Archive | July 27th, 2015

India: Farmer Suicides Reach Record Levels


Monsanto seeds are said to be responsible for the spike in suicides of India farmers.

Monsanto seeds are said to be responsible for the spike in suicides of India farmers.

We Recommend About 12,000 farmers killed themselves in the country in 2014.

The National Crime Records Bureau informed Sunday that 5,650 farmers had committed suicide in 2014 – corresponding to an average of 15 every hour. While this sounds shocking, other sources say this is an underestimation.

This information comes at a bad time for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as the Indian Congress will open its new parliamentary session Tuesday that will debate the controversial bill reforming land acquisition. The reform aims at removing from a previous bill voted in 2013 a variety of safeguards preventing forcible acquisition.

Although the NCRB’s figures appear to show the number of suicides have halved since the same time last year, its methods were not the same. According to the Times of India, the government only took into account the landowners, instead of including all the rural workers.

The Times writes that when these are included, the real figure shoots up to 12,360 suicides over the past year, almost 600 more than the previous year.

In the most agrarian state in the country, Maharashtra, the record of suicides skyrocketed. The Hindu reports that over 10,000 were registered between 2012 and 2014. In this state, suicides do not only affect agriculture, but all sectors, with a total of 16,300 cases of people taking their own lives in 2014 alone, of 131,000 nationwide.

The reforms to the Land Acquisition Bill included the removal of various requirements, like the social impact assessment study and a limitation on return of land to affected families.

The Congress will be debating it again from Tuesday because “the government has been unable to convert the ordinance into a statute,” reported, “given the enormous political and social backlash.”

Posted in IndiaComments Off on India: Farmer Suicides Reach Record Levels

Bernie the Bomber’s Bad Week


Image result for Bernie Sanders’ PHOTO

Bernie the Bomber’s Bad Week 1999

by Will Miller

In late April I was among the 25 Vermonters who occupied Congressman Bernie Sanders’ Burlington office to protest his support of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and the ongoing war against Iraq. Calling ourselves the “Instant Antiwar Action Group,” we decided to bring our outrage at Bernie’s escalating hypocrisy directly to his office, an action that resulted
in 15 of us being arrested for trespass.

Many of us worked on Bernie’s campaigns through 1980’s, the years he was–as the local press repeatedly put it– the “avowed socialist” Mayor of Burlington, Vermont. His descent into de facto membership the Democratic party has been a major setback for the task of building a real electoral alternative to the two factions of the corporate property that monopolize what passes for political choice in the United States. Bernie’s selling out says clearly to working people and those unable to find work that even leftists become mainstream politicians, when and if they win office.

Sanders presented himself to the left outside of Vermont as the leader of the third party movement, vanquishing the two major parties in every Mayoral election from 1981-88.

When he first got elected Mayor of Burlington he was the only elected U.S. official to attend the anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution in Managua. The Gannett owned Burlington Free Press
said he had to be removed from office “by any means necessary.” Now that same Burlington Free Press endorses his Congressional candidacy.

Bernie became an imperialist to get elected in 1990. In August, 1990–after the Bush administration enticed Iraq into invading Kuwait–Sanders said he wasn’t “going to let some damn
war cost him the election,” according to a staff member who was present at the time. So Sanders backed the buildup in the Persian Gulfand dumped on the left anti-imperialist peace movement, singling out his former allies like Dave Dellinger for public criticism.

He lost in 1988 Congressional race, the last time the Democratic party ran an official candidate against him. In that election Sanders and the Democrat, Paul Poirer, split the majority of votes and the election went to the Republican, Peter Smith.

Bernie–out of office for the first time in eight years– then went to the Kennedy School at Harvard for six months and came back with a new relationship with the state’s Democrats. The Vermont Democratic Party leadership has allowed no authorized candidate to run against Bernie in 1990 (or since) and in return, Bernie has repeatedly blocked third party building. His closet party,
the Democrats, are very worried about a left 3rd party forming in Vermont. In the last two elections, Sanders has prevented Progressives in his machine from running against Howard Dean,
our conservative Democratic Governor who was ahead of Gingrich in the attack on welfare.

The unauthorized Democratic candidate in 1990, Delores Sandoval, an African American faculty member at the University of Vermont, was amazed that the official party treated her as a nonperson and Bernie kept outflanking her to her right. She opposed the Gulf build-up, Bernie supported it. She supported decriminalization of drug use and Bernie defended the war on drugs, and so on…..

After being safely elected in November of 1990, Bernie continued to support the buildup while seeking membership in the Democratic Congressional Caucus–with the enthusiastic support of t
he Vermont Democratic Party leadership. But, the national Democratic Party blew him off, so he finally voted against the war and returned home–and as the war began–belatedly claimed to be the leader of the anti-war movement in Vermont.

Since 1991 the Democrats have given Bernie membership in their Congressional Caucus. Reciprocally, Bernie has become an ardent imperialist. Sanders endorsed Clinton in 1992 and 1996. In 1992 he described Clinton as the “lesser of evils,” (a justification he used to denounce when he was what the local press called an “avowed socialist”). By 1996 he gave Clinton an unqualified endorsement. He has been a consistent “Friend of Bill’s” from since 1992. One student I know worked on the Clinton Campaign in 1996 and all across Vermont, Bernie was on the stage with the rest of the Vermont Democratic Party Leadership, while the unauthorized Democratic candidate for his Congressional seat was kept out in the audience.

