New York Jewish Rabbi Charged with Stealing $12.4 Million from Disabled Kids


New York Jewish rabbi Samuel Hiller and three others have been indicted for stealing over $12.4 million in public aid for disabled children.

The charges include grand larceny, identity theft, and falsifying business records at one of the city’s largest providers of special education services for disabled children, according to a news release issued Tuesday by Queens County District Attorney Richard Brown. “It is disheartening to see a betrayal of the magnitude alleged in this indictment,” Brown said in a statement.

The men allegedly diverted money belonging to Island Child Development Center, which serves Orthodox preschool children with disabilities, used it for personal expenses, home repairs and other business endeavors.

If convicted, each of the men would face up to 25 years in prison.

The fraud was uncovered when the center’s former executive director ran off with his records just before a scheduled routine annual audit meeting in July 2012.

The center received roughly $27 million in state funding between 2005 and 2012.

The defendants were identified as Rabbi Samuel Hiller, 56, of Far Rockaway in the borough of Queens, Kurman, 52, of Hewlett, the former executive director of the nonprofit center in Far Rockaway from which the New York state and city funding was taken; Daniel Laniado, 41, the owner of a kosher supermarket in Brooklyn; and Roy Hoffmann, 50, of Woodmere.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI0 Comments

Wicked Games: US ‘Uses Terrorism as Main Mechanism of Its Foreign Policy’

Image result for US ‘Uses Terrorism CARTOON

In an interview with RT, Russian military analyst Alexander Zhilin said that US media allegations that Russia is pursuing its own interests in Syria are “absolute nonsense”, given that Moscow “cooperates there with the legitimately elected president.”

He also pointed to Washington’s hypocritical statements about the necessity of fighting terrorism, saying they came as the White House continued to use terrorism as a major mechanism of its foreign policy.

“Just think about it: if a country with a military budget exceeding  the consolidated budget of all the countries in the world uses terrorism as the main instrument of its foreign policy, fighting terrorism is almost impossible”, Zhilin said.

He also lashed out at US President Barack Obama and US Secretary of State John Kerry repeatedly calling for the ouster of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

“My question is: who are you to make such calls? It means Obama who bombed out half the world’s territory must not step down, while Assad must step down, right? It is the wrong approach,” he said.

According to him, Washington currently wages so-called network-centric warfare against Moscow, a military doctrine pioneered by the US Department of Defense in the 1990s. The goal is to translate an information advantage, enabled in part by information technology, into a competitive advantage through the robust computer networking of a well-informed, geographically decentralized force.

“The United States has started a propaganda [war] against Russia, which is why it is creating an anti-Russian coalition with the participation of Saudi ArabiaTurkey and the US private military companies,” he pointed out.

Zhilin expressed regret about foreign media outlets, including CNN and the BBC, being involved in this war and misinforming their readers about Russia’s air campaign in Syria. He recalled that Russia’s “participation in Syria suggests the support of the legitimately elected president,” and that “it was Washington which started the invasion without getting the UN’s go-ahead.”

“You know, I’m very sorry that the BBC and CNN, once respected media outlets, have turned into primitive propaganda and disinformation news agencies,” he said.

Zhilin’s remarks came shortly after CNN reported that the Russian air support had allowed the Syrian Army to begin liberating the strategic city of Aleppo, which was seized by militants several years ago. At the same time, CNN alleged that in Syria, Russia does not only struggle with Daesh militants but also pursues its own interests.

Posted in USA0 Comments

On Progressive Democrats: Sanders v. Clinton



by Richard Falk

In past years, I tried to distance myself from ‘liberals’ by describing myself as ‘progressive.’ It was admittedly a middle ground between being a liberal, which I associated with being a comforter of the established order while opting for humane policies at the margins, and being a ‘radical’ or ‘leftist,’ which struck me as terms of self-exile outside domains of relevant discourse. My basic objection to liberals and their agenda was that they swallowed ‘the system’ whole while excusing themselves by claiming the mantle of realism and moral concern.

In my view, American structures of militarism and capitalism needed to be transformed in socialist directions if humanity was to have a positive future, and this is what the liberals I knew didn’t want to hear about, believing that such structural criticisms would hand the government over to Republicans by alienating the mainstream and thus be a prescription for the self-destruction of the Democratic Party, and political darkness.

