 2018
A group of Mapuche leaders Saturday met in Temucuicui to decide next possible steps after the assassination of Camilo Catrillanca on Nov. 14 by Chilean Carabineros (police).
The leaders decided on four demands they will put forward to the Chilean state.
"We demand the current government to urgently dismantle and remove said police unit (Jungle Command) considering that this constitutes a permanent threat, violating our right to live in peace, violating the rights of our children, women and the elderly," they said in a statement.
The other three demands of the community are; self-determination for the Mapuche people, establishing a commission of historical truth 'to clarify the crimes against humanity' against the Mapuche people, and territorial restitution.
Marcelo Catrillanca, father of Camilo was in charge of the meeting. He urged the Mapuche people to continue their mobilizations and civil disobedience in the country.
Jorge Huenchullan, a community leader said that the participants of the meeting expressed "their pain and outrage at how the State has been carrying out policies regarding the Mapuche people", adding that "if the authorities agree to carry out the demands, we are willing to talk. If they are not, there will be a call to rebellion."
Additionally, they added that "we remind the Chilean State that the lands and territory (of Mapuche) were taken over and occupied by military violence," so those who are not Mapuche lack legitimacy and legality in that land.
The four carabineros who took part in the operation which killed Camilo were ordered into preventive detention on Nov. 30. They are charged with homicide and obstruction of justice for destroying evidence. A period of two months for the investigation was established by the prosecutor's office.
Mexico's EZLN Expresses Solidarity With Chile Mapuche Struggle
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Civil Liberties, Illegal Occupation	| Chile, Human rights, Latin America | Leave a comment
Canadian Jewish News Promotes 'Terror Tourism'
By Yves Engler | Palestine Chronicle | December 3, 2018
What should we make of a media outlet that praises those who join or give money to a foreign army, which occupies territory belonging to another people, terrorizes the local population by destroying houses, restricting their movement, subjecting them to military courts and shooting unarmed protesters?
What should we call the Canadian Jewish News, an unfailing flatterer of Canadians who join or finance a military subjugating Palestinians? Would "promoter of terror tourism" be an appropriate description?
Over the past month the CJN has published at least four pieces celebrating Canadian support for the Israeli military. On November 22 it reported, "Bayli Dukes, who recently won the Israel Defence Forces' Award of Excellence for the Southern Command of the IDF, was a biology student at York University in Toronto less than two years ago. Tired of sitting on the couch and posting on Facebook about the situation in Israel, she decided there was more she could be doing."
A day earlier it posted an article titled "Hand-knitted tuques – a very Canadian gift for IDF soldiers" described 80-year olds in Toronto knitting "for charitable causes, such as IDF soldiers in Israel." Through the Hats for Israeli Soldiers initiative "more than 50,000 hats have been made for combat soldiers on Israel's front lines", the CJN reported. The paper quoted IDF soldier Dovid Berger's thank you letter. "I'm currently a chayal in the 51st brigade of Golani. We are now on our way to a week-long drill in the cold and wet [occupied Syrian] Golan Heights, and last night we received our beautiful black hats you sent us. Thank you so much, some of us have been borrowing each other's hats and now there's enough for everyone to have at least one. It really makes a big difference to us to see how people from Canada and the U.S.A. (and everywhere in the world) are really caring about us."
A photo in its November 14 print edition was titled "Honouring IDF veterans". The caption read: "former Israeli defense minister Moshe Yaalon … makes presentation to Montrealers who served in the Israel Defence Forces…. during the Canadian Institute for Jewish research's 30th anniversary Gala."
An October 30 piece in the community paper reported, "former NHL player Keith Primeau was among more than 100 Canadians who cycled through Israel over five days this month, to raise funds for disabled veterans in that country. This was the 11th Courage in Motion Bike Ride, which is organized by Beit Halochem Canada."
The CJN regularly promotes that organization. A search of its database for "Beit Halochem" found dozens of stories about fundraisers and other initiatives supporting Aid to Disabled Veterans of Israel. A 2009 story titled "Israeli veterans enjoy 24th visit to Montreal" reported, "the annual visit was sponsored by the 25-year-old Beit Halochem Canada (Aid to Disabled Veterans of Israel), which raises funds for Israel's Beit Halochem, a network of centres that provide therapy and support to more than 51,000 disabled vets and victims of terror."
Another military initiative CJN promotes is Israel Defence Forces Widows & Orphans, which is partly funded by the Israeli government. "I served three years in the Nahal Brigade. I was in Lebanon, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip", Shlomi Nahumson, director of youth programs at Widows and Orphans, told the paper in advance of a Toronto fundraiser for the group.
Another military initiative popular with CJN is Sar-El, which was founded by Israeli general Aharon Davidi in 1982. "Toronto brothers volunteer for Sar-El at height of war", "91-year-old volunteers on Israeli army base" and "Toronto artist's mural unites Israeli army base" are a sampling of the headlines about a program in which about 150 Canadians serve each year as volunteers on Israeli army supply bases.
At least a dozen CJN stories have promoted the Association for the Soldiers of Israel in Canada. "IDF represents all Jews, female general says" and "Community shows support for Israeli soldiers", noted headlines about a group established in 1971 to provide financial and moral support to active duty soldiers. The later story quoted a speaker claiming, "the IDF saves lives, and not just in Israel — all over the world."
CJN has published a series of stories sympathetic to Tzofim Garin Tzabar, which recruits non-Israeli Jews into the IDF. A 2004 article about a program supported by the IDF, Israel Scouts, Jewish Agency and Ministry of Absorption was titled "Canadian youths serve in IDF: Motivated by Zionist ideals, love of Israel." It reported, "[Canadian Yakov] Frydman-Kohl is attending tank school at an Israeli army base somewhere near the West Bank town of Jericho. He recently completed a course in advanced training before his first deployment somewhere in the Gaza Strip."
CJN lauded Heather Reisman and Gerry Schwartz' Heseg Foundation for Lone Soldiers. "Philanthropists aid Israeli 'lone soldiers'", was the title of one story about the billionaire Toronto couple providing millions of dollars annually for these non-Israeli soldiers.