Sanders continues to support sanctions even though the Iraqi body count has now passed 1.5 million. Just as he has supported every bombing of Iraq since 1992. When Clinton sent military
units to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in October, 1994 because Iraq moved troops inside Iraq closer to the Kuwait border (apparently about 100 miles away), Bernie supported this because “we cannot
tolerate aggression.”

As a Congressman in Vermont he has allied himself the MIA/POW crowd, the American Legion and the VFW, the very groups that red baited him as Mayor. At the same time he and his staff “forget” to invite the Green Mountain Veteran’s for Peace–the only anti- imperialist veterans group in the state–to his sponsored Veterans events. He sends out mailings to veterans that supports the US having “the strongest military in the world,” while praising our sacrifices as veterans “for the freedom of Americans.”

Bernie regularly rides out with the rest of the Vermont Congressional delegation defending the military contracts in Vermont against cuts by the Pentagon, while arguing that some moderation in military spending is possible on the grounds “that the threat of communism
is over” (WCAX interview, 10/94).

Incidentally, Sanders now has a stronger record voting on the Democratic side in the Congress than either Bonier or Gephardt –the Congressional Leadership of the Democratic Party. It is
tempting to situate Sanders within the framework of the Congress as a whole. By that standard he doesn’t look so bad–though that’s a very low standard to use. But remember, unlike Maxine Waters or Ron Dellums who moved continuously to their left during their Congressional careers, Bernie got where he is now by a lurch to the right. He promises working people, the aged, the poor, and the “vanishing middle class” that he will defend them while he repeatedly blocks the building of the anti-capitalist political movement and party that might actual make such promises legitimate.

Indeed, when challenged publicly about his failure to help build a left alternative to the major capitalist parties, Sanders claims he is now too busy with his work in Congress to be

Among his other discredits, Sanders supported the Federal Crime Bill that give the gave the capitalist state more than 50 new pretexts to execute members of the working class–because
those without capital get the punishment. He did this while courting the Vermont Police Chief’s Assn. Sanders also voted to extradite Assata Shakur from Cuba in violation of the existing treaties with Cuba.

Recently, Bernie championed in Congress the dumping of Vermont’s nuclear waste near Sierra Blanca, Texas, a low income border community with a mostly Latino population that is overwhelmingly opposed to the dump project. Environmental racism and classism seem not to bother him.

On a related issue, Bernie was recently asked by the local press why he was the only member of Vermont’ s three member Congressional delegation who had no person of color on his staff.
Bernie responded that “we’re hiring the most qualified people we can.”

For all of these reasons, we are sitting-in at Bernie Sander’s Office. We call on all Vermonters who shares our concern and horror at what U.S. Empire is doing in Yugoslavia and Iraq to
make your voices heard.

The response to our occupation of Bernie’s office was, unfortunately, consistent with his lurch to the mainstream. At 6:30 PM, one half hour after closing time, Philip Fiermonte of Bernie’s staff had 15 of us arrested for trespass. Sanders refused a conference call with those in the occupation, which was carried out nonviolently and with no disruption to his staff. Fiermonte claimed he could not contact Sanders for the four hours of the occupation– if true, it still another way Bernie
has gotten out of touch in the Congress.

Ironically, Fiermonte was one of the defendants in the celebrated Winooski 44 case in 1984, where the conservative U.S. Senator Robt. Stafford’s (R-VT) office was occupied for his support of Reagan’s murderous wars in Central America. At least Stafford’s staff let the occupation continue for three days before having anyone arrested.

In the following week, Bernie, doing quick damage control, ducked responsibility for arresting the “Sanders 15″ and got himself included at the last minute with a Congressional delegation going to Austria to meet with representatives of the Russian Duna to bring the Russians in to help broker
a settlement in the US/NATO war in Yugoslavia. But, before leaving to see the Russians, he voted in favor of the continued bombing of Yugoslavia, a bombing that the Russians had already said would have to stop as a precondition for any settlement. A general town meeting has already been
scheduled for the following Monday, so he turned it to a “town meeting on Kosovo.”

Apparently, Bernie Sanders has forgotten what a Town Meeting is. Perhaps he lived in Burlington (too “big” for town meetings) and Washington (scared to death of town meetings) for so many years he cannot recall how a democratic town meeting actually works. No one is allowed to appoint themselves the moderator for the town meeting and persons who are partisans on the issues before the town are excluded from the moderator’s election in favor of persons
who can moderate fairly and evenhandedly.

Sanders as the self-appointed moderator/boss opened the evening with naked self-justification. “It is a very complex situation…” followed by the ritual of demonization of Milosevic–a technique he has perfected over the last eight years on Saddam Hussein of Iraq. Then he presented the false dilemma that the only alternative to bombing is doing nothing. Sanders said his situation was the same as that of Joschka Fischer’s of the Green Party, Germany’s Foreign Minister, who has outraged his Green Party membership by supporting the bombing his coalition government is carrying out as part of NATO. Back in Vermont the assembled citizenry moaned audibly.

He continued by subjecting the packed room of over 200 people to more than an hour of a panel presentation by people of his own choosing; even then, only one panelist overtly supported his position–Bogdan Denich, a professor from New York City and leader of the pro-imperialist wing of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Another panelist, Shirley Gedeon, a UVM Economist whose speciality is the Balkans, undercut Sander’s historical analysis and a third, Roddy Cleary, a feminist and religious activist, challenged he support of the bombing directly.