In my lifetime there never was a progressive presidential candidate in my sense, although George McGovern came close, as did Gene McCarthy, and their political failures, were often cited as proof that the practical wisdom of the liberal position should be heeded. Whenever I acknowledged having voted for the third party candidate, Ralph Nader, in the 2000 elections, the best that I could hope for from my liberal friends was scorn, followed by the allegation of irresponsibility, pointing out that the Florida outcome would likely have gone Al Gore’s way if Nader’s name had not been on the ballot, and attracted the vote of some 90,000 wayward citizens. And so the misery of the George W. Bush years would have been avoided, and in its place the lesser misery of Gore would have been experienced.


With these considerations in mind, I am startled by the amusing controversy between Hilary Clinton and Bernie Sanders as to whether Clinton is entitled to claim the mantle of ‘progressive.’ What seems odd and unexpected is that both candidates competing for support among Democrats, avoid any reference to being a ‘liberal’ and both proudly claim to be a ‘progressive.’ Actually, when challenged, Clinton does behave like a liberal, claiming realism is on her side, and dismissing Sanders transformative proposals (on health care, college tuition, wages, tax reform) as not achievable. In contrast, she bases her appeal on a commitment to finish what Obama started and a record of getting things done.

In other words, she shares the abstract language of Sanders, but when it comes down to it, her promised contributions will be limited to the margins, identifying her in ways characteristic of her long political career—as a liberal. In fairness I suppose both candidates and their minders have made linguistic calculations. In Sanders’ case it is to run away as far as possible from being called ‘a socialist’ and for Clinton it seems to be wanting to avoid the deadend boredom of being classified as ‘a liberal.’

If I had to associate the word liberal with a particular set of views, I would probably select Nicholas Kristof, a regular opinion page columnist for the New York Times, as exemplifying the liberal worldview. And sure enough, in a true liberal mode Kristof jumped to Clinton’s defense with a condescending pat on Barry Sander’s back along the way. Under the headline “2 Questions For Bernie Sanders” [NYT, February 4, 2016] Kristof puts forward the usual liberal ‘higher wisdom’: first, Sanders’ sweeping proposals would never get enacted in the real world of Washington politics, and secondly, nominating a self-proclaimed ‘socialist’ would alienate American voters to such an extent as virtually to assure the election of a dangerous Republican reactionary such as Ted Cruz. There is no doubt that the current makeup of Congress would block the policymaking ambitions of any Democrat who lands in the White House, whether Clinton or Sanders, but if this is the case then the election is almost as irrelevant as many young people have believed in the past, at least until Obama and now Sanders came along. This cynicism is itself dangerously simplistic as a Democrat as president at least can be counted on to do less harm.

No sensible person would doubt that these practical considerations are serious concerns, but they must be balanced against the deep structural deformation long associated with neoliberal capitalism and geopolitical militarism. For too long these deeper maladies of American politics have been swept under the rug in deference to the imperatives of practical politics, and Kristof never dares even entertains an assessment of why it might finally make sense to give up on the liberal option.

In my view, Bernie Sanders is a true progressive because he has the courage to confront structurally Wall Street America, although he can claim only the weak form of progressivism as he has yet to confront Pentagon America. Sanders contends that his movement is a call for ‘revolution’ but if that is the claim then to be fully credible it must also call into question the American Global Domination Project, involving the network of foreign bases, naval supremacy throughout the world’s oceans, nuclear modernization program, and the ambitious militarizing plans for the management of space. In the meantime, while impatient for the revolution needed in America, I greatly prefer a true progressive to a disguised liberal, and so did 84% of the young voters who backed Sanders over Clinton in Iowa.

Posted in USA0 Comments

Zionist Elizabeth Warren Defends Nazi Shelling of Gaza Schools, Hospitals


Image result for elizabeth warren cartoons

Zach Carter

The Israeli military has the right to attack Palestinian hospitals and schools in self defense if Hamas has put rocket launchers next to them, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said last week at a local town hall, according to the Cape Cod Times.

Warren, in defending her vote to send funds to Israel in the middle of its war with Hamas, said she thinks civilian casualties are the “last thing Israel wants.”

“But when Hamas puts its rocket launchers next to hospitals, next to schools, they’re using their civilian population to protect their military assets. And I believe Israel has a right, at that point, to defend itself,” she said.

Israeli tanks shelled schools and hospitals during the most recent conflict in Gaza. The Israeli government claimed at the time that rockets and militants had been located nearby. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency condemned militants for hiding rockets in two schools, and also sharply criticized Israeli attacks on other schools as.

The Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War prohibits attacks on hospitals, “unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.” Even under those circumstances, civilian hospitals can only be attacked “after due warning has been given, naming, in all appropriate cases, a reasonable time limit and after such warning has remained unheeded.”

Warren argued that Israel’s use of force was justified by the violence in the region. “America has a very special relationship with Israel,” she said. “Israel lives in a very dangerous part of the world, and a part of the world where there aren’t many liberal democracies and democracies that are controlled by the rule of law. And we very much need an ally in that part of the world.”

She also questioned whether to condition future U.S. funding for Israel on the halting of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. “I think there’s a question of whether we should go that far,” Warren said.

Israel is indeed a democracy. The nation’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a member of the Likud Party, whose founding charter calls for the destruction of any Palestinian state; Hamas’ founding document calls for the same for Israel, though it recently joined a unity government that says it will recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Warren has been on the receiving end of sporadic criticism over the years from progressives for a hawkish if hesitant approach to foreign policy, which she appears to prefer to avoid in favor of domestic economic policy.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), another favorite of progressives, has also come under fire from his base for his defense of Israel. A recent town hall got testy, with constituents and the senator exchanging harsh words, and Sanders ending on a note of resignation. “This is a very depressing and difficult issue. This has gone on for 60 bloody years,” he said. “If you’re asking me, do I have a magical solution? I don’t. And you know what, I doubt very much that you do.”

UPDATE: 8/29 — Shahar Azani, spokesman for the Consulate General of Israel In New York, responded in a statement:

Israel’s government and its Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu have repeatedly accepted the calls for a two state solution, saying in his “Bar Ilan Speech” that “We are ready to agree to a real peace agreement, a demilitarized Palestinian state side by side with the Jewish state.” Needless to say this government is led by the Likud party, whose leader is Prime Minister Netanyahu. There have been countless recent reaffirmations of the Israeli government’s belief in “two states for two peoples” as the end result of a negotiated deal.

Hamas has not changed their ideology or practices since they were founded in 1987. They are still one of the region’s most dangerous Islamic terrorist organizations who celebrate the kidnapping and murder of innocent children, perpetrated numerous suicide bombing attacks on Israeli buses and only recently launched thousands of rockets indiscriminately with the goal to kill as many Israelis, Jews and non-Jews, as possible.

It is highly inappropriate to insinuate that Hamas now somehow recognizes Israel’s right to exist just days after a recent conflict ended with a senior Hamas spokesperson saying that “The time has come for us to say that the true war is not aimed at opening border crossings. Our true war is aimed at the liberation of Jerusalem, Allah willing.” Hamas has never once claimed that it would live side by side with the State of Israel.


In July, Netanyahu told the Times of Israel, “I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan,” a remark widely viewed as a rejection of a two-state solution.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZI0 Comments

The trumpeter and his trumpet


Abdulrazaq Magaji

In a world where more people are busy buying and blowing their trumpets, Mr. Trump knows he is the appropriate person to blow his own trumpet. And boy, has he made a success of his new found vocation.

You do not need the statement of a run-of-the-mill prophet or parapsychologist on this: Donald Trump will fly the flag of the Republican Party in the November 4 presidential election in the United States. He will face Hilary Rodham Clinton, former first lady, former US secretary of state and sitting member of the senate of the United States’ of America who will fly the Democratic Party flag. On November 5, newspapers will carry screaming headlines to tell the story of how Trump was trumped! It really does not matter how anyone feels about it.

Before then, it is okay for Mr. Trump to turn himself into one jolly good trumpeter. Blow on, man! After all, the man has enough dough to buy more trumpets than he will ever need. And, trumpets are meant to be blown, anyway. In a world where more people are busy buying and blowing their trumpets, Mr. Trump knows he is the appropriate person to blow his own trumpet. And boy, has he made a success of his new found vocation.

Mr. Trump has blown himself into contention. As it is, he is leading the pack in the race for the presidential ticket of the Republican Party. Of course, the Democrats will be happy with the trend and many of them will be praying, may be, even working for the eventual emergence of Trump, another ‘soft’ opponent. The other time, another ‘soft’ opponent, John McCain got caned in the process of re-writing American history when he literally made Barack Obama the first person of colour to be elected US president. The stage is set for Trump to give America its first female president.