More generally, the paper has published numerous stories about Canadian 'lone soldiers'. "Going in alone: the motivations and hardships of Israel lone soldiers", "Parents of 'lone soldiers' discuss support group" and "Lone soldiers: young idealists and worried parents", detailed Canadians fighting in the Israeli military. They've also publicized numerous books about Canadian and other non-Israelis joining the IDF. In one CJN quoted Abe Levine, an Ontarian who helped drive Palestinians from their homes in 1948, saying, "what I don't understand is why Israelis don't send 10 rockets back for every one fired from Gaza." The story continued, "during his time in the Machal [overseas military volunteers], Levine saw most Arabs as 'the enemy.' Though he said he had lines he would not cross – 'I wouldn't kill an Arab if I just saw him standing outside his house.'"
CJN promoted Nefesh B'Nefesh's (Jewish Souls United) recruitment of Canadians to the IDF. "Nefesh B'Nefesh brings aspiring soldiers to Israel", noted a headline about a group that facilitates "Aliyah" for those unsatisfied with their and their ancestors' dispossession of First Nations and want to help colonize another indigenous people.
While CJN provides positive publicity to groups promoting the Israeli military, these groups (often registered Canadian charities) finance the paper. The previously mentioned story about Nefesh B'Nefesh ended with "the reporter's trip was partly subsidized by Nefesh B'Nefesh." More significantly, these organizations regularly advertise in the paper. "Express your Zionism by serving as a civilian volunteer on an Israeli army supply base", read a Sar-El ad while another noted "the Association for the soldiers of Israel invites you to show your support for the brave youth of the IDF at our gala dinner."
Yet, while it promotes joining and financing a military actively killing Arabs, CJN accuses Palestinian Canadians of supporting terrorism. An August headline noted, "Canadian Arabic-language newspaper criticized for pro-terrorist op-ed" while a 2017 one stated, "B'nai Brith wants a Mississauga teacher fired for backing terrorists".
The hypocrisy is glaring. While CJN accuses others, it may be this country's biggest promoter of "terror tourism".
– Yves Engler is the author of Canada and Israel: Building Apartheid and a number of other books. Visit his website: yvesengler.com.
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes	| Canada, Canadian Jewish News, Heather Reisman and Gerry Schwartz' Heseg Foundation for Lone Soldiers, Israel, Palestine, Zionism | Leave a comment
No connection between Judaism and Al-Aqsa, suggests UN resolution
Muslims arrive at Al-Aqsa Mosque Compound to perform the Friday prayer in Jerusalem on 26 October 2018 [Mostafa Alkharouf/Anadolu Agency]
MEMO | December 3, 2018
The UN General Assembly has apparently rejected any connection between Judaism and the Noble Sanctuary of Al-Aqsa. In a vote held on Friday, the General Assembly passed six resolutions condemning Israeli violations against Palestinians. Among them was Resolution A/73/L.29 entitled "Jerusalem" which called for "respect for the historic status quo at the holy places of Jerusalem, including the Haram Al-Sharif."
The use of the Arabic name for the sanctuary has been interpreted as a not-so-subtle rejection of the site's alleged connection with Judaism. The Jewish name for the Noble Sanctuary, the Temple Mount, is not mentioned anywhere in the UN document.
The resolution received 148 votes in favour and just 11 against. It also stressed that the UN General Assembly,
"Reiterates its determination that any actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the Holy City of Jerusalem are illegal and therefore null and void and have no validity whatsoever, and calls upon Israel to immediately cease all such illegal and unilateral measures."
The Assembly passed several other resolutions on the question of Israel-Palestine this weekend. One — A/73/L.29 The Syrian Golan — rejected Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights, "demand[ing] once more that Israel withdraw from all the occupied Syrian Golan to the line of 4 June 1967 in implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions."
The resolution also declared that "the Israeli decision of 14 December 1981 to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan is null and void," adding: "The continued [Israeli] occupation of the Syrian Golan and its de facto annexation constitute a stumbling block in the way of achieving a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region."
The General Assembly resolutions were condemned vehemently in the Israeli media, with Breaking Israel News slamming them as evidence of the UN "[continuing] its streak of frequently condemning the Jewish state". Other media cited NGO UN Watch — which is known for calling the UN anti-Israel or anti-Semitic – as saying that the "Jerusalem" resolution "implies that Israeli administration of Jerusalem hinders freedom of religion when in fact the opposite is true." UN Watch also labelled the "Syrian Golan" resolution as being "oblivious to [the] genocidal massacres taking place now in Syria, and its security implications for Israel and the civilians of the Golan Heights."
The resolutions, however, were hailed as a success by the Palestinian Authority, Wafa reported. "By voting in favour of the five resolutions," said Palestine's Permanent Observer to the UN, Riyad Mansour, "the international community affirms its support of our national cause, despite the efforts made by the US administration in international forums to resist this."
In a rare move, following the General Assembly vote, the European Union publicly warned the Palestinians that they must drop their UN bid to use only Al-Haram Al-Sharif to refer to Jerusalem's holiest site. In a statement, the EU "[stressed] the need for language on the holy sites of Jerusalem to reflect the importance and historical significance of the holy sites for the three monotheistic religions, and to respect religious and cultural sensitivities." It added that the future choice of language "may affect the EU's collective support for the resolutions."
Commenting on the EU statement, the Jerusalem Post observed, "Until now, the EU has not taken a united stand on a drive by both the Arab states and the Palestinians to subtly change UN language with regard to the Temple Mount [Al-Haram Al-Sharif]." Its opposition or decision to abstain on any future resolutions of this nature "would mark a dramatic shift in its policy."
Hamas hails Fatah's criticism to US' draft resolution condemning resistance at UN
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation	| European Union, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestine, United Nations, Zionism | Leave a comment
Iran opposes US-drafted resolution against Palestinian resistance Hamas: FM
Press TV – December 3, 2018
Iran has voiced its objection to a US-drafted resolution condemning the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, saying the Islamic Republic would do its utmost to prevent its ratification at the United Nations General Assembly.