Apparently, with all the college and universities in Vermont, Bernie had to travel far into flatlander territory to find an academic willing to support his “bomb now, talk later” position. In fact, Denich went beyond Bernie’s present position and called for sending in ground troops, immediately.

After allotting the panelists and himself 12 minutes each and now more than an hour and a half into the meeting, the people finally had a chance to speak. But only for 2 minutes each, dictated the self-appointed moderator Bernie! And this after having lectured us on how “complex” the issue of the US/NATO War on Yugoslavia really is. When he was challenged by a few members of the meeting about his undemocratic restriction of peoples’ speech, he said anyone who didn’t like it could leave. It seems when Sanders was in college in Chicago, he learned more from Mayor Richard J. Daley than from his academic studies.

The overwhelming majority of the people present were against Sander’s support for the bombing. Even with all his attempts to control the meeting, the people had at him for more than an hour and a half. He was denounced for his selling out to the Empire and it’s war machine and for his support for the 9 year old war against Iraq and his active support for every US intervention since he has been in Congress–Iraq, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Liberia, Zaire (Congo), Albania, Sudan, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia.

He was further criticized for his refusal to ban or even object to the use of depleted uranium with it’s long term toxicity in both Iraq and Yugoslavia. Sanders even tried to escape responsibility for arresting 15 of his constituents in his office one week ago for the crime of wanting to talk to him without an appointment by blaming those arrested for their arrest, as if they went out and brought the police in to arrest themselves.

Sanders was repeatedly unresponsive to questions put to him. He evasiveness and arrogance did not serve him well. In the end, only a few people defended him. Whatever else Sanders gets for his joining the other side in the global struggle for social justice–he has lost the left and the peace movement here is Vermont.

Maybe in the next election he will finally have to run officially as the Democrat he has been for the last 9 years! And then the people of Vermont will be free to build the anti-capitalist political movement and party that Sanders has worked so hard to block for more than a decade.

People left the meeting resolving to escalate the antiwar movement before the US escalates the war with an invasion of ground troops. The latest leaks out of NATO sources in Europe suggest that the current plan is to invade with troops by the end of May. Remember Vietnam!

Never again!

Posted in USAComments Off on Bernie the Bomber’s Bad Week

Forced Adoption: UK families flee to Ireland to keep their children


UK families are fleeing to Ireland as social workers continue to use false allegations and vague definitions of abuse to forcibly remove children from their parents and boost adoption statistics. RT’s documentary crew spoke to several of those families.

The UK is just one of two countries in Europe (the other is Croatia) where adoption without the consent of a child’s biological parents – known as ‘forced adoption’ – is practiced.

Despite international law calling it an emergency measure, “there were over 2,000 children forcibly taken from one family to another” last year, MP John Hemming told RT’s documentary channel (RTD). Every year, some 11,000 children are taken into local authority care without the consent of their parents.

According to the MP, social workers are instructed by their managers to advise the court to get the child adopted – even if they’re been taken care of by a competent family.

With Britain’s children’s minister, Edward Timpson, proudly announcing a 63 percent rise in adoptions since 2011, children are being removed from their families “merely to satisfy government target,” Hemming said.

UK legislation provides several reasons for removing a child from their parents, with “risk of future emotional harm” being the most widely used – and the most controversial.

“Now how do you quantify that? It’s almost impossible to quantify, but a lot of people lose their children because the social services and the courts say there’s a risk of future emotional harm,” human rights activist Yolande Lindbridge said.

It’s very difficult for parents to get their children back after a final hearing in court, because “the appeal system isn’t set up for people to win,” she stressed.

If the court rules that the forced adoption was a mistake, it often still decides to leave the child with their new family, so as “not to upset the child again,” said Bridget Robb, chief executive of the British Association of Social Workers.

There are also cases when parents – especially those with complications in mental development – are told that their children will be removed even before they’ve given birth.

With limited tools to fight the system, many UK families are choosing to flee to neighboring Ireland or other foreign countries to keep their children.

Ireland is willing to provide support to those parents, unlike England, which “may identify that there may’ve been a problem, but is not willing to help you solve that problem,” according to John Paskell, a parent who fled the UK with his child.

The documentary ‘Forced Adoption: UK,’ premiering on RT and RTD on March 23, tells the story of several UK families who have experienced forced adoption and are now fighting to keep their children or have them returned.

Posted in UKComments Off on Forced Adoption: UK families flee to Ireland to keep their children

Obama regime moves to block release of Guantanamo force feeding tapes

Image result for guantanamo photos

The Obama administration last night asked a federal judge to reconsider her order to release the Guantánamo force-feeding tapes.

In the ongoing First Amendment battle by 16 press organizations seeking to publish the video tapes of former detainee Abu Wa’el Dhiab being force-fed, Judge Gladys Kessler issued an order on July 10th that the government complete key redactions and prepare the tapes for release by September 30th.

Last night, however, the Obama administration filed a motion for reconsideration of that order with Judge Kessler. Justice Department lawyers claim in their filing that releasing the footage will aid extremist groups and say the press have no First Amendment right to the evidence.

The tapes were first filed to court as classified evidence in a legal challenge to prison conditions at Guantanamo Bay, Dhiab v Obama. 16 press organizations, including Associated Press, the Washington Post and the New York Times, intervened seeking the videos’ release to the public on press freedom grounds. Judge Kessler ordered them to be released; the Obama administration then appealed in what Judge Kessler called “as frivolous an appeal as I’ve seen.’

Meanwhile, the military nurse who objected to brutal force-feeding at Gitmo is today being presented with the Year of Ethics award by the American Nurses Association (ANA). The nurse, who has chosen to remain anonymous, previously faced dismissal from the military after he refused to force-feed detainees because of the suffering it was causing men held without charge or trial at the prison.

Commenting, Reprieve director and attorney for Abu Wa’el Dhiab, Cori Crider, said: “Judge Kessler said the Obama administration’s initial appeal was as ‘frivolous’ as she’d ever seen – well, the government decided to top that with another frivolous request for a do-over. Yet it has put no fresh evidence before the Court that would justify censoring the force-feeding tapes. Once again, the government’s argument boils down to the same old tripe: if people see the truth about Gitmo today, the ‘terrorists’ will win. We don’t deny the footage is upsetting stuff – some of it deeply so – but that’s precisely why it should be released. Americans deserve to see what is being done in their name. Releasing crucial parts of this footage will provide yet more reason the President should fulfil his promise to shut Gitmo down.”

Posted in USAComments Off on Obama regime moves to block release of Guantanamo force feeding tapes

Pentagon Wants To Place A Power Radar System In Ukraine


US Government Is Getting Ready To Make Its Move In Syria, Turkey Is Now Allowing The Us To Use Its Airbase To Carry Out Strikes In Syria

Greek parliament approves more austerity for the people. Greek adds 10% tax to everyday supplies. Greek stores close down. UK retail sales decline. Fannie and Freddie are in the same spot as they were back in 2008.Caterpillar just reported one of the worst quarters for sales. The economy is in the worst shape, even worse than in 2008.

Obama creating more executive orders to allow illegals stay in this country. US Government introduces a bill to hide those foods that are GMO created. Pentagon wants to place a power radar system in Ukraine. US Government is getting ready to make its move in Syria, Turkey is now allowing the US to use its airbase to carry out strikes in Syria.FBI is pushing the agenda that the IS is worst terrorist organization they have ever seen.

Posted in USA, UkraineComments Off on Pentagon Wants To Place A Power Radar System In Ukraine

Tsipras and Varoufakis Approve of Home Evictions and Expropriation of Depositors

Global Research
Tsipras accord

During their election campaign, the Syriza movement promised the people of Greece an end to the inhumane politics of austerity and the dictatorship of the Troika.

After being elected in January, Prime Minister Tsipras and his Finance Minister Varoufakis negotiated with the EU commission, the ECB and the IMF for almost five months. While fulfilling almost all of their financial demands, Syrizas leaders openly criticized the institutions for their tough bargaining and resisted some of their harshest measures.

At the beginning of July, the Troika tightened its grip on Greece. Tsipras and Varoufakis in return called for a referendum in which the people of Greece took a very clear stance and said no to the continuation of austerity politics.

Rather than fulfill this mandate, Tsipras responded with a 180-degree turnaround. He dismissed his finance minister, went to Brussels and accepted the most far-reaching austerity measures ever imposed on his country.

Meanwhile Tsipras has survived two votes in the Greek parliament with the support of exactly those forces whom he once called his political adversaries. He has also removed all those members from his cabinet that were unwilling to follow his new course.

Last Wednesday, both Tsipras and his former finance minister went even further by giving their consent to a reform package that will facilitate foreclosures and home evictions. Given the disastrous economic situation, high unemployment and the ongoing capital controls, thousands of home owners will fall into arrears with their interest and repayment installments in the coming months and thus become victims of this new legislation, which will go into effect on 1 January 2016.

Tsipras and Varoufakis, who loved posing as the advocates of the common people during their election campaign, are thus frankly siding with collecting agencies and openly turning their backs on working people strangled by debt.

However, there was worse to come in Wednesdays vote. Pretending to protect Greek taxpayers, Tsipras and Varoufakis also gave their consent to the EUs Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD). This legislation provides for the replacement of bailouts of banks with taxpayers money by the partial expropriation of savers, depositors and shareholders.

To understand the true nature of a bail-in, one only has to take a look at what happened in Cyprus in the spring of 2013. There, depositors with more than 100,000 euros in their accounts lost 40 percent of their money, which was used to recapitalize their bank. The measure was a devastating blow for the middle class, small businesses and retirees who lost a large part of their lifetime savings.

Although deposits under 100,000 euros are officially protected within the EU, this is no guarantee that they will be left untouched. After most large depositors removed their money during the past months, the four biggest banks in Greece – Piraeus Bank, Alpha Bank, Eurobank and the National Bank of Greece presently only hold deposits of around 130 billion euros. It is estimated that 40 to 50 percent of their loans are not being serviced and only 40 percent of customers deposits exceed 8,000 euros. Strangled by bad loans, these four banks that make up 90 percent of Greeces banking business, are desperate to increase their equity capital and therefore urgently need fresh money.

By the way, the agreement between the Troika and the government of Cyprus in 2013 was not based on any existing laws, but concluded on the basis of a quickly resolved agreement between the rulers in Nicosia and the EU. Implementing a similar emergency agreement in Greece would probably not present a big problem to the EU or the Troika. As reported by the Financial Times and confirmed by one of the banks concerned, such a measure has already been discussed. According to their sources, Greek authorities are aiming at a 30 percent haircut for all deposits exceeding 8,000 euros.

Tsipras as well as Varoufakis must have known this when they voted in favor of the BRRD on Wednesday. They have thus willingly contributed to a further deepening of the assaults not only on the working people and the middle class of Greece, but also on millions of savers, depositors and small enterpreneurs in Serbia, Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Romania who maintain their accounts at the regional subsidiaries of the large Greek banks and whose living standards in some cases are far below those of Greece. They, too, will in all probability be subjected to a bail-in.

On the weekend before before the vote, Yannis Varoufakis gave an interview to the Spanish newspaper El Mundo in which he described the creditors of his country as “terrorists”. Is there a better way of demonstrating ones moral depravity than by consenting to the partial expropriation of working people and the destruction of the lifelong work of small entrepreneurs only three days after making a statement like that?

Posted in GreeceComments Off on Tsipras and Varoufakis Approve of Home Evictions and Expropriation of Depositors

Zionist stolen children: where is UNICEF I$raHell?

Stolen children

By Marianne Azizi

In September 2015, members of Coalition for Children and Families in Israel (CCF) will be walking 50 miles – a mile for each 200 children who are taken into institutions by the social services from fit parents.

We are walking for the 10,000 children in Israel (population: 8.3 million), and for all children and families worldwide, who should be together without state intervention.

It is remarkable that the Israel branch of the United Nations children’s charity, UNICEF, will not endorse, support, mentor or mention this action.

When I spoke to the UNICEF representative in Israel, he seemed to imply that campaigning for the stolen children and the unfair justice system in Israel, which is damaging parents and children, was an act against the state of Israel.

CCF recently presented a request in the United Nations Human Rights Council, in the discussion on right to life for, transparency and independence to help families and children who have no legal remedies and are separated too often by flimsy excuses. This is happening worldwide, and Israel is leading the way in overprotective welfare practices.

What have we come to when democracy in action is classed as “against the state”?

Here is a conversation with the head of UNICEF Israel, Jonny Cline:

Marianne Azizi
I am going to be doing a walk for the children of Israel. Would UNICEF consider discussing support, endorsement or sponsorship?

It will be on behalf of the civil society CCF Israel, Coalition for Children and Families. It would be great to get your involvement. We want to raise more awareness of the family laws and parental alienation and help keep parents and children together wherever possible.

You know there are a lot of issues, but I want to organise something more positively focused.

Let me know if you want to discuss. Thanks Jonny.

19/07/2015 22:41
Jonny Cline
That is out of our mandate I am afraid

19/07/2015 22:41

Marianne Azizi

To support it?

We are asking various children’s charities/organisations and had the UNHRC presentation in Geneva regarding children. Why would this be out of your mandate to support the children? I am not sure I understand.
It doesn’t have to involve money.

19/07/2015 22:44

Jonny Cline

You are not asking us to support children, you are asking us to support an organisation

19/07/2015 22:45
Marianne Azizi
We are asking just for you to endorse the mission – which is for the children in poverty in Israel and the families to stay united. It is not yet decided whether it is for the organisation, or just me. I am still working on the outline. If it was not for an organisation, would you consider?

19/07/2015 22:47
Marianne Azizi
I am going to walk 60 miles to raise awareness for the children of Israel. Either through the civil society or not, to hopefully get funding or publicity for the plight of the children inside. I am asking under what banner would you support it as UNICEF?

19/07/2015 22:48
Jonny Cline
The coalition and its activities are portraying the state as the enemy in actions such as demanding that the UNHRC investigate Israel. We work with the state, as does UNICEF all around the world, not against it. You catch more bees with honey

19/07/2015 22:48
Marianne Azizi
I agree.
However, the issues that were raised are real ones, and there is a strong desire to work with the state.

19/07/2015 22:49
Jonny Cline
Then give me a case that needs support, because the one of the coalition is beyond my mandate if it is to attack a state rather than lobby and advocate for a better situation in a constructive way
We cannot become involved in individual cases, not even a collection of them, only macro policy or implementation issues

19/07/2015 22:51
Marianne Azizi
Ok. I will send you a case. The coalition is trying to raise awareness, because they have tens of thousands of people with no remedies – and nowhere to turn. If there was a way to do it differently they would. But collectively, Jonny, there is a disaster going on. The individual cases all merge into one common theme.

19/07/2015 22:51
Marianne Azizi
I understand where they are coming from, as they don’t have independent ombudsman as well you know.
But i appreciate your time to respond.

19/07/2015 22:53
Jonny Cline
Unfortunately, the body dealing with their issues are not acting in a way we can become involved with. We are the ones leading the bill for the creation of the ombudsman. I would have hoped they would consider that constructive rather than the way they act towards us too

19/07/2015 22:54
Marianne Azizi
I don’t personally believe that challenging the system is going against the state. It is what all democratic nations do. Most of the people want a better system. In the UK when people demonstrate or protest, it isn’t an act against the state, it’s a protest against injustice.
I think you are probably referring to Moti Leybel in particular? He has not been involved in CCF until recently.

19/07/2015 22:54
Jonny Cline
We challenge the system, but not by trying to bring external forces in inappropriate ways
I have nothing against Moti. He is a very passionate advocate.

19/07/2015 22:55
Marianne Azizi
You mean that going to the UNHRC is inappropriate?
We had to get UN intervention to protect his freedom. Being arrested and imprisoned as a human rights defender is internationally inappropriate too!

19/07/2015 22:56
Jonny Cline
That is definitely outside the realms of our mandate and not activity with which we can he involved

19/07/2015 22:58
Marianne Azizi
All democratic states have to accept challenges to their systems – it doesn’t make those people enemies of a state. It is the democratic “right” to protest. But people are becoming broken and afraid. I spent months 24/7 seeing this, and over 10 years previously helping people trapped in Israel, both Israeli and foreign nationals. Reports were done, and still nothing has changed, Jonny. In fact in some ways it has deteriorated.

19/07/2015 23:01
Jonny Cline
You are not talking to me as a person, but as the Israeli Fund for UNICEF
I have a mandate and I respect its boundaries

19/07/2015 23:04
Marianne Azizi
Ok. I see. What circumstances do UNICEF support something like this, then? If any? I am doing this at my own expense – I want to do something for the children.

19/07/2015 23:06
Jonny Cline
When it is a macro policy issue, and when there are advocates who are willing to explain it to me in a way that respects the boundaries of our mandate.
1am is not the time to do that, though.

19/07/2015 23:07
Marianne Azizi
Sure! I was under impression from the website that UNICEF works in collaboration with civil societies. At least that is what is written there. We’ll catch up in a day time.

19/07/2015 23:08
Marianne Azizi
Civil Society and UNICEF
As world leaders set out a roadmap for human progress over the next 15 years, it is vital that every child is included, and that children everywhere are at the heart of the new global agenda.

19/07/2015 23:10
Jonny Cline
We do, but we choose with which bodies, taking risk analysis very seriously
If we have issues where we can have larger impact with less investment or risk we will exhaust all of those options first

19/07/2015 23:12
Marianne Azizi
OK, so Coalition for Children and Families doesn’t fulfil the criteria, it seems. Sorry to hear that. I’ve taken over this civil society and trying to find better ways to proceed, but clearly UNICEF is not one of our options. Thanks anyway.

19/07/2015 23:12
Jonny Cline
And there is a distinct difference between work done in developing countries, where UNICEF is represented by country offices headed by diplomats who are UNICEF employees, and in developed countries such as Israel where the fund is a local NGO headed by a local employee
Look more into UNICEF’s national committee structure and mandate, not the UNICEF country office one.
That might clear up the misunderstanding

19/07/2015 23:14
Marianne Azizi
OK. I think I’ve got it. Crisis remains, and we will find another way to help the kids. I just thought I would ask for support, but will try other avenues – 50 miles walking is not a small challenge. But I will do all it takes. Can you advise or point me in a different direction

19/07/2015 23:15
Jonny Cline
Maybe try me when I am more awake. Right now I have a baby in a sling trying to get him to sleep

19/07/2015 23:15
Marianne Azizi
Will do.
You understand the passion, I hope.

19/07/2015 23:16
Jonny Cline
As I said, perhaps the crisis could be deconstructed by less militant, if no less passionate, means and advocates

19/07/2015 23:16
Marianne Azizi
Hence my request to you.

19/07/2015 23:17
Jonny Cline
I understand and appreciate it
I wish you the best of luck, and perhaps I will have the opportunity to learn more sometime

19/07/2015 23:18
Marianne Azizi
We are talking about thousands of children, not a few. It’s difficult to do nothing. I will come and educate you when I am back

19/07/2015 23:18
Marianne Azizi
Good night.

19/07/2015 23:18
Jonny Cline
Looking forward to it
Good night

20/07/2015 14:49
Marianne Azizi
Hi Jonny, thanks for last night. I will write an article to explain how the mandate works as many people don’t understand.
If you don’t mind me quoting some of your answers? Better than me trying to interpet it!

20/07/2015 14:52
Jonny Cline
Have you read up from other sources?

20/07/2015 14:53
Marianne Azizi

20/07/2015 14:53
Jonny Cline
Yes, on the structure and mandate

20/07/2015 14:53
Marianne Azizi
I have read the website, which is why as a CSO [Civil Society Organization] I contacted you with that potential. We share common aim of children in Israel.

20/07/2015 14:56
Jonny Cline
I mean the difference between the natcom [National Committees] and co-mandates

20/07/2015 14:56
Marianne Azizi
I have someone co-writing with me from an NGO…

20/07/2015 14:58
Jonny Cline

Today I spoke with UNICEF UK who seemed shocked that the Israel “arm” have not done more to endorse the CRC [Convention on the Rights of the Child] treaties. We are disappointed that UNICEF Israel consider our civil society a “risk assessment”, yet still ask for information on Israeli children!

We can assure the readers the stories coming out from Israel are verifiable and shocking.

Here is the issue: the Zionist supporters of Israel – please note that real children are suffering daily in the country and have no voice. Parents are desperately contacting us wanting a miracle by exposure of their stories, which the press is gagging. Contacting the UN is seen as an “enemy” tactic.

CCF Israel and UK are working for world awareness, and view challenges to government as democratic, and never consider that such challenges would make the civil society an enemy of the state.

The bottom line is this. If you support the concept of Israel, it’s time to look at the people who live there and listen to them. If you don’t support the state of Israel, it’s time to separate the people from their government and realise that strong censorship of all the news you get and the apparent views you are reading does not apply to almost half of the people who are living there.

Whistleblowers are arrested and interrogated for telling the truth. The Israel which is portrayed and fed through news feeds is not necessarily the real country.

Many people who read this article will be strongly in support of the children of Gaza and appalled by the operation which killed thousands of people. They will be indignant at the thought or concept that Israeli people may or may not have supported the operation. The walk in September will support all children worldwide.

Others reading this will be strong supporters of Israel’s right to exist, yet do not want the know full facts of what this existence means to millions of ordinary people.