Trump must be a great American patriot. Aside this, he is rich, talks tough and cares no hoot that smiling could be therapeutic. His dour nature, the lack of mirth in his smile whenever he chooses to flash one and his gung-ho outlook makes him the spokesperson of the endangered American extreme far-right! Sadly, the man has proved to be a poor student of history. Like McCain before him, Trump does not even know that his compatriots are increasingly turning their back to stiff necked politicians.

It is even more intriguing that Mr. Trump does not even seem to know that beyond the challenge of global terrorism, the world is getting safer and more Americans believe the world is capable of taking more steps away from the precipice. It is sheer modesty that made critics to classify Mr. Trump as an elephant in the room. He is worse than that: place Mr. Trump in the Oval Office and the world would be a heartbeat away from a major conflagration. The mere fact that the man aspires to the presidency of the United States of America has turned all of us into emergency prayer warriors.

And, this is for good reason. Being the American patriot that he is, Mr. Trump has vowed to restore what he calls America’s lost glory if he gets elected in November. To that effect, he will, within hours of being inaugurated, throw Muslims out of America, banish Muslims from entering the United States of America and throw out African immigrants especially those from Nigeria because they have taken over jobs meant for Americans. For all Mr. Trump cares, it makes no difference that the African immigrants he accuses of taking jobs meant for Americans are products of the normally-high American spirit of competitiveness.

Of course, Mr. Trump will promote a hawkish foreign policy. For instance, Trump believes the two-state solution to resolve the Arab-Israeli crisis, a major fuel that drives global terrorism, has to be reviewed since it does not guarantee the safety of Israel. If he feels Palestinians are unformed people, as Senator McCain once suggested, Mr. Trump was modest not to voice it.

Mr. Trump has also served notice that he will put Iran where it rightly belongs. To do this, the Iran nuclear deal will be fed to the shredding machine because it treated Iran as an ally, instead of an implacable adversary, of the United States of America. Mr. Trump has also sent clear signals to the Russians and Iranians and their allies to the effect that their funny game of propping the shaky government of Syrian president, Bashir al-Assad, will come to grief if he wins the election. And, the man is dead serious.

As a mark of his seriousness, Mr. Trump has continued to talk tough and act tough. He believes, like many Americans, that so many things are wrong with America. Problem is, his idea of kicking every ass as a way of forcing America and the world to subscribe to his ideal America does not appear to sit with most of his compatriots. Even as a candidate, Mr. Trump does not shy away from wielding the big stick. If he is not calling the bluff of presidential debate organisers, Mr. Trump is busy throwing out demonstrators from his campaigns or sullying handicapped questioners at campaign venues.

There is the temptation to dismiss Mr. Trump as a disgruntled, bigmouthed American who has seized the opportunity of the campaigns to vent his bottled-up anger. Otherwise, no serious politician in today’s supposedly civilised and liberal America will glamourize hate speech and display unrestrained love for impunity. Aside the famed American system that has a way of fencing controversial individuals from the White House, it is about time psychiatry tests became a major requirement for the US presidency.

There is nothing to suggest that Mr. Trump is nutty. Just a controversial trumpeter, may be. Fear is, his courage thus far heightens the prospect of a loaded escapee from a nuthouse getting to talk and, may be, buy his way to the White House.

Posted in USA0 Comments

Pentagon plans for renewed war in Libya




Abayomi Azikiwe

Reports abound of foreign troops’ presence and plans for major Western deployment motivated by the instability, and the threat of terrorism and to take decisive military action to check ISIL’s expansion.

General Joseph F. Dunford, Jr., the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was quoted recently as saying that the United States is preparing, in conjunction with its imperialist allies, a renewed military campaign in Libya.

Speaking as if the US had a limited or even a non-existent role in the current military and security crisis in the North African state, Pentagon officials along with other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) including France, Britain and Italy, are saying they are motivated by the instability and threat of terrorism posed by the situation, particularly the seizure of territory along the western Mediterranean coast by the so-called “Islamic State”.

Gen. Dunford said with reference to a deepening interventionist policy toward Libya, ‘You want to take decisive military action to check ISIL’s expansion, and at the same time you want to do it in such a way that’s supportive of a long-term political process… I think it’s pretty clear to all of us – French, US alike – that whatever we do is going to be in conjunction with the new government,’ referring to the neo-colonial dominated regime that United Nations Libyan envoy Martin Kobler has been attempting to mould together.

There are two rival regimes stemming from a split within the political forces, which were installed in the aftermath of the war of regime change carried out in 2011. Rebel organisations, including many who had been labelled as “terrorists”, were funded, armed, given diplomatic support and media acceptance by the US State Department, the British Foreign Office and others in an effort to impose them as “legitimate” leaders of the oil-rich country.