In a telephone conversation with Head of Hamas Political Bureau Ismail Haniyeh on Monday, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif reaffirmed the Islamic Republic's full support for the Palestinian people's rights.
The UN General Assembly plans to vote on Tuesday on the motion that would reportedly condemn the resistance movement "for repeatedly firing rockets into Israel and for inciting violence."
"Iran will make its utmost efforts at the General Assembly in coordination with other Muslim and progressive countries to prevent the ratification of the resolution [which is] a violation of the United Nations Charter and runs counter to the Palestinian people's resistance," the top Iranian diplomat said.
He added that the policies of certain regional countries have emboldened the administration of US President Donald Trump not only to relocate its embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem al-Quds in violation of the international law, but also to propose a resolution against the Palestinian people's resistance at the General Assembly.
Earlier on Monday, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah party vowed to support its rival Hamas at the General Assembly against the US-drafted resolution.
"We will stand against all hostile efforts to condemn Hamas at the United Nations," Fatah spokesman Osama Qawassmeh said.
In a letter addressed to UN General Assembly President Maria Fernanda Espinosa late last month, the Hamas political bureau chief condemned "aggressive" attempts by the US to pass the resolution against the resistance movement, urging the world body to end Tel Aviv's "abhorrent" occupation of the Palestinian territories.
Haniyeh highlighted the importance of international work to thwart Washington's efforts meant to delegitimize the Palestinian resistance.
The letter came days after Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Danon said that US diplomats had been in talks with their EU counterparts to win their backing for a draft resolution against Hamas.
The Palestinian leadership has been divided between Fatah and Hamas since 2006, when the latter scored a landslide victory in parliamentary elections in the Gaza Strip.
Ever since, Hamas has been running the coastal enclave, while Fatah has been based in the autonomous parts of the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism	| Hamas, Human rights, Iran, Israel, Palestine, United States, Zionism | 2 Comments
Controlling the Israel Message: How to Manage the American Sheeple
By Philip Giraldi | American Herald Tribune | December 3, 2018
There has been another defenestration of a television-based political commentator for touching the only real electrified third rail remaining in reporting what passes for the news. Marc Lamont Hill, a Temple University professor of Media Studies and Urban Education, who is a regular political commentator on CNN, was fired for what he said in a speech at the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, which took place last Wednesday at the United Nations. Hill called for a "free Palestine from river to the sea," which CNN considered grounds for terminating his contract.
As ever, the Israelis were quick to jump on the bandwagon with their New York Consul General Dani Dayan denouncing Hill as a "racist, a bigot, [and] an anti-Semite." He noted that Hill is under contract both with Temple University and CNN, implying that he should be punished by being fired, and called the remarks "appalling." To no avail, Hill responded "I support Palestinian freedom. I support Palestinian self-determination. I am deeply critical of Israeli policy and practice. I do not support anti-Semitism, killing Jewish people, or any of the other things attributed to my speech."
Hill was fired by CNN within 24 hours. The message is clear. You can criticize Christianity, Muslims, white males, Donald Trump and the American government at will and you can even criticize blacks or sexual alphabet soups if you are clever in how you do it, but never, never go after Jews or Israel even indirectly if you want to keep your job. One recalls the fate of Rick Sanchez, a CNN anchor who was fired in September 2010 one day after he complained about how Jon Stewart and others in the Jewish mafia that runs the media treat Hispanics, saying "Yeah, very powerless people. He's such a minority. I mean, you know, please. What—are you kidding? I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart. And to imply that somehow they, the people in this country who are Jewish, are an oppressed minority?"
Sanchez was forced to publicly grovel for his "inartful" comments and even had to write a letter of apology to the monstrous Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Far worse, he also had to endure two hours of counseling with "America's rabbi" Shmuley Boteach. Sanchez subsequently drifted through low level jobs for a number of years, but he is now a news anchor with RT America.
Also in 2010, Octavia Nasr, a Lebanese-American journalist who had been CNN's Senior Editor for Mideast Affairs for over 20 years was immediately fired after she tweeted "sad to hear of the passing" of Lebanese cleric Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlalah. Fadlalah's only crime was that he had been demonized by Israel and the neocons as a "spiritual mentor" of Hezbollah. Nasr's only crime is that she granted the admittedly controversial dead man some respect.
To be sure, CNN is pro-Israeli in its reporting and, more important, in terms of choosing what not to report. Its lead political anchor is Wolf Blitzer, a former American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC) employee, who speaks Hebrew and has lived in Israel. Like most major American mainstream media outlets, CNN has numerous Jewish employees working to select, edit and produce the news stories that actually air, well placed to manage what does finally go out to the public.
Reports critical of Israel or Jews are not welcome anywhere in the U.S. national media, which is why Israel gets away with slaughtering unarmed Gazans using army snipers. I note a recent bizarre though interesting story that appeared in the British media and was not picked up by the U.S. mainstream at all. The story detailed how the leadership of the European Jewish Congress is seeking the insertion of "warning messages" in both Christian and Muslim holy texts. In a document entitled "An End to Antisemitism," which was released last week, it was recommended that "Translations of the New Testament, the Qur'an and other Christian or Muslim literatures need marginal glosses, and introductions that emphasize continuity with Jewish heritage of both Christianity and Islam and warn readers about antisemitic passages in them. While some efforts have been made in this direction in the case of Christianity, these efforts need to be extended and made consistent in both religions." One wonders when the same body will be recommending that the nastier bits of the Torah and Talmud be "glossed" to deal with the numerous slaughters of conquered peoples as well as slurs on Jesus Christ and assertions that Jews have the right to treat non-Jews as no better than livestock?