So who are the Israeli people going to turn to? The government is rife with corruption; there is no independent ombudsman despite the UNHRC’s constant attempts to encourage one. The civil society CCF, which supports reform, is quashed at every opportunity.

It is widely believed by Israeli people that the international community would have absolutely no sympathy if they complain. The international news is controlled and dominated by the minister of communication, Binyamin Netanyahu. His position as minister of three ministries has been challenged, for in reality no prime minister should also hold these positions.

Whistle-blowers are arrested and interrogated for telling the truth. The Israel which is portrayed and fed through news feeds is not necessarily the real country. We may be prevented from making the 50 mile walk to educate the outside world with the countless families queueing up to share their stories.

All that we have asked for is transparency, reform and a chance for the people of Israel, 36 per cent whom live in poverty, to get past the day they survive in, then perhaps they might have a chance to engage in the multiple comments made by people on social media who have never even lived there.

It is possible the UNICEF office in Israel is so low level that its mandate is narrow. But perhaps there could be fear of Zionist lobbies urging them to steer clear of Israeli domestic issues.

UNICEF UK was surprised by the comments as the main mandate of UNICEF is to ensure that the treaty of UNCRC is upheld in each country. A report by UNCRC published in June 2015 shows that an independent ombudsman for children still has not been delivered. (Paragraph 18).

If UNICEF Israel is the main campaigner for independent reviewers, it has been a long time in the process, as the treaty was signed in 1991. The Israel authorities have not yet set up either an independent method of reporting, nor have they signed up to the optional treaty for children to complain directly through due process.

All families and children worldwide have the right to live their hopes and dreams without state interference, and we shall start the process in Israel in September with the aim that people around the world walk for their children too.

All children deserve to be with their families with a minimum of state intervention.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zionist stolen children: where is UNICEF I$raHell?

HAND’S OFF SYRIA لرئيس الأسد: الارهاب فكر مريض وعقيدة منحرفة أسسه الاستعمار


مسائية المركز الإخباري 26.07.2015

مسائية المركز الإخباري 26.07.2015
الرئيس الأسد: الارهاب فكر مريض وعقيدة منحرفة أسسه الاستعمار
الرئيس الأسد: الإرهاب أداة رئيسية للغرب والحل السياسي أداة احتياط
القضاء على ارهابيين بأرياف حمص ودرعا وحلب
حزب الشعوب الديمقراطي: لن نسمح لأردوغان وداود أوغلو بجر تركيا إلى حروب …

Posted in Arabic, SyriaComments Off on HAND’S OFF SYRIA لرئيس الأسد: الارهاب فكر مريض وعقيدة منحرفة أسسه الاستعمار

West Flirts With Fascism – Again


Image result for SALMAN saudi king photos

By Finian Cunningham

There seems little doubt that Western so-called democracies are gravitating toward increasingly autocratic politics. Executive power is being exercised by secret policy formulation, to be imposed on the electorate, or on other countries, with no regard for democratic oversight.

Western states are once again flirting with fascism – as in earlier dark periods over the past century.

Here is a recent snapshot of the disturbing trend. Britain’s Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond this week openly voiced his frustration with democratic process as something that is “cumbersome” for the pursuit of foreign military objectives.

Meanwhile, America’s top General Wesley Clark told US media that Washington needs the power to round up “disloyal” citizens in internment camps without due legal process.

Added to this is the condemnation also this week by France’s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius of a French parliamentary delegation travelling to Russia on a fact-finding visit over the Ukraine crisis.

Then we have the ongoing diktat to the Greek people of their country’s financial policies, imposed by the European Union’s creditors led by German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

In each instance we see a sinister logic emboldened among Western states, whereby democratic mandate and legal standards are over-ridden by the ruling political class. What other way to describe this tendency but as a form of incipient fascism?

We should not be surprised by such tendency. Despite much-vaunted claims of democracy, human rights and law, Western states have always had a propensity towards fascism.

The publication of photographs last week of British Queen Elizabeth making a Nazi salute, as a young girl in 1933, along with adult members of the royal family, is a stark reminder that Britain’s ruling class were earnest supporters of Adolf Hitler and his fascist regime during the 1930s. Queen Elizabeth’s uncle, who became King Edward VIII, travelled to Nazi Germany in 1937 following his abdication. He was not only filmed giving Nazi salutes to the Führer, the British royal also plotted treasonously with the Third Reich to form a Nazi-collaborationist regime in England.

In much the same way that the French ruling class, led by General Philippe Pétain, formed the despicable Vichy regime that worked assiduously with Nazi Germany to murder and incarcerate tens of thousands of their own compatriots between 1940-44.

As for the supposedly noble American champions of democracy, Washington has a long and bloody history of sponsoring fascist regimes and their death squads throughout Latin America to make that continent “safe” for US capitalist exploitation.

Washington’s penchant for despots and autocrats is manifest today in its unwavering support for the Persian Gulf Arab dictatorships and the Israeli regime. The same can be said for Britain, France and Germany, where weapons sales and oil interests prevail over popular demands for democracy, human rights and international legal justice.

For several decades after the Second World War, Western states could make a reasonable claim of practising democracy, at least at home if not overseas. During those years, there was a semblance of electoral process and of governing policies mandated by the people. There was undoubted progress in democratic distribution of wealth and the creation of social security systems and public services in education and healthcare.

However, over the past two decades, democratic reforms in Western states have been relentlessly rolled back. This retrograde process is correlated with the vast polarisation of wealth and power between an oligarchic minority and the wider population. Western “governments” are increasingly political vehicles that serve the interests of the oligarchy, while meting out economic austerity and repression on the general populace.

The upcoming presidential election in the US is a classic case in point of how electoral “choice” is determined by the financial and corporate oligarchy. Whoever wins that contest will be a servant of the ruling class.

In Britain, we see a Conservative administration composed of millionaires like Prime Minister David Cameron and his Chancellor George Osborne, which was “elected” by a minority of voters – only 36 per cent – and bankrolled into office by City of London finance. Now Cameron’s government is inflicting even more savage austerity measures that will leave millions of citizens much worse off, while enriching the bankers and the rich.

Western countries are grappling with a systemic problem – the demise of capitalism. During the postwar decades, owing in part to the reconstruction of Europe and Asia-Pacific, the system performed relatively well, providing high levels of employment and upholding living standards.

A turning point was reached as early as the mid-1970s and certainly after the early 1990s when capitalism went into secular decline. The decline has perhaps been most dramatically seen in the United States where the real earnings of workers are less now than they were in the 1970s. Real unemployment – not the dubious official figure – is over 20 per cent. Some 50 million Americans are classed as poor out of a total population of 310 million. The richest 400 American individuals have more combined wealth than 150 million fellow Americans.

It is in this historical context that Western rulers are increasingly resorting to authoritarian methods of governance – out of necessity.

Faced with ever-growing angry and deprived populations, the Western ruling class are challenged by democratic rights colliding with the system’s appalling dysfunction.

It is also in this context that Western powers are seeking an escape route from the social tensions at home by pursuing militarism abroad.

It is no coincidence that Western governments have embarked on a hostile policy towards Russia during a time when Western countries are straining from economic and social collapse.

British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond claimed that Western countries are “at a disadvantage” in opposing Vladimir Putin’s Russia because Britain and its allies are encumbered by democratic procedure.

As the Financial Times reported: “The foreign secretary told MPs [members of parliament] on Tuesday that the UK and other Nato members were less able to react quickly to changing world events because of having to secure the assent of parliament, the media and the public.”

Hammond’s logic means his ruling clique want to get rid of democracy in order to act as they see fit without democratic oversight. The secret bombing, disclosed earlier this month, of Syria by the British air force in contravention of both parliamentary prohibition and international law is a sign of where Hammond wants to take his government’s power.

Perhaps even more noxious is the view of retired American General Wesley Clark, who is a major figure in the US political class. He told American news channel MSNBC that the time was ripe for the authorities to detain and lock-up anyone who is deemed to be “disloyal to America”. He openly cited the mass incarceration of Japanese-Americans and German-Americans during the Second World War as a favourable precedent.

“Disloyal Americans” is a dangerously mutable notion. Any citizen who criticises Washington’s foreign militarism, oligarchic economic policy or its increasingly police state practices could be liable for detention without trial.

Ineluctably, it seems, Western powers are moving more and more to adopt authoritarian measures against their populations. Once again, as in previous times, they are flirting with fascism to shore up their deeply dysfunctional economic system. It’s a love affair that never really died.

Posted in USAComments Off on West Flirts With Fascism – Again

Pentagon Admits It May Have Lost (SOLD) $500 Million in Weapons To Al-Qaeda

Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem, Sr

Image result for bin laden photos

Bin laden

Ever wonder where your where your tax money goes?:

The Pentagon is unable to account for more than $500 million in U.S. military aid given to Yemen, amid fears that the weaponry, aircraft and equipment is at risk of being seized by Iranian-backed rebels or al-Qaeda, according to U.S. officials.With Yemen in turmoil and its government splintering, the Defense Department has lost its ability to monitor the whereabouts of small arms, ammunition, night-vision goggles, patrol boats, vehicles and other supplies donated by the United States….[.]

In recent weeks, members of Congress have held closed-door meetings with U.S. military officials to press for an accounting of the arms and equipment. Pentagon officials have said that they have little information to go on and that there is little they can do at this point to prevent the weapons and gear from falling into the wrong hands.

The tragicomedy of the apparent loss of these weapons has shined a light on our counterterrorism policy in now-collapsing Yemen, a subject few in our media care about, judging from the lack of coverage compared to, for example, burning questions about Hillary Clinton’s email server.  Our supposedly representative Congress held “closed-door” meetings with DOD officials last week, asking the Pentagon to account for all of this hardware. The Pentagon brass essentially shrugged its shoulders:

“We have to assume it’s completely compromised and gone,” said a legislative aide on Capitol Hill who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

Here’s what’s gone missing in Yemen, presumed lost and irretrievable:

• 1,250,000 rounds of ammunition
• 200 Glock 9 mm pistols
• 200 M-4 rifles
• 4 Huey II helicopters
• 2 Cessna 208 transport and surveillance aircraft
• 2 coastal patrol boats
• 1 CN-235 transport and surveillance aircraft
• 4 hand-launched Raven drones
• 160 Humvees
• 250 suits of body armor
• 300 sets of night-vision goggles

Here’s a Huey Helicopter. Four of these were apparently misplaced:

huey helicopter photo: Huey 67.jpg

Here’s a CN-235 Transport plane. Two of these are lying around somewhere, maybe with the two coastal patrol boats:

cn-235 photo: CN235 31_28A.jpg

Posted in Middle East, USAComments Off on Pentagon Admits It May Have Lost (SOLD) $500 Million in Weapons To Al-Qaeda

Shoah’s pages