At present the Pentagon and State Department efforts are ostensibly being carried out against the growing influence of the so-called Islamic State, which has taken control of several cities and towns on the Mediterranean coast. Washington has been fighting a low-level war against IS in Iraq, Syria and now Libya. Nonetheless, the intervention of the Russian Federation during the concluding months of 2015 has been rejected by the administration of President Barack Obama as unwarranted interference designed to bolster the internationally-recognised government of President Bahsar al-Assad in Damascus.

However, with specific reference to Libya, Gen. Dunford stresses that action needs to be taken soon, perhaps not days but weeks, he has emphasised in a statement to the press. ‘My perspective is we need to do more. Quickly is weeks not hours,’ the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff noted.


Setting the stage for such an intervention has been politically dependent upon the securing of a purported unity accord between the two rival factions claiming “legitimacy” in the North African state. Although there have been numerous announcements of an agreement, most ranking elements within the General National Congress in Tripoli and the House of Representatives in Tobruk have rejected the terms of the peace treaty.

In addition to problems between both Libyan camps, some have rejected the notion of a foreign military occupation. If the elements opposed to imperialist intervention maintain their position, it could easily signal a much more complicated and contentious tenure for the proposed force of 6,000 troops, which will ostensibly be led by Italy, the former colonial power in Libya prior to independence in 1951.

An article published by Colin Freeman on January 21 said: ‘A senior figure in Libya’s new unity government has warned that the country may be unwilling to accept British troops in its fight against Isil’s growing presence. Ahmed Mateeq, the newly appointed deputy prime minister, said that Libya “did not need” to take up the offer from Britain of 1,000 soldiers to train Libyan troops.” (The Telegraph, UK)

Such a statement delivered only a few days after the announcement of a unity accord aimed at ending a year and a half of civil war between the US-backed forces installed by Washington and Brussels, could signal the unravelling of the entire scheme. If imperialist forces are fired on by Libyan political groups who are supposedly party to the UN-brokered agreement, this could bring an even higher degree of instability to the country and the region.

Freeman in the same above-mentioned article pointed out that, ‘Mr Mateeq said that while Western help was welcome in terms of “logistical and technical support”, most Libyans would not accept the presence of foreign troops on their soil. This is highly sensitive for Libyans and we prefer to look after the Libyan soil ourselves. At the moment I don’t think we could accept that, although we do view the British as our friends and allies.”

Mateeq is a member of the 32-member ministerial regime established in late January capping off more than 18 months of heated talks mediated by Kobler, a German career diplomat who has been involved in other imperialist war scenarios including Iraq and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Even if Kobler and his Western backers can strong arm the divided rival regimes into accepting the unity accord this does not take into consideration the hundreds of other armed militias that are roaming the country acting, in many cases, as a law unto themselves.

The Telegraph correspondent Freeman emphasised that ‘Contrary to Mr Mateeq’s remarks, diplomats close to the UN negotiations on the new unity government said last weekend that they thought the new unity government was likely to accept the British offer [of indefinite foreign occupation], as long as the troops were confined to a training role.’

Nonetheless, he continued, ‘A previous British training arrangement for Libyan troops ended in chaos two years ago when Libyan soldiers stationed at Bassingbourn Barracks were accused of sexual assault. Diplomats say that with hindsight, the mission should have been carried out on Libyan rather than UK soil.’

Moreover, a report by the Al-Arabiya news website on January 23 claimed that Russian troops were also present in Libya purportedly in support of the unity accord negotiated by the UN envoy Kobler. This article says: ‘Dozens of British, Russia and American troops have arrived in Libya in support for the weak internationally-recognised government in Tobruk, London-based daily Asharq al-Awsat reported. The daily also said French troops are expected to arrive soon for the same purpose.’

This article also says, ‘The officers and soldiers are currently stationed in Jamal Abdulnasir military base south of Tobruk where the parliament is holding its sessions in the city. Witnesses in the base, meanwhile, said the number of foreign troops has grown to 500 in the past three weeks, but a security official, who spoke under the condition of anonymity, said they are just dozens.’

The claims of Russian involvement remain to be verified. Russia has played a critical role in defending the Syria Government by assisting the national military in retaking large swaths of territory inside the embattled state.


These discussions are taking place amid the presidential primary campaigns where one leading Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, played a key role in the blockades, massive bombing and rebel ground war against the Jamahiriya Government led by Colonel Muammar Gaddafi five years ago. Apart from the Congressional hearings held last year over the attacks on the Benghazi compound occupied by Ambassador Christopher Stevens along with diplomatic personnel and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) personnel in September 2012, the question of the role of Clinton in the Libyan destabilisation, bombing and subsequent chaotic security situation, which has fostered instability across North and West Africa, has not been brought to the debates or evoked by the corporate media.

The region is far more unstable than at any time in over four decades when a war was fought between Egypt and Israel in 1973, prompting an oil embargo and the consequent economic crisis inside the US during this period. Later on in 1978-79, the Egyptian government of the-then President Anwar Sadat, under tremendous pressure from Washington, signed a separate peace agreement with Tel Aviv.

This agreement with Israel effectively neutralised the role of Cairo in the struggle for the independence of Palestine. At present the bulk of discussion centreing around North African and Middle Eastern affairs focuses on the role of IS, al-Qaeda and other so-called “Islamist extremist organisations”.

This narrative provides a rationale and political justification for a permanent imperialist occupation of the regions negating the right to self-determination for the states involved.

Posted in Libya, USA0 Comments

SHOKING: HUGE Scandal – Chelsea Clinton Is NOT Bill’s Daughter?

chelsea clinton

It appears Chelsea Clinton’s real father is Webster Hubbell, the former Mayor of Little Rock, Arkansas. Hubbell was a law partner at Rose Law Firm with Hillary, and became one of the most important Clinton-insiders.

Then-Governor Clinton appointed Hubbell as Chief Justice of the Arkansas State Supreme Court, but 10 years later he resigned before pleading guilty to federal mail fraud and tax evasion for overbilling clients. Hubbell served 15 months in prison.

The New Yorker reported on rumors that Hillary Clinton’s affair was first noticed in 1984 at the Governor’s Mansion during Bill’s second term, but had started long before.

Apparently, Bill Clinton is infertile. This raises serious character questions about Hillary Clinton… If she was elected, this type of sex scandal could open her up to blackmail.

Robert Morrow claimed:

“His exact words were, ‘I shoot blanks.’ Stunned by what I’d just heard, I asked him, ‘Then what about Chelsea?’ And he said, ‘Oh, Webb (Hubbell) sired her.’”

As the National Enquirer reported (the same tabloid which broke the John Edwards sex scandal), the accusation was being made by former Clinton aide Larry Nichols.

“According to well-respected author Edward Klein’s (2005) book, The Truth about Hillary, Bill discovered his wife was pregnant by reading it in the ‘Arkansas Gazette.’”

“It’s unfortunate, sad really, that Chelsea has no real relationship with Hubbell – who I believe to be her real biological father – when he’s alive and kicking and living in North Carolina.

“But it could be she’s in denial, despite overwhelming proof that Webb is her real dad.”

“Whatever Chelsea does or doesn’t know about her paternity, I’m sure she considers Bill her real dad — despite there being no blood ties,” Nichols said. “I saw firsthand what a doting, loving father he was to his little girl.

“He always treated her as if she was his own – which in his heart, I believe she’s always been – from day one.”

And, as an update, the National Enquirer attempted a DNA test and Hubble was NOT excluded as the possible father:

The ENQUIRER approached Webb, 67, at a book signing in Durham, N.C., on July 18, 2014. He was promoting his political thriller ironically titled, “When Men Betray.”

Webb arrived to a crowd of about 10 people in attendance – including an ENQUIRER reporter posing as a fan.

Our reporter presented a brand new Sharpie pen and a pristine copy of the book. Webb signed his name in the book – and even agreed to place both the book and the Sharpie pen in a protective bag.

“Webb was more than accommodating. He just thought I was some kind of super fan,” said the reporter, who also retrieved a large Starbucks drink that Webb had been drinking from – which was later tested for additional saliva and DNA!

Chelsea’s DNA was much more difficult to acquire. As a former First Daughter, she’s constantly guarded by Secret Service agents or an entourage from her dad’s Clinton Foundation – where she serves as Vice Chairwoman.

On April 9, however, The ENQUIRER was there as Chelsea spoke about public health initiatives at Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston.

The undercover ENQUIRER reporter posed as a high school student visiting Harvard on a college tour. As Chelsea exited the auditorium, the teenager followed with a new Sharpie and a clean copy of Hillary’s authorized biography, “Living History.”

“Chelsea, I admire you so much! Can you sign your mother’s book for me?” the teen gushed.

Eager to please, Chelsea signed the book for the teenager – who quickly returned it, along with the Sharpie pen tucked inside, to an ENQUIRER reporter.

The samples were taken to a genetics lab in the Southeastern United States – which agreed to do the testing on the agreement that The ENQUIRER not publish its name.

The forensic examination of the samples could not disprove that Webb was Chelsea’s father – with the official result being “inconclusive.”

Here are some striking photos which show how similar Hubble and Chelsea Clinton look.

chelsea clinton2

chelsea clinton3

chelsea clinton4


Posted in USA0 Comments



Robert Ford was US Ambassador to Syria when the revolt against Syrian president Assad was launched. He not only was a chief architect of regime change in Syria, but actively worked with rebels to aid their overthrow of the Syrian government.

Ford assured us that those taking up arms to overthrow the Syrian government were simply moderates and democrats seeking to change Syria’s autocratic system. Anyone pointing out the obviously Islamist extremist nature of the rebellion and the foreign funding and backing for the jihadists was written off as an Assad apologist or worse.

Ambassador Ford talked himself blue in the face reassuring us that he was only supporting moderates in Syria. As evidence mounted that the recipients of the largesse doled out by Washington was going to jihadist groups, Ford finally admitted early last year that most of the moderates he backed were fighting alongside ISIS and al-Qaeda. Witness this incredible Twitter exchange with then-ex Ambassador Ford:


Then late last year the McClatchy News Service ran an article in which Ambassador Ford admitted that his “moderates” regularly collaborated with ISIS and al-Qaeda to the point where he no longer thought the US government should be arming them.

So those who pointed out that the rebellion in Syria was foreign-driven and jihadist from the start were no longer crazy conspiracy theorists, but were rather conspiracy factists.

Did that stop Ford from pushing radicals, though? Hardly!

As the Syria peace talks are scheduled to begin within days in Geneva, with a main sticking point being whether to admit groups that have allied with al-Qaeda to the negotiating table as potential leaders of “new Syria,” it is extremely instructive to recall what Ambassador Ford said about one such group, Ahrar al-Sham, to a BBC interviewer last October.

Ahrar al-Sham, according to experts including those at Stanford University, “was founded by members of Al Qaeda and maintains links to AQ’s core leadership.” The group vigorously rejects the notion of an elected government in Syria after the overthrow of Assad, instead calling for:

…a Divine system prescribed for his Caliph and slaves… It is the system where the rule is for the pure Islamic law. Allah’s law is complete, and you need only consider the texts and derive rules.

Ahrar al-Sham has been reported by Christian rights groups in Syria to have executed Christians in Idlib, Syria, after they captured the town last year. The Christians committed the “crime” of not following Sharia law.

Sounds like a pretty bad group, but nevertheless it still has its Western cheerleaders…including Ambassador Robert Ford!

Here’s Ford in an interview with the BBC last October about Ahrar al-Sham (emphasis added):

Stephen Sackur BBC: “Ok, let me ask bluntly, Ahrar al Sham (The Free Men of Syria) group, one of the most powerful groups you would call “moderate”, is it really moderate when a group like that proclaims its desire to see Sharia as the driving force of a “future Syria”.. which clearly makes comments which suggest that Alawites and Christians would find it very difficult to find a place in their Syria…. Are these moderate?? You regard this as moderation?”

Robert Ford: “This is how I define as a moderate in the Syrian context, Stephen; a moderate is a group that accepts there has to be a political negotiation and there has to be a political process after a transition government is set up.. a political process to determine the future permanent government of Syria.. That there must be pluralism in that process… and it’s one that works with other groups/ factions in a pluralistic setting…I don’t agree at all with Ahrar al Sham’s desires to set up an Islamic State (in Syria).. but I have to admit that they accept the needs to be a political negotiation.. I have to admit they’re willing to work with other groups and they do on the ground with great effect…This is one of the reasons, they’re strong as they are, as you mentioned… It’s not a group I ever want my daughter to marry into… I don’t agree with their vision of society…but I would not call them Jihadis, they’re not looking to impose an Islamic State at sword point… Different, they’re therefore, from alQaida… Different therefore from the Islamic State..And they’re willing to accept even such things as Parliament…and some kind of government institutions… So, yes they want Sharia … but the kind of Sharia they want may in fact, in the end, not look like the kind of Sharia the “Islamic State” already imposing over most of central and Eastern of Syria…”

Is it any surprise that Syria is in the current disastrous state, where hundreds of thousands have died in a war instigated by those who knew from the beginning would only benefit radical Islamist extremists? Is there no justice for those who push such murder and mayhem on such a grand scale? Today, as civilized people recognize International Holocaust Remembrance Day, is Nuremberg dead?

Posted in Syria, USA0 Comments

100s of Those Killed by US Drone Strikes in Pakistan Remain Unidentified

Image result for Drone CARTOON

Of thousands killed in US drone attacks in Pakistan since 2004, less than one third of the victims have been identified, including a record low number of ten last year, according to an international investigation.

UK-based not-for-profit organization revealed the figures in the framework of their “Naming the Dead” project. Initially created for tracking US drone strikes in countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia, the project seeks to identify casualties, calling for accountability for the attacks.

According to project data, of 2,494 people confirmed killed by American drone strikes in Pakistan, only 729 have been identified. In 2015 the names of those killed was extremely small – only ten of 60 allegedly killed by drones.

Five of ten victims were pronounced members of Al Qaeda, another three were named Pakistani Taliban fighters and the last two were aid workers from Western states.

The US carried out 13 drone attacks in Pakistan in 2015, killing about 60 people. While unnamed sources revealed to Naming the Dead that the vast majority of victims in the six attacks were Uzbeks, the data on the rest of those killed remains scarce.

In 2015, Pakistan authorities declined to assist in the identification process of victims, for the first time since the US launched its drone campaign.According to Common Dreams, ISPR, the Pakistani military propaganda division, could have banned the release of data pertaining to the issue. Islamabad has started a military campaign against terrorists and other non-state groups in Waziristan in 2014, preventing data from being leaked.

ISI, Pakistan’s spy agency, is reportedly keeping secret the names of those murdered in drone attacks across the state’s tribal areas. Before 2015, the agency used to provide reporters and officials with the lion’s share of information on casualties, including those caused by American unmanned aerial vehicles.

ISI is still providing journalists with the names of Taliban and al Qaeda members murdered by US drones in Afghanistan.

But, as the Bureau announced, both Afghan and Pakistan officials tend to underestimate the number of casualties in bordering regions. They reported on 700 killed in drone attacks in 2015. In reality, Naming the Dead says at least 100 more people were killed.According to Washington, a total of 411 air and drone strikes were conducted in Afghanistan last year. But that’s all the authorities announced, leaving no specific information of number of killed people there.

See also:

Taliban Denies Group’s Responsibility for Pakistan University Attack

Posted in Pakistan & Kashmir, USA0 Comments

Carter Welcomes Zio-Wahhabi ’Boots on Ground’ Offer in anti-ISIL Campaign


By: Kitty Moses

Image result for ISIS FLAG

Saudi Zio-Wahhabi flag

The US defense chief welcomed reports on Thursday about Saudi Zio-Wahhabi willingness to deploy troops in Syria, noting that he would discuss the issue with his Zio-Wahhabi slaves in Brussels next week.

During an interview with the Zio-Wahhabi al-Arabiya TV channel on Thursday, Zio-Wahhabi military spokesman Brigadier General Ahmed al-Asiri said Riyadh “is ready to participate in any ground operations that the coalition may agree to carry out in Syria”.

“That kind of news is very welcome. I look forward to discussing that with the Zio-Wahhabi defense minister next week – and other kinds of contributions that Zio-Wahhabi regime can make,” Secretary of Defense Ash Carter told reporters at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada.

Carter is going to meet defense ministers of 26 countries, which are part of the US-led coalition countering the so-called ‘Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’ (ISIL) takfiri group in Belgian capital Brussels.

The US defense chief acknowledged that the Zio-Wahhabi regime has indicated willingness to do more in the fight against ISIL, which western media reports revealed it receives funds from main regional countries including the Saudi Zio-Wahhabi regime.

“I should mention also Saudi Arabia has indicated a willingness to take the lead in marshaling some Muslim-majority countries,” he said.

Carter said that the Netherlands also pledged to support anti-ISIL operations in Syria last week, in addition to the Dutch government’s existing contributions to the campaign in Iraq.

“You see others stepping up, and the reason why I’m going to Brussels next week is to bring the full weight of the coalition behind accelerating the defeat of ISIL,” Carter said.

Posted in Saudi Arabia, USA0 Comments


Shoah’s pages

Join our mailing list

* = required field
February 2016
« Jan