Some in the media might argue that the same set of rules about not offending one's religious beliefs would apply to all religions, not just to Judaism, but it is difficult to find evidence of any even handedness, particularly when Islam is being discussed by commentators who are completely ignorant of the tenets of the religion. Nor are there any apparent limits in making ridiculous statements on CNN if one is disparaging Arabs, most particularly if they are Palestinians. CNN paid commentator former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum has claimed absurdly that Palestinians do not even exist, which many Israelis believe, without any admonishment. Consider the outrage if he were to say that Jewish Israelis do not exist, which may actually be much closer to the truth according to some geneticists.
And what about when a Jew is attacking Christians? Far from there being any consequences, there is a demonstrable double standard as Christian beliefs appear to be fair game in some circles. Dana Jacobson currently co-anchor for the weekend edition of CBS national morning news experienced an apparently alcohol driven meltdown at a sports roast that she was helping emcee in January 2008 when she was working for ESPN.
Belting down vodka and cursing "like a sailor," Jacobson went after Catholics in particular and said "Fuck Notre Dame," "Fuck touchdown Jesus" and "Fuck Jesus" a number of times before she was hauled off the stage. Her after-the-fact apology consisted of written concession that she had demonstrated a "poor lack of judgment." And her punishment by ESPN also demonstrated a "lack of judgment" when the company spokesman Josh Krulewitz reported that "Her actions and comments were inappropriate and we've dealt with it." Dealing with it apparently consisted of a one-week suspension.
Any company operating in the United States should be able to dismiss an employee for any reason or for no reason, but anything even mildly critical of Jewish collective behavior or Israel is severely punished immediately. Professor Marc Lamont Hill said nothing wrong. On the contrary, he said something badly needed and which should have been accepted by CNN if it were really a global communications network dedicated to the truth and, one might add, to justice. Instead it was more of the same old, same old. If you criticize Israel don't let the door hit you in the ass as you leave the building.
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Islamophobia, Mainstream Media, Warmongering	| CNN, Israel, Palestine, RT America, United States, Zionism | 3 Comments
After Soros Flees Turkey, Will He Flee The Rest Of The "Global South" Too?
By Andrew KORYBKO – Oriental Review – 03/12/2018
Soros' "Open Society Foundation" decided to leave Turkey.
The organization's representatives said that it was due to the recent accusations that they've meddled in the country's internal affairs, which is an allusion to President Erdogan's claims last week about their involvement in the 2013 Gezi Park Color Revolution attempt and is ironically the group's raison d'etre. Truth be told, they're making a responsible move after seeing the writing on the wall and calculating that a crackdown would be imminent if they don't leave on their own volition, which works out to be a win-win for both their organization and the government. The "Open Society Foundation" can evacuate its foreign assets from the country and disband its public network, while the state doesn't have to endure the weaponized infowar campaign that the Mainstream Media would predictably launch if Turkey undertook Russian-like measures to kick this organization out of the country.
This quid-pro-quo is pragmatic for both parties because the "Open Society Foundation's" domestic Hybrid War operatives get off scot-free, though the state is already likely aware of who they are and won't hesitate to detain them if they ever pose a future threat to security in the event that they decide to "go underground" to continue their destabilizing activities. At the same time, however, some of the most zealous among them might more safely relocate abroad instead, which would allow them to continue their work remotely through social media and other channels. Still, seeing as how the Turkish state retains strong control over the internet, this threat is conceivably manageable and isn't seen as being anywhere near as dangerous as if the "Open Society Foundation" and its employees continued their activities in the country unchecked.
Soros' retreat from Turkey might be a harbinger of what's to come because President Erdogan commands tremendous respect among the international Muslim community or "Ummah", so other Muslim governments might be inspired by his leadership in fearlessly calling out the "Open Society Foundation" and seek to emulate his example in the hopes that this will prompt the Color Revolution fifth column to preemptively flee from their countries too. Soros and his organization might try to push back against any similar state pressure if they feel that the authorities there aren't as strong as their Turkish counterparts and could be influenced by any infowar smear campaign against them, but that's nevertheless still a fight that they'd be choosing to wage and one which might ultimately be unsuccessful, especially if those governments round up the group's domestic employees on the pretext that they're security threats.
It's still too early to say, but the tide might finally be turning against Soros in the "Global South".
December 3, 2018 Posted by aletho | Corruption, Deception	| Open Society Foundation, Turkey | Leave a comment


Neymar faces a race to be fit for this year's World Cup finals after the Brazil team doctor was quoted Thursday saying the Paris St Germain forward would be out for up to three months with a foot injury.
The 26-year-old, who became the world's most expensive player last August when PSG paid 222 million euros to sign him from Barcelona, is to undergo surgery on a fractured metatarsal and a sprained ankle this week.
Brazil's team doctor Rodrigo Lasmar said Neymar will need up to three months to recover from the injury.
"The surgery will be done in Belo Horizonte at the Mater Dei hospital on Saturday morning," Lasmar told TV Globo.
Five-times World Cup winners Brazil play their first match on June 17 against Switzerland and then face Costa Rica and Serbia.
"We have time to recuperate him and it will all be done to ensure he is ready as quickly as possible so that he will have enough time to prepare adequately and arrive in top condition for the tournament," Lasmar added.
PSG confirmed the injury on Wednesday, ruling him out of the club's Champions League last-16, second leg, against Spanish holders Real Madrid.
Initially Neymar's father predicted the injury would keep his son out for between six to eight weeks, giving him plenty of time to recover for the tournament in Russia.


Dane has been an active percussionist and drummer in Chicago since moving to the city in 2010. His performance experience covers a lot of ground and has given him the opportunity to share the stage with many amazing musicians including The Knights, Vadim Gluzman, Anne Akiko Meyers, Alessio Bax, New Music Detroit, the Madison Symphony Orchestra, Goldford, the Gold Coast All Stars, the Chicago Players, Lakeshore Rush, Sidewalk Chalk, and Spectrum Trio to name a few. Dane has performed throughout the U.S. at venues and festivals such as Ravinia, the North Shore Chamber Music Festival, PASIC, Chicago Symphony Center, Lincoln Hall, Windy City Live, Vocalo Radio, Merit School of Music, Thalia Hall, and the Juilliard School.
Having a deep passion for education, Dane started Chicago Percussion Lessons in 2010 and has also served as an instructor at Terra Sounds in Glenview, IL from 2011-2017 as well as Neuqua Valley High School in Naperville, IL from 2011-2017, which was named a National GRAMMY Signature School in 2013.


text:
Writer encourages vaccination
Category: Opinions
Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 at 8:00 PM
By Madison Streich
Published in: Vol. 119, No. 17
Anti-vaccination is now a national issue. Too many are convinced that not getting a vaccination will be more helpful than getting one. Meanwhile, reputable doctors and other health specialists agree that it's beneficial for your health to get vaccinated, according to Medical News Today.
It's understandable that parents want the best for their children, but I do not agree that avoiding vaccinations is in their best interest.
People are more likely to attract these long-eradicated diseases if they do not get that vaccine. It's so wrong to believe, "it's not in my area, that means I won't get it." Diseases drop in numbers because there are people out there getting vaccines.
"Vaccines introduce a weakened or deactivated version of a virus or bacteria into a child's body, which will protect them from certain illnesses in the future. Some people fear that this process may weaken the immune system or make a child unwell," reported Medical News Today.
The vaccine is a small part of the disease, which then teaches your body to fight it off. That's just how a vaccine works; it's not making anyone sick. Statements such as these are not factual, therefore they make no sense to me.
It also doesn't make sense when people think that a vaccination can push development of other future health concerns.
"Most scientific and medical experts are satisfied that no connection exists between vaccines and autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders," reads the History of Vaccines website. Many in the anti-vax community believe that if their kids receive vaccines at a young age, it will lead to them having autism later on.
According to the CDC, this worry is invalid: "studies have shown that there is no link between receiving vaccines and developing ASD (Autism spectrum disorder). In 2011, an Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on eight vaccines given to children and adults found that with rare exceptions, these vaccines are very safe."
In more specific analysis of vaccines, this link has once again been disproven. CDC research on thimerosal, which is "a mercury-based preservative used to prevent contamination of multidose vials of vaccines" also does not cause austism.
I do not understand how parents can be confident when they say a vaccine can give their child autism. Look at the research. I certainly did.
It's safe to say that anti-vaccination should not be a thing. Everyone should be safe and get vaccinated to prevent people from getting diseases and spreading them to each other.
Tags: vaccinations
The List: Deep-dive holiday movies for your break
By Sam Bohen
This is a deep-dive list. A list filled with titles that will impress your relatives when you mention them around the roast beast (but do not actually gather, of course, because of the pandemic).
VOICES: The Presidential election — it's time to accept the results
By Julia Carden
Through these actions, Trump is trying to create a reality that matches his desires. He is also encouraging his followers to agree with his beliefs: he doesn't think it's over and he still believes there's a chance he'll be re-elected.
VOICES: Cell phone addiction accelerating with COVID-19 pandemic
By Steven McGarvie
Society is getting a little too comfortable letting technology help them with their daily routine. Meanwhile, the art of human interaction is dying quickly.
VOICES: New Supreme Court brings concerns of biases
By Emma McNeeley
When I think of a judge, I think of someone who listens to all the people, all the sides of a story, and makes decisions without a bias. Amy Coney Barrett has certain biases that she won't let go of.
The List: Easy ways to practice sustainability
By Emily Anderson
Living a sustainable life doesn't mean creating zero waste, growing all your own food and giving up modern comforts. It's really just about making smarter choices day-to-day.
VOICES: Gauging the success of an online fall semester
By Cassandra Gripp
In terms of health and safety, Edinboro going online this fall has certainly been a success. But the transition has done a number on students. It is difficult to stay motivated for a class that isn't in-person.
Vol. 119, No. 18
« Past Issues
Inside This Issue »
Interview: Upcoming Interim President Dr. Dale-Elizabeth Pehrsson talks integration, COVID-19 and more By… https://t.co/QGGNnIwsqE
EdinboroNow on 11/19/2020, 7:33 PM
Album Review: Oneohtrix Point Never — Magic Oneohtrix Point Never Read Now: https://t.co/kRQ9GJ0frK https://t.co/DWKOriERdO
Album Review: Nothing But Thieves — Moral Panic https://t.co/lzWtrq4tIC https://t.co/g0RuiSBw5D
2021 © Edinboro Campus Media. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by Epic Web Studios, LLC

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Home — Essay Samples — History — History of The United States — American History — American Leaders And The Vietnam War: Lessons We Should Learn
American Leaders And The Vietnam War: Lessons We Should Learn
Category History, Government, War
Subcategory History of The United States, Politics
Topic American History, President, Vietnam War
In 1961 John F. Kennedy was elected as US president and focused on suppresing the insurgency in South Vietnam and warned Russians against aiding the guerillas. Some scholars argue that Kennedy entered the war very reluctantly. He chose to perpetuate a stalemate, as he feared the political consequences of withdrawal or massive escalation. Kennedy thought that a combination of American warnings, counter-insurgency advice and larger South Vietnamese forces would overcome National Liberation Front (NLF). He never considered neutralization and a graceful exit.
At the time of Kennedy's death there were more than 16,000 US military advisors in South Vietnam. Johnson succeeded Kennedy and escalated the Vietnam War. He came to office with the rhetoric of ending it but once in office he appeared to have other motives. His dominating and assertive personality and the history of the involvement had a huge role to play at this time. Johnson maintained a moderate policy until the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed in august 1964. The authenticity of the attacks on US warships is doubtful to this day, but Johnson used this to get a resolution to take an offensive stance. The idea of loosing the war freightened Johnson, as he feared it would affect American credibility. He feared loosing Vietnam to communism like China.
From 1965 to 1974 the war was in full swing. The US politicians at that time were failing to agree on a definite foreign policy. Johnson, however, worried for America's credibility and prestige. Attacking was in favour of his domestic political agenda. Johnson worked without popular public support and didn't want the Republicans to sabotage his agenda. The war was a result of long term, subterennean currents in American idealogy and culture. If Vietnam fell this would heavily affect his political influence and public agenda. Personal politics was witnessed to be at play around this time. By the end of 1971 there were 156,000 US military personnel in Vietnam.
Nixon inherited the War with the intent to bring it to an end but he took a long while to bring the troops back. There was a huge credibility gap between the public and the government because of no trasnparency in the politics. Documents like Pentagon Papers were an evidence of how the US citizens were being lied to and cause social unrest. The media should've played a better role as they mostly emerged as tactical critics of the war after the Tet Offensive, whereas they should've condemed the war in its totality. The opposition faced by leadership from within the military shows how divided America was on the War and only the elite had a role to play. Many war crimes were committed in Nixon and Johnson's time, such as My Lai massacre and use of Agent Orange.
Another reason for US involvement in the region, which falls in the grey area, is the drug trade. CIA was allegedly involved in Drug Trade in Vietnam's neighbor Laos. Accusations of heroin traffic blossomed in the shadows of a CIA-sustained guerilla war. Another reason to gain regional dominance was to have control of the drug trade route known as Golden Traingle. Air America has been accused of using jets to smuggle Heroin. US have carried out colonialism through controlling drug activities rather than boosting local economies. America's love for war can also be defined with the help of arms trade. The arms industry is one of the biggest industries of US and the more arms they sell the more profit they make. Americas's involvement has been questioned to this day and not only did it leave Vietnam in shambles but also had profound affects on American culture, politics, military preparedeness and the perception of America's role in the world. The institutional decision-making and conduct of war has moral amibiguities for US. The US defeat in Vietnam saw the end of an American 'arrogance of power' which showed the policy makers that conventional military might didn't qualify to impose power in various theatres of cold war. It was no longer plausible to treat communism as some 'monolithic' entity that put 'vital US interests at stake everywhere.
The high rate of drug abuse amongst US soldiers, the level of mistrust between the people, and the high amount of civilian deaths show that US lost the war at all fronts. Although there are a number of lessons to be learnt from the Vietnam War, US failed to learn any. History is an evidence of US getting involved in other countries war such as Afghanistan, Iraq and now Syria. The lesson leaders should take from this is that war should never be the first priority in resolving conflicts. Negotiations and neutrality should be the priority. If war is the only option left, then the leaders should specify goals before deploying troops to the battleground. War might be profitable for weapon industry but it definitley has devestating effects for a country. If war is being fought then it should be fought under the rules of war.
Political leaders should learn that the wars cannot be won with weapons but with an ideology. Proper knowledge of the society you're trying to transform is important. Leaders should not just flow with the currents of history and make decisions based on the past. They should not be afraid to alter the course of history, as lessons of the past are not always used wisely. Overgeneralization should be resisted when taking lessons from history. Another lesson is that domestic politics should not have a role to play in international politics. Given the time of Johnson, some of his decisions were influenced by the opposition he faced from his fellow politicians, which basically represented a divide in the domestic politics. A country's foreign policy should not be influnced by ones own personality traits, or else it is no less than a dictatorship. Democracy supports the free will of people and if people want to be communist no one has the right to choose otherwise. Never ending US wars represent the class interest of the elite and ending this imperialist tradition should be a priority for the new leaders. Accountabilty of the utilisation of the tax money, paid by the public is necessary for a transparent democracy. The civilians should be properly informed and political decision should never be hidden from them. They should be made aware of the expenditure upfront.
Another lesson is that communism will prevail, no matter how much money is spent on containment. Imposing ones ideologies and culture on a country alien to it never turns out well as can be witnessed throughout history.
American History Roaring 1920s in the United States
Vietnam War The representation of the Vietnam War in video games
American History The founding documents of USA
American History Durkheim vs. Du Bois: The Underlying Differences
American History Reformers of the Rabble
American History A Lift Of The Most Influencial Presidents On America
Brexit Brexit as the most challenging issue in the European Union
Bangladesh Relations between Bangladesh and Sri Lanka
International Politics The Indian Elections: Possibility of Modi Becoming the Prime Minister in 2019
Politics AI frameworks for NHS in the UK
Politics Evaluation of the kingdom of Jordan's decent work country programme
Feminism A Rhetorical Analysis of Hillary Clinton Speech on Women's Rights


Robert E. Lee symbolized the best of the South for many people. He was pardoned for treason by President Johnson after the war.
The battles that caused the loss of so much life in the Civil War were the results of decisions made by the military commanders of the North and the South. Who were these people? Why did they order the kinds of attacks that characterized this war? How could they follow orders that in many cases seemed like sheer suicide? Many of the opposing officers were actually friends, who had been classmates at West Point and having fought at each other's sides in the US-Mexican War of 1848.
Robert E. Lee was offered the position of commander in chief of the Union Army by President Lincoln before Virginia seceded from the United States. Lee was born into one of the South's most prominent families, and was the son of a Revolutionary War hero. His wife was the granddaughter of Martha Washington.
Lee did not favor either slavery or secession, but joined the Confederate army out of duty to Virginia, which he would not dishonor. Although he was the unquestioned military leader of the South, he was not given charge of the entire Confederate Army until the war's outcome had already been decided. He was a brilliant military strategist, continually outsmarting and defeating opponents with armies much larger than his own.
Stonewall Jackson was killed by his own troops during battle. The Major that ordered the attack died a few years later, his family claiming because of guilt.
Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson was an intensely religious man. A former teacher at Virginia Military Institute, he believed the Southern cause was sacred. He was totally fearless in battle. He would drive troops to the point of total exhaustion, seemingly insensitive to their hardship and suffering.
After Jackson won five battles in one month, an aura of invincibility surrounded him. It lasted until his death, in the spring of 1863, during one of his most dramatic victories, the battle of Chancellorsville.
The Union had outstanding officers, but for the first three years of the war, the Union Army had five different commanders. As Lincoln grew impatient with each one's caution or inflexibility, he'd replace him. They simply did not win the decisive battle that Lincoln needed. Ulysses S. Grant was chosen as the general who could finish the job. He had fought in the US-Mexican War and won battles at Fort Henry and Fort Donelson in Tennessee during the winter of 1862. Grant had also led the Union troops during the pivotal Vicksburg victory.
For his strategy in those battles, he earned the nickname "Unconditional Surrender" Grant. After he became commander in chief of the Union Army, he doggedly pursued Lee. Grant fought Lee measure for measure and continued to advance, even as Union casualties soared and despite suffering great criticism for those losses.
General Sherman, shown here during the Atlanta Campaign is infamous for his tactics during his March to the Sea. His men looted and destroyed civilian homes and businesses throughout the region.
Grant's most trusted officer, William Tecumseh Sherman, had fought with Grant earlier in the war. Sherman's job was to take Atlanta, an action that was a key part of Lincoln's strategy to conclude the war.
Sherman was a nervous, talkative master strategist, who understood how difficult the war was going to be to win. He felt that the North would have to make life very difficult on civilians in the South in order to weaken the resolve of the Confederate Army. His ruthless and destructive drives across the South — first to Atlanta, then to the sea at Savannah, and finally through South Carolina, are his legacy.
This collection of Private Newton Scott's letters covers his three years with the Iowa Infantry, in which he served as a clerk. Take a look at this take on the Civil War from a homesick 21-year-old soldier. More than just an account of battle movements, Scott's letters describe the life of an everyday soldier, from his frustrations with politics to homesickness, and hope for an end to the war.
Confederate General Longstreet is best remembered for recommending defensive tactics at Gettysburg — advice General Lee did not heed. Once a hero, within 10 years of the war's end Longstreet was vilified in the South. This comprehensive website explores the controversy and provides links to events in his life, pictures, and additional resources.
This brief biography of "the most hated and despised man in the history of Georgia" includes information on his battles as well as photographs of the man himself. The supreme commander of the Union armies in the West, Sherman led a campaign in Georgia that was the first in which civilians were treated as the enemy. Sherman's march on Atlanta was legendary for its destruction of the historic city. This North Georgia website has links to people and places surrounding the life of William Tecumseh Sherman.
Frederick Douglass's sons were among the recruits of the 54th Massachusetts, one of the first African American infantry units in the United States Army. Founder and commander, of the 54th, Colonel Robert Gould Shaw, was under much pressure to prove the worth of his African American soldiers. Their most famous effort was the bloody attack on Battery Wagner, in which Shaw was killed and the troops of the 54th showed remarkable courage and patriotism despite suffering heavy casualties. See photographs of the famous 54th, and read the real story behind the regiment whose legend was documented in the 1989 film Glory.
Belle Boyd was an 18-year-old Southern belle — and one of the Confederacy's greatest spies!


Grilled eggplant with heirloom tomato sauce, topped with a quinoa salad of chickpeas, cucumber, dried cherries and micro arugula.
Slow roasted green bell pepper stuffed with fresh veggies, black beans, chipotle peppers, garlic, rolled oats and a blend of aromatic herbs and spices.
Sautéed tofu and water chestnuts tossed with a Thai curry sauce on a bed of cauliflower rice garnished with cilantro, lime and peanuts.
Ice cream pies: featuring foxys icecream: Oreo, grasshopper, peanut butter cup, this $&@! Just got real!


text:
Oxford Saïd welcomes its largest percentage of female MBA students ever
Thu, 6th October 2022
48% of students in this year's class are female, making it one of the most gender-balanced business schools in the world.
Nearly half of all participants enrolled on the Oxford 2022-2023 Masters in Business Administration programme are women. They make up 48% percent of this year's MBA students, making it the largest ratio of female-to-male participants in the school's 26-year history and one of the best gender-balanced cohorts in the world.
Despite progress in recent decades, female participation in MBAs still only averages at around 40% among the leading business schools.
Kathy Harvey, Associate Dean, MBA and Executive Degrees, at Saïd Business School, who has spearheaded the drive to boost female engagement at the school said:
'This is an incredibly proud moment for everyone at Oxford Saïd. Diversity, equality, and inclusion are paramount to everything we do as a school, and empowering women is key to that. To achieve such a high ratio of female MBA students is a testament to our mission to prepare the next generation of female leaders and to end gender inequality in business once and for all.
I would like to thank everybody who has made this milestone possible and to warmly welcome all of our new students starting at the school. As you join, may you be inspired by the news, reminded that change is possible, and encouraged to champion your female peers and their achievements.'
Saïd Business School has long promoted female participation, seeing it as a critical way to increase female representation in business. In spite of industry progress in recent years, women in business remain largely underrepresented, especially at board level. As of July 2022, just 8.8% of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies were female.
Saïd Business School currently runs two major scholarship programmes aimed exclusively at women, the Laidlaw scholarship and the Forté Fellowship. For the 2022 cohort, there are eight Laidlaw and three Forté scholars.
Zoe Woods, a current Oxford 1+1 MBA student, and Forté fellow said:
'I couldn't be more proud to be part of this cohort. It truly makes me feel like 50/50 is within reach. Saïd's focus on diversity is one of the main reasons I chose Oxford. Gender is of course just one aspect of diversity, but I think Saïd's focus on gender is indicative of a broader commitment to bring diverse voices into the classroom -- and you can really feel that in our cohort.
I feel so privileged to be a Said Business School Forté Fellow, and share Forté's mission of advancing women in business. I can't wait to work with future female applicants as they apply to Oxford, and get us closer to gender parity.
So many businesses claim that underrepresentation of women in leadership is a pipeline problem. Looking around the room at my classmates I can confirm there are a plethora of truly talented women out there ready to lead. In doing so, we need to keep challenging our default assumptions about what a leader looks like, to make way for more diverse styles of leadership.'
The school is also home to the highly successful Oxford Women in Leadership Alliance, a student run group which works to challenge conventional conceptions of women in business and cultivate the next generation of leaders by staging discussions and events. They recently hosted chef, social entrepreneur and women's advocate Asma Khan to mark International Women's Day.
Aside from its recording-breaking level of female participants, this year's MBA cohort also boasted an impressive proportion of international students, with 93% of participants coming from outside of the UK, representing a total of 64 different nationalities. The candidates bring with them an average of 5 years of work experience from across 18 different industries. There are 313 students enrolled in total.
This year also marks another important milestone in our drive to support and empower women leaders throughout their career stages. This week the school welcomed the 10th cohort of the Women Transforming Leadership Programme, a course open to women in influential leadership roles.
The MBA class of 2022


It's a tradition dating back to the early days of British parliament.
Ted Arnott is carried by fellow MPPs after his election as the new Speaker of the Ontario Legislative Assembly at Queen's Park in Toronto on July 11, 2018.
It's a position that comes with a $36,000 pay bump and an apartment at Queen's Park, but you'd never know it by the way Ted Arnott resisted after he was elected the new Speaker of Ontario's Legislative Assembly.
Arnott, the Progressive Conservative MPP for Wellington-Halton Hills who was first elected in 1990, was chosen by his colleagues Wednesday on the first ballot.
A former assistant Speaker in the last Parliament, Arnott bested fellow Tories Rick Nicholls, Randy Hillier, and Jane McKenna.
And even though he wanted the job, Arnott had to be ceremoniously dragged to his new seat, just like other Speakers who have come before him across the country. Still, he had a big smile across his face.
The fun bit of theatre is a nod to the very real danger the role used to represent when it became part of the British parliamentary system in 1377.
Back then, the Speaker was appointed by the monarch and tasked with telling the king or queen what was going on in Parliament. If the Speaker brought back unpleasant news, such as a refusal to raise taxes on behalf of the king or queen, they could be put to death.
According to UK Parliament, seven Speakers were executed by beheading between 1394 and 1535.
And that's why those chosen for the job, which basically amounts to serving as a referee in the legislature, typically pretend to be resisting the call to serve.
In 2015, veteran Liberal MP Geoff Regan turned things up a notch by appearing to be terrified to assume the role of Speaker of the House of Commons. That position comes with, among other things, a pay raise of $84,000 on top of the base MP salary of $175,600 and an official residence in the Gatineau Hills.
Newly-elected Speaker of the House Geoff Regan jokingly resists as he's escorted to the Speaker's chair by former interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in the House of Commons on Dec. 3, 2015.
Andrew Scheer, now the leader of the federal Conservatives, was bit more reserved after he was elected House Speaker in 2011.
Former prime Minister Stephen Harper and former NDP leader Jack Layton lead Andrew Scheer to the Speaker's chair on June 2, 2011.
Arnott received a standing ovation Wednesday as accepted his new position. He joked it was likely the last one he'd receive as "servant of the House."
As Speaker, he'll now earn $152,914 per year, while the average MPP takes home $116,550. He'll also get to use an apartment on the third floor of the legislature.
Arnott told reporters later that he hoped to maintain a standard of decorum and enhance the reputation of all who serve at Queen's Park.
"I think the public expects that and I think the public deserves it," he said.


These patterns are simple to identify (no hoops to jump) and have powerful profit potential. Here are some words from Todd: "I've been a full-time trader for over 22 years and, during that time, I've quietly mentored over 6,000 traders ranging from Wall Street pros to total newbies. So I'm confident that this presentation is going to be a real eye-opener for you! Oh, yeah, no one can corner the market. not even a central bank… can control the market for any significant period of time. I liken Forex trading to hunting. We are the hunters and the Forex market is our pray. We must wait till our pray is at its weakest and most vulnerable. Impatience, greed and a lack of discipline is the main reason traders fail at Forex (not the system used).
A unique benefit of trading Forex signals is that it gives guidance and discipline in a Forex currency trader. Forex profit signals service providers send you alerts when the conditions are right for the trade. By trading large lots with a small account fund usually leads to a complete disaster. Instead of quick-and-easy-cash you get fast-and- nonrefundable-losses. Making consistent income working from home is not just a dream. As long as you use the consistently accurate andreliable versions of this type of software you should be making successfultrades automatically in a short space of time. By redgsr : A how to tutorial about Good Forex Investing Practices, Forex Investing Practices, Forex Investing Practices, Finance with step by step guide from redgsr. The strategy is to trade money into a currency that is expected to rise in value, which will in return provide a great return on investment.
So, why do so many new traders blow their accounts? New traders tend to start with a small account of $500 or less and try to develop their own trading plan. They study forex, create their own strategy and then spend days, weeks, even months paper trading their system. Best of all forex can never become zero but stocks can become zero and majority of the options expire worthless. There are no commissions. Yep, you read it right. Most of these new participants are introduced to currencies because they purchased a trading book, course or some other tool which promises to forecast which direction market will go in the future.
In any industry, the hallmark of a professional is he/she who is willing to use their skills at the right time, in the right way and in the right amount. Precision, efficiency and coherence are all a part of patience. You must take action and use the results of your research to enter the market and place trades. Is not afraid of hard work — successful trading takes work. Those who view their entrance into the Forex markets as a get rich quick scheme are most likely to find out that it is a get poor quick scheme for those who enter the markets unprepared. The question is: Are you up for the challenge? Forex Trading – How Much Can You Earn? Foreign currency exchange market is an attractive and lucrative online investment opportunity.
There's lots of beneficial and also insightful info in this article. I will need to come back as well as read it yet again in order to evaluate some of your viewpoints. This specific is actually a good article.


text:
set -e -u

echo "Check and revert repositories..."
cd $ROSWSS_ROOT
repos=$(wstool | grep -E "(MV|M |V |M|V) git  master" | awk '{print $1, $4}' | tr ' ' '#' | tr '\n' ' ')

for repo in $repos
do
    echo "Reverting repository ${repo%%#*}..."
    cd ${repo%%#*}
    git reset --hard
    git checkout ${repo##*#}
    cd -
done

echo
echo "Checking and reverting repositories finished."
echo

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub