Russia is to replace its old soviet made rigs with modern ones able to drill in shale oil deposits, which could be a boom for manufacturers like National Oilwell Varco of the US and China’s Honghua Group.

More than half of Russia’s 1,835 oil and gas rigs are over 20
years old, according to VTB Capital research. The
outdated rigs won’t be powerful or advanced enough for producers
such as Rosneft drilling in Siberia’s shale rock, Bloomberg
quotes field analysts.

Richard Anderson, the Chief Financial Officer of Russia’s largest
drilling rig operator, Eurasia Drilling, said that the US uses
250 rigs to produce just 700,000 barrels a day at the Bakken
shale formation. The Siberian Bazhenov formation is many times
larger, which means Russia needs several hundred new rigs.
Supplying that number of rigs at an average of $35 million would
cost $8.8 billion.

Rosneft and its partner Exxon Mobil, have just started to explore
the Bazhenov shale formation in Siberia. Bazhenov is estimated to
be the size of France, and could contain enough oil to more than
double Russia’s current reserves. The successful development of
Bazhenov is seen as vital to maintaining Russia’s reserves above
10 million barrels a day.

A lack of modern rigs remains a key stumbling block to developing
Bazhenov, Bloomberg quotes industry analysts. Hydraulic
fracturing, or fracking, at horizontal wells in Russia breaks
even at $90 a barrel without tax breaks, they estimate. Russia’s
Urals is trading at about $102 a barrel.

Deliveries of new rigs will reach a five-year high of 105 units
this year, according to VTB data. However, older rigs are being
quickly retired, which may result in a capacity squeeze.

“New drilling rigs must be built,” Bloomberg quotes Antony
Crawford, the head for National Oilwell in Russia, whose company
plans a factory east of Moscow. “This issue represents a clear
and present danger to Russia’s ability to maintain output during
the next three to five years.”

National Oilwell may sell five rigs to Russia-focused companies
this year, according to VTB. The largest US oil equipment
supplier competes with China’s Honghua and Russia’s OMZ for
orders. Oil is often more difficult to extract from shale rock
and drill bits often need to turn 90 degrees and continue
drilling horizontally, which is impossible with old rigs,
oilprice.com writes.

This article originally appeared on: RT

European business are missing out on opportunities in China to the tune of €17.5bn, and their optimism for things getting better is at an all-time low according to the EU Chamber of Commerce in China.

Rising labor costs as well as a slowing Chinese economy have
eroded the financial results of European companies operating in
China, the report said. As a result optimism nosedived to
its lowest level since the first survey in 2004. Most businesses
were pessimistic about their profitability in China in the next 2
years, with only 29% being optimistic.

The economic under-performance of China was a key reason for the
prevailing pessimism, Adam Dunnett, secretary general of the
European Chamber, told a press conference.

“The figures that we’ve seen coming out of the National Bureau
of Statistics… have shown… we are in for a longer haul, so I
think that has caught some people by surprise that it hasn’t been
a sooner recovery,” as France 24 quoted Mr. Dunnet.

2012 was the worst year for the Chinese economy this century,
having grown by 7.8%, which was followed by another frustrating
7.7% growth in 1Q 2013.

Limitations on market access, coupled with a tricky regulatory
environment that sometimes proves to be discriminatory, seem to
have become the last straw.

“Despite increasing rhetoric from senior Chinese leaders that
efforts will be undertaken to transform and level the regulatory
environment through allowing greater play to market forces,
European companies have so far perceived few concrete
changes,” said Davide Cucino, the chamber president.

The results of the survey come out amidst rising trade tension
between the world’s second largest economy and the EU, the
Financial Times says. The tariffs on Chinese solar panels that
the European Commission is set to impose comes as the major apple
of discord between the two.

 As soon as next week Karel De Gucht, EU Trade Commissioner,
is expected to introduce import tariffs on Chinese solar panels
averaging 47%. However, more than a half of the EU remains
against the tariff.

The other move by the EU that Beijing says is unjustified is an
investigation into Chinese telecoms equipment. Should the
trade dispute intensify, close commercial ties estimated at about
€1bn a day could be put at risk.

This article originally appeared on: RT

The new law obliging internationally-funded economic research centers to register as ‘foreign agents’ lacks common sense and could bring the economy back to Soviet-style, with everything controlled by the state, leading economists have warned.

In a letter published by Vedomosti daily, a 15 Russian academics
urge the government to reconsider the so-called ‘foreign agents’
law. They warn that incorrect application of this act may lead to
a closure of research centers and ruin cooperation between
independent economic analysts and the Russian authorities.

The highly-criticized and controversial law – which came into
force in November last year – obliges all politically-active
non-governmental organizations that receive foreign funding to
register as foreign agents.

Currently – because of loose wording in the document –
practically any non-profit organization may be forced to get that
label if it gets sponsorship from abroad and has ‘politics’ or
‘authorities’ mentioned in their charter, experts
say. 

The authors of the letter insist that the requirement should only
apply to organizations that are both sponsored from abroad and
serve the interests of a foreign state or company.

“That’s exactly the approach used in other countries that have
‘foreign agents’ concept,” the authors noted.

They opined that economists — as part of their profession — are
often involved in the development and the fulfillment of the
economic policy. That includes the implementation of initiatives
proposed by the government and discussions of reforms.

But since economics is a global science and because of
underdevelopment of socio-economic research in Russia, analysis
centers “seek cooperation with foreign partners” and look for
various sources for their funding — including from abroad. This
money is spent on education, including internship of Russian
students in other countries, economic research and the
publication of the results.

However, “the logic of Russian law enforcers suggests”
that almost the entire expert community in the country is
comprised of foreign agents, who must register in that status,
the academics observed. 

“In Russian the word ‘agent’ means a person who acts in
someone else’s interests, or a spy. We, on the contrary, have
always acted for the benefit of our country and are definitely
not spies. Therefore, registering as foreign agents would be
self-incrimination, which we can’t do,” they pointed out.

The government has made it clear it is interested in independent
economic analysis. According to the expert community it has been
trying to respond to this demand. However unannounced inspections
of NGOs by prosecutors put this cooperation at risk.

The state officials have repeatedly underlined that the goal of
the so-called foreign agents is to inform the public better on
the sources of income of NGOs involved in
politics. 

“All our actions are connected not with the closures of these
organizations, not with the ban, but with getting the cashflow
under control,” President Vladimir Putin said back in April.
“The freedom of NGOs is not limited in any way, they just
have to register.”

Twelve of the authors of the Vedomosti letter took part in the
drafting of the governmental project known as ‘Strategy-2020’ — a
plan for Russia’s social and economic development until the end
of the decade.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is currently on his nationwide “I’m probably running for president” tour. He’s made the requisite stops in the early election states of Iowa and New Hampshire, courting the GOP faithful and bringing the figurative freezers full of red meat to throw their way. Demonstrating impressive political savvy, he’s also making a habit of making bold statements that set him apart from potential Establishment competitors from both sides of the aisle.

He may be making the right rounds, shaking the right hands, and firing at the right targets, but if he’s serious about being elected president, Senator Paul should join the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). At least that is the incredibly bad advice offered by Jacob Heilbrunn to the freshman senator and scion of the libertarian-leaning Paul family.

In an article published on May 19 in The National Interest – a foreign policy journal – senior editor Heilbrunn suggests not only that Paul “put as much distance between himself” and those who consider the CFR and its globalist policies to be a threat to liberty and U.S. sovereignty, but, “for good measure” he should add CFR president Richard N. Haass as a consigliore.

Here’s Heilbrunn’s pitch:

Nothing would signal that Paul intends to be a serious candidate for the presidency [more] than reaching out to mainstream Republicans such as Haass. Haass is the antithesis of a neoconservative, and it is neocons who, by and large, dominate the GOP, at least when it comes to setting the terms of debate. Whether they wield much influence outside it is a matter of debate. But as one of the avatars of shifting the debate on foreign policy, Paul would do well to broaden his message. Obviously, Paul is not going to abandon his libertarian credo. But it’s hardly in conflict with tempering his message for a wider audience. His aim should be to present himself as a mainstream candidate espousing the revival of precepts that were successfully followed by GOP stalwarts such as Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and George H.W. Bush.

Broaden his message by appealing to the mainstream? That sounds like the none-too-successful strategy of several former GOP presidential contenders.

Beyond shilling for the perpetuation of the same-old-same-old, country club, Establishment partisan politics that have accelerated the decline of this country and its Constitution, Heilbrunn laments that Paul will hew too rigidly to the principles of civil libertarianism that are the essence of his broadening appeal.

And, speaking of that hoary Establishment claque, aren’t they the same group that Senator Paul described as “stale and moss-covered” during a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference in March?

Undaunted, after extolling Haass’ experience in both Bush (older and younger) administrations, Heilbrunn makes his final appeal to Paul to demonstrate his presidential pragmatism by adopting Haass’ worldview and promoting the CFR’s foreign policy proposals.

Just what is the Council on Foreign Relations? Are they indeed “a secretive organization, the agent of nefarious bankers intent on promoting world government” as Heilbrunn mockingly says “the right” believes them to be?

Or, alternatively, are they, as Heilbrunn claims, a “network of realist thinkers with government experience and serious intellectual attainments”?

In truth, for decades since its creation, the Council on Foreign Relations has been the “mother ship” of the internationalist Establishment and the source of marching orders for the successive State Departments.

Perhaps the best evidence of the influence of this organization was revealed during a speech delivered at CFR headquarters in New York City in 2009, by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In her remarks, Clinton offered an accurate and chilling assessment of the relationship between the CFR and American foreign policymakers: “We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.”

How prevalent have members of the CFR been in the highest ranks of American politics?

The administrations of every president since Franklin D. Roosevelt have been filled with members of the CFR. From cabinet-level secretaries to the lowest-ranking sub-bureaucrat, presidents have turned to the CFR as the in-house personnel pool.

This path has been faithfully followed by every president – Republican or Democrat – including Barack Obama.

For a full and frightening account of the origin, purposes, and practices of the CFR, readers should turn to James Perloff’s seminal book on the subject, The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline. Originally published in 1988, the information provided by Perloff is timeless and timely.

What follows is a brief recitation of Perloff’s account of the inception and influence of the CFR. This synopsis, taken from Perloff’s article “Council on Foreign Relations: Influencing American Government” in the August 3, 2009 issue of The New American magazine, should serve as a primer for readers unfamiliar with the group, as well as a warning to Senator Paul to ignore the advice of Jacob Heilbrunn and anyone else who would see him abandon his constitutional conservatism in favor of the staid, secretive, sovereignty-eroding globalism of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Power Behind the Throne

In theory, America’s government is supposed to be “of the people, by the people, for the people.” While this concept rang true in early America, and many individuals still trust in it, the last century has seen the reality of power increasingly shift from the people to an establishment rooted in banking, Wall Street, and powerful multinational corporations. Syndicated columnist Edith Kermit Roosevelt, granddaughter of Teddy Roosevelt, explained:

The word “Establishment” is a general term for the power elite in international finance, business, the professions and government, largely from the northeast, who wield most of the power regardless of who is in the White House. Most people are unaware of the existence of this “legitimate Mafia.” Yet the power of the Establishment makes itself felt from the professor who seeks a foundation grant, to the candidate for a cabinet post or State Department job. It affects the nation’s policies in almost every area.

Roosevelt added that this group’s goal is “a One World Socialist state governed by ‘experts’ like themselves.” 

David Rockefeller, the longtime chairman (and now chairman emeritus) of the CFR, acknowledged the role of the establishment in trying to lead America in the one-world direction in his 2002 book Memoirs:

For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists” and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.

Two major means the establishment employs for controlling government policy: (1) through its influence within the two major parties and the mass media, it can usually assure that both the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates will be its own hand-picked men; (2) by stacking presidential cabinets with CFR members at key positions – especially those involving defense, finance, foreign policy, and national security – it can assure that America will move in the direction it wants.

Since the council’s founding in 1921, 21 secretaries of defense or war, 19 secretaries of the treasury, 17 secretaries of state, and 15 CIA directors have hailed from the Council on Foreign Relations.



Background


Prior to the CFR’s founding, what Congressman Charles Lindbergh, Sr. (the father of the famous aviator) called the “Money Trust” – a cabal of international bankers including the houses of Rockefeller, Morgan, and Rothschild – conspired to create the Federal Reserve System. Their agents, such as Paul Warburg and Benjamin Strong, who had secretly planned the Fed at a nine-day meeting on Jekyll Island, were then put in charge of the system itself. This gave them control of American interest rates, and, by virtue of this, control of the stock market, as well as the capacity to have the U.S. government spend without limit by having the Fed create money from nothing. The result has been decades of inflation and skyrocketing national debt. Not just an accumulation of wealth, but a consolidation of political power was involved.

The Money Trust had backed Woodrow Wilson in the presidential elections, and then controlled him through their front man, Edward Mandell House, who lived in the White House. The trust recognized how the power of government could be used to advance their own interests. 

Wilson, surrounded by the bankers, traveled to the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, which was settling the aftermath of World War I.

His chief proposal there, of course, was the League of Nations – a first step toward world government. However, although the League was established by the Versailles Treaty, the United States did not join because the Senate refused to ratify the treaty. 

In response to this rejection, the bankers’ circle, still in Paris, held a series of meetings and proposed to establish a new organization in the United States, whose purpose would be to lead America into the League. This organization was incorporated in New York City two years later as the Council on Foreign Relations.



Architects of a New World Order


The CFR’s goal was formation of an incrementally stronger world government. Admiral Chester Ward, former Judge Advocate of the U.S. Navy, was a CFR member for 16 years before resigning in disgust. He stated: “The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence, and submergence into an all-powerful one-world government.” 

After World War II, the League’s successor, the United Nations, was born.

Contrary to what the public is commonly told, the UN was not founded by nations who had tired of war. The UN was conceived by a group of CFR members in the State Department calling themselves the Informal Agenda Group. They drafted the original proposal for the UN, and secured the approval of President Roosevelt, who then made establishing the UN his highest postwar priority. When the UN held its founding meeting in San Francisco in 1945, 47 of the American delegates were CFR members.



Though the UN was not initially set up as a world government, the intent was that it would develop into one over time. John Foster Dulles (CFR), an American delegate to the UN founding meeting who later became Secretary of State under Eisenhower, acknowledged as much in his book War or Peace: “The United Nations represents not a final stage in the development of world order, but only a primitive stage. Therefore its primary task is to create the conditions which will make possible a more highly developed organization.”

Again, Perloff’s book The Shadows of Power relates so much more of the destructive effect of CFR influence.

Going forward, one thing is certain, as Perloff wrote in the aforementioned article:

As long as the CFR controls our government, we can anticipate more of the same: diminishing national sovereignty; free flow of immigration (which confuses national identity and weakens national loyalties); increasing jobs losses through multinational trade agreements; further internationalization of law (Law of the Sea Treaty, Kyoto Protocol, World Court, global taxation, etc.); increasing loss of freedoms in a “surveillance society”; progressive organization of the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union; and ultimately, broader merger into a world government where all power will be concentrated in the hands of the elite.

^{Photo of Sen. Rand Paul: AP Images}

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, and the surveillance state. He can be reached at
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Lawsuit accuses IRS of violating the Bill of Rights

Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
May 30, 2013

Photo: Sage Ross

A defense for the Bill of Rights came alive yesterday as 25 Tea Party groups struck back at the Internal Revenue Service for the gross persecution of their rights.

A constitutional law firm representing these groups sued the Internal Revenue Service and top Obama officials, claiming the IRS effectively denied their tax-exempt status by unlawfully delaying their applications. In its district court filing, the Washington-based American Center for Law and Justice accused the IRS of a “comprehensive, pervasive, invidious, and organized scheme” to violate the First and Fifth Amendments rights of Tea Party members in a spectacle of suppression more fitting to the Dark Ages.

“The IRS and the federal government are not going to get away with this unlawful targeting of conservative groups,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “As this unconstitutional scheme continues even today, the only way to stop this flagrant and arrogant abuse of our clients’ rights is to file a federal lawsuit, which we have done. The lawsuit sends a very powerful message to the IRS and the Obama Administration — including the White House: Americans are not going to be bullied and intimidated by our government. They will not be subjected to unconstitutional treatment and unlawfully singled out and punished because of their ideological beliefs. Those responsible for this unprecedented intimidation ploy must be held accountable.”

The lawsuit accuses the IRS of not only violating the Bill of Rights, but also their very own rules and regulations, a sure sign of the unlawfulness creeping into the very foundation of our constitutional republic.

A constitutional republic worth fighting for, and these 25 Tea Party groups are doing so right now.

Read the lawsuit here

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 9:44 am

Tags: activism, constitution, domestic news, government corruption

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

On Monday, May 13, Seattle Schools Superintendent Jose Banda announced that “High schools may opt out of MAP [Measures of Academic Progress Test] in 2013-14.”

This announcement was greeted with spontaneous celebrations by teachers and students at Garfield High School where the boycott of MAP tests began in January.

Garfield High School’s librarian, Janet Woodward summed up the meaning of the MAP test boycott for Garfield saying, “I feel vindicated by the decision to remove MAP testing from the high schools. Our movement has succeeded in exposing all of the fallacies of using this canned assessment. It is a waste of money and time, turns professionals into proctor clerks and produces results which are not statistically relevant.”

It was the first time a group of teachers have boycotted a standardized test in America. The boycott began on January 9, 2013 when the 19 strong group of teachers at Garfield High voted unanimously to refuse to administer the MAP test. The MAP test purports to evaluates student progress in reading and math in all grades (K-12). This is part of the growing national fight back against the high stakes testing regime that has swept through the US education system.

Garfield High teachers published a letter explaining the reasons for their boycott of the MAP test.

They point out how the MAP test disrupts students learning, is a costly and ineffective measure of student progress and is unfairly used to evaluate the effectiveness of teachers. Their letter concludes,”We are not troublemakers nor do we want to impede the high functioning of our school. We are professionals who care deeply about our students and cannot continue to participate in a practice that harms our school and our students.”

The teachers’ successful boycott of the MAP tests was down to a variety of factors. The unswerving determination of teachers at Garfield and other Seattle schools to continue the test boycott in the face of threats of suspension from Superintendent Banda. The victory over the MAP test would not have been possible without the massive support from local parents, many of whom refused to enter their kids for the MAP tests.

Another hugely important factor in this defeat of standardized testing was the solidarity action of hundreds of Seattle high schools students who held meetings and gave out flyers supporting the teacher test boycott. The independent decision of hundreds of students to refuse to sit the tests was critical to this victory over the MAP test. A break down of the winter MAP testing numbers at Garfield High revealed that only 180 valid tests were delivered out of a planned 810. Hundreds of students had taken solidarity action in support of their teachers by refusing to take the tests.

Besides this, the campaign has won huge support from teachers and trade unions across America. 60 leading academics, researchers and trade unionists signed a statement of support for the MAP test boycott.

The boycott of MAP test at Garfield High and other Seattle schools are part of the growing national movement against ”high stakes” public school testing. In the past year hundreds of school boards across the country have passed resolutions calling for an end to high stakes testing of students stating that it is strangling learning. In New York a growing number of parents are refusing to let their children sit the standardized tests. The New York principals association has said that it no longer supports high stakes standardized testing. Many New York parents have criticised companies such as Pearson for profiteering from the increased testing of students.

Alongside this, is the growing movement against massive cuts to education funding. On 17 May thousands of students in Philadelphia walked out in protest at the planned cuts to education spending. Meanwhile, in Chicago on 22 May there was three days of protests against the mayor’s plan to close 54 local schools.

Professor Diane Ravitch,who is a historian of education and former US assistant secretary of Education under President Bush signed a statement of support for the Seattle teachers along with 60 other leading education academics. She has recently commented,”We’ve had more than a decade of standardized testing and now we need to admit that it’s not helping.” In March 2010 in an article for the Wall Street Journal she explained why she was opposed to standardized testing:

”The current emphasis on accountability has created a punitive atmosphere in the schools. The Obama administration seems to think that schools will improve if we fire teachers and close schools. They do not recognize that schools are often the anchor of their communities, representing values, traditions and ideals that have persevered across decades. They also fail to recognize that the best predictor of low academic performance is poverty–not bad teachers.”

Professor Mark Naison of Fordham University says the negative effects of testing disproportionately impacts low income students. Professor Wayne Au of Washington University supported the Seattle teachers boycott of MAP tests and has commented,”The emerging consensus among [academic] researchers is clear: high stakes standardized tests are highly problematic to say the least.”

The Chicago Teachers’ Union has launched a campaign called Pencils Down to support both local and national efforts to eliminate high stakes standardized tests from public schools. In a paper called Debunking the myths of Standardized Testing it comments:

”Children who do not have access to health care, who are hungry, who do not have books or access to other informal learning at home, whose parents have limited education, whose families are constantly stressed by economic problems, and who do not go to libraries and museums in their free time are at and academic disadvantage.

These factors are highly related not only to testing outcomes,academic achievement,future education and socio‐economic success,but also to the racial, ethnic and class origins of individuals.”

Education writer Alfie Kohn has noted how politicians and the education establishment express ”outrage” at low academic achievement amongst low-income and other disadvantaged children. They believe in quick fixes such as blaming teachers for low educational attainment:

”Many public officials, along with like‐minded journalists and other observers, are apt to minimize the matter of resources and assume that everything deficient about education for poor and minority children can be remedied by more forceful demands that we ‘raise the bar.’ The implication here would seem to be that teachers and students could be doing a better job but have, for some reason, chosen not to do so and need only be bribed or threatened into improvement…The focus among policy has been on standard s of outcomes rather than standards of opportunity.”

High stakes standardized testing are a major part of President Obama’s education programme Race To The Top. This gives city and state authorities the power to take punitive action against schools and individual teachers for poor student performance in standardized tests. It is worth noting that most private schools, where President Obama and other public officials send their kids, refuse to administer standardized tests. They want their students to have access to critical thinking skills and creativity not rote learning.

Garfield history teacher and union rep Jesse Hagopian has commented upon the significance of their victory in an interview with Democracy Now TV on 20 May:

”It’s a real crisis for for these corporate education reformers …because their whole system of education reform rests on these data points, on reducing teaching and learning to a single score that they can use to close schools like your seeing proposed in Chicago and Philadelphia. That they can use these data points to degrade education and profit from it turning them into charter [schools].”

Jesse Hagopian went on to note the importance of the Seattle teacher’s victory against inappropriate forms of school testing:

”This boycott represented a threat to their ability to reduce teaching and learning to a single score. I think that’s why Michelle Ree and these corporate reformers are so upset we stood up to their tests and refused to give them. I think that’s why so many teachers, parents and students across the nation are celebrating this victory.”

Garfield High teacher Mallory Clarke said their victory will have positive consequences for the future, “I think the Seattle Schools’ final position on the MAP this year is evidence of the power of teachers. We carved out a bit of time from our overwhelming responsibilities to take on some of the worst features of so-called education reform, and we moved mountains. Getting free of the MAP at the high school level gives us an opening to pursue useful assessment.”

During the test boycott over 20 teachers from around Seattle met to develop an alternative to the MAP test called Teacher Work Group on Assessment Recommendations, Spring 2013 Superintendent Banda’s decision to allow schools to opt out of the MAP test was made on the provision that schools will need to develop their own assessments in 2014 to replace the MAP test. The teacher working group recommendations should provide the guidelines to do that.

This is all in sharp contrast with Finland which is universally recognised as having one of the best education systems in the world. In Finland education is free at all levels. There is no national testing of learning outcomes. Students only take one standardized test when they are sixteen. Teachers are well paid highly respected individuals and are not penalised by a payment by results regime. There is an emphasis upon social equality sadly lacking in America with its mania for privatization of public services that benefits big companies looking to make quick profits.

The victory of teacher’s in Seattle against high stakes testing should inspire teacher’s, parents and students that a fight back against the big business agenda in education is possible. As Garfield Special Education teacher Serena Samar said, “Our actions as a staff have reignited the belief that a group of people can make a difference.”

Dylan Murphy  is a historian and a trade union activist in the National Union of Teachers.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Saudi health authorizes say three more people have died from a deadly new respiratory virus related to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in the country.

Saudi Arabiaâ„¢s Ministry of Health announced on Thursday that the three victims, aged between 24 and 60, were suffering from chronic diseases, including kidney failure. They had been hospitalized a month ago.

Thirty people have died globally from the novel coronavirus.

The novel coronavirus, also known as nCoV-EMC, is a cousin of SARS. The virus first emerged in the Middle East, and was discovered on September 2012 in a Qatari man who had recently traveled to Saudi Arabia.

Cases have been reported in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the UAE, Qatar, Britain and Germany, and health officials have said the virus is likely to have already spread between people in some circumstances.

Health authorities are trying to find out how humans are contracting the virus in a bid to find the best remedy to it.

It does not appear to be as contagious as SARS, which killed some 800 people in a 2003 epidemic.

The novel coronavirus is most closely related to a bat virus. Scientists are considering whether bats or other animals like goats or camels are a possible source of infection.

The World Health Organization has advised countries to test any people with unexplained pneumonia.

MP/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

A bateria de um celular morre em dois anos, um computador em quatro, a geladeira está tendo problemas em oito anos e de repente, em um belo dia, a televisão lhe diz adeus.
“Não há nada para se fazer além de comprar outra”.
É possível fazer produtos que durem mais do que isso? Quem sabe a vida toda?
Benito Muros da SOP (Sem Obsolescência Programada), diz que é possível. Por isso está ameaçado de morte.

O conceito de obsolescência programada surgiu entre 1920 e 1930 com a intenção de criar um novo modelo de mercado, que visava a fabricação de produtos com curta durabilidade de maneira premeditada obrigando os consumidores a adquirir novos produtos de forma acelerada e sem uma necessidade real.

As lâmpadas e a luta de Benito Muros respondem a um novo conceito empresarial, baseado em desenvolver produtos que não caduquem, como aquelas geladeiras Frigidaire ou máquinas de lavar Westinghouse que duravam a vida toda.

Uma filosofia empresarial mais conforme com nossos tempos, graças à comercialização de produtos que não estejam programados para ter uma vida curta, senão que respeitem o meio ambiente e que não gerem resíduos que, por vezes, acabam desembocando em containers de lixo no terceiro mundo.

Veja a entrevista onde ele fala sobre seu projeto.

Se trata de um movimento que denuncia a Obsolescência Programada. Lutamos para que as coisas durem o que tenham que durar, porém os fabricantes de produtos eletrônicos os programam para que durem um tempo determinado e obrigam os usuários a comprar outros novos. A lei permite!
O consumo de nossa sociedade está baseado em produtos com data de validade. Mudar isso suporia mudar nosso modelo de produção e optar por um sistema mais sustentável. Os fabricantes devem ser conscientes de que as crises de endividamento como a que vivemos são inevitáveis e que podemos deter o crime ecológico.
(Repórter: A lavadora de minha mãe durou 35 anos)
E agora aos seis já da problemas. Também, antes havia umas meias de náilon irrompíveis.
Deixaram de fabricar, por isso, porque duravam demais.
Más hoje, por exemplo temos uma lâmpada que está acesa a 111 anos em um parque de bombeiros de Livermore (California). Foi então que surgiu a idéia de criar, junto com outros engenheiros, uma linha de iluminação que dure toda a vida.
(Repórter: Não queima nunca?)
Nunca! Dura mais de cem anos, porém como não veremos, oferecemos uma garantia de 25 anos.
(Repórter: Não se vê isto nos grandes armazéns.)
Não, porque as distribuidoras nos dizem que vivem das que se queimam. Inclusive recebemos ofertas de milhares de dólares para tira-la do mercado.
(Repórter: E quanto custa sua lâmpada?)
Pode ser comprada online por uns 37 euros. Aos fabricantes não lhes interessa.
(Repórter: Um gênio ou um louco?)
Nem um nem outro. Somente buscamos uma sociedade mais justa. Ainda que isto signifique estar ameaçado de morte.

A lâmpada criada pela OEP Electrics responde à necessidade atual de um compromisso com o meio ambiente. Ao durar tanto tempo, não gera resíduos ao mesmo tempo em que permite uma poupança energética de até 92% e emite até 70% a menos de CO2.

Mas, ao que parece, a indústria de produtos elétricos não está muito contente com a descoberta. Benito Muros diz que está sendo ameaçado devido a seu invento e inclusive afirma ter recebido ofertas milionárias para retirar seu produto do mercado.

– “Senhor Muros, você não pode colocar seus sistemas de iluminação no mercado. Você e sua família serão aniquilados”, reza a denúncia que Muros apresentou à Polícia, que apesar do medo não se acovardou.

Para realizar sua pesquisa, Muros viajou até o parque de bombeiros de Livermore (Califórnia), lugar no qual há uma lâmpada que permanece acesa de forma ininterrupta há mais de 111 anos. Ali contatou com descendentes e conhecidos dos criadores da lâmpada, já que não existia documentação a respeito.

Com esta informação conseguiu as bases para começar sua pesquisa, cujo achado supõe um novo conceito de modelo empresarial baseado na não Obsolescência Programada.

Conheça a lâmpada nestes vídeos:

Uma pequena lista das vantagens prometidas por Benito Muros e OEP Electrics:
– Gasta 92% menos eletricidade que uma lâmpada incandescente, 85% em relação às alógenas e 70% em relação às fluerescentes.
– Garante 25 anos funcionando 24 horas por dia, 365 dias por ano.
– Não se queima no caso de acender e pagar varias vezes. A empresa OEP Electrics garante 10.000 (Dez mil) comutações (acender e apagar) diárias.
РEla acende na hora. Ṇo precisa esperar ela esquentar.
РṆo emite ultra violeta e nem ultra vermelho (Evitando problemas de pele e nos olhos)
РṆo faz zumbido.
РConsegue iluminar em temperaturas de at̩ 45 graus abaixo de zero.
– Não contém tungstênio e nem mercúrio. Não possui metais pesados que demoram para desintegrar. São recicláveis e seguem todas as normas ambientais.
– Emite 70% a menos de CO².
– Por ter mais tempo de vida, produz menos resíduos para a natureza.
– Praticamente não esquenta utilizando somente aquela energia que será necessária para iluminar, ao contrário das lâmpadas convencionais que gastam 95% da energia para produzir calor e 5% para iluminar.
РPor ṇo esquentar e ṇo produzir radia̤̣o evita deteriorar os materiais que esṭo perto.
РEvitam risco de inc̻ndio.
РṆo prejudicam o frio dentro de c̢maras frigorificas.

Visite o site da OEP Electrics: http://www.oepelectrics.es/

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/oepelectrics

Veja mais informações aqui: http://www.informativos.net/entrevi…ito-muros-define-la-nueva-economia_54108.aspx

Veja uma entrevista de Benito Muros:

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

File photo shows Iranian archer and Paralympic gold medalist Zahra Ne’mati at 2012 Paralympics in London.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranâ„¢s deputy foreign minister for Arab and African affairs says the Islamic Republic will not allow the overthrow of the Syrian government.

Hossein Amir-Abdollahian made the remarks on the sidelines of the Friends of Syria Conference in the Iranian capital, Tehran, on Wednesday. The international event was attended by representatives from around 40 countries with the aim of contributing to a political solution to the foreign-sponsored crisis in the Arab country.

Å“We will not allow the Syrian government to be overthrown. We strongly support the Syrian nation and government as well as the opposition that believes in a political resolution,” he added.

Amir-Abdollahian added that Iran will utilize its experiences in the region to prevent the collapse of the Syrian government.

Regarding Iranâ„¢s participation in a forthcoming international conference on Syria in Geneva, the Iranian diplomat said the Islamic Republic has been verbally invited to the meeting, but not in writing.

He said Iran will make a final decision on taking part in the conference after receiving a written invitation, adding, “During diplomatic talks, we have announced that because the focus of the Geneva conference is finding a political solution, we will consider any such invitation with a positive attitude.”

On May 7, Russia and the United States agreed in Moscow to convene an international conference on Syria, which will serve as a follow-up to an earlier Geneva meeting held in June 2012. Russia has highlighted the need for Iran’s presence in the forthcoming meeting.

Iran has repeatedly expressed its opposition to any foreign intervention in Syria’s internal affairs, stressing that inclusive dialog and national reconciliation as well as free elections are the keys to resolving the unrest in the Arab country.

The crisis has gripped Syria since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of Syrian security forces, have been killed in the unrest.

AR/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Naveen Thukral and Risa Maeda
Reuters
May 30, 2013

A strain of genetically modified wheat found in the United States fuelled concerns over food supplies across Asia on Thursday, with major importer Japan cancelling a tender offer to buy U.S. grain.

Other top Asian wheat importers South Korea, China and the Philippines said they were closely monitoring the situation after the U.S. government found genetically engineered wheat sprouting on a farm in the state of Oregon.

The strain was never approved for sale or consumption.

Read full article

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 am

Tags: food, gmo, health

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Republicans are upset about President Obama’s May 23 foreign-policy address, yet politics aside, it’s hard to say why. “We show this lack of resolve, talking about the war being over,” Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Fox News Sunday.

But four days later in his Memorial Day remarks, Obama said, “Our nation is still at war.”

Why did the earlier speech set off Republicans? He acknowledged that terrorism can never be completely eliminated and that a risk-free society is impossible. He conceded that U.S. military action breeds enemies. He admitted that not every foreign violent organization is a threat to Americans. He even quoted James Madison: “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

Indeed, Obama said some things that need saying, but will he do what needs doing? More precisely, will he stop doing what shouldn’t be done?

The speech provides no reason for optimism. For one thing, his premise is wrong: The U.S. government was on a perpetual war footing before the attacks of 9/11, intervening one way or another in many places. The “war on terror” has just been more visible.

Obama says he wants to understand the roots of terrorism, but he just repeats bromides. “These threats don’t arise in a vacuum,” he said. “Most, though not all, of the terrorism we face is fueled by a common ideology – a belief by some extremists that Islam is in conflict with the United States and the West.”

But this implies the “extremist ideology” arose in a vacuum. Obama shows no understanding that Muslim violence has been a response to generations of Western and most recently American efforts to maintain hegemony in the Muslim world.  These efforts have consisted in direct overt and covert intervention, backing for brutal and corrupt dictators and monarchs, and enabling of Israel’s repression of the Palestinians. From Osama bin Laden on down, the perpetrators of anti-American violence have consistently said so.

Despite Obama’s acknowledgement of the dangers, to Americans and others, of perpetual U.S. warfare, one strains to find signs of change in the speech. He says “our response to terrorism can’t depend on military or law enforcement alone,” but he still envisions a large role for the military: He says the first order of business is to “finish the work of defeating al Qaeda and its associated forces.” And, “Beyond the Afghan theater, we only target al Qaeda and its associated forces.” But “its associated forces” is a conveniently vague justification for continued U.S. militarism. It goes beyond Congress’s 2001 authorization for military force.

While Obama promises only to narrow the use of drones and shift responsibility from the CIA to the Pentagon, we can’t be sure even this will happen — or matter. His “presidential policy guidance” is classified, and he reserves the authority to target alleged militants who pose a “continuing and imminent threat” when he decides that other alternatives are unavailable or are too risky. Yet his administration has drained the word “imminent” of meaning

“Before any strike is taken,” he added, “there must be near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured – the highest standard we can set.” But he conceded that his administration has killed an undisclosed number of noncombatants. Independent sources say several hundredhave been killed – while entire villages live in terror of the next strike. This will not change.

Remember that administration targets are only accused of planning attacks. There is no due process, and an oversight board would not change that.

Obama defended his killing of American Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen on the grounds that al-Awlaki had helped plan attacks, but Obama offered no proof, and investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill says the first efforts to kill Awlaki preceded the terrorist plots he is allegedly linked to. And what about the separate drone killings of al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son and other Americans?

Obama also renewed his long-dormant call for closing Guantanamo – but not before the mass hunger strike and force-feedings that the whole world is watching.

This all looks more like legacy preparation than real change in policy. Witness Syria and Iran.

So why are Republicans fussing? Obama said, “We cannot use force everywhere that a radical ideology takes root.”

For Republicans, that’s un-American.

Sheldon Richman is vice president and editor at The Future of Freedom Foundation (www.fff.org) in Fairfax, Va. He can be reached through his blog, Free Association.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Russia is to replace its old soviet made rigs with modern ones able to drill in shale oil deposits, which could be a boom for manufacturers like National Oilwell Varco of the US and China’s Honghua Group.

More than half of Russia’s 1,835 oil and gas rigs are over 20
years old, according to VTB Capital research. The
outdated rigs won’t be powerful or advanced enough for producers
such as Rosneft drilling in Siberia’s shale rock, Bloomberg
quotes field analysts.

Richard Anderson, the Chief Financial Officer of Russia’s largest
drilling rig operator, Eurasia Drilling, said that the US uses
250 rigs to produce just 700,000 barrels a day at the Bakken
shale formation. The Siberian Bazhenov formation is many times
larger, which means Russia needs several hundred new rigs.
Supplying that number of rigs at an average of $35 million would
cost $8.8 billion.

Rosneft and its partner Exxon Mobil, have just started to explore
the Bazhenov shale formation in Siberia. Bazhenov is estimated to
be the size of France, and could contain enough oil to more than
double Russia’s current reserves. The successful development of
Bazhenov is seen as vital to maintaining Russia’s reserves above
10 million barrels a day.

A lack of modern rigs remains a key stumbling block to developing
Bazhenov, Bloomberg quotes industry analysts. Hydraulic
fracturing, or fracking, at horizontal wells in Russia breaks
even at $90 a barrel without tax breaks, they estimate. Russia’s
Urals is trading at about $102 a barrel.

Deliveries of new rigs will reach a five-year high of 105 units
this year, according to VTB data. However, older rigs are being
quickly retired, which may result in a capacity squeeze.

“New drilling rigs must be built,” Bloomberg quotes Antony
Crawford, the head for National Oilwell in Russia, whose company
plans a factory east of Moscow. “This issue represents a clear
and present danger to Russia’s ability to maintain output during
the next three to five years.”

National Oilwell may sell five rigs to Russia-focused companies
this year, according to VTB. The largest US oil equipment
supplier competes with China’s Honghua and Russia’s OMZ for
orders. Oil is often more difficult to extract from shale rock
and drill bits often need to turn 90 degrees and continue
drilling horizontally, which is impossible with old rigs,
oilprice.com writes.

This article originally appeared on: RT

European business are missing out on opportunities in China to the tune of €17.5bn, and their optimism for things getting better is at an all-time low according to the EU Chamber of Commerce in China.

Rising labor costs as well as a slowing Chinese economy have
eroded the financial results of European companies operating in
China, the report said. As a result optimism nosedived to
its lowest level since the first survey in 2004. Most businesses
were pessimistic about their profitability in China in the next 2
years, with only 29% being optimistic.

The economic under-performance of China was a key reason for the
prevailing pessimism, Adam Dunnett, secretary general of the
European Chamber, told a press conference.

“The figures that we’ve seen coming out of the National Bureau
of Statistics… have shown… we are in for a longer haul, so I
think that has caught some people by surprise that it hasn’t been
a sooner recovery,” as France 24 quoted Mr. Dunnet.

2012 was the worst year for the Chinese economy this century,
having grown by 7.8%, which was followed by another frustrating
7.7% growth in 1Q 2013.

Limitations on market access, coupled with a tricky regulatory
environment that sometimes proves to be discriminatory, seem to
have become the last straw.

“Despite increasing rhetoric from senior Chinese leaders that
efforts will be undertaken to transform and level the regulatory
environment through allowing greater play to market forces,
European companies have so far perceived few concrete
changes,” said Davide Cucino, the chamber president.

The results of the survey come out amidst rising trade tension
between the world’s second largest economy and the EU, the
Financial Times says. The tariffs on Chinese solar panels that
the European Commission is set to impose comes as the major apple
of discord between the two.

 As soon as next week Karel De Gucht, EU Trade Commissioner,
is expected to introduce import tariffs on Chinese solar panels
averaging 47%. However, more than a half of the EU remains
against the tariff.

The other move by the EU that Beijing says is unjustified is an
investigation into Chinese telecoms equipment. Should the
trade dispute intensify, close commercial ties estimated at about
€1bn a day could be put at risk.

This article originally appeared on: RT

The new law obliging internationally-funded economic research centers to register as ‘foreign agents’ lacks common sense and could bring the economy back to Soviet-style, with everything controlled by the state, leading economists have warned.

In a letter published by Vedomosti daily, a 15 Russian academics
urge the government to reconsider the so-called ‘foreign agents’
law. They warn that incorrect application of this act may lead to
a closure of research centers and ruin cooperation between
independent economic analysts and the Russian authorities.

The highly-criticized and controversial law – which came into
force in November last year – obliges all politically-active
non-governmental organizations that receive foreign funding to
register as foreign agents.

Currently – because of loose wording in the document –
practically any non-profit organization may be forced to get that
label if it gets sponsorship from abroad and has ‘politics’ or
‘authorities’ mentioned in their charter, experts
say. 

The authors of the letter insist that the requirement should only
apply to organizations that are both sponsored from abroad and
serve the interests of a foreign state or company.

“That’s exactly the approach used in other countries that have
‘foreign agents’ concept,” the authors noted.

They opined that economists — as part of their profession — are
often involved in the development and the fulfillment of the
economic policy. That includes the implementation of initiatives
proposed by the government and discussions of reforms.

But since economics is a global science and because of
underdevelopment of socio-economic research in Russia, analysis
centers “seek cooperation with foreign partners” and look for
various sources for their funding — including from abroad. This
money is spent on education, including internship of Russian
students in other countries, economic research and the
publication of the results.

However, “the logic of Russian law enforcers suggests”
that almost the entire expert community in the country is
comprised of foreign agents, who must register in that status,
the academics observed. 

“In Russian the word ‘agent’ means a person who acts in
someone else’s interests, or a spy. We, on the contrary, have
always acted for the benefit of our country and are definitely
not spies. Therefore, registering as foreign agents would be
self-incrimination, which we can’t do,” they pointed out.

The government has made it clear it is interested in independent
economic analysis. According to the expert community it has been
trying to respond to this demand. However unannounced inspections
of NGOs by prosecutors put this cooperation at risk.

The state officials have repeatedly underlined that the goal of
the so-called foreign agents is to inform the public better on
the sources of income of NGOs involved in
politics. 

“All our actions are connected not with the closures of these
organizations, not with the ban, but with getting the cashflow
under control,” President Vladimir Putin said back in April.
“The freedom of NGOs is not limited in any way, they just
have to register.”

Twelve of the authors of the Vedomosti letter took part in the
drafting of the governmental project known as ‘Strategy-2020’ — a
plan for Russia’s social and economic development until the end
of the decade.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Iranian presidential candidate Ali Akbar Velayati has pledged to alleviate the adverse effects of Western sanctions against Iran by adopting a Å“successful” foreign policy approach.

Å“We can have successful foreign relations and policy and in that case, we would be able to reduce the sanctions; this is practicable and we will do this,” said Velayati in a televised interview on Wednesday.

Å“Developing foreign relations with other countries is among the main pillars of our future administration. My 16 years of experience as foreign minister has shown that this can be done,” the presidential candidate, who is a senior advisor to Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, pointed out.

Å“Our most important plan is to waive visa [requirement] with a maximum number of countries and, as I have learnt, we can have visa waivers with over 40 countries,” the former foreign minister said.

Velayati argued that although sanctions are behind a portion of Iranâ„¢s economic problems, a major part of the setbacks is due to the incorrect measures adopted by the countryâ„¢s officials.

The United States, Israel and some of their allies falsely claim that Iran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program, with the US and the European Union using the claim as pretext to impose illegal sanctions against Iran.

Velayati noted that creating a production-oriented economy and encouraging peopleâ„¢s participation in economic activities will be on top of his agenda.

Velayati is contending against lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, President of the Strategic Research Center of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, former First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref, Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

Iranians will go to the polls in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election on June 14. The fourth city and rural council elections are also scheduled to be held on the same day.

ASH/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

In a drive to improve profits, Panasonic has announced plans to cut 5,000 jobs over the next three years.

The cutbacks will hit its automotive and industrial unit, which
accounts for about a third of the company’s workforce, the Nikkei
reported Thursday, citing a Panasonic executive.

“A reduction in labor costs will be a big part of our plan to
improve profitability,” Yoshihiko Yamada, the head of
Panasonic’s automotive and industrial division, told analysts and
investors in Tokyo on Thursday.

The division, which includes automotive components,
semiconductors, production machinery and other devices, employs
110,000 people, and is the crux of Tsuga’s business strategy to
create a new niche for Panasonic in the already over-saturated
consumer electronics markets, which rivals Sony and Samsung have
a steady hold on.

The cuts are part of Panasonic’ strategy to boost its
operating profit margin over the next three years to a five
percent minimum, which will be set by the company’s president,
Kazuhiko Tsuga.

In May, the Japanese electronics giant reported a near-record net
loss of $7.5 billion (754 billion yen) for the fiscal year
through March, pointing to a slowdown in sales as well as
restructuring costs. 

The company also missed Bloomberg analysts forecast net income of
64 billion yen, and predicted it would only amount to 50 billion
yen ($495 million).

In light of the losses, Tsuga has announced a 2-year
restructuring plan under which overseas plants will be shut down
and other arms of the business, such as healthcare and logistics,
will be trimmed back.

The electronics market has been hit particularly hard by the
global recession, and has struggled to stay afloat as consumers’
luxury item budgets contract and electronics businesses worldwide
decline.

The Nikkei plunged 5.2 percent at market close in Tokyo, and the
Shanghai Composite and the Hang Send both slid 0.3 percent.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Ibragim Todashev, who was killed by the FBI during a questioning, was shot six times, once in the crown of his head, photos shown at a press conference in Moscow reveal. His father suspects it could have been a kill shot.

“I can show you the photos taken after the killing of my son.
I have 16 photographs. I just would like to say that looking at
these photos is like being in a movie. I only saw things like
that in movies: shooting a person, and then the kill shot. Six
shots in the body, one of them in the head,” Abdulbaki
Todashev said at the press conference at RIA Novosti news agency
in the Russian capital.

He explained that the photos were taken by friends of his son in
the US, to whom the FBI handed the body.

“I want justice and I want an investigation to be carried out,
I want these people [the FBI agents] to be put on trial in
accordance with US law. They are not FBI officers, they are
bandits. I cannot call them otherwise, they must be put on
trial,” he said.

Abdulbaki Todashev said his main aim now is to go to the US and
get his son’s body.

“My brother and I, we went to the American embassy today. We
both want to fly there, we’ve applied for a visa,” he
explained.

This article originally appeared on: RT

A leading Russian economist and rector of the New Economic School Sergey Guriev has reportedly resigned and left Russia. Local media suggest his departure from the country may be related to the second Yukos case.

First reports on Guriev’s sudden resignation and departure
appeared on Wednesday. The media assumed that Guriev’s move was
out of fear of prosecution in Russia in relation to the second
Yukos case, in which he had participated as an expert.

Vedomosti business daily claims Guriev left Russia out of fear
that his negative conclusion on the second verdict for Mikhail
Khodorkovsky might leave him with accusations of obstructing
justice.

According to Gazeta.ru, sources familiar with the situation say
that Guriev and a group of other experts face pressure from law
enforcers, after they had examined the verdict in the Yukos case
in 2011 upon the request of the Human Rights Council. According
to the sources quoted by the publication the Investigative
Committee intends to reveal whether the experts were financed
from Yukos funds or from abroad.

On Wednesday the economist wrote on his Facebook page that he’s
currently abroad. “Better in Paris than in Krasnokamensk,”
he wrote referring to the city, where in 2005-2006 former Yukos
owner Mikhail Khodorkovsky was serving his prison term.

On Thursday the Investigative Committee confirmed to the news
agencies, that some time ago Guriev had been summoned for
questioning on the Yukos case.The head of the New Economic School
did not comment on the reports of his resignation. Neither has
the School’s press service, which said Guriev was on a vacation
and formally remained the head of the institution.

Guriev’s lawyer Ruslan Kozhura confirmed to Interfax that Guriev
had been questioned at the Investigative Committee, among other
things the questions touched on his expert conclusion in the
Yukos case for the HRC.

Other opinions suggest that the runaway economist was thus
“punished” for his outspoken support of Russian opposition
activist Aleksey Navalny, who faces court case over alleged
embezzlement.

Guriev is a member of the Russian government’s expert council and
a member of the personnel policy council of Moscow City Hall. The
Human Rights Council earlier summoned Guriev as an expert on the
second Yukos case. Guriev said the former Yukos head Mikhail
Khodorkovsky had been convicted unlawfully.

This article originally appeared on: RT

In a drive to improve profits, Panasonic has announced plans to cut 5,000 jobs over the next three years.

The cutbacks will hit its automotive and industrial unit, which
accounts for about a third of the company’s workforce, the Nikkei
reported Thursday, citing a Panasonic executive.

“A reduction in labor costs will be a big part of our plan to
improve profitability,” Yoshihiko Yamada, the head of
Panasonic’s automotive and industrial division, told analysts and
investors in Tokyo on Thursday.

The division, which includes automotive components,
semiconductors, production machinery and other devices, employs
110,000 people, and is the crux of Tsuga’s business strategy to
create a new niche for Panasonic in the already over-saturated
consumer electronics markets, which rivals Sony and Samsung have
a steady hold on.

The cuts are part of Panasonic’ strategy to boost its
operating profit margin over the next three years to a five
percent minimum, which will be set by the company’s president,
Kazuhiko Tsuga.

In May, the Japanese electronics giant reported a near-record net
loss of $7.5 billion (754 billion yen) for the fiscal year
through March, pointing to a slowdown in sales as well as
restructuring costs. 

The company also missed Bloomberg analysts forecast net income of
64 billion yen, and predicted it would only amount to 50 billion
yen ($495 million).

In light of the losses, Tsuga has announced a 2-year
restructuring plan under which overseas plants will be shut down
and other arms of the business, such as healthcare and logistics,
will be trimmed back.

The electronics market has been hit particularly hard by the
global recession, and has struggled to stay afloat as consumers’
luxury item budgets contract and electronics businesses worldwide
decline.

The Nikkei plunged 5.2 percent at market close in Tokyo, and the
Shanghai Composite and the Hang Send both slid 0.3 percent.

This article originally appeared on: RT

A leading Russian economist and rector of the New Economic School Sergey Guriev has reportedly resigned and left Russia. Local media suggest his departure from the country may be related to the second Yukos case.

First reports on Guriev’s sudden resignation and departure
appeared on Wednesday. The media assumed that Guriev’s move was
out of fear of prosecution in Russia in relation to the second
Yukos case, in which he had participated as an expert.

Vedomosti business daily claims Guriev left Russia out of fear
that his negative conclusion on the second verdict for Mikhail
Khodorkovsky might leave him with accusations of obstructing
justice.

According to Gazeta.ru, sources familiar with the situation say
that Guriev and a group of other experts face pressure from law
enforcers, after they had examined the verdict in the Yukos case
in 2011 upon the request of the Human Rights Council. According
to the sources quoted by the publication the Investigative
Committee intends to reveal whether the experts were financed
from Yukos funds or from abroad.

On Wednesday the economist wrote on his Facebook page that he’s
currently abroad. “Better in Paris than in Krasnokamensk,”
he wrote referring to the city, where in 2005-2006 former Yukos
owner Mikhail Khodorkovsky was serving his prison term.

On Thursday the Investigative Committee confirmed to the news
agencies, that some time ago Guriev had been summoned for
questioning on the Yukos case.The head of the New Economic School
did not comment on the reports of his resignation. Neither has
the School’s press service, which said Guriev was on a vacation
and formally remained the head of the institution.

Guriev’s lawyer Ruslan Kozhura confirmed to Interfax that Guriev
had been questioned at the Investigative Committee, among other
things the questions touched on his expert conclusion in the
Yukos case for the HRC.

Other opinions suggest that the runaway economist was thus
“punished” for his outspoken support of Russian opposition
activist Aleksey Navalny, who faces court case over alleged
embezzlement.

Guriev is a member of the Russian government’s expert council and
a member of the personnel policy council of Moscow City Hall. The
Human Rights Council earlier summoned Guriev as an expert on the
second Yukos case. Guriev said the former Yukos head Mikhail
Khodorkovsky had been convicted unlawfully.

This article originally appeared on: RT

People seldom think of Canadian foreign policy when the term “gunboat diplomacy” is used, but they should. It is not just the USA, Great Britain, France or other better-known imperial powers that use military force as a “diplomatic” tool.

For example, Postmedia recently revealed that a Canadian naval vessel stopped a boat carrying Jamaica’s former prime minister. Bruce Golding was aboard his fishing trawler last spring when Canadian forces questioned him just outside Jamaican waters.

This incident led to the discovery that Canadian ships fired .50-calibre heavy machine guns in Jamaican territorial waters without authorization. Ottawa claimed the Canadian Navy’s actions were the result of outdated maps.

While this may be technically true the Canadian navy has long taken an aggressive posture in the region. In a 2000 book chapter titled “Maple Leaf Over the Caribbean: Gunboat Diplomacy Canadian Style” Royal Military College historian Sean Maloney writes: “Since 1960, Canada has used its military forces at least 26 times in the Caribbean to support Canadian foreign policy. In addition, Canada planned three additional operations, including two unilateral interventions into Caribbean states.”

In May 1963 two Canadian naval vessels joined U.S., British and French warships that “conducted landing exercises up to the [Haiti’s] territorial limit several times with the express purpose of intimidating the Duvalier government.” The 1963 mission was largely aimed at guaranteeing that Duvalier did not make any moves towards Cuba and that a Cuban-inspired guerilla movement did not seize power.

Two years later thousands of U.S. troops invaded the Dominican Republic to stop a left-wing government from taking office. Alongside the U.S. invasion, a Canadian warship was sent to Santo Domingo in April 1965, in the words of Defence Minister Paul Hellyer, “to stand by in case it is required.”

The next year two Canadian gunboats were deployed to Barbados’ independence celebration in a bizarre diplomatic maneuver designed to demonstrate Canada’s military prowess. Maloney notes: “We can only speculate at who the ‘signal’ was directed towards, but given the fact that tensions were running high in the Caribbean over the Dominican Republic Affair [1965 U.S. invasion], it is likely that the targets were any outside force, probably Cuban, which might be tempted to interfere with Barbadian independence.” Of course, Canadian naval vessels (which regularly dock in Barbados on maneuvers) were considered no threat to Barbadian independence. Intervening in another country to defend it from possible outside intervention may be the pinnacle of the imperial mindset.

Four decades later the Canadian Navy continues to be active in the Caribbean as the recent incident in Jamaican waters makes clear. In another example, a May 2008 Frontline magazine article describes a trip to the region aboard HMCS Iroquois designed “to reaffirm the fact that Canada takes the Caribbean seriously as an area of strategic interest.”

Canada’s military presence reaches beyond the high seas. In 2011 Ottawa signed an agreement to set up a small base to house soldiers and equipment at a base in Kingston and the newly created Canadian Special Operational Regiment has been heavily involved in training Jamaica’s military.

Canada has trained Jamaica’s security forces since not long after the country’s independence in 1958. Canadian Caribbean Relations in Transition explains: “[Canada] cooperated closely with Jamaica in setting up the latter’s national security organizations. Cadet training schemes were followed by reciprocal high-level military visits and consultations. Aircraft were sold to Jamaica and pilot training was undertaken. Technical assistance was initiated and expanded to include joint training exercises.”

Canadian military training in Jamaica has been particularly controversial. When “a battalion of 850 Canadian troops landed in the mountainous Jamaican interior to conduct a tropical training exercise” in the early 70s, Abeng, a leftist Jamaican paper, cried foul. The paper’s editors claimed Ottawa was preparing to intervene to protect Montréal-based Alcan’s bauxite facilities in the event of civil unrest and/or in case a socialist government took office.

While numerous books dealing with Canadian-Caribbean relations scoff at Abeng’s accusations, the archives confirm the paper’s suspicions. “Subsequent [to 1979] planning for intervention seems to bear out the Abeng accusations,” notes Maloney. Code-named, NIMROD CAPPER, “the objective of the operation revolved around securing and protecting the Alcan facilities from mob unrest and outright seizure or sabotage.”

Later, Canadian military planning resumed from where NIMROD CAPPER began with an exercise titled “Southern Renewal,” beginning in 1988. Maloney explains: “In this case a company from two RCR [Royal Canadian Reserves] was covertly inserted to ‘rescue’ Canadian industrial personnel with knowledge of bauxite deposits seized by Jamaican rebels and held hostage.”

Some Canadians might explain this away as overzealous military planning, but a historically minded Jamaican nationalist would have every reason to be concerned.

Canadian soldiers garrisoned Bermuda from 1914-1916 and St. Lucia from 1915-1919. They also replaced British forces in Jamaica from 1940-1946, as well as in Bermuda and the Bahamas during segments of this period.

Perceptions of race underlay the use of Canadian troops during World War Two. According to Canadian Defence Minister Norman Rogers, the governor of Jamaica “had intimated that it will be risky to remove all white troops.”

The situation in the Bahamas was even more sensitive. In June 1942 rioting broke out over the low wages received by black labourers. Canadian troops arrived in the Bahamas just after the riots and their main task was to protect a paranoid governor, the Duke of Windsor.

Not only does the current Canadian government engage in gunboat diplomacy, our country has a long, shameful and mostly hidden history of doing so.

Yves Engler’s latest book is The Ugly Canadian: Stephen Harper’s foreign policy. For more info: yvesengler.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Rosneft shareholders will meet on June 20 to consider amending the company’s charter which would grant BP certain veto powers on future decisions.

According to two sources close to Rosneft’s board of directors,
there is a possibility amendments will be adopted which would
authorize the purchase and sale of Rosneft shares,
Vedomosti reported.

BP sold 50 percent of TNK-BP to Rosneft in March, and increased
its shareholding in Rosneft to 19.85 percent, to become the
company’s second largest shareholder after the Kremlin.

If the new charter stipulations go through, BP will likely push
for blocking rights.

Rosneft’s spokesperson said the ‘blocking’ right would be used as
a measure to extend the ability of shareholders to increase
capital authorization. The amendment will not add any additional
shareholders to the mix.

The amendments will greatly enhance the role of minority
shareholders, like BP CEO Robert Dudley, who has been promised
one of two BP seats on the nine person Rosneft board. The second
‘BP seat’ has not yet been filled.

Under the amendments, Rosneft won’t be able to liquify, make big
deals, repurchase shares, or authorize capital, without the
approval of the shareholders.

The proposal isn’t novel in the Russian gas industry; Lukoil set
a precedent in 2005 when it changed its charter to incorporate
such a ‘blocking’ vote after ConocoPhillips bought 20 percent of
its shares.

Rosneft announced its plan to acquire TNK-BP as early as
2003, and the two companies have almost fully
integrated, with BP bosses out of the picture and Rosneft
President Igor Sechin calling most of the shots.

Since the acquisition, minority shareholders have been crossing
their fingers that Sechin will buy them out, or at least fold the
assets into the new merged company, neither which has happened.

Sechin’s lack of initiative in paying out minority shareholders
has spooked buyers and markets, and has has sent the stock price
plummeting.

On May 22, Sechin proposed that Rosneft would only be accountable
for TNK-BP dividends as of March 21, when it took control of
operations. The stock price fell from 7.140 to 6.770, over 5
percent, in 24 hours and still hasn’t climbed above the 7 dollar
mark before Sechin provoked fear that dividends would severely
decrease or be axed.

TNK-BP may follow the fate of other Russian subsidiaries bought
under large conglomerates, and may cease to exist. In order for
Rosneft to fully dissolve TNK-BP, it needs to buy out or bring in
TNK-BP Holding, which would prove difficult as 5 percent of the
shares are public and free floating.

This article originally appeared on: RT

The first batch of S-300 air defense complexes has arrived in Syria, President Bashar Assad said in an interview to Lebanon Al-Manar. Assad also said that Syrian army is battling up to 100,000 foreign mercenaries.

Assad revealed that the rest of the S-300 complexes previewed by
a Russian-Syrian arms contract will be coming soon, reports RT
Arabic (Rusiya Al Yaum), which has confirmed details of the
exclusive interview to be broadcast on the Lebanese TV channel at
9pm local time (18:00 GMT) Thursday.

The president promised that the Syrian army will “immediately
react” of a new Israeli aggression of Syrian soil, recalling
recent bombings of military objects inside Syrian territory by
the Israeli Air Force.

He noted that “The Syrian government will not interfere if
some kind of Syrian group starts a war to liberate the Golan
Heights,” occupied by Israel since the 1967 War.

During the interview, Assad confirmed the presence of Hezbollah
fighters in Syria on the Lebanese border, but stressed, that
“it is the Syrian army, not Hezbollah, battling the groups of
armed rebels and will continue to do so until total elimination
of the terrorists.”

Assad put blame for financing terrorists on Qatar, Saudi Arabia
and Turkey, which helped up to 100,000 militants to infiltrate
into Syria.

He assured that Damascus will participate in the upcoming
conference on Syria in Geneva (Geneva-2), but stressed that there
are no expectations of “important decisions” being made
there.

On Wednesday Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem told the
Lebanese TV channel Al-Mayadeen that in Geneva the Syrian
government expects to talk to those members of the opposition
which “do not have blood on their hands.”

“We cannot make a peaceful settlement with those who sow
terror and violence,” said Muallem, who is expected to head
the Syrian delegation in Geneva.

“We’re going [to the Geneva conference] with good intentions
and hope to end the conflict. We go to Geneva without
preconditions,” Muallem stated.

This contradicts the position of the disintegrated Syrian
opposition, which has just failed to reach unity at a summit in
Istanbul. In a released statement divided opposition coalition
has put forward a condition that, in any case, negotiations with
the President Bashar Assad regime must lead to his resignation.
Also, the statement says, Syrian opposition will not participate
in peace talks “while massacres underway”, AP reports.

Muallem also shared that Moscow supplies Damascus only with
weapons of defense and pointed out that “those who are afraid
of such weapons are actually preparing aggression [against Syria]
themselves”.

The news about S-300 systems in Syria comes a mere two days after
the EU’s decision to lift an arms embargo on Syria, allowing
European countries to ‘fully support’ the rebels fighting against
the Assad regime.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov lashed at the EU’s move
as “an unlawful”.

“This is an unlawful decision, in principle, to discuss
seriously on official level the issue of supplying or not
supplying arms to non-state actors is contrary to all norms of
international law,” Lavrov said earlier.

Germany has become the first among leading European states who
decided to stay away from arms supply to the Syrian opposition.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel officially stated on Wednesday
that Germany will ”under no circumstances” send weapons
to rebels in Syria.

Also on Wednesday a group of independent UN experts stated that
the majority of the Syrian rebel militants do not fight for
democracy.

“It was said the rebels were angels, but there is only a
minority of fighters with a democratic history who believe in the
Syrian mosaic and want a state for all,” Paulo Pinheiro, who
took part in UN investigation, told reporters.

“The majority of rebels are very far from having democratic
thoughts and have other aspirations,” Pinheiro concluded.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Brussels, home to major EU political institutions, appears to have the highest infant mortality rate in Europe, according to a recent survey. An infant’s life in the capital of Belgium is at higher risk than in countries like Romania, Slovenia or Latvia.

The city, commonly associated with prosperity and comfort,
features a perinatal mortality rate of 11.6 per 1,000 births,
according to a survey published by Euro-Peristat, a statistics
agency focused on gathering infant health data in Europe. The
figure, described as “shocking” by Doctors of the World, includes
deaths of fetuses older than 22 weeks, deaths during births and
deaths of newborns younger than four weeks.

Brussels’ infant mortality rate is about twice as high as
countries like Iceland (4.7), Portugal (4.8) or Cyprus (4.2).
Even places, traditionally associated with poorer living
conditions feature lower figures than the unofficial capital of
the EU. In Romania it’s 9.5, Latvia 9.3 and in Slovenia 7.1.

The heart of EU’s decision-making, in fact saw the infant
mortality rate skyrocket within between 2005 and 2010, as it
increased by 36.5 per cent during that time.

“The figures are shocking”, said Stephane Heymans of
Doctors of the World, as cited by De Morgen magazine. “But we
need to be cautious with the estimates. We are speaking of very
small figures here, so each single case influences the outcome.
And also a city is being compared to countries. No doubt there
are other cities with very bad rates.”

Experts say the infant mortality situation in Brussels is a sign
of how divided the city is, with some really poor neighborhoods
being part of one of the richest cities in EU. The unemployment
rate in the capital is also much higher than in the rest of the
country.

“It’s an indicator of an increased poverty in some parts of
the city. In the poor neighborhoods, in the migrant neighborhoods
unemployment is more than 50 per cent. And in those
neighborhoods, of course, the living conditions are not very
good, not very healthy. And that shows also in this kind of
figures,” says sociologist, Prof. Eric Corijn.

The infant mortality figures come shortly after an OECD report,
published earlier in May, which listed Belgium among countries
with increasing child poverty.

“Households with children were hit hard during the crisis.
Since 2007, child poverty increased in 16 OECD countries, with
increases… in Turkey, Spain, Belgium, Slovenia and Hungary,”
the report reads.

Doctors point at the lack of access to medical services for
Brussels’ residents. 

“People without papers, they are more and more [often] refused
medical services. It takes a lot of time to obtain those papers.
Hospitals put a lot of pressure on doctors and on administration
in general to not accept people who cannot pay or cannot prove
they can pay,” says Pierre Ryckmans of Doctors of the World.

With unemployment and poverty gripping Europe and recession
raging on, a rise in infant deaths is seen as a gruesome
indicator of the harshness of austerity measures. And those hit
hardest are the destitute part of the population. And the
situation is unlikely to improve in the near future, as deeper
recession is expected in the EU. The OECD issued its new forecast
on Tuesday, saying the European Union economy will shrink by 0.6
per cent this year. Just six months ago it only predicted a
0.1 per cent decline for the eurozone.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Several significant US news organizations reject the Department of Justice’s proposal to discuss off-the-record ‘new guidelines’ in light of the reporter wiretapping scandal. Last week President Obama urged the DOJ to search a consensus with the media.

Major news outlets, including Associated Press, the New York
Times and the Huffington Post refused to attend the DoJ
‘reconciliation’ meeting on the current rules governing federal
leaks investigations unless it is fully recorded and could be
transformed into news.

President Obama appointed the US Attorney General Eric Holder to
conduct meetings with news organizations, including internet
media outlets, radio stations, TV channels, wire services, and
media associations concerning new media guidelines.

To begin with, Holder plans to gather bureau chiefs of
Washington-based national news organizations within next two
days. Experts from government agencies in intelligence and
investigation are to attend the meeting as well.

But the outcry raised by the scandal with the DoJ secretly
recording phone calls of Associated Press reporters and gathering
emails of a Fox News journalist made the proposed hush-hush
dialogue unacceptable for insulted media outlets.

All hell broke loose on May 13 when the president of the
Associated Press Gary Pruitt officially protested to Holder over
the department’s broad surveillance of more than 100 individual
reporters’ phone conversations. The AP called the ongoing
monitoring a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.”

“It isn’t appropriate for us to attend an off-the-record
meeting with the attorney general,” New York Times Executive
Editor Jill Abramson announced in a statement. “Our Washington
bureau is aggressively covering the department’s handling of leak
investigations at this time.”

AP media relations manager Erin Madigan White even threatened DoJ
that, should the meeting not be recorded, the news outlets will
come together and share their point of view as to how DoJ media
regulation should be updated in an open letter. But if the DOJ
agrees to record the event, AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll
will attend it, White said.

Moreover, AP expects its attorneys to attend any future meetings
on the legal specifics between the attorney-general’s office and
media lawyers.

“Evidently, there will be a future session with department
officials on the substance of how the law should be applied in
leak cases and I am hopeful that our counsel, David McCraw, will
be able to participate in that meeting,” Jill Abramson said
in a statement to The Huffington Post.

According to a tweet by the Huffington Post’s Senior Media
Reporter Michael Calderone, the HP will also not attend the
meeting unless there is a record.

At the same time POLITICO Editor-in-Chief John Harris will attend
this week’s private meeting with Holder, as well as the
Washington Post’s representative.

The meetings, aimed at restoring the trust of the US media
community in the government security agencies, are scheduled to
take place within weeks. 

Obama is waiting for recommended media policy changes from
Holder, empowered to report directly to the president on
recommended media policy, by July 12.

This article originally appeared on: RT

China has dismissed US claims hackers procured blueprints for America’s most advanced weaponry. Beijing stated the allegations underestimate the Chinese people’s intellect and that China is perfectly capable of producing its own weapons.

A US Science Board report leaked this week alleged the Chinese
hackers had obtained access to the designs of two dozen major US
weapons systems in what amounted to “billions of dollars of
combat advantage to China.”

The Washington Post, who saw a copy of the report, intimated that
such information could be used by the Chinese government to speed
up the development of their military. An unnamed official told
the Post that China had saved themselves “25 years of research
and development” by stealing the plans.

Beijing reacted with ire, with Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman
Geng Yansheng dismissing the report as ridiculous.

“It both underestimates the Pentagon’s defensive security
abilities and the Chinese people’s intelligence,” said Geng
in a news briefing.

He stressed that China had demonstrated on numerous occasions it
has the ability “to build the weapons needed for national
security.”

“Recently China’s aircraft carrier, new fighter jets and
transport aircraft … have clearly shown this,” concluded
Geng.

The Washington Post wrote that among the designs procured by the
Chinese were blueprints for combat aircraft, ships and missiles
defense systems for Europe, Asia and the Gulf. These included the
advanced Patriot missile system, the F/A-18 fighter jet, the
Black Hawk helicopter and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

While Pentagon press secretary George Little told CNN on Tuesday
claims that cyber-attacks had weakened US military capabilities
were incorrect.

“Suggestions that cyberintrusions have somehow led to the
erosion of our capabilities or technological edge are incorrect,
we maintain full confidence in our weapons platforms,” said
Little.

The White House has accused Beijing repeatedly of hack attacks on
US government and military systems. At the beginning of May the
US Department of Defense formally condemned Chinese
cyber-attacks, “some of which appear to be attributable
directly to the Chinese government and military.”

“Hacking attacks are transnational and anonymous,” Hong
Lei, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said. “Determining
their origins is extremely difficult. We don’t know how the
evidence in this so-called report can be tenable.”

The issue of cyber warfare has been a significant bone of
contention in Sino-American relations lately, although Beijing
has refuted all claims of cyber-attack on the US. Chinese
President Xi Jingping is in America this week, where he will
conduct talks with his American counterpart Barack Obama.

Cyber security is expected to be at the top of the agenda, as
well as China’s growing military might and its claim on disputed
territory in the East China Sea.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Social rifts have been widening in the UK after the Woolwich murder and the discovery of an Oxford sex-grooming ring. In the midst of growing anti-Muslim protests, it has been suggested religion is merely a scapegoat in an already-divided society.

Social tensions have been on the rise on the streets of Britain
following the murder of 25-year-old British soldier Drummer Lee
Rigby in East London by two alleged Muslim extremists. The
suspected killers claimed to be acting in vengeance for Muslims
killed abroad by British troops in a video of the brutal attack.

The killing triggered violent protests from right-wing group the
English Defense League (EDL) who slam the government for not
doing enough against Muslim extremism. There has also been a
flurry of attacks on Mosques in London and the rest of Britain in
the wake of the incident.

Prior to this, the case of an Oxford-based sex-grooming ring that
was active for eight years gripped the British public. Seven men
of Asian origin were charged with rape, trafficking and
orchestrating child prostitution among girls as young as 11.

Speculation has been rife as to the causes of these latest
incidents, with some laying the blame at the feet of Britain’s
growing Muslim population. However, others suggest the attacks
have nothing to do with religion and originate from extremist
groups that have slipped under the UK government’s radar.

Assed Baig, a UK-based freelance journalist, told RT that the
latest incidents had absolutely nothing to do with Islam. He
described the motives of race and religion as “red
herrings.”

Speaking about the Oxford sex ring, he said the perpetrators were
merely “predatory men targeting vulnerable girls who happened
to be white, if those girls were Asian or black these men would
have carried out the same actions.”

“The crimes that they committed are not Islamic, they are not
crimes of radicalization,” stressed Baig.

Moreover, the Muslim Council of Britain has decried both the
murder of Lee Rigby and the Oxford grooming ring as “appalling
acts,” but has signaled that the fault should not be laid at
the feet of the British Muslim Community.

Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation told
RT that “if you are involved in terrorism or extremism
you do not represent Islam, you do not act in our name , you are
bringing shame on our community and you must be confronted.”

Referencing the attack on Lee Rigby, the MCB said that it was
more concerning how the killers “slipped through the net of
the security services while within their radar.”

The MCB also reminded the government that it was its
responsibility to protect its citizens from right-wing extremists
and urged for leadership to combat “the challenge of civic
apathy.”

While Mustafa Field, the director of the Mosques and Imams
National Advisory Board signaled that the perpetrators of these
crimes were small pockets of radicals not affiliated with the
Muslim Community.

“There’s very little evidence to indicate that mosques have
been involved in radicalizing individuals,” he said to the
Guardian. “But the mosques are left to de-radicalize
them.”

He went on to say that the phenomenon of
“self-radicalization” is becoming more prevalent in the UK
and the government needs to pay more attention to extremist
individuals.

Sean Thomas, a writer and journalist based in London told RT that
politicians and prosecutors alike are afraid of addressing the
issue for fear of being branded as “racist.”

“It can ruin careers,” said Thomas to RT correspondent
Polly Boyko. 

“The fact that it took a Muslim prosecutor to cut through and
say ‘Look there is a problem here,’ shows that white prosecutors,
white social workers, white legal officers and white politicians
were very wary of approaching the issue because they are all
terrified of being seen as racist,” said Thomas.

He drew attention to the fact that the case was brought up by far
right-wing politician, Nick Griffin, back in 2004. The subsequent
BBC documentary that was filmed on the subject led to the
political establishment trying to put a gag on the politician
rather than investigate the crimes.

“They ignored everything he said and instead tried to silence
his point of view and so the crimes went on for a number of
years,” said Thomas.

This article originally appeared on: RT

The European Commission is launching legal action against the UK, which it believes discriminates against EU citizens by making them pass an additional test to prove their rights to benefits. The UK says it will fight to keep the extra test.

The UK’s so-called ‘right to reside’ test is discriminatory to EU
citizens, leading to thousands being denied benefits, such as a
child tax credit and jobseeker’s allowance, according to European
Commission, which is taking the case to the European Court
of Justice in Luxembourg.

The EC believes the standard EU test to tell if a migrant is
eligible for welfare payments is enough and any extra testing is
an infringement on EU citizens’ rights.

“We are asking the UK to change its resident permit test
because it is a discrimination against other EU citizens in our
open internal market,” said an EU source cited by Reuters.

It’s not the first time the UK has been criticized for its ‘right
to reside’ test. Britain was already told to put an end to the
practice in 2011. However, it did not give up on the extra
testing then and it now promises to fight for it.

“The right-to-reside part of our habitual residence test is a
vital and fair tool to ensure that benefits are only paid to
people who are legally allowed to live in Britain. We have always
been clear that we believe our rules are in line with EU law. If
the commission decides to begin legal proceedings, we will fight
vigorously to ensure that our benefit system is protected from
abuse by migrants,” said spokesman for the Department for
Work and Pensions, as cited by the Guardian.

Peter Lilley, the Conservative MP and former minister in charge
of social security at the time when the controversial testing was
introduced, said in an interview to the BBC that the legal action
by the EU is an attempt “to extend their competence into areas
where the treaties say they shouldn’t be involved.”

The legal battle in Luxembourg looms at a time when debate over
leaving the EU is becoming more and more acute in the UK. Prime
Minister Cameron promised that if he is reelected in 2015 a
referendum would be held on Britain’s membership in the EU not
later than 2017.

This year’s Queen’s Speech earlier in May contained a number of
new measures aimed at curbing immigration to the UK, especially
from poorer EU nations such as Romania and Bulgaria.

Among those is a six-month restriction to the jobseeker’s
allowance, which will apply to all EU nationals unable to prove
they are actively seeking employment and have a genuine chance of
getting work.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Yemen is demanding $20 million from the US to build a rehab center for former Guantanamo detainees that would be extradited to the country. The facility would be designed to prevent them from returning to militant activities.

Last week President Barack Obama announced the US’s readiness to
lift up ban on repatriating Yemeni nationals from Guantanamo Bay
top security prison.

Sanaa has put a price tag on the issue, asking Washington and the
Gulf capitals to fund construction of a rehabilitation center
that will potentially soothe the pains of former extremists and
disincline them from armed violence.

“The detainees will be rehabilitated and reintegrated into
society,” state news agency Saba quoted Yemen’s President
Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi as saying. On Tuesday, Hadi shared his
views with the US Senator John McCain who is touring the Middle
East.

Yemen’s Human Rights Minister Houriah Mashhour told Reuters that
the government approved the plan, but needs funding, from $18 to
$20 million to bring the project into life.

“The [financial] support that the United States would offer to
Yemen in this regard will not be more than what it is [currently]
spending to maintain Guantanamo prison,” Mashhour evaluated
in an interview on Wednesday.

She also addressed wealthy Arab states of the Persian Gulf, which
promoted the power transfer in Yemen in 2011 and helped to stop
months-long political instability in Yemen, to sponsor the rehab
project.

A large number, if not the majority of the Guantanamo detainees
are from Yemen.

Among the 86 Gitmo prisoners already cleared for transfer or
release are 56 Yemeni nationals. The next 80 detainees awaiting
clearance for transfer have unaccounted for number of Yemenis as
well. Many of them are among the 100+ Gitmo prisoners who are on
hunger strike, which began sometime in
February, demanding to be let out.

Most of them were detained over a decade ago, following the 9/11
terror acts in the US and the American invasion to Afghanistan.

Washington stopped repatriating Yemeni nationals from Guantanamo
prison in 2010, following the 2009 incident of an attempted
US-bound plane blast. A man who attempted to bring explosives
aboard in his underwear had been trained by Al-Qaeda-linked
militants in Yemen.

Yemen is one of the most impoverished countries in the Arabian
Peninsula, which definitely helps Al-Qaeda cells, which
traditionally recruit new members among poverty-stricken
population.

The Arab Spring protests in 2011 hit low-lived Yemen particularly
hard, putting the country on the verge of a civil war. In the end
President Ali Abdullah Saleh was ousted and replaced with his
subordinate Hadi.

Though the situation in Yemen has largely stabilized since then,
the Islamist insurgency together with Al-Qaeda are still
targeting governmental facilities and troops in regular attacks
and explosions.

Because of the extended US security concerns Mashhour does not
expect the repatriation process to start before the end of 2013.
While many of the Guantanamo prisoners were returned to the
countries of origin, dozens of Yemeni nationals are still
awaiting their fate in Gitmo.

Mashhour stressed Yemen’s government is not going to put such
people on trial because “had there been any evidence against
them, the United States would have put them on trial,” she
told Reuters.

So Yemeni authorities are going to concentrate their efforts on
rehabilitating the former detainees, Mashhour said, stressing
that most of the 21 inmates repatriated before the 2010 ban have
managed to return to normal life. She personally talked to some
of them, she revealed, and shared that some are employed by
Yemeni companies.

As for those who opted to get back to militants, “very few
did” the minister said, specifying she has no “precise
information” on them.

Mashhour pointed out that “rehabilitating [former Gitmo
inmates] is an issue that is not exclusively a Yemeni issue.
Saudi Arabia has a similar program which Guantanamo inmates have
been put through.”

She named poverty and unemployment as the main reasons for people
joining extremists, therefore new jobs for the former militants
returning to normal life is crucial.

This article originally appeared on: RT

In a drive to improve profits, Panasonic has announced plans to cut 5,000 jobs over the next three years.

The cutbacks will hit its automotive and industrial unit, which
accounts for about a third of the company’s workforce, the Nikkei
reported Thursday, citing a Panasonic executive.

“A reduction in labor costs will be a big part of our plan to
improve profitability,” Yoshihiko Yamada, the head of
Panasonic’s automotive and industrial division, told analysts and
investors in Tokyo on Thursday.

The division, which includes automotive components,
semiconductors, production machinery and other devices, employs
110,000 people, and is the crux of Tsuga’s business strategy to
create a new niche for Panasonic in the already over-saturated
consumer electronics markets, which rivals Sony and Samsung have
a steady hold on.

The cuts are part of Panasonic’ strategy to boost its
operating profit margin over the next three years to a five
percent minimum, which will be set by the company’s president,
Kazuhiko Tsuga.

In May, the Japanese electronics giant reported a near-record net
loss of $7.5 billion (754 billion yen) for the fiscal year
through March, pointing to a slowdown in sales as well as
restructuring costs. 

The company also missed Bloomberg analysts forecast net income of
64 billion yen, and predicted it would only amount to 50 billion
yen ($495 million).

In light of the losses, Tsuga has announced a 2-year
restructuring plan under which overseas plants will be shut down
and other arms of the business, such as healthcare and logistics,
will be trimmed back.

The electronics market has been hit particularly hard by the
global recession, and has struggled to stay afloat as consumers’
luxury item budgets contract and electronics businesses worldwide
decline.

The Nikkei plunged 5.2 percent at market close in Tokyo, and the
Shanghai Composite and the Hang Send both slid 0.3 percent.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Ibragim Todashev, who was killed by the FBI during a questioning, was shot six times, once in the crown of his head, photos shown at a press conference in Moscow reveal. His father suspects it could have been a kill shot.

“I can show you the photos taken after the killing of my son.
I have 16 photographs. I just would like to say that looking at
these photos is like being in a movie. I only saw things like
that in movies: shooting a person, and then the kill shot. Six
shots in the body, one of them in the head,” Abdulbaki
Todashev said at the press conference at RIA Novosti news agency
in the Russian capital.

He explained that the photos were taken by friends of his son in
the US, to whom the FBI handed the body.

“I want justice and I want an investigation to be carried out,
I want these people [the FBI agents] to be put on trial in
accordance with US law. They are not FBI officers, they are
bandits. I cannot call them otherwise, they must be put on
trial,” he said.

Abdulbaki Todashev said his main aim now is to go to the US and
get his son’s body.

“My brother and I, we went to the American embassy today. We
both want to fly there, we’ve applied for a visa,” he
explained.

This article originally appeared on: RT

The UN-Arab League special representative for Syria has expressed hope that the Tehran conference on Syria would help bring about an end to the ongoing crisis in the Arab country.

Å“Tehran conference as well as the Geneva 2 conference are highly important and we hope they would help resolve the crisis in Syria, which is in a very complicated condition,” Lakhdar Brahimi said in a Wednesday message to the Friends of Syria Conference in Tehran.

On Wednesday, Iran hosted the Friends of Syria Conference in Tehran under the banner of Å“Political Solution, Regional Stability.” The event was attended by representatives from 40 countries, seeking to find a political solution to the crisis in the Arab country.

On May 7, Russia and the United States also agreed to convene an international conference on Syria in Geneva, which will serve as a follow-up to an earlier Geneva meeting held in June 2012. Russia has highlighted the necessity of Iran’s presence in the event. No exact date has been set for the meeting yet.

Pointing to the upcoming Geneva 2 conference, Brahimi expressed hope that the talks would be held as soon as possible, adding, Å“This agreement [between Russia and the US] could be a significant step [toward the resolution of the crisis in Syria], but it is apparently the first step.”

Unrest has gripped Syria for over two years and many people, including large numbers of Syrian security personnel, have lost their lives in the foreign-sponsored militancy.

On May 23, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said, Å“Syria is determined to tackle terrorism and those who support it regionally and globally, and to find a political solution to the crisis.”

MKA/SS/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

“Gunmen in Pakistan on Monday set ablaze five trucks carrying NATO equipment out of Afghanistan as the international military alliance winds down it combat mission there, officials said.”

-Agence France Presse, 3/1/13

There is nothing that better sums up the utter failure of America’s longest war than getting ambushed as you are trying to get the hell out of the county. And yet the April 1 debacle in Baluchistan was in many ways a metaphor for a looming crisis that NATO and the U.S. seem totally unprepared for: with the clock ticking down on removing most combat troops by 2014, there are no official negotiations going on, nor does there seem to be any strategy for how to bring them about.

“I still cannot understand how we, the international community and the Afghan government have managed to arrive at a situation in which everything is coming together in 2014–elections, new president, economic transition, military transition––and negotiations for the peace process have not really started,” said Bernard Bajolet, former French ambassador to Kabul and current head of France’s foreign intelligence service.

When the Obama administration sent an additional 30,000 troops into Afghanistan in 2009 as part of the “surge,” the goal was to secure the country’s southern provinces, suppress opium cultivation, and force the Taliban to give up on the war. Not only did the surge fail to impress the Taliban and its allies, it never stabilized the southern provinces of Helmand and Kandahar. Both are once again under the sway of the insurgency and opium production has soared. What the surge did manage was to spread the insurgency into the formally secure areas in the north and west.

With the exception of the current U.S. commander in Afghanistan, virtually everyone has concluded that the war has been a disaster for all involved.

The Afghans have lost more than two million dead over the past 30 years, huge sections of the population have been turned into refugees, and the country is becoming what one international law enforcement official described to the New York Times as “the world’s first true narco state.” According to the World Bank, 36 percent of Afghans are at or below the poverty line, and 20 percent of Afghan children never reach the age of five.

The war has cost American taxpayers over $1.4 trillion, and, according to a recent study, the final butcher bill for both Iraq and Afghanistan will top $6 trillion. The decade-long conflict has put enormous strains on the NATO alliance, destabilized and alienated nuclear-armed Pakistan, and helped to spread al-Qaeda-like organizations throughout the Middle East and Africa.

Only U.S. Gen. Joseph “Fighting Joe” Dunford, head of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) thinks the war on the Taliban is being won, and that the Afghan Army is “steadily gaining in confidence, competence, and commitment.” Attacks by the Taliban are up 47 percent over last year, and the casualty rate for Afghan soldiers and police has increased 40 percent. The yearly desertion rate of the Afghan Army is between 27 percent and 30 percent.

In theory, ISAF combat troops will exit Afghanistan in 2014 and turn the war over to the Afghan Army and police, organizations that have yet to show they can take on the insurgency. One of the Army’s crack units was recently overrun in eastern Afghanistan. Given the fragility of the Afghan government and its army, one would think that the White House should be putting on a full court press to get talks going, but instead it is following a strategy that has demonstrably failed in the past.

The tactic of “shooting and talking” that is central to the surge has produced lots of casualties but virtually zero dialogue, hardly a surprise. That approach has never worked in Afghanistan.

Part of the problem is that the call for talks is so heavily laden with caveats and restrictions that that they derail any possibility of real negotiations, among them are that the Taliban have to accept the 2004 constitution and renounce violence and “terrorism.”

However, the Taliban argue that the 2004 constitution was imposed from the outside, and they want a role in re-writing it. As for “terrorism,” the Taliban denounced international terrorism five years ago.

As Anatol Lieven, a King’s College London professor, senior researcher at the New American Foundation, and probably the best informed English language writer on Afghanistan, points out, the Americans consistently paint themselves into a corner by demonizing their opponents.

That, in turn, leads to “a belief that any enemy of the United States must inevitably be evil. Not only does this tendency make pragmatic compromises with opponents much more difficult (and much more embarrassing should they eventually be reached), but, consciously or unconsciously it allows the US government and media to blind the US public, and often themselves, to the evils of America’s own allies.”

For instance, the Americans will not talk with the Haqqani group, a Taliban ally, even though it is the most effective military force confronting the NATO occupation. The same goes for Iran, even though Teheran played a key role in organizing the 2003 Bonn conference that led to the formation of the current Kabul government. Iran also has legitimate interests in the current war. Because opium and heroin are not a major problem in the US, Washington can afford to turn a blind eye to the Afghan government’s alliance with drug dealing warlords. Heroin addiction, however, constitutes a national health crisis in Iran and Russia.

It is not exactly clear what will happen in 2014. While American combat units are supposed to be withdrawn, in accordance with a treaty between NATO and the government of President Harmid Karzai, several thousand Special Forces, trainers, CIA personal, and aircraft will remain on nine bases until 2024. That agreement was the supposed reason for the massive suicide bomb May 16 in Kabul that killed 6 Americans and 16 Afghans. Hezb-i-Islami, an insurgent group based around Kabul and the eastern part of the country, took credit for the attack.

That attack underlines how difficult it will be to forge some kind of agreement.

Hezb-i-Islami pulled off the bombing, but the party’s political wing is a major player in the Karzai government, holding down the posts of education minister and advisor to the president. Hezb-i-Islami leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is also a rival of Taliban leader Mullah Omar, and the bombing could just as well have been a maneuver to make sure Hezb-i-Islami has a seat at the table if talks start up. Hekmatyar has offered to negotiate with NATO in the past.

The Taliban itself is divided into several factions, partly because the Americans’ systematic assassination of high and mid-level Taliban leaders has decentralized the organization. The Taliban is increasingly an alliance of local groups that may have very different politics.

The Haqqanis’ have a strong presence in Pakistan, which requires that the organization maintain cordial relations with Pakistan’s Army and intelligence services. They scratch each other’s backs. So any understanding to end the war will have to be acceptable to the Haqqanis and Islamabad. No agreement is possible without the participation of both.

Instead of recognizing the reality of the situation, however, the Obama administration continues to ignore the powerful Haqqanis, sideline Iran, and to alienate the average Pakistani though its drone war.

As complex as the situation looks, a solution is possible, but only if the White House changes course. First, the “shoot and talk” nonsense must end immediately, General Dunford’s hallucinations not withstanding. If the U.S. couldn’t smother the insurgency during the surge, how can it do so now with fewer troops? All the shooting will do is get a lot more people killed–most of them Afghan soldiers, police, and civilians caught in the crossfire–and sabotage any potential talks.

According to Lieven, the Taliban are far more realistic about the current situation than is the White House. Last July, he and a group of academics met “leading figures close to the Taliban” during a trip to the Persian Gulf. He says there was “a widespread recognition within the Taliban that while they can maintain a struggle in the south and east of Afghanistan indefinitely,” they could never conquer the whole country. Further, “in their own estimate,” they have the support of about 30 percent of population. A recent Asia Foundation poll came to a similar conclusion.

While the Taliban refuse to negotiate with the Karzai government, Lieven says they told the delegation, “there can be no return to the ‘pure’ government of mullahs,” and “most strikingly, they said that the Taliban might be prepared to agree to the US bases remaining until 2024.” The latter compromise will not make the Iranians, Chinese, or Russians very happy–not to mention Hezb-i-Islami–but it reflects a deep-seated philosophy in Afghan politics: figure out a way to cut a deal.

The Taliban’s rejection of talks with the Kabul government means that going ahead with next year’s presidential election is probably a bad idea. An all-Afghan constitutional convention would be a better idea, with elections postponed until after a new constitution is in place.

There are numerous issues that could sink a final agreement because there are many players with multiple agendas. Regardless, those agendas will have to be addressed, even if not quite to everyone’s satisfaction. And everyone has to sit at the table, since those who are excluded have the power to torpedo the entire endeavor. This means all the combatants, but also Iran, India, China, Russia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.

And the White House needs to get off its butt. Afghan President Karzai, just returned from an arms buying spree in India, asked New Delhi to increase its presence in Afghanistan. This will hardly be popular with Pakistan and China, and Islamabad can make serious mischief if it wants to.

The ambush in Pakistan brings to mind Karl Marx’s famous dictum about history: it happens first as tragedy, then as farce.

The first time this happened was during Britain’s first Anglo-Afghan War (1839-42), when Afghans overran an East India Company army retreating from Kabul. Out of 4,500 soldiers and 12,000 civilians, a single assistant surgeon made it back to Jalalabad.

The most recent ambush certainly had an element of farce about it. Four masked gunmen on two motorbikes forced the trucks to stop, sprinkled them with gasoline and set the vehicles ablaze. One driver received a minor injury.

There is no need for a chaos-engulfed finale to the Afghan War. There is no reason to continue the bloodshed, which all the parties recognize will not alter the final outcome a whit. It is time for the White House to step up and do the right thing and end one of the bloodiest wars in recent history.

Conn Hallinan can be read at dispatchesfromtheedgeblog.wordpress.com and middleempireseries.wordpress.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

London attack suspect appears at Westminster magistrates’ court under high levels of security.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iraqi policemen inspect a damaged police pickup truck on the scene of a car bomb attack in the al-Karradah neighborhood of Baghdad on May 30, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Afghan soldiers arrive at the site of an attack in Kabul on May 24, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Donna Anderson
Infowars.com
May 30, 2013

Photo: MSN News

Doug and Catherine Snodgrass were thrilled when their 17-year old son suddenly made a new friend at school. As it turns out, the “new friend” was an undercover cop who proceeded to convince the teen to sell him some weed and then arrested him in an undercover drug sting.

Doug Snodgrass explained that his son has Asperger’s and other disabilities which makes it difficult for him to make friends. Snodgrass told ABC News that his son had just recently enrolled at Chaparral High School in California and “He suddently had this friend who was texting him around the clock.”

What Snodgrass didn’t know was that “Daniel” was an undercover cop with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department.

“Daniel” developed a friendship with Snodgrass’ son and asked him to sell him his prescription medication. When the teen refused, “Daniel” gave him $20 and asked him to buy him some marijuana. Eventually, “Daniel” persuaded the teen, convincing him that he desperately needed the drug.

In December 2012, Snodgrass’ son was arrested along with 21 other students from three schools, all on various drug charges related to the undercover operation.

In January, a juvenile court judge ruled that there were extenuating circumstances in the case and sentenced Snodgrass to informal probation and 20 hours of community service, stating also that there was “no finding of guilt.”

In March, Judge Marian H. Tully ruled that the Temecula Valley Unified School District could not expel the teen, and that they had, in fact, failed to provide him with proper supervision while at school.

“Within three days of the officer’s requests, [the] student burned himself due to his anxiety,” Tully said. “Ultimately, the student was persuaded to buy marijuana for someone he thought was a friend who desperately needed this drug and brought it to school for him.”

Snodgrass says his son has been harassed by teachers who’ve given him multiple suspensions and threaten expulsion. “Our son was cleared of the criminal charge, but the school continued to try and expel him,” Snodgrass said.

The Snodgrasses are currently suing the school for unspecified damages, stating the school should have provided better protection for their son instead of participating in an undercover drug sting with local authorities that intentionally targeted and discriminated against their son.

Stephen Downing, a retired Deputy Chief of Police in the LAPD, said the behavior of the police in this case points to troubling trends in policy. “It is evidence of just how far we have gone, and how callous we have become, in treating our children with the care and dignity they should be entitled.”

“The fact that the police officer chose to prey upon the most vulnerable” is “egregious” but not surprising, he said. He pointed toward policing tactics and policies – like quotas, the increasing criminalization of America’s schools, and the war on drugs – that put pressure on police to treat normal teen behavior as criminal.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 8:46 am

Tags: domestic news, police state

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Infowars.com
May 30, 2013

Yes, Virginia, the Devil does exist, and his name is Jerry Andrew Active. Just hours after being released from jail in Anchorage, Alaska, Active went on a diabolical rampage that ended in the brutal death of an elderly Alaska couple and the horrifying rape of their 2-year-old granddaughter.

Jerry Andrew Active, 24, had been serving time for a probation violation. Released from the Anchorage Correctional Complex shortly after 8 a.m. On Saturday, May 25, he wormed his way through an open window in the victims home less than 12 hours later.

The victims, 71-year-old Touch Chean and his 73-year-old wife, Sorn Sreap, were discovered when the couple’s grandson and his wife arrived home. At the same time, they also discovered Active raping their 2-year-old daughter.

Active was arrested at the scene and has been charged with murder, sexual assault, sexual abuse of a m inor and burglary. Bail has been set at $1.5 million.

According to The Blaze, Active has been in and out of jail since 2007. In 2009, he was arrested for sexually assaulting an 11-year-old girl while the family slept, then assaulting three other members of the household.

In 2010, Active was convicted on charges of attempted sexual abuse of a minor and trespassing.

Department of Corrections spokeswoman Kaci Schroeder said Active violated his probation repeatedly, “sometimes being arrested on the very day he got out of jail.”

The Blaze report says, “From Oct. 2, 2011 to when police arrested him Saturday, Active had spent 18 days on the outside, according to a timeline released by the Department of Corrections.”

“He messed up quickly and repeatedly,” Schroeder said, each time earning a new, short jail sentence.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 8:55 am

Tags: domestic news

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Yemen is demanding $20 million from the US to build a rehab center for former Guantanamo detainees that would be extradited to the country. The facility would be designed to prevent them from returning to militant activities.

Last week President Barack Obama announced the US’s readiness to
lift up ban on repatriating Yemeni nationals from Guantanamo Bay
top security prison.

Sanaa has put a price tag on the issue, asking Washington and the
Gulf capitals to fund construction of a rehabilitation center
that will potentially soothe the pains of former extremists and
disincline them from armed violence.

“The detainees will be rehabilitated and reintegrated into
society,” state news agency Saba quoted Yemen’s President
Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi as saying. On Tuesday, Hadi shared his
views with the US Senator John McCain who is touring the Middle
East.

Yemen’s Human Rights Minister Houriah Mashhour told Reuters that
the government approved the plan, but needs funding, from $18 to
$20 million to bring the project into life.

“The [financial] support that the United States would offer to
Yemen in this regard will not be more than what it is [currently]
spending to maintain Guantanamo prison,” Mashhour evaluated
in an interview on Wednesday.

She also addressed wealthy Arab states of the Persian Gulf, which
promoted the power transfer in Yemen in 2011 and helped to stop
months-long political instability in Yemen, to sponsor the rehab
project.

A large number, if not the majority of the Guantanamo detainees
are from Yemen.

Among the 86 Gitmo prisoners already cleared for transfer or
release are 56 Yemeni nationals. The next 80 detainees awaiting
clearance for transfer have unaccounted for number of Yemenis as
well. Many of them are among the 100+ Gitmo prisoners who are on
hunger strike, which began sometime in
February, demanding to be let out.

Most of them were detained over a decade ago, following the 9/11
terror acts in the US and the American invasion to Afghanistan.

Washington stopped repatriating Yemeni nationals from Guantanamo
prison in 2010, following the 2009 incident of an attempted
US-bound plane blast. A man who attempted to bring explosives
aboard in his underwear had been trained by Al-Qaeda-linked
militants in Yemen.

Yemen is one of the most impoverished countries in the Arabian
Peninsula, which definitely helps Al-Qaeda cells, which
traditionally recruit new members among poverty-stricken
population.

The Arab Spring protests in 2011 hit low-lived Yemen particularly
hard, putting the country on the verge of a civil war. In the end
President Ali Abdullah Saleh was ousted and replaced with his
subordinate Hadi.

Though the situation in Yemen has largely stabilized since then,
the Islamist insurgency together with Al-Qaeda are still
targeting governmental facilities and troops in regular attacks
and explosions.

Because of the extended US security concerns Mashhour does not
expect the repatriation process to start before the end of 2013.
While many of the Guantanamo prisoners were returned to the
countries of origin, dozens of Yemeni nationals are still
awaiting their fate in Gitmo.

Mashhour stressed Yemen’s government is not going to put such
people on trial because “had there been any evidence against
them, the United States would have put them on trial,” she
told Reuters.

So Yemeni authorities are going to concentrate their efforts on
rehabilitating the former detainees, Mashhour said, stressing
that most of the 21 inmates repatriated before the 2010 ban have
managed to return to normal life. She personally talked to some
of them, she revealed, and shared that some are employed by
Yemeni companies.

As for those who opted to get back to militants, “very few
did” the minister said, specifying she has no “precise
information” on them.

Mashhour pointed out that “rehabilitating [former Gitmo
inmates] is an issue that is not exclusively a Yemeni issue.
Saudi Arabia has a similar program which Guantanamo inmates have
been put through.”

She named poverty and unemployment as the main reasons for people
joining extremists, therefore new jobs for the former militants
returning to normal life is crucial.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Demonstrators take part in a protest against the government’s austerity policies near Belem Presidential palace in Lisbon on May 25, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The richest 20 percent of US households will receive more than half of the benefits in the overall savings in tax breaks this year, a report shows.

More than half of the USD 900 billion tax benefits projected for 2013 will be allocated to households with income in the top 20 percent of the population, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported on Wednesday.

The government agency added that 17 percent or USD 153 billion in tax relief will be distributed to households in the top 1 percent of the population – those with at least USD 327,000 in annual income.

The middle 20 percent of the population will receive 13 percent of those tax expenditures, while the lowest 20 percent will get only 8 percent, said the CBO.

This is while a new study by Audit Analytics found that large US companies have boosted their overseas earnings by 15 percent last year to a record USD 1.9 trillion, while keeping their profits abroad to avoid paying taxes under the tax deferral law.

Moreover, an average American taxpayer would have to pay an extra USD 1,026 in taxes to make up for the lost revenue of offshore tax havens by corporations and wealthy individuals.

US President Barack Obama and democratic lawmakers have pushed for tax reforms including limits on tax breaks for the rich, as an alternative to sweeping cuts following the sequester.

Å“We think itâ„¢s important to decide whether we want to prioritize education for the kids of our servicemen and women or tax expenditures for the top 1 percent,” said Representative Chris Van Hollen, member of the House Budget Committee.

GMA/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The European Commission is launching legal action against the UK, which it believes discriminates against EU citizens by making them pass an additional test to prove their rights to benefits. The UK says it will fight to keep the extra test.

The UK’s so-called ‘right to reside’ test is discriminatory to EU
citizens, leading to thousands being denied benefits, such as a
child tax credit and jobseeker’s allowance, according to European
Commission, which is taking the case to the European Court
of Justice in Luxembourg.

The EC believes the standard EU test to tell if a migrant is
eligible for welfare payments is enough and any extra testing is
an infringement on EU citizens’ rights.

“We are asking the UK to change its resident permit test
because it is a discrimination against other EU citizens in our
open internal market,” said an EU source cited by Reuters.

It’s not the first time the UK has been criticized for its ‘right
to reside’ test. Britain was already told to put an end to the
practice in 2011. However, it did not give up on the extra
testing then and it now promises to fight for it.

“The right-to-reside part of our habitual residence test is a
vital and fair tool to ensure that benefits are only paid to
people who are legally allowed to live in Britain. We have always
been clear that we believe our rules are in line with EU law. If
the commission decides to begin legal proceedings, we will fight
vigorously to ensure that our benefit system is protected from
abuse by migrants,” said spokesman for the Department for
Work and Pensions, as cited by the Guardian.

Peter Lilley, the Conservative MP and former minister in charge
of social security at the time when the controversial testing was
introduced, said in an interview to the BBC that the legal action
by the EU is an attempt “to extend their competence into areas
where the treaties say they shouldn’t be involved.”

The legal battle in Luxembourg looms at a time when debate over
leaving the EU is becoming more and more acute in the UK. Prime
Minister Cameron promised that if he is reelected in 2015 a
referendum would be held on Britain’s membership in the EU not
later than 2017.

This year’s Queen’s Speech earlier in May contained a number of
new measures aimed at curbing immigration to the UK, especially
from poorer EU nations such as Romania and Bulgaria.

Among those is a six-month restriction to the jobseeker’s
allowance, which will apply to all EU nationals unable to prove
they are actively seeking employment and have a genuine chance of
getting work.

This article originally appeared on: RT

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

UNITED NATIONS – When the United States invaded Iraq back in March 2003, one of its primary objectives was to track down and destroy weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) reportedly stockpiled by the regime of President Saddam Hussein.

WMD hazard symbols. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons) By its own definition — and by U.N. standards — the United States was frantically searching for WMDs constituting three of the world’s most lethal armaments: nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC) weapons.

The search, apparently based on faulty U.S. intelligence, proved futile. But the acronym “WMD” became an integral part of military jargon worldwide as characterising NBCs.

Since last April’s bombings in Boston, Massachusetts, however, both the administration of President Barack Obama and the mainstream news media have offered a new definition of WMDs: shrapnel-packed, homemade pressure cooker bombs that killed three and wounded more than 250 during a marathon in that U.S. city.

“Comparing the weapons used in the Boston bombings with nuclear weapons in particular is ludicrous.” — Dr. Natalie J. Goldring of Georgetown University

That bomb has repeatedly been described as a “weapon of mass destruction”.

Dr. Natalie J. Goldring, a senior fellow with the Security Studies Programme in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, told IPS the weapons used in the Boston bombings were improvised explosive devices (IEDs), not weapons of mass destruction.

Chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons are commonly grouped together as weapons of mass destruction, she said. Combining these weapons in a single category makes it seem as though all three types of weapons are equivalent to one another. They’re not, said Goldring.

“Nuclear weapons are by far more destructive than existing chemical or biological weapons. Even so, all three types of weapons have the capability to be massively more damaging than the weapons used in Boston,” she said.

“Comparing the weapons used in the Boston bombings with nuclear weapons in particular is ludicrous,” said Goldring, who also represents the Acronym Institute at the United Nations on conventional weapons and arms trade issues.

According to some military experts, the IEDs used in the Boston bombings are no different from the IEDs widely used against U.S. armed forces by insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Jody Williams, the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and chair of the Nobel Women’s Initiative, told IPS, “If you want to confuse people, you blur the lines of distinction between things and also situations.”

She said an improvised explosive device as a “weapon of mass destruction” is just such an example, as is the broad use of “terrorist” and “terrorism” in the aftermath of Sep. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

“We also have the ‘good guys’ and the ‘bad guys’ — a tad broad, to say the least,” said Williams, who led a highly successful global campaign that resulted in a worldwide ban on anti-personnel landmines.

She said it is easier for the U.S. government to continue to prosecute its borderless “war on terror” if people don’t quite understand or see distinctions. It’s all “too confusing” and best left in the hands of the “experts” in Washington, she added.

Siemon Wezeman, senior researcher at the Arms Transfers Programme at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), told IPS the use of the term WMD to describe the Boston bombs has been perceived as “weird”.

He said most people would think WMDs are the serious mass killer weapons — nuclear, biological, chemical, and potentially radiological. However, said Wezeman, the term WMD has been used loosely from the time it was probably first coined in 1937 to describe more or less every weapon.

There seem to be in the U.S. official terminology some 50 different definitions, he said.

“Considering the U.S. official terminology, WMD would more or less cover every type of slightly larger explosive weapon — IEDs, hand grenades, artillery shells, small cannon — as used daily by ‘terrorists’ as well as armed forces,” he added.

“Of course for most people and for normal usage, WMD remains just the nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological (CBRN) weapons,” Wezeman said.

Goldring told IPS, “As horrific as the Boston bombings were, the number of casualties caused by those bombings was a tiny fraction of the likely casualties if one or more nuclear weapons were exploded in a city.”

She pointed out that scientists estimate that if even a relatively small (10 kilotonne) nuclear weapon were exploded in a city, the entire area out about a mile in every direction would be largely destroyed.

“Calling the Boston bombs weapons of mass destruction is a political statement. It makes no sense from a substantive perspective,” she said.

If the Boston bombs are weapons of mass destruction, Goldring asked, “Does that mean all of the improvised explosive devices used in Afghanistan and Iraq are also defined as weapons of mass destruction?”

That simply makes no sense, she said, adding, “IEDs have caused enormous damage to military personnel and civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq, but they are not weapons of mass destruction.”

© 2013 IPS North America

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Social rifts have been widening in the UK after the Woolwich murder and the discovery of an Oxford sex-grooming ring. In the midst of growing anti-Muslim protests, it has been suggested religion is merely a scapegoat in an already-divided society.

Social tensions have been on the rise on the streets of Britain
following the murder of 25-year-old British soldier Drummer Lee
Rigby in East London by two alleged Muslim extremists. The
suspected killers claimed to be acting in vengeance for Muslims
killed abroad by British troops in a video of the brutal attack.

The killing triggered violent protests from right-wing group the
English Defense League (EDL) who slam the government for not
doing enough against Muslim extremism. There has also been a
flurry of attacks on Mosques in London and the rest of Britain in
the wake of the incident.

Prior to this, the case of an Oxford-based sex-grooming ring that
was active for eight years gripped the British public. Seven men
of Asian origin were charged with rape, trafficking and
orchestrating child prostitution among girls as young as 11.

Speculation has been rife as to the causes of these latest
incidents, with some laying the blame at the feet of Britain’s
growing Muslim population. However, others suggest the attacks
have nothing to do with religion and originate from extremist
groups that have slipped under the UK government’s radar.

Assed Baig, a UK-based freelance journalist, told RT that the
latest incidents had absolutely nothing to do with Islam. He
described the motives of race and religion as “red
herrings.”

Speaking about the Oxford sex ring, he said the perpetrators were
merely “predatory men targeting vulnerable girls who happened
to be white, if those girls were Asian or black these men would
have carried out the same actions.”

“The crimes that they committed are not Islamic, they are not
crimes of radicalization,” stressed Baig.

Moreover, the Muslim Council of Britain has decried both the
murder of Lee Rigby and the Oxford grooming ring as “appalling
acts,” but has signaled that the fault should not be laid at
the feet of the British Muslim Community.

Referencing the attack on Lee Rigby, the MCB said that it was
more concerning how the killers “slipped through the net of
the security services while within their radar.”

The MCB also reminded the government that it was its
responsibility to protect its citizens from right-wing extremists
and urged for leadership to combat “the challenge of civic
apathy.”

While Mustafa Field, the director of the Mosques and Imams
National Advisory Board signaled that the perpetrators of these
crimes were small pockets of radicals not affiliated with the
Muslim Community.

“There’s very little evidence to indicate that mosques have
been involved in radicalizing individuals,” he said to the
Guardian. “But the mosques are left to de-radicalize
them.”

He went on to say that the phenomenon of
“self-radicalization” is becoming more prevalent in the UK
and the government needs to pay more attention to extremist
individuals.

Sean Thomas, a writer and journalist based in London told RT that
politicians and prosecutors alike are afraid of addressing the
issue for fear of being branded as “racist.”

“It can ruin careers,” said Thomas to RT correspondent
Polly Boyko. 

“The fact that it took a Muslim prosecutor to cut through and
say ‘Look there is a problem here,’ shows that white prosecutors,
white social workers, white legal officers and white politicians
were very wary of approaching the issue because they are all
terrified of being seen as racist,” said Thomas.

He drew attention to the fact that the case was brought up by far
right-wing politician, Nick Griffin, back in 2004. The subsequent
BBC documentary that was filmed on the subject led to the
political establishment trying to put a gag on the politician
rather than investigate the crimes.

“They ignored everything he said and instead tried to silence
his point of view and so the crimes went on for a number of
years,” said Thomas.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Firefighters attend a demonstration against the government’s spending cuts in social services in Barcelona, on May 29, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The European Commission is taking Britain to court for allegedly discriminating against migrants who claim social security in the country.

The commission argued that Britain imposes an extra residency test on European Union (EU) nationals that does not apply to British citizens, saying the UK is breaching EU law.

The EU commission also stated that the discriminatory test could deny thousands of immigrants their right to claim unemployment and family welfare benefits to which they are entitled under European law.

“The commission asked Britain to end this discrimination against EU nationals in September 2011 but no measures have been notified to us,” an official said.

Welfare benefits “unfairly and illegally” denied to immigrants include, child benefit, child tax credit, income based jobseeker’s allowance, state pension credit and income based employment and support allowances.

According to figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), net migration into Britain has dropped by a third in recent years, from 247,000 in June 2011 to 163,000 in 2012.

MOS/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

US-led soldiers patrol an area of Afghanistan. (file photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The Syrian Army has inflicted heavy losses on foreign-backed militants fighting against the government in the countryâ„¢s main port city of Latakia.

On Thursday, a number of militants from the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front terrorist group were killed in intense clashes with Syrian soldiers in the al-Rihaniyya district of the city, located 348 kilometers (216 miles) northwest of Damascus, the official SANA news agency reported.

Moreover, Syrian troops clashed with militants in Frenluq neighborhood of Latakia, killing and injuring a number of them.

A rocket launcher and a base used by foreign-backed gunmen to launch mortar attacks were destroyed in the operations.

A commander, identified as Abu al-Abed, was also among the slain militants.

Syria has been gripped by a deadly unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of government forces, have been killed in the violence.

Damascus says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

The Syrian government says the West and its regional allies including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are supporting the militants.

Several international human rights organizations have accused militants operating in Syria of committing war crimes.

MP/KA

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

China has dismissed US claims hackers procured blueprints for America’s most advanced weaponry. Beijing stated the allegations underestimate the Chinese people’s intellect and that China is perfectly capable of producing its own weapons.

A US Science Board report leaked this week alleged the Chinese
hackers had obtained access to the designs of two dozen major US
weapons systems in what amounted to “billions of dollars of
combat advantage to China.”

The Washington Post, who saw a copy of the report, intimated that
such information could be used by the Chinese government to speed
up the development of their military. An unnamed official told
the Post that China had saved themselves “25 years of research
and development” by stealing the plans.

Beijing reacted with ire, with Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman
Geng Yansheng dismissing the report as ridiculous.

“It both underestimates the Pentagon’s defensive security
abilities and the Chinese people’s intelligence,” said Geng
in a news briefing.

He stressed that China had demonstrated on numerous occasions it
has the ability “to build the weapons needed for national
security.”

“Recently China’s aircraft carrier, new fighter jets and
transport aircraft … have clearly shown this,” concluded
Geng.

The Washington Post wrote that among the designs procured by the
Chinese were blueprints for combat aircraft, ships and missiles
defense systems for Europe, Asia and the Gulf. These included the
advanced Patriot missile system, the F/A-18 fighter jet, the
Black Hawk helicopter and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

While Pentagon press secretary George Little told CNN on Tuesday
claims that cyber-attacks had weakened US military capabilities
were incorrect.

“Suggestions that cyberintrusions have somehow led to the
erosion of our capabilities or technological edge are incorrect,
we maintain full confidence in our weapons platforms,” said
Little.

The White House has accused Beijing repeatedly of hack attacks on
US government and military systems. At the beginning of May the
US Department of Defense formally condemned Chinese
cyber-attacks, “some of which appear to be attributable
directly to the Chinese government and military.”

“Hacking attacks are transnational and anonymous,” Hong
Lei, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said. “Determining
their origins is extremely difficult. We don’t know how the
evidence in this so-called report can be tenable.”

The issue of cyber warfare has been a significant bone of
contention in Sino-American relations lately, although Beijing
has refuted all claims of cyber-attack on the US. Chinese
President Xi Jingping is in America this week, where he will
conduct talks with his American counterpart Barack Obama.

Cyber security is expected to be at the top of the agenda, as
well as China’s growing military might and its claim on disputed
territory in the East China Sea.

This article originally appeared on: RT

On May 29 Planetary Resources, one of two private concerns hoping to someday mine near-earth asteroids, announced plans for the first-ever crowdfunded space telescope, a venture that would allow private researchers to conduct space research using a private space telescope – and even display their photo above the Earth. As a necessary first step to locate and survey near-earth asteroids with potential for commercial use, Planetary Resources plans to build and deploy a fleet of telescope-bearing spacecraft, known as ARKYDs, for scouring the solar system. One of these will be dedicated for private use by educators, researchers, and other interested citizens, and will be able to look anywhere in space.

The ARKYDs will be significantly smaller than the Hubble Space Telescope, the most iconic and successful space observatory of them all. But they will all have much greater capability than earth-based telescopes, being hundreds of miles above the clouds, dust, artificial light, and other obstacles to deep-space viewing on the earth’s surface.

Planetary Resources’ vision is nothing less than to create civilian and student access to a domain of astronomy available up until now only to elite professional scientists and astronauts funded by public money. According to Planetary Resources, the ARKYD’s fourfold mission will be:

– To give students access to space capabilities – Whether studying planets in a 5th grade class or writing a graduate thesis, students of all ages will have the ability to direct the telescope and explore what interests them! We’re planning some exciting new educational opportunities just for K-12 educational programs.

– To support important research and discovery – There are thousands of institutions and researchers in need for greater access to in-orbit space observatories. The ARKYD will provide a new, low-cost resource to help observe distant galaxies, search for alien planets, and monitor the skies for potentially dangerous asteroids. Researchers at MIT, the University of Washington, and across the globe have shown interest in using the ARKYD to further their important research.

– To build excitement about space and all of its potential – The ARKYD is designed to be a fun and interactive experience that is accessible to anyone. This kind of direct access to a satellite is unprecedented. Our backers will be the first people in history to control a public space telescope!

– To give YOU a say – What makes this mission unique is that we’re putting control of the telescope in YOUR hands. You’ll get the opportunity to help decide which science centers and museums are the beneficiaries of ARKYD telescope time, what photos to take, and more. We’re putting YOU in control! By pledging toward this mission, you’ll receive access to our website and mobile apps allowing you to follow along with the progress of the satellite, sneak peaks at photos and videos, and get voting access to make your voice heard in the future direction of the satellite!

Planetary Resources has prepared a multi-tiered program of pledges, which will allow the public use of the ARKYD for everything from “selfies” (digital photos of donors displayed on a screen in space and photographed by the ARKYD’s camera) to advanced exploration of the solar system, stars, and distant galaxies. For 39 dollars, you can receive two prints of a “selfie,” for example, while for a $5,000 pledge, your institution can have access to a range of ARKYD’s services, including 25 Main Optic observations. A donation of $10,000 or more will get your name printed on the ARKYD and will also get a newly-discovered asteroid named in your honor.

At the time of this writing, the ARKYD crowdfunding campaign has already raised more than $234,000 of its $1 million goal – after only one day of online fundraising.

The ARKYD program is an early indicator of the promise of privatized space exploration for science. Publicly subsidized science in general, and space exploration in particular, has always been justified on the basis of the free market’s alleged inability to provide truly visionary services like cutting-edge research with no immediate commercial value. As a result, space exploration on the public dime has been characterized by chronic cost overruns, scarce resources (ask any astrophysicist how difficult it is to get “telescope time” on publicly funded telescopes), and a generational failure to live up to the promises of the “space age” as envisioned by science fiction and scientists alike (Where are the moon and Mars bases of Heinlein and Bradbury, or the manned exploration of the outer solar system promised in Space Odyssey: 2001 and other classic sci-fi epics?).

The decision to send astronauts to the moon was a political decision driven by the politics of the day (the space race with the Soviet Union). Once that race was won, there was no further political incentive to explore further, except with relatively cheap unmanned probes accessible only to scientific elites. Manned space exploration from the mid-1970s to the present day has been confined to low-earth orbit; this, too, was the result of political, not market, decisions on cost-returns.

None of this is to disparage the very real progress produced by publicly funded space programs like the Voyager probes, the Cassini Saturn probe, the various Mars landers and orbital probes, the Hubble Space Telescope and other space observatories, the Space Shuttle, and the International Space Station. But we are justified in asking – if the galloping pace of space privatization is any indication – how much further along we might be had the vision of private space commercial development been allowed to germinate sooner. The ARKYD program is just the latest piece of evidence that even cutting edge, non-commercial research, as well as education generally, stands to benefit enormously as a byproduct of a second, private-sector Space Age.

^{Graphic: srceen-grab from Planetary Resources video}

This article originally appeared on: The New American

The first batch of S-300 air defense complexes has arrived in Syria, President Bashar Assad said in an interview to Lebanon Al-Manar. Assad also said that Syrian army is battling up to 100,000 foreign mercenaries.

Assad revealed that the rest of the S-300 complexes previewed by
a Russian-Syrian arms contract will be coming soon, reports RT
Arabic (Rusiya Al Yaum), which has confirmed details of the
exclusive interview to be broadcast on the Lebanese TV channel at
9pm local time (18:00 GMT) Thursday.

The president promised that the Syrian army will “immediately
react” of a new Israeli aggression of Syrian soil, recalling
recent bombings of military objects inside Syrian territory by
the Israeli Air Force.

He noted that “The Syrian government will not interfere if
some kind of Syrian group starts a war to liberate the Golan
Heights,” occupied by Israel since the 1967 War.

During the interview, Assad confirmed the presence of Hezbollah
fighters in Syria on the Lebanese border, but stressed, that
“it is the Syrian army, not Hezbollah, battling the groups of
armed rebels and will continue to do so until total elimination
of the terrorists.”

Assad put blame for financing terrorists on Qatar, Saudi Arabia
and Turkey, which helped up to 100,000 militants to infiltrate
into Syria.

He assured that Damascus will participate in the upcoming
conference on Syria in Geneva (Geneva-2), but stressed that there
are no expectations of “important decisions” being made
there.

On Wednesday Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem told the
Lebanese TV channel Al-Mayadeen that in Geneva the Syrian
government expects to talk to those members of the opposition
which “do not have blood on their hands.”

“We cannot make a peaceful settlement with those who sow
terror and violence,” said Muallem, who is expected to head
the Syrian delegation in Geneva.

“We’re going [to the Geneva conference] with good intentions
and hope to end the conflict. We go to Geneva without
preconditions,” Muallem stated.

This contradicts the position of the disintegrated Syrian
opposition, which has just failed to reach unity at a summit in
Istanbul. In a released statement divided opposition coalition
has put forward a condition that, in any case, negotiations with
the President Bashar Assad regime must lead to his resignation.

Muallem also shared that Moscow supplies Damascus only with
weapons of defense and pointed out that “those who are afraid
of such weapons are actually preparing aggression [against Syria]
themselves”.

The news about S-300 systems in Syria comes a mere two days after
the EU’s decision to lift an arms embargo on Syria, allowing
European countries to ‘fully support’ the rebels fighting against
the Assad regime.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov lashed at the EU’s move
as “an unlawful”.

“This is an unlawful decision, in principle, to discuss
seriously on official level the issue of supplying or not
supplying arms to non-state actors is contrary to all norms of
international law,” Lavrov said earlier.

Germany has become the first among leading European states who
decided to stay away from arms supply to the Syrian opposition.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel officially stated on Wednesday
that Germany will ”under no circumstances” send weapons
to rebels in Syria.

Also on Wednesday a group of independent UN experts stated that
the majority of the Syrian rebel militants do not fight for
democracy.

“It was said the rebels were angels, but there is only a
minority of fighters with a democratic history who believe in the
Syrian mosaic and want a state for all,” Paulo Pinheiro, who
took part in UN investigation, told reporters.

“The majority of rebels are very far from having democratic
thoughts and have other aspirations,” Pinheiro concluded.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Brussels, home to major EU political institutions, appears to have the highest infant mortality rate in Europe, according to a recent survey. An infant’s life in the capital of Belgium is at higher risk than in countries like Romania, Slovenia or Latvia.

The city, commonly associated with prosperity and comfort,
features a perinatal mortality rate of 11.6 per 1,000 births,
according to a survey published by Euro-Peristat, a statistics
agency focused on gathering infant health data in Europe. The
figure, described as “shocking” by Doctors of the World, includes
deaths of fetuses older than 22 weeks, deaths during births and
deaths of newborns younger than four weeks.

Brussels’ infant mortality rate is about twice as high as
countries like Iceland (4.7), Portugal (4.8) or Cyprus (4.2).
Even places, traditionally associated with poorer living
conditions feature lower figures than the unofficial capital of
the EU. In Romania it’s 9.5, Latvia 9.3 and in Slovenia 7.1.

The heart of EU’s decision-making, in fact saw the infant
mortality rate skyrocket within between 2005 and 2010, as it
increased by 36.5 per cent during that time.

“The figures are shocking”, said Stephane Heymans of
Doctors of the World, as cited by De Morgen magazine. “But we
need to be cautious with the estimates. We are speaking of very
small figures here, so each single case influences the outcome.
And also a city is being compared to countries. No doubt there
are other cities with very bad rates.”

Experts say the infant mortality situation in Brussels is a sign
of how divided the city is, with some really poor neighborhoods
being part of one of the richest cities in EU. The unemployment
rate in the capital is also much higher than in the rest of the
country.

“It’s an indicator of an increased poverty in some parts of
the city. In the poor neighborhoods, in the migrant neighborhoods
unemployment is more than 50 per cent. And in those
neighborhoods, of course, the living conditions are not very
good, not very healthy. And that shows also in this kind of
figures,” says sociologist, Prof. Eric Corijn.

The infant mortality figures come shortly after an OECD report,
published earlier in May, which listed Belgium among countries
with increasing child poverty.

“Households with children were hit hard during the crisis.
Since 2007, child poverty increased in 16 OECD countries, with
increases… in Turkey, Spain, Belgium, Slovenia and Hungary,”
the report reads.

Doctors point at the lack of access to medical services for
Brussels’ residents. 

“People without papers, they are more and more [often] refused
medical services. It takes a lot of time to obtain those papers.
Hospitals put a lot of pressure on doctors and on administration
in general to not accept people who cannot pay or cannot prove
they can pay,” says Pierre Ryckmans of Doctors of the World.

With unemployment and poverty gripping Europe and recession
raging on, a rise in infant deaths is seen as a gruesome
indicator of the harshness of austerity measures. And those hit
hardest are the destitute part of the population. And the
situation is unlikely to improve in the near future, as deeper
recession is expected in the EU. The OECD issued its new forecast
on Tuesday, saying the European Union economy will shrink by 0.6
per cent this year. Just six months ago it only predicted a
0.1 per cent decline for the eurozone.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Several significant US news organizations reject the Department of Justice’s proposal to discuss off-the-record ‘new guidelines’ in light of the reporter wiretapping scandal. Last week President Obama urged the DOJ to search a consensus with the media.

Major news outlets, including Associated Press, the New York
Times and the Huffington Post refused to attend the DoJ
‘reconciliation’ meeting on the current rules governing federal
leaks investigations unless it is fully recorded and could be
transformed into news.

President Obama appointed the US Attorney General Eric Holder to
conduct meetings with news organizations, including internet
media outlets, radio stations, TV channels, wire services, and
media associations concerning new media guidelines.

To begin with, Holder plans to gather bureau chiefs of
Washington-based national news organizations within next two
days. Experts from government agencies in intelligence and
investigation are to attend the meeting as well.

But the outcry raised by the scandal with the DoJ secretly
recording phone calls of Associated Press reporters and gathering
emails of a Fox News journalist made the proposed hush-hush
dialogue unacceptable for insulted media outlets.

All hell broke loose on May 13 when the president of the
Associated Press Gary Pruitt officially protested to Holder over
the department’s broad surveillance of more than 100 individual
reporters’ phone conversations. The AP called the ongoing
monitoring a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.”

“It isn’t appropriate for us to attend an off-the-record
meeting with the attorney general,” New York Times Executive
Editor Jill Abramson announced in a statement. “Our Washington
bureau is aggressively covering the department’s handling of leak
investigations at this time.”

AP media relations manager Erin Madigan White even threatened DoJ
that, should the meeting not be recorded, the news outlets will
come together and share their point of view as to how DoJ media
regulation should be updated in an open letter. But if the DOJ
agrees to record the event, AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll
will attend it, White said.

Moreover, AP expects its attorneys to attend any future meetings
on the legal specifics between the attorney-general’s office and
media lawyers.

“Evidently, there will be a future session with department
officials on the substance of how the law should be applied in
leak cases and I am hopeful that our counsel, David McCraw, will
be able to participate in that meeting,” Jill Abramson said
in a statement to The Huffington Post.

According to a tweet by the Huffington Post’s Senior Media
Reporter Michael Calderone, the HP will also not attend the
meeting unless there is a record.

At the same time POLITICO Editor-in-Chief John Harris will attend
this week’s private meeting with Holder, as well as the
Washington Post’s representative.

The meetings, aimed at restoring the trust of the US media
community in the government security agencies, are scheduled to
take place within weeks. 

Obama is waiting for recommended media policy changes from
Holder, empowered to report directly to the president on
recommended media policy, by July 12.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Jones portrayed as angry red demon in crude demonization stunt

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
May 30, 2013

During a ‘Talking Points Memo’ segment in which he praised Facebook for cracking down on sexist rhetoric, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly flashed up an image of Alex Jones engaged in an angry rant next to the words, “HATE SPEECH”.

While O’Reilly asked, “can anything be done to stop the hate speech,” a close up of Jones’ face flashed a furious shade of red.

“O’Reilly declared there is “plenty of hatred being spewed” on the internet and on talk radio, and credited Facebook for its new policy of taking down posts promoting sexist hate speech,” reports Mediaite. “O’Reilly said it’s disturbing how “commonplace” and “acceptable” hate speech is, mostly attributing the level of public hate speech to the internet.”

The attempt at smearing Jones was so crude that it wouldn’t have looked out of place in a 1930′s Nazi propaganda cartoon portraying Jews as demons.

While Jones is well known for his impassioned rants, he has never once uttered anything that could be deemed “sexist,” and in fact routinely calls on men and women to unite against their common enemy — tyranny in government.

O’Reilly’s segment made no mention whatsoever of Jones and provided no example of him engaging in “hate speech”. Jones’ image was merely used as a cheap trick to connect him with hate speech, implying that he should be silenced.

O’Reilly’s vehement support for corporations like Facebook cracking down on “hate speech” is particularly ironic given that his critics have routinely accused him of engaging in the very same thing.

In addition, Facebook habitually cites flimsy reasons to shut down political discourse that has nothing whatsoever to do with hate speech, such as its move earlier this week to censor images of children involved in the global protest against Monsanto.

As we reported last year, Facebook is now apparently censoring political posts which violate its “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities” as hate speech, such as an image of Osama Bin Laden with the words “Al-CIA-da” written underneath.

Facebook is also liaising with authorities to report on individuals who express political opinions through Facebook, which is later deemed as extremist rhetoric.

Last year, former Marine Brandon Raub was kidnapped from his home by police, FBI and Secret Service agents and forcibly incarcerated in a psychiatric ward by authorities in Virginia in response to Facebook posts which the FBI deemed “terrorist” in nature yet which were later dismissed by a judge.

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 6:40 am

Tags: mainstream media, police state

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Iranian presidential candidate Saeed Jalili has stressed the importance of managing national potentialities to resolve the ongoing problems in the country.

Å“Today, you see a number of major problems that all the people are facing. Why should it be like this? The problem of high prices, the problem of unemployment, the problem of housing and problems like this,” he said in an address in a mosque in southeast Tehran on Wednesday.

Å“If we rightly manage our potentialities, many of these problems will not even emerge,” he stated.

The Principlist candidate said Å“high prices and inflation” are two problems that all Iranian people are presently grappling with.

Jalili further cited unemployment as one of the issues that many young people are facing.

Å“Canâ„¢t the existing potential in our country really manage such issues? What I am saying is not just a claim. It is an accurate assessment based on an evaluation of all the potentialities in the country,” the presidential candidate said.

Jalili, who is also the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), reiterated that the Iranian youths can themselves become entrepreneurs if these problems are properly resolved.

The fact that the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei named the previous Iranian calendar year (ended March 20, 2013) as the year of support for national production is itself a plan that should be a guideline and motto for all the officials of the Islamic establishment, particularly those of the executive branch and the administration, he pointed out.

Jalili currently faces seven rivals in the June 14 presidential election, namely former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, President of the Strategic Research Center of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

SF/AR/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Jon Rappoport
Infowars.com
May 30, 2013

The campaign and attack against the individual takes many forms.

In 2012, I was contacted by a disillusioned psychiatrist who had “left the field.” He told me he was interested in discussing his experiences.

Here is a key remark he made in our conversation:

“Is there a normal state of mind? The answer is no. There is the ability to deal with the reality of the world, which is a very important skill. But state of mind is another matter entirely. You could have a million people who can deal with the world, and they’re all operating in different states of mind. There is no ‘normal’. ‘Normal’ is a modern myth that has no benefits–except to the people who invented it and control it. If you can control ‘normal’ and disseminate it broadly, slip it into consciousness, you have power. It’s like one of those steamrollers. You flatten people.”

There is no ‘normal’ state of mind. It’s a myth.

It’s sold.

The professional definitions of normal are supposed to create a uniform standard of thought and behavior. A collectivism.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Coming in from another vector, we have sociologists and anthropologists, practitioners of a fake science to rival psychiatry in promoting a climate of pseudo-babble.

One of the founders of sociology, Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), coined the phrase “collective consciousness.” Durkheim insisted there were “inherent” qualities that existed in society apart from individuals. Exposing his own absurd theory, he went so far as to claim suicide was one of those qualities, as if the “phenomenon” were present beyond any individual choice to end life.

He wrote: “Man is the more vulnerable to self-destruction the more he is detached from any collectivity, that is to say, the more he lives as an egoist.”

In other words, according to Burkheim, the individual who rejects the norms of society must be wrapped up in himself in some morally repugnant way. There are no other alternatives.

In his book, The Division of Labor, Burkheim spun moral conscience in the following fashion: “…Make yourself usefully fulfill a determinate function.” He cited this as a kind of command issued by collective consciousness. If this sounds Marxian, and if it sounds like the presentation of the individual human as machine-cog, it is.

From the mud of sociology’s beginnings, the long sordid history of the academic discipline brings us to something like this. Peter Callero, of the department of sociology, Western Oregon University, has penned a paper titled: The Myth of Individualism:

“Most people today believe that an individual is a person with an independent and distinct identification. This, however, is a myth.”

By some mistake, Callero’s memo never reached me. For example, I’m under the impression that I’m sitting here writing these words. Apparently not. A collection or group is doing the job. Where are they?

Maybe they’re hiding under my desk or floating in the air of my room like invisible wraiths. Maybe they’re off in the Amazon annoying a tribe of hunters, shooting videos of their “daily customs and practices.”

Sociology and anthropology have established themselves as serious “social sciences.” That means professional journals, university courses, endowed chairs, conferences, links to foundations and governments, task forces designing optimum futures.

The practitioners of these fake endeavors are dupes and agents in a massive psyop, whose purpose is the deleting of the independent individual.

Collectivism is the replacement.

All their hypotheses start with a consideration of the group as the prime element of existence.

The psychiatric State operates hand-in-glove with sociology, in the sense that it promotes some 300 officially certified mental disorders that are the same in all people. Psychiatry is a collectivism of the mind.

I’ve established, in many articles, that psychiatric diagnosis is a complete fraud. There are no physical tests of any kind for any so-called disorder.

The 20th century saw the rise of systems-thinkers, who applied their ideas to society as a whole. They gained power because global elites were pushing forward a systems-program of their own: planetary management.

The Globalist program was (and is) all about central planning and distribution of goods and services, under the cynical rubric of “greatest good for the greatest number.” This is collectivism, plain and simple. It camouflages a leading prow of brute force, Soviet style, with more subtle forms of brutality.

Universities serve as mind-control factories, turning out graduates who only see the sunshine propaganda of group harmony.

Capitalism and socialism have sex, procreate, and their child is Globalism. It contains elements of both parents. The capitalism of the father is, however, is not about the free market. It’s founded in the crime of controlling the means of production, when what is produced (out of thin air) is money.

The Federal Reserve, along with other private international banking institutions, invent money at their discretion and profit from that invention. They give and they take. They expand economies and contract them. They create booms and busts. They bankrupt nations, as a prelude to asserting the only solution is a de facto single global nation.

At the same time, the fortunes of the old captains of industry have been diverted into foundations, which are run by men who were the diabolical spawn of the parents mentioned above.

These foundations (Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller, etc.) are devoted to funding projects, both intellectual and material, which promote and expand collectivism.

The independent individual is seen as a barrier to these operations.

He must go.

As always, the men who run this planet have put in place “the solution to their own problem.” They understand that their schemes will raise resistance, and so they’ve devised the favored form of that resistance.

It’s: false unity.

They bankroll groups and projects that seek to overturn the march toward a fascist world order. These groups offer, instead, their own form of collectivism, under the flag of “cooperation.”

“If we all cooperate and come together, we can stop the spread of the evil empire. If we join hands around the world, we’ll attain social justice for all. If we see ourselves as One, instead of as individuals, we’ll emerge victorious.”

Naturally, this op causes considerable confusion. People want to cooperate. They want to do good. They want to join together. But when the means to make it happen are simply diversions from true resistance, we have a bait and switch.

And the target is still the free, independent, and powerful individual.

Occupy Wall Street was an example of a budding movement that went nowhere. It was co-opted by, of all people, the staff of the White House, who encouraged it, while at the same time carrying on their usual incestuous partnership with Wall Street.

The Big Sleep coming at the global population from a number of vectors is couched in terms of collective unity. The sign of waking up is a demand for individual freedom. And then, taking that freedom without waiting for permission.

The rebel is forged in any of a thousand different fires of mad controlling authority. That’s where he is born. He knows, in his bones, what these authorities are demanding of him: surrender.

He knows this in an unshakable core of his being.

He can spot the collective that asks for that surrender from a mile off. It approaches, these days, with a glazed friendly smile, produced out of thousands of hours of market research.

The rebel isn’t trying to produce a better overarching system. He isn’t falling for that one.

He knows that within him, the potential for creation is extraordinary. He doesn’t complain about a lack of answers. He invents them. He exposes arbitrary authority as an insane form of theater, more surreal than surreal.

He does this for his own sake, and then to wake others up.

Compromising his freedom to attain valuable goals isn’t on his list of things to do.

He knows the bait and switch.

He doesn’t need a mythical place where everyone comes together.

Like any fairy tale, myth, legend, story, collectivism began as the idea in the mind of one person. Somewhere in the mists of the past, that person dreamed it up. It was his notion. It was his perverse “work of art.”

He sold it to his friends as a way they could control the mass, the populace, the audience. He said, “Do you see how this works? We can subscribe to the most wonderful sentiments, we can appear to be servants of the Good, we can hide behind all that while we destroy freedom. It’s a winner.”

Collectivism isn’t a mass outpouring of share and care. It’s coming down from the top of the ladder.

The rebel understands these things. He knows someone, somewhere, cooked up the whole idea and promoted it, like flatware or recliner chairs or rhinestones.

In 1934, Smedley Butler became a rebel. He was the highest ranking general in the US Marine Corps. He’d been awarded two Medals of Honor. Approached by a group of corporate leaders to put together his own army, march on Washington, and dethrone Franklin Roosevelt, Butler pretended to go along with the plan, then exposed it.

Here are two of his more famous statements:

“Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.”

Butler’s second statement was published by Common Sense, a socialist newspaper, in 1935. The newspaper failed to realize that Butler’s derogatory references to capitalism applied to a specific kind of theft and murder, practiced by corporate men who ultimately intended to destroy whatever was left of the free market and, then, own all markets–State Corporatism, Globalism. Socialism.

“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

Butler’s rebellion was actually against the elite capitalists who came to support socialism as the method for securing and expanding their wealth and power.

That’s the turnaround that many people miss, especially those who are dewy-eyed about what collectivism promises.

The rebel is able to defend himself against delusion all the way into the core of his own mind. He discovers and invents his own reality, and he doesn’t suppose that any other human being has to agree to the contents of that reality.

Oscar Wilde: “Art is individualism, and individualism is a disturbing and disintegrating force. There lies its immense value. For what it seeks to disturb is monotony of type, slavery of custom, tyranny of habit, and the reduction of man to the level of a machine.”

Nevertheless, Wilde was a socialist. He labored under the puerile delusion that private property could be abolished, thereby freeing all people from the need to slave for a living. In this way, he urged, everyone would have the necessary leisure to pursue art.

Collectivism leading to freedom of the individual. How quaint.

The real strategy of collectivism is the squashing of the mind, making it into a center of passivity and obedience, bereft of any original thought. When all people share the same imposed reality, there is no reality at all. The mind then stands only symbolically, like a black tree that has been dead for years.

To the degree it ever existed, the principle of the individual determining his own reality is being lost. What’s replacing it is the idea that “common ground” comes first and last This means doctrine. This means operant conditioning in schools. This means a Holism that preaches delusional unity.

The anthropomorphic religious diddle called Gaia has ascended. The idea of humble devotion to Mother Earth is a fool’s errand. As George Carlin put it: “The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles … hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages … And we think some plastic bags and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference?”

It’s one thing to keep the environment healthy. It’s quite another thing to worship it and feel anxious about its future. Humans aren’t going to destroy the Earth.

But humans may end up submitting to a level of brainwashing that rivals the all-encompassing mind control of the Mayans. Humans may forget how to rebel. Humans may accept the loss of freedom as a minor bump on the road to promised salvation in the arms of “the wise ones.”

The Reality Manufacturing Company turns out its product every day. It strives to improve its sales pitch and televised fabrications. It deploys talent spotters to enlist the best and the brightest in its research divisions. It invests considerable time and money in diversionary scandals and their subsequent exposure by way of the limited hangout:

“Yes, mistakes were made. A few heads will roll. These people, who were supposed to serve the public good, wandered off course, and we promise to make every effort to see that this doesn’t happen again.”

“Do you want to be normal? Buy our product. You’ll never feel so welcomed, so accepted. You’ll resonate with all other minds. You’ll ascend to the highest point of the collective star. Be the first on your block to sign up for the future.”

This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang, not with a whimper, but with a heavily armed, surveilled Disneyland. Everyone takes the same rides and eats the same cotton candy. In this cartoon called reality, whoever declines and defects is reeducated.

The list of functioning conspiracies in our time period is very long. But the conspiracy of conspiracies is systemic. It is the action of the non-rebel, who shapes his own mind as a receptacle, inviting in any philosophy that suggests interconnected zeroes.

This is a mind where any thought or idea is automatically stripped of meaning and then hooked up to another such zero, and the whole apparatus is networked for ceaseless motion.

It is, in fact, a mirror of collectivism which, similarly, insists on an intimate relationship among all persons, who have themselves been emptied of individuality.

The rebel says no. And he means it.

Jon Rappoport

The author of two explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED and EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thDistrict of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 6:09 am

Tags: foreign affairs, terrorism, war

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Michael Snyder
Economic Collapse
May 30, 2013

37 million Americans currently have outstanding student loans, and the delinquency rate on those student loans has now reached a level never seen before. According to a new report that was just released by the U.S. Department of Education, 11 percent of all student loans are at least 90 days delinquent. That is a brand new record high, and it is almost double the rate of a decade ago. Total student loan debt exceeds a trillion dollars, and it is now the second largest category of consumer debt after home mortgages. The student loan debt bubble has been growing particularly rapidly in recent years. According to the Federal Reserve, the total amount of student loan debt has risen by 275 percent since 2003. That is a staggering figure. Millions upon millions of young college graduates are entering the “real world” only to discover that they are already financially crippled for decades to come by oppressive student loan debt burdens. Large numbers of young people are even putting off buying homes or getting married simply because of student loan debt.

So why is this happening? Well, a big part of the problem is that the cost of college tuition has gotten wildly out of control. Since 1978, the cost of college tuition has risen even more rapidly then the cost of medical care has. Tuition costs at public universities have risen by 27 percent over the past five years, and there appears to be no end in sight.

We keep encouraging our young people to take out all of the loans that are necessary to pay for college, because a college education is supposedly the “key” to their futures.

But is that really the case?

Sadly, the reality of the matter is that millions of young Americans are graduating from college only to discover that the jobs that they were promised simply do not exist.

In fact, at this point about half of all college graduates are working jobs that do not even require a college degree.

This is leading to mass disillusionment with the system. One survey found that 70% of all college graduates wish that they had spent more time preparing for the “real world” while they were still in college.

And because so many of them cannot get decent jobs, more college graduates then ever are finding that they cannot pay back the huge student loans that they were encouraged to sign up for. The following is from a recent Bloomberg article.

Eleven percent of student loans were seriously delinquent – at least 90 days past due – in the third quarter of 2012, compared with 6 percent in the first quarter of 2003, according to the report by the U.S.Education Department. Almost 30 percent of 20- to 24-year-olds aren’t employed or in school, the study found.

Everyone agrees that we are now dealing with an unprecedented student loan debt bubble, but none of our leaders seem to have any solutions.

The two charts posted below come from a recent Zero Hedge article, and they are very illuminating. The first chart shows how the amount of student loan debt owned by the federal government has absolutely exploded in recent years, and the second chart shows how the percentage of student loan debt that is at least 90 days delinquent has risen to a brand new record high…

How is the economy ever going to recover if an increasingly large percentage of our young college graduates are financially crippled by student loan debt?

And things are about to get even worse.

If Congress takes no action, the interest rate on federal student loans is going to double to 6.8 percent on July 1st. That rate increase would affect more than 7 million students.

And debt burdens just continue to increase in size. In fact, according toone recent study, “70 per cent of the class of 2013 is graduating with college-related debt — averaging $35,200 — including federal, state and private loans, as well as debt owed to family and accumulated through credit cards.”

This is one reason why there is so much poverty among young adults in America today. As I mentioned in a previous article, families that have a head of household that is under the age of 30 have a poverty rateof 37 percent. For much more on the student loan debt bubble and how it is crippling an entire generation of Americans, please see my recent article entitled “29 Shocking Facts That Prove That College Education In America Is A Giant Money Making Scam“.

And of course delinquency rates remain very high on other forms of debt as well. For example, delinquency rates on home mortgages have typically been around 2 to 3 percent historically. But as you can see from the chart below, the delinquency rate on single-family residential mortgages is currently close to 10 percent…

So are we really having an “economic recovery”?

Of course not.

Things are good for those that have lots of money in the stock market (for now), but for the vast majority of Americans things continue to get worse.

And we continue to forget the lessons that we should have learned from the financial crisis of 2008. Right now, we are seeing a resurgence of cash out financing. But this time, people are leveraging their inflated stock portfolios instead of their home equity. The following is from a CNN report…

The recent run-up in the market, financial advisers say, has led to a resurgence of the type of loan not seen since the end of the housing boom – cash out financing. But this time, though, people aren’t tapping their inflated house for money. These days stock portfolios appear to be the well of choice.

Financial planners say in recent months clients have taken out so-called margin loans to buy real estate, fund small business acquisitions, or to provide gap financing before a traditional loan could be secured from a bank.

“No one wants to be out of the market for 90 days,” says Mark Brown, a financial planner for Brown Tedstron in Denver. “People just don’t want to sell right now.”

We are a nation that is absolutely addicted to debt. We know that it is wrong, but we just can’t help ourselves.

We are like the 900 pound man that recently died. He knew that he was eating himself to death, but he just couldn’t stop.

In the end, we are going to pay a great price for our gluttony. Everyone in the world can see that we are killing the greatest economy that ever existed, but we simply do not have the self-discipline to do anything about it.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 6:08 am

Tags: business, economics, financial, money

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Syria Report
May 30, 2013

A shocking report from pan-Arab TV station Al-Jadeed reveals America’s Republican Senator, John McCain, visited kidnappers of Lebanese pilgrims.

Elizabeth O’Bagy, political director for the “Syrian Emergency Task Force” and , a U.S.-based nonprofit providing support to the opposition, allegedly organised the visit which brought McCain just half a mile inside Syria on Monday 27 May.

The 76 year-old notoriously hawkish senator is particularly famous for singing a song consisting of the words “bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.”

In one meeting inside the Syrian border at the Bab al-Salameh border border crossing, he held talks with Asifat al-Shamal (Northern Storm Brigade), which controls the crossing. Asifat al-Shamal is one of countless militant groups which make up the much reported “Free Syrian Army”, a term which has becoming increasingly redundant as sectarianism, religious extremism and Al-Qaeda ideology become the norm.

In Elizabeth O’Bagy’s own Twitter commentary, she announced that McCain was hosted by the Asifat al-Shamal Brigade and met twenty “commanders” in total.

Soon after or during the snap visit, at least three photos surfaced showing McCain posing with various individuals.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

In the following images, McCain is posing with senior members of the Asifat al-Shamal Brigade as well as the chief of the “Free Syrian Army”, Salim Idriss.

On May 22, 2012, dozens of Lebanese men and women were travelling on a bus through Syria on their way back to Lebanon from a pilgrimage to religious sites in Iran. After crossing the Turkish border into the Aleppo region, the bus was ambushed in Azzaz by around 30 gunmen, who forced several of the passengers to dismount at gunpoint. The militants instructed one of the passengers to go to the local police station, report the ambush and inform police officers of a desire to swap the hostages for two individuals being held by police.

Following much global media coverage, it was alleged by supporters and apologists of armed groups that the hostages were “members of Hezbollah”, a predictable accusation, echoing countless war crimes in which the victims are accused of being somehow linked to the Syrian government. Usually, the victims are of a minority sect, underlining the overt sectarianism espoused by the thousand or so militant groups operating in Syria. Victims of the ambush say that they were never accused of being members of Hezbollah, but rather, that because they are Shia Muslims, they could be used as leverage to negotiate with the Syrian government. The same militant group, kidnapped Lebanese journalist Fidaa Itani in late 2012.

In total, eleven men were kidnapped by the militant groups in Azzaz. The hostages have been regularly referred to as “the Forgotten” as they are still being held in captivity.

Daniel Shoueib, a relative of one of the hostages, who was reading the news of McCain’s surprise and unexpected visit, was shocked to see the photo which showed men he recognised as the kidnappers on May 22, 2012. Daniel went on to criticise American policy, specifically the sponsoring and support of terror groups who are responsible for acts such as sectarian kidnappings. .. points to the sign in the larger version of the photo which among other words printed, says “New Syria”.

Another relative, Hayat Aouali, spoke of the United States with its influence over armed militant groups, challenging its decision-makers to use the influence to bring about the release of the hostages, who are said to be held in circumstances involving maltreatment.

Significantly, Turkey’s support for armed groups in Syria, especially for the organisation with which McCain visited in Syria, paints a bleak picture of regional positions toward Syria. Indeed, it appears to vindicate the Syrian government’s position that the insurgency and violence are a result of foreign intervention.

Reporters from  Lebanon’s Al-Jadeed TV met militants from the Asifat al-Shamal Brigade at the Bab al-Salameh border crossing, as did John McCain on Monday. In a screenshot of Al-Jadeed TV’s report, a man identified as Muahmmad Noor can be seen — a member of the militant brigade.

In the images of McCain’s visit, the same man can be seen.

The man behind McCain’s right shoulder is Abu Youssef. He stamped the passports of the Al-Jadeed TV staff when they visited Syria through the Bab al-Salameh border crossing. The following images show Abu Youssef in both a screenshot from the Al-Jadeed report and him posing with McCain during his visit.

The following is the report from Al-Jadeed TV. The clip was translated by Arabi Souri.

Abu Youssef is spotted in a CNN report on McCain’s visit. Note that the man being interviewed is present in all of the photos of the senators visit — highlighting the mainstream media’s reliance on what it usually refers to as peaceful “activists”, despite there oftentimes active involvement in armed and usually sectarian militant organisations.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 6:10 am

Tags: foreign affairs, terrorism, war

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Mike Adams
Natural News
May 30, 2013

The genetic apocalypse we’ve been warning about for years may have already begun. The USDA just announced they found a significant amount of genetically engineered wheat growing in farm fields in Oregon. As the USDA announced yesterday, “…test results of plant samples from an Oregon farm indicate the presence of genetically engineered (GE) glyphosate-resistant wheat plants.”

Why is this a big deal? Because GE wheat has never been approved for commercialization or sale. These strains of GE wheat escaped from GMO field experiments conducted across 16 states by Monsanto from 1998 to 2005. As the USDA states, “Further testing by USDA laboratories indicates the presence of the same GE glyphosate-resistant wheat variety that Monsanto was authorized to field test in 16 states from 1998 to 2005.”

And that means genetic pollution is already out of control. The GE wheat for which Monsanto claims patent ownership is now invading farms that never planted GE wheat.

All U.S. commercially-grown wheat now suspect

There are at least five serious ramifications from this:

#1) Monsanto can now sue all the farms where GM wheat has been found growing. According to U.S. federal courts, those farmers have “stolen” Monsanto’s intellectual property.

#2) The spread of GM wheat from experimental fields to wheat production fields is proof that GMOs cause genetic pollution – self-replicating pollution with the potential to devastate global food production.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

#3) All wheat produced in the United States will now be heavily scrutinized – and possibly even rejected – by other nations that traditionally import U.S. wheat. This obviously has enormous economic implications for U.S. farmers and agriculture.

#4) It proves the USDA cannot control the GMO field experiments it approves. Open-field experiments are not “safe” nor “controlled.” They are experiments conducted in the open air, where genetic pollution is an inevitable result. The genetic pollution that began in 1998 can’t be put back into the box in 2013…

#5) U.S. consumers who eat wheat products are right now almost certainly ingesting some level of genetically modified wheat. This level may currently be very small – perhaps even less than 1% – but it is yet another source of GMO pollution in the food supply that could hugely impact Americans’ grocery shopping decisions.

U.S. wheat producers should be freaked out right now

Until today, Americans have been assured there are no GMOs in wheat products. They know that if you want to avoid GMOs, don’t buy corn. Wheat has always been seen as a “safe haven” from genetically modified food.

But now that myth has been shattered with the USDA’s announcement that they found GE wheat growing in farm fields in Oregon. If they found it in Oregon, it’s probably present in the 15 other states where GE wheat was openly planted in experimental fields, too.

Don’t worry about the safety of GE wheat, however. The USDA is absolutely sure it’s completely safe for you. And why? Because Monsanto told the FDA it was safe!

I’m not kidding. Here’s the USDA’s official explanation of this non-logic:

The detection of this wheat variety does not pose a food safety concern. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) completed a voluntary consultation on the safety of food and feed derived from this GE glyphosate-resistant wheat variety in 2004. For the consultation, the developer provided information to FDA to support the safety of this wheat variety. FDA completed the voluntary consultation with no further questions concerning the safety of grain and forage derived from this wheat, meaning that this variety is as safe as non-GE wheat currently on the market.

Oh, so the FDA “consulted” with Monsanto who told them their GE wheat was safe? I feel so much better already. Because Monsanto would never lie to the FDA about the safety of its GMOs.

USDA says it’s taking the findings seriously

“We are taking this situation very seriously and have launched a formal investigation,” said Michael Firko, Acting Deputy Administrator for APHIS’ Biotechnology Regulatory Services, a division of the USDA.

“Our first priority is to as quickly as possible determine the circumstances and extent of the situation and how it happened. We are collaborating with state, industry, and trading partners on this situation and are committed to providing timely information about our findings. USDA will put all necessary resources towards this investigation.”

Why is the USDA moving so quickly on this issue? Because they know the discovery of GE wheat growing in “the wild” puts the entire credibility of the U.S. wheat supply at risk. GMOs are banned in at least 27 countries around the world, and those countries will not likely allow genetically-contaminated wheat to be imported from the United States.

Depending on what happens next, we could be looking at a global embargo of U.S. wheat exports, meaning the U.S. wheat market would all but collapse. (This might be a good time to consider shorting some wheat futures if you’re into trading commodities…)

And while this would cause a short-term flooding of cheap wheat in the U.S. market (because nobody else is buying it), the drop in price would put so many wheat farmers out of business that wheat supply would be hard hit in 2014 and beyond, and that equals long-term price increases. GMOs being found in the wheat supply, in other words, means higher food prices for all Americans.

My repeated warning about a genetic apocalypse

It was just yesterday that I warned in a Natural News article about the potential for GMOs to cause a runaway genetic apocalypse. “A genetic apocalypse may devastate America’s bread basket,” I wrote, followed by:

Mark my words: there will come a day when Americans will wish they had burned all the GM corn fields to the ground. But by then it will be too late. The blight will be upon us, and with it comes the starvation, the suffering, the desperation and the riots. Hunger turns all family men into savages, just as greed turns all corporate men into demons.

There, I was talking about corn. But apparently this was too optimistic: wheat is now being impacted, too.

In that same article, I also stated, “the U.S. government is playing Russian roulette with America’s food future” – a statement that’s somewhat hilarious given that Russia won’t even play Russian roulette with its own crops. GMOs are a uniquely American form of corporate arrogance and genetic pollution. Nowhere in the world is agricultural imperialism so foolish yet so strongly backed by government gone bonkers.

By backing GMOs, the USDA is destroying the future of U.S. agriculture

The USDA announcement all but proves these warnings to be correct: GMOs really do escape experimental fields, and they really do infect and contaminate commercial crops in North America. Those crops then become tainted and are undesirable by 90% of consumers and most developed nations around the world. By allowing GMOs to continue to be planted anywhere in North America, the U.S. government is destroying the integrity of its agricultural industries for centuries to come.

Genetic pollution may never be able to be entirely removed from wheat, corn and other GM crops. And the worst part is that this genetic contamination may make these plants highly susceptible to threats that scientists have no way to anticipate or understand. While other nations around the world have exercised caution, the U.S. government conspired with Monsanto to abandon caution and risk the entire future of America’s agricultural industry on quack corporate “science” that has turned out to be a genetic pollution nightmare.

Sources for this story include:
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/05/ge_wheat_detection.shtml

http://farmfutures.com/story-usda-identifies-ge-glyphosate-resistant-…

http://tv.greenmedinfo.com/breaking-usda-finds-unnaproved-monsantos-g…

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 6:13 am

Tags: food, gmo, health, natural health

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

RT
May 30, 2013

Ibragim Todashev, who was killed during an FBI interview last week, was unarmed when he was fatally shot, according to law enforcement officials. Civil rights activists are now calling for independent investigation of the death.

Todashev, who knew Boston Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev, had neither gun nor knife when he was shot by the FBI, two law enforcement officials, who did not disclose their names, told the Washington Post on Wednesday.

Before that, investigators offered conflicting accounts of what happened in Todashev’s final minutes. One federal agent claimed Todashev was shot after trying to grab an agent’s sidearm. A second agent claimed Todashev brandished a knife. A Bureau statement issued on the day of the incident said only that an “individual” being interviewed was killed when a “violent confrontation was initiated by the individual.”

Investigators now say that the matter will be the subject of a probe that is expected to last for several months.

“The FBI takes very seriously any shooting incidents involving our agents and as such we have an effective, time-tested process for addressing them internally,” FBI spokesman Paul Bresson said in a statement Wednesday.

“The review process is thorough and objective and conducted as expeditiously as possible under the circumstances.”

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

Meanwhile a Florida office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a civil rights group, thinks that the efforts by the FBI itself are not enough. The organization is calling on the Department of Justice to step in and review the circumstances under which Todashev was shot.

“Our call for an independent investigation of this disturbing incident is not just about the victim and his family, but is also about constitutional rights and the rule of law,” said CAIR-Tampa Executive Director Hassan Shibly.

Todashev associated with Tamerlan Tsarnaev within mixed martial arts and boxing circles in the Boston area before he moved from Cambridge, Massachusetts, to Orlando, Florida. FBI officials maintained he was never a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing.

Law enforcement officials, speaking anonymously, claimed Todashev implicated himself and Tsarnaev in connection with a triple murder in Waltham, Massachusetts, on September 11, 2011. On September 12, police found three dead men in a well-kept rental home. Their throats had reportedly been slit and their bodies covered in marijuana.

The spokeswoman for Middlesex County’s district attorney’s office only told the Post that the investigation was ongoing, refusing to speculate as to whether Todashev or Tsarnaev were suspects. Sources close to the investigation said Todashev was friends with one of the victims.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 at 6:12 am

Tags: domestic news, government corruption, police state

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Rosneft shareholders will meet on June 20 to consider amending the company’s charter which would grant BP certain veto powers on future decisions.

According to two sources close to Rosneft’s board of directors,
there is a possibility amendments will be adopted which would
authorize the purchase and sale of Rosneft shares,
Vedomosti reported.

BP sold 50 percent of TNK-BP to Rosneft in March, and increased
its shareholding in Rosneft to 19.85 percent, to become the
company’s second largest shareholder after the Kremlin.

If the new charter stipulations go through, BP will likely push
for blocking rights.

Rosneft’s spokesperson said the ‘blocking’ right would be used as
a measure to extend the ability of shareholders to increase
capital authorization. The amendment will not add any additional
shareholders to the mix.

The amendments will greatly enhance the role of minority
shareholders, like BP CEO Robert Dudley, who has been promised
one of two BP seats on the nine person Rosneft board. The second
‘BP seat’ has not yet been filled.

Under the amendments, Rosneft won’t be able to liquify, make big
deals, repurchase shares, or authorize capital, without the
approval of the shareholders.

The proposal isn’t novel in the Russian gas industry; Lukoil set
a precedent in 2005 when it changed its charter to incorporate
such a ‘blocking’ vote after ConocoPhillips bought 20 percent of
its shares.

Rosneft announced its plan to acquire TNK-BP as early as
2003, and the two companies have almost fully
integrated, with BP bosses out of the picture and Rosneft
President Igor Sechin calling most of the shots.

Since the acquisition, minority shareholders have been crossing
their fingers that Sechin will buy them out, or at least fold the
assets into the new merged company, neither which has happened.

Sechin’s lack of initiative in paying out minority shareholders
has spooked buyers and markets, and has has sent the stock price
plummeting.

On May 22, Sechin proposed that Rosneft would only be accountable
for TNK-BP dividends as of March 21, when it took control of
operations. The stock price fell from 7.140 to 6.770, over 5
percent, in 24 hours and still hasn’t climbed above the 7 dollar
mark before Sechin provoked fear that dividends would severely
decrease or be axed.

TNK-BP may follow the fate of other Russian subsidiaries bought
under large conglomerates, and may cease to exist. In order for
Rosneft to fully dissolve TNK-BP, it needs to buy out or bring in
TNK-BP Holding, which would prove difficult as 5 percent of the
shares are public and free floating.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Since November, more than a thousand Bangladeshi garment workers have perished in two tragic factory calamities: a fire in Tazreen and a building collapse in Savar, outside the capital, Dhaka. Bangladesh is a major exporter of apparel to the West and “is set to become the world’s largest apparel exporter over the next few years,” the Economist reports. Wages are lower there than most places, including China, and a large percentage of the 4 million garment workers are women.
 
Are dangerous factories the price of progress? A passionate debate now rages over whether international safety standards should be enforced against manufacturers in the developing world and their Western retailers. Proponents of standards argue that the costs would be small and the benefits great. An Accord on Fire and Building Safety has been signed by major retailers in Europe and a few in North America, but the Huffington Post says that 14 other North American retailers have refused to endorse it. “Some retailers, like Walmart, claim they are working on separate initiatives to improve conditions and workplace safety in Bangladesh,” the online publication states, but this claim has been met with skepticism.
 
Opponents of government regulation argue that artificially raising the costs of manufacturing in poor countries would harm intended beneficiaries by destroying jobs. If so, workers would face worse options, including life on the streets and prostitution.
 
Unfortunately, the debate is unnecessarily narrow. What needs discussing – and radical changing – is the country’s political-economic system, which benefits elites while keeping the mass of people down. The economists are correct that under the status quo, imposing safety standards would raise costs, cause unemployment, and aggravate poverty. But we can’t leave the matter there. We must go on to examine how the political-economic system constricts people’s employment opportunities, including self-employment, and otherwise stifles their efforts to improve their lives. Thus, a debate over whether garment factories should be subject to safety regulations, while the status quo goes largely undisturbed, misses the point.
 
According to a report (PDF) written for the Netherlands ministry of foreign affairs, most Bangladeshis, unsurprisingly, are victimized by a land system that has long benefited the rural and urban elites. “Land-grabbing of both rural and urban land by domestic actors is a problem in Bangladesh,” the report states.

Wealthy and influential people have encroached on public lands…, often with help of officials in land-administration and management departments. Among other examples, hundreds of housing companies in urban areas have started to demarcate their project area using pillars and signboard before receiving titles. They use local musclemen with guns and occupy local administrations, including the police. Most of the time, land owners feel obliged to sell their productive resources to the companies at a price inferior to market value. Civil servants within the government support these companies and receive some plot of land in exchange.

Women suffer most because of the patriarchy supported by the political system. “Women in Bangladesh rarely have equal property rights and rarely hold title to land,” the report notes. “Social and customary practices effectively exclude women from direct access to land.”
 
As a result,

Many of the rural poor in Bangladesh are landless, have only small plots of land, are depending on tenancy, or sharecropping. Moreover, tenure insecurity is high due to outdated and unfair laws and policies…. These growing rural inequalities and instability also generate migration to towns, increasing the rates of urban poverty.

Much as in Britain after the Enclosures, urban migration swells the ranks of workers, allowing employers to take advantage of them. Since Bangladesh does not have a free-market economy, starting a business is mired in regulatory red tape – and worse, such as “intellectual property” law – that benefit the elite while stifling the chance for poor individuals to find alternatives to factory work. (The owner of the Savar factory, Mohammed Sohel Rana, got rich in a system where, the Guardian writes, “politics and business are closely connected, corruption is rife, and the gap between rich and poor continues to grow.”) Moreover, until the factory collapse, garment workers could not organize without employer permission.
 
Crony capitalism deprives Bangladeshis of property rights, freedom of exchange, and therefore work options. The people need neither the corporatist status quo nor Western condescension. They need radical land reform and freed markets.
 
Sheldon Richman is vice president and editor at The Future of Freedom Foundation in Fairfax, Va.

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Avelar Energy – part of the Renova Group – intends to sell solar panels and build power stations in South Africa as the company shifts its markets from Europe to Africa and Asia.

Avelar plans to build its first power station in South Africa
this year. It has signed its first $ 500,000 contract with the
Dawn Group, which owns a network of logistics facilities. Avelar
will be installing solar panels on the roof of their partners and
sell them the generated energy. It will be the first Russian
company investing in alternative energy production overseas.

By 2015 the company plans to build power plants with the Dawn
Group with a 6 MW capacity worth $400mn. It also holding talks
about cooperation with 20 other companies in the region,
Vedomosti quotes the head of Avelar.

Avelar is part of Russia’s leading investment group Renova owned
by oligarch Viktor Vekselberg. It produces solar panels in
Chuvashia and has recently announced plans to wind down its
operations in the EU and increase its presence in Russia, South
Africa, India, Chile, Pakistan, and Indonesia.

Solar panels sales and direct supply of electricity are becoming
more cost-effective than traditional generation, particularly in
the sunny regions, the daily Vedomosti quotes Oleg Shutkin,
analyst at the Association of Solar Energy.

The potential of solar energy in the countries of the so-called
“sun belt” is estimated to reach 600 GW by 2020, an equivalent to
three Russian power stations, oilru.com reports.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Russia has improved its competitiveness profile in 2013, taking 42nd position from the total of 60. However, since 2004 the situation changed little, with the ‘oil curse’ remaining a stumbling block to better performance.

Positioned between Latvia and Peru in 2013, Russia went up 6
places on a competitiveness ladder, designed by the
Switzerland-based IMD World Competitiveness Centre. The US
regained its top spot with the financial sector rebound and lots
of technological innovation. Switzerland and Hong Kong took 2nd
and the 3rd positions.

The United Arab Emirates had the biggest breakthrough in 2013, as
it jumped to 8th place from 16th. Asian powerhouses — China (21)
and Japan (24) — also made progress, with the latter appearing to
be enjoying the first fruit of Abenomics, the report said. Most of Europe remained
mired in austerity measures, which is eating into the growth
prospects in the region. And BRICS club, enjoyed mixed
fortunes,remaining “lands of opportunities,” as 
Professor Stéphane Garelli, director of theIMD World
Competitiveness Center, put it.

The IMD ranking is compiled on the basis of

statistics and interviews with 4200 company managers, about 100
of them are Russians.

The best progress in Russia was made in terms of

the country’s employment, as it went up to 13th place from 27th.
In 2012 Russia’s unemployment rate stood at 5.5%, while the
average figure for the countries ranked by IMD was 8%. Youth
unemployment at 13.2% was twice as low as the world

average. However, Russia’s labor market as a whole doesn’t look
rosy, as better employment was primarily due to the black
economy, while in the legal one the number of people in work
slid, as Vedomosti quoted Valery Mironov from the

Development Center of the Higher School of Economics.

Among other Russian strong points were a low government debt, low
tax on individual’s income, stable interest rates, the education
level and employee’s qualifications. Exports, the pension system,
capital market, bureaucracy, as well as low acceptance of
innovation and poor demographic and healthcare indicators were
among the country’s drawbacks.

In almost a decade Russia’s ranking remained almost unchanged, as
in 2004 the country was in 41st place. Russia’s main problem is
evident and clear: a low level of economic diversification and
strong dependence on commodity prices, Garelli explained.

Though a move upwards in the competitiveness ranking is generally
positive, most of Russia’s perspective criteria remains without
much progress or declining, agrees Anna Bodrova, an analyst at
Investcafe. “To move up the ranking due to macroeconomic
indicators isn’t very difficult, but both business regulations
and its quality and efficiency remain Russia’s weak spots. … the
effect from developing these areas will enable Russia go up the
rating another 8-12 points,” Bodrova explained.

One of the key issues of the 2013 IMD report is that
competitiveness could hardly be compatible with austerity. 

“While the euro zone remains stalled, the robust comeback of
the US to the top of the competitiveness rankings, and better
news from Japan, have revived the austerity debate,” said
Garelli.

“Structural reforms are unavoidable, but growth remains a
prerequisite for competitiveness. In addition, the harshness of
austerity measures too often antagonizes the population. In the
end, countries need to preserve social cohesion to deliver
prosperity,” he added.

The need to stimulate growth rather than impose draconian cuts
is becoming increasingly recognized by the key
policymakers across Europe . But while the need to find a
balance between cuts and growth now seems to have become evident,
a golden middle remains a tricky thing to find.

“The trouble is that no one knows where this balance lies. We
are in uncharted territory now and everyone is feeling their
way,” Ben Aris, editor-in-chief at Business New Europe, told
Business RT

earlier.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Russia has improved its competitiveness profile in 2013, taking 42nd position from the total of 60. However, since 2004 the situation changed little, with the ‘oil curse’ remaining a stumbling block to better performance.

Positioned between Latvia and Peru in 2013, Russia went up 6
places on a competitiveness ladder, designed by the
Switzerland-based IMD World Competitiveness Centre. The US
regained its top spot with the financial sector rebound and lots
of technological innovation. Switzerland and Hong Kong took 2nd
and the 3rd positions.

The United Arab Emirates had the biggest breakthrough in 2013, as
it jumped to 8th place from 16th. Asian powerhouses — China (21)
and Japan (24) — also made progress, with the latter appearing to
be enjoying the first fruit of Abenomics, the report said. Most of Europe remained
mired in austerity measures, which is eating into the growth
prospects in the region. And BRICS club, enjoyed mixed
fortunes,remaining “lands of opportunities,” as 
Professor Stéphane Garelli, director of theIMD World
Competitiveness Center, put it.

The IMD ranking is compiled on the basis of

statistics and interviews with 4200 company managers, about 100
of them are Russians.

The best progress in Russia was made in terms of

the country’s employment, as it went up to 13th place from 27th.
In 2012 Russia’s unemployment rate stood at 5.5%, while the
average figure for the countries ranked by IMD was 8%. Youth
unemployment at 13.2% was twice as low as the world

average. However, Russia’s labor market as a whole doesn’t look
rosy, as better employment was primarily due to the black
economy, while in the legal one the number of people in work
slid, as Vedomosti quoted Valery Mironov from the

Development Center of the Higher School of Economics.

Among other Russian strong points were a low government debt, low
tax on individual’s income, stable interest rates, the education
level and employee’s qualifications. Exports, the pension system,
capital market, bureaucracy, as well as low acceptance of
innovation and poor demographic and healthcare indicators were
among the country’s drawbacks.

In almost a decade Russia’s ranking remained almost unchanged, as
in 2004 the country was in 41st place. Russia’s main problem is
evident and clear: a low level of economic diversification and
strong dependence on commodity prices, Garelli explained.

Though a move upwards in the competitiveness ranking is generally
positive, most of Russia’s perspective criteria remains without
much progress or declining, agrees Anna Bodrova, an analyst at
Investcafe. “To move up the ranking due to macroeconomic
indicators isn’t very difficult, but both business regulations
and its quality and efficiency remain Russia’s weak spots. … the
effect from developing these areas will enable Russia go up the
rating another 8-12 points,” Bodrova explained.

One of the key issues of the 2013 IMD report is that
competitiveness could hardly be compatible with austerity. 

“While the euro zone remains stalled, the robust comeback of
the US to the top of the competitiveness rankings, and better
news from Japan, have revived the austerity debate,” said
Garelli.

“Structural reforms are unavoidable, but growth remains a
prerequisite for competitiveness. In addition, the harshness of
austerity measures too often antagonizes the population. In the
end, countries need to preserve social cohesion to deliver
prosperity,” he added.

The need to stimulate growth rather than impose draconian cuts
is becoming increasingly recognized by the key
policymakers across Europe . But while the need to find a
balance between cuts and growth now seems to have become evident,
a golden middle remains a tricky thing to find.

“The trouble is that no one knows where this balance lies. We
are in uncharted territory now and everyone is feeling their
way,” Ben Aris, editor-in-chief at Business New Europe, told
Business RT

earlier.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Republican James Comey will be introduced by President Barack Obama as the new nominee for FBI director.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Republican James Comey will be introduced by President Barack Obama as the new nominee for FBI director.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Decorations craved by athletes all over the globe – medals for the 2014 Sochi Olympics – have been unveiled in St. Petersburg. For the Games due to start in 251 days, a record-breaking number of 1,300 medals were produced.

The medals represent a combination of metal surface, patchwork
designs, and a transparent pattern representing the icy slopes of
the Caucasus Mountains.

They were presented by Russian Olympic skating champion Svetlana
Zhurova, who stressed how vital a medal is for sporting
professionals.

“For any athlete an Olympic medal is a precious gift which
will stay with him or her throughout the years. The athlete may
hide it in a secret place, but when you take it and look at it —
you remember the victorious moments. I look at this Sochi-2014
medal here and understand that nobody will ever doubt the fact
that this medal was won in Russia. All the codes, patterns of
Russian tradition have been encrypted into this medal. There is
ice and flight in this medal…”

The Paralympic medals were made in a similar stylistic design,
with its form set to represent the integrity and soul power of
the Paralympic athletes.

The medals were produced using an open tender among professional
designers. Although there were international bids, it was a
Russian team that won.

The gold, silver and bronze medals, weigh between 460 and 531
grams. It takes 18 hours to produce each medal.

According to the international standards, the medals aren’t
produced of only precious metals. For instance, the Sochi 2014
gold medal has a golden surface with an alloy of different metals
underneath.

Almost 3kg of pure gold were used to cover all the golden medals
set to be awarded to the Games’ event winners.

The first ever Winter Olympics to be held in Russia run from
February 7 to 23 in the southern city of Sochi.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Canadaâ„¢s Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird (shown) announced the new anti-Iran sanctions on Wednesday.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Hawkish US Senator John McCain (C) poses with infamous kidnapper in Syria, Mohamed Nour (seen with his hand on his chest and holding a camera)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranâ„¢s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (R) and Algerian Foreign Minister Mourad Medelci meet in Tehran on May 29, 2012.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Afghan President Hamid Karzai says the United States must accept conditions set by Afghans if it wants to maintain permanent military bases in Afghanistan, Press TV reports.

On May 9, the Afghan President said Washington had demanded to keep nine military bases across Afghanistan. Karzai stated that the US planned to keep its nine bases in the main cities of the country, such as the capital Kabul, Kandahar, and Herat.

On Thursday, President Karzai said, Å“Any agreement will not benefit Afghanistan if they are signed without taking the interests of the country into account.”

On May 2, 2012, Washington and Kabul signed a deal that authorized the presence of US troops for a period of 10 years after 2014, which was the original date agreed earlier for the departure of all foreign combat troops from Afghanistan. Afghanistanâ„¢s parliament approved the pact on May 26.

Karzai also accused certain foreign countries of using the peace talks with the Taliban militants for their own interests. He said if the foreign countries follow their own path in talks with the militants, then he will reveal their secret political activities in Afghanistan.

FKO/MSH/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

This file photo shows a militant operating in Syria.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

A group of US lawmakers have taken an Ëœanti-terrorâ„¢ trip to Russia and are due to meet with head of the Chechen Republic, cited by human rights groups as a brutal ruler involved in numerous cases of torture and killing of dissidents.

California Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher is leading a six-member delegation to Moscow Å“to discuss improving counterterrorism cooperation,” The Washington Post reports on Thursday, insisting that the trip was arranged by American Hollywood actor Steven Seagal, who is close to Chechnyaâ„¢s Muslim ruler Ramzan Kadyrov, in a bid to boost his image.

According to the report, the idea of the Chechnya visit by US lawmakers generated Å“heated” arguments in Washington and was opposed by the State Department and other officials Å“not only because of safety concerns but also because of Kadyrovâ„¢s reputation.”

The daily further cites Human Rights Watch as stating that the 36-year-old Kadyrov Å“is alleged to be personally behind a number of cases of torture and killings.”

This is while the US-based rights group has often been accused by many observers of following the official American foreign policy in reporting human rights violations across the globe.

Rep. Rohrabacher, who is the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia and emerging threats, is accompanied on the Russia trip by three other Republican members of the House, Steve King of Iowa, Paul Cook of California and Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Two Democratic Congressmen, William Keating of Massachusetts and Steve Cohen of Tennessee are also part of the delegation but do not plan to join their Republican peers on the Chechnya visit, the report adds.

Rohrabacher said his congressional delegation would be meeting with Russian officials Å“to find ways to work together better in the fight against terrorism.

Aside from searching for answers to Å“questions about the Boston Marathon bombing suspects,” who reportedly have roots in Chechnya and Dagestan, Å“the delegation wants to show Russians that their interests coincide with those of Americans in fighting terrorism,” the report says.

The daily, however, does not elaborate on what type of answers the US lawmakers are looking to find during their visits to Moscow and Chechnya.

Å“The Cold War is over,” Rohrabacher is quoted as saying. Å“We should be standing together.”

Rep. Keating, who represents a congressional district near Boston, said he was going to Moscow Å“on behalf of the victims of the marathon bombing,” adding that Å“we want to build bridges, so this doesnâ„¢t happen to other people.”

The development comes as Americans accused two young naturalized US citizens and brothers, originally from Dagestan, of involvement in the Boston bombings and then suspiciously killed one of them and critically injured the other.

Moreover, a friend of one of the accused bombers, Ibragim Todasheve, 27, who was also a Chechnya native and lived in Orlando, Florida, was also suspiciously killed recently by an FBI agent during an interrogation session.

MFB/MFB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]A US-led foreign soldier has been killed by an improvised explosive device (IED) in eastern Afghanistan, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) says.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Russia says the foreign-backed Syrian opposition coalition is seeking to thwart peace efforts and provoke military intervention in Syria Ëœthrough any means.â„¢

Å“We are under the impression that the National Coalition and its regional sponsors are doing everything so as not to allow the start of the political process and achieve military intervention in Syria through any means possible,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters.

On Wednesday, the so-called Syrian National Coalition said it would engage in peace efforts only if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad resigned.

Å“These demands are impossible to fulfil,” the Russian foreign minister said, adding, Å“The only thing that unites them is a demand of Bashar al-Assadâ„¢s immediate departure.”

Å“I hope that there will be sensible forces among the Americans and Europeans who will be able to rein in those who condone these absolutely unacceptable aggressive approaches of the National Coalition and who try to make this coalition look like the only structure with which the Syrian government should talk,” Lavrov stated.

President Assad said on Thursday that Damascus was already in possession of the first batch of the Russian S-300 missile defense systems.

The Syrian president told Lebanonâ„¢s Al-Manar TV that the second shipment of the Russian systems will be delivered to Syria soon.

The foreign-sponsored militancy in Syria, which erupted over two years ago, has taken its toll on the lives of many people, including large numbers of Syrian soldiers and security personnel.

MSH/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranâ„¢s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi says the crisis in Syria can be settled through dialog, warning that foreign military support for the terrorists will complicate the situation in the Arab country.

Salehi made the remarks in a Wednesday meeting with Tanzaniaâ„¢s Defense Minister Shamsi Vuai Nahodha in the capital, Tehran.

Å“Interference by foreign countries and military support for extremist groups will merely complicate [the situation] and increase the extent of destruction in Syria,” Salehi said.

Turmoil has gripped Syria since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of Syrian security forces, have been killed in the unrest.

The Tanzanian official, for his part, praised Iranâ„¢s efforts to find the most reasonable solution to the crisis in Syria through negotiations and underlined the need for the expansion of cooperation among countries to prevent regional and international crises.

The two officials also called for the enhancement of ties in different fields.

On the same day, Salehi also met with Ugandaâ„¢s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs in charge of Regional Cooperation Asuman Kiyingi.

During the meeting, Salehi called on the international community to take swift measures to put an end to the turmoil in Syria.

Å“Since Syria is located in a very sensitive region, its developments are not limited to the country and even the region, but are on course to go international. Therefore, the international community should take steps toward settling the crisis,” he said.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Salehi said the Islamic Republic pursues the policy of expanding ties with African countries, praising the relations between Iran and Uganda.

Kiyingi, for his part, stressed his countryâ„¢s opposition to any military option in Syria and expressed support for talks between the parties to the conflict as the only way out of the ongoing unrest.

The meetings were held on the sidelines of the International Conference on Syria held in the Iranian capital on May 29. The event brought together delegates from around 40 countries.

The international conference was convened to help find a political solution to the crisis in the Arab country.

AR/NN/HJL

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranâ„¢s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (R) and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari meet in Tehran, May 29, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Six people have been killed and several others wounded in recent bomb attacks in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

On Thursday, a car bomb blast hit the northeastern part of Baghdad, leaving four people dead and a dozen others wounded.

Iraqi Interior Ministry sources said another car bomb attack at a thoroughfare in Baghdadâ„¢s southern district of Karrada killed two people and injured eight others.

Two roadside bombings at the districts of Saidiyah and Baladiyat in southern and eastern Baghdad also wounded nearly ten people, the sources added.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki says militant groups and the remnants of the former Baâ„¢athist regime are to blame for the recent wave of violence in the country.

On Wednesday, a bomb attack, which was carried out in a northwestern neighborhood of Baghdad, killed 16 people and injured more than 40 others.

Two bomb blasts in a commercial area in western Baghdad also killed nine people and wounded 15 others on the same day. An Iraqi army brigadier general was also shot dead at his home in the city of Abu Ghraib.

On May 2, the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) said April had been the deadliest month in Iraq since 2008 as terrorist acts killed over 700 people and injured more than 1, 630 others across the country.

MSH/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Iraqi security forces have arrested 16 members of a terrorist group, Al-Iraqiya television network reports.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

London Mayor slams govt. for tightening visa controls

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Prominent British charities have found that nearly half a million people across the UK are now relying on food banks to survive hunger and destitution.

The charities said in a report that living costs and the governmentâ„¢s welfare reforms have pushed thousands more households into poverty and hardship.

The study commissioned by ËœChurch Action on Povertyâ„¢ and ËœOxfam said Britain is facing a dramatic rise in poverty, because of wage cuts, the squeeze on benefits and the continuing economic downturn.

The study called for a Parliamentary inquiry into how the governmentâ„¢s cuts, the increased use of sanctions and benefit error have driven up the number of Å“hidden hungry.”

Recent figures from the Trussell Trust, the biggest provider of food banks in the country, said the number of people using its services had leapt from 40,000 in 2009/10 to more than 350,000 in 2012/13.

In their report entitled ËœWalking the Breadlineâ„¢, Oxfam and Church Action Poverty said the true number of hungry people could be as high as 500,000 because the problem is not being monitored properly.

They said the surge has been mainly caused by changes to the benefit system such as the toughening of crisis loan eligibility rules, delays in payments, Jobseekerâ„¢s Allowance sanctions and sickness benefit reassessments.

Å“The shocking reality is that hundreds of thousands of people in the UK are turning to food aid”, said Oxfam boss Mark Goldring.

“Cuts to social safety-nets have gone too far, leading to destitution, hardship and hunger on a large scale. It is unacceptable that this is happening in the seventh wealthiest nation on the planet.”

Niall Cooper of Church Action on Poverty added: Å“The safety net that was there to protect people is being eroded to such an extent that we are seeing a rise in hunger.

“Food banks are not designed to, and should not, replace the Ëœnormalâ„¢ safety net provided by the state in the form of welfare support.”

MOL/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Afghanistan’s President Hamid Karzai says the United States must accept Kabul’s conditions to maintain permanent bases in the war-torn country.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Russia says the foreign-backed Syrian opposition coalition is seeking to thwart peace efforts and provoke foreign military intervention.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Joshua Frank, Managing Editor of CounterPunch, is the author of Left Out! How Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush, and along with Jeffrey St. Clair, the editor of Red State Rebels: Tales of Grassroots Resistance in the Heartland, and of Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, published by AK Press. Hopeless is now available in Kindle format. He can be reached at brickburner@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

Air of uncertainty is engulfing most matters related to Egypt. Since the Egyptian revolt started over two years ago, the country remains hostage to a barefaced power struggle with many destructive implications that have polarized society in unprecedented ways, perhaps in all of Egypt’s modern history. And while in Egypt itself nothing is sacred and no one is safe from the massive campaigns of defamation, demonization and sheer lies that each political camp is launching against the other, Palestinians find themselves in a most precarious position.

Palestinians in the Gaza Strip in particular, are heavily dependent on their Egyptian neighbors. Six years of an Israeli siege, originally imposed to punish Palestinians for electing Hamas in an election viewed widely as transparent and fair, has culminated into a drama with international dimensions. This drama of course involved the Palestinians, but also Israel’s traditional benefactors — lead, as always, by the United States — Arab countries, Iran, Turkey and more. Aside from the vicious nature of a siege imposed to punish a civilian population for making democratic choices, the siege has morphed to acquire multiple meanings. On one hand, it further cemented the division of Palestinian political elites, as the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority (PA) invested in ensuring the isolation of its Hamas political opponents. Notably, this took place after their brief but bloody encounters in Gaza in 2007. On the other hand, the siege positioned Hamas, whose survival was at stake, forcefully in a regional camp that involved Iran, Syria and the Lebanese resistance group Hezbollah.

The last development in particular was exploited by Israel in every way possible and certainly without much context. It subsequently attacked Gaza at will, killing and wounding thousands in the course of few years, in the name of fighting Middle Eastern radicals hell-bent on erasing Israel off the map.

Under ousted President Hosni Mubarak, Egypt served as a buffer zone for Israel and the US to isolate Hamas from the rest of the world. The Egyptian dictator also had his own reasons for isolating Gaza. Any success in Mubarak’s neighborhood for the Islamists, Palestinians or others, would have constituted a threat and would have emboldened Egypt’s own Islamists to expect or strive for a greater role in Egypt’s undemocratic political institutions. Moreover, by tightening the noose, the Egyptian regime at the time had hoped to strengthen its role as a major player in the US Arab camp of ‘moderates’, in exchange for financial and political perks.

The Mubarak regime justified its incarceration of Gaza as its attempt at preserving Palestinian unity. The logic was flawed, but also clever. Under the auspices of the George W. Bush Administration and full Egyptian involvement, Israel and Mahmoud Abbas’ PA had reached an agreement on Movement and Access at the Gaza-Egypt border in November 2005. Expectedly, the agreement was tilted in every way necessary to reassure Israel regarding its many security concerns. A European mission — The European Union Border Assistance Mission at the Rafah Crossing Point (EU BAM Rafah) — was hurriedly deployed to monitor the border. Those listed by Israel as ‘suspects’ were either turned back or detained. It was an Israeli operation conducted by Palestinian and EU hands, with full Egyptian cooperation. The Mubarak regime argued that opening the border under Hamas’ authority was a violation of the agreement and would have further divided Palestinians.

When Palestinian militants clashed in Gaza in 2007, resulting in the removal of Abbas’ Fatah loyalists from the Strip’s entire security apparatus, Abbas found himself on the very camp urging greater clamp down at Gaza’s border, especially with Egypt. The latter enthusiastically obliged. As Mubarak erected a barrier and an underground wall around Gaza’s 12k border, Abbas cheered him on. “I support the wall,” he was quoted in the Guardian on Jan 31, 2010. “It is the Egyptians’ sovereign right in their own country. Legitimate supplies should be brought through the legal crossings.”

Abbas of course knew well that ‘legal crossings’ between Gaza and Israel were meant to ration food and fuel for Palestinians in the impoverished Gaza, in ways consistent with Israel’s position, as reiterated by the then influential Israeli official Dov Weissglass: “The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger.” As for the other ‘legal crossing’ with Egypt, it had no commercial use, and it was heavily restricted even for individuals with health problems and students.

Following a lethal Israeli war on Gaza in 2008-9, known by its Israeli name Operation Cast Lead, Egypt moved even closer to the Israeli and PA position of choking Gaza. Gazans didn’t expect Mubarak to allow the seriously damaged place to completely recover from a one-sided war that killed over 1400 people, wounded thousands more, and damaged much of the place’s barely subsisting infrastructure. However, they did hope that Mubarak would open the border crossing on a more predictable basis; yet they watched in dismay as western security experts flocked to Egypt to fortify the Gaza border even further, before all of Gaza’s victims were accounted for.

Things have not always been this bad between Gaza and Egypt. In fact, in past decades, Gazans saw a strong connection, a bond even, with historical, political, cultural and religious dimensions that made them in some respects view Egypt as their respite, their last lines of defense. Historically, Egypt, which fought bitter wars against Israel, as other Arab countries conspired or capitulated, was in control of Gaza between 1948 and 1956, and again between 1957 and 1967. Even after the Israeli occupation of the remainder of historic Palestine, the political rapport was never severed until 1978 when President Anwar Sadat signed the Camp David Accords. A second phase of those accords put in place a ‘framework’ that would turn Gaza, along with the West Bank into autonomous regions.

While many in Egypt fully understand that finding a dignified and lasting resolution to the humiliation experienced by Palestinians in Gaza is a must, as they remain confined to a tiny space with no political horizon in sight, some media pundits are callously fanning the flames against the Gaza population and their government. They might’ve forgotten that it was Gazans that lead the celebration of Egypt’s January 25 Revolution and it was their resistance that kept the Israeli army at bay all of these years. Then, no one truly knew what sort of political outcome the revolution would usher in. Most Palestinians seemed happy that Egyptians were gasping the air of freedom, and truly believed that what was good for Egypt was as equally good for Palestine.

It is only obvious that neither Gazans nor their government have any vested interest in destabilizing Egypt. Palestinians understand that a strong, stable Egypt would have to immediately tend to some unfinished business, one being the Gaza siege, and the other balancing out Israel’s untamed military arrogance in that area. Yes, Gaza has its religious zealots like any other place, but conflating that with a Hamas-Muslim Brotherhood plot to undermine the army’s presence in Sinai is another unsubstantiated claim aimed solely at fomenting hate against Palestinians.

When media reports confirmed the release of seven kidnapped Egyptian soldiers in Sinai that were received by President Mohamed Morsi at the Almatha airport on May 22, it was the Palestinians in Gaza who echoed the cheers of their brethren in Egypt. Aside from genuine gratification of their release, Gazans were also happy to see thousands of stranded passengers being allowed to cross the border after having spent six days fighting the elements and sleeping on card board.

Palestinians in Gaza feel humiliated and are deeply frustrated for paying the price of Egypt’s protracted political turmoil. It is time that the Muslim Brotherhood government of Morsi do some serious soul-searching and understand that Palestinians will continue to dig tunnels to survive if Cairo doesn’t reach an agreement with the Gaza government that would allow for commercial exchange and humanitarian relief.

Yes, Egypt has every right to secure its border, but certainly not at the expense of a besieged people who are tired of being subjected to ‘collective punishment’ or being used as political fodder. Additionally, they are most certainly tired of digging tunnels to survive.

Ramzy Baroud is editor of PalestineChronicle.com. He is the author of The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People’s Struggle  and  “My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story” (Pluto Press, London).

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

I’m sick of being shoved around by big corporations. They get to pollute the air I breathe; fire my friends, depriving them of health care and retirement funds; pull out of the community I live in, “downsizing” the workforce and leaving the city it probably never paid taxes to in the first place in a shambles, leading to poverty and further job losses; bribe politicians legally and secretly; and get the best seats and best food and all the skyboxes at professional sports events I can’t even afford to watch on Pay-Per-View.

Worse, no one seems to care. “That’s how business works,” people say. That’s what a man said to me a few months after a large company “downsized” his wife and moved operations to India. The man, struggling with his own small business, had zero anger at the company that had crapped out his wife. He didn’t recognize that his falling-down house and living room ceiling-with-paint-peeling-off- were the direct result of the company’s prioritizing profits. When I offered that such conduct by corporations should be illegal, the man said, “If you regulate them, they will just locate in India,” an irony that was apparently lost on him.

Corporations aren’t our friends. State Farm — along with a host of other companies — “is there,” but it doesn’t really act like the “good neighbor” it purports to be. Most corporations are there to take your money and give you as little possible in return. These days, that’s called “business. “ Most Republicans and Democrats who talk of giving tax breaks to businesses and who proudly call themselves “business friendly” seem not to fathom that most corporations are legally obligated do whatever is necessary to maximize profits. (If don’t, shareholders can sue.)

So screw all else. If the law restricts profit making, some companies just break the law and convince the prosecutor or U.S. Attorney General that prosecuting them will harm America — we don’t want these businesses to fail! Or, companies will adhere to the law — until their paid lobbyists rewrite the law, and the companies bribe (read: make campaign donations to) politicians to get them to pass the new law.

You might have noticed that, over the years, it’s only gotten harder to regulate corporations. Regulate the very banks that drove us into the bailout? Yeah, right. Stop Monsanto from turning our food into Frankenstein’s monster? Give me a break. Stop companies from fracking up our groundwater? Good luck, and don’t get burned when you turn on your water faucet. It’s also only gotten harder to sue businesses. Congress, state legislatures, and our business-friendly U.S. Supreme Court have seen to that.

Look at global warming. Look at pollution. Everyone knows we’re on a bus, headed toward a cliff … But even this metaphor has changed. These days, the company that owns the bus doesn’t actually care if the bus roars over the cliff and kills the driver and passengers and anyone unlucky enough to be at the bottom of the cliff. The company cares only that: the bus is insured; the fuel was purchased at the lowest possible cost (and ideally the bus will go over the cliff when the needle hits Empty); the bus is reasonably fuel-efficient; and that there is some way to avoid paying out claims to the dead passengers’ families. (The company probably included a binding arbitration clause on the tickets, so that’s all set.) The driver? His family won’t sue, thanks to workers’ comp.

The company can be fairly sure that no one will demand too much from it — people will channel their anger by creating a victim compensation fund and hoping Ken Feinberg will manage it. Last, if the company’s reputation takes a dive as a result of all this, there’s a new company name and cool new logo waiting in the wings. (Remember ValueJet, the airline that crashed a jet into a Florida swamp in 1996? Think about it whenever you board AirTran.)

Anyway, I’m sick of being on the receiving end of all this, so I’ve incorporated myself. Now I do all I can legally to maximize my own profit — which we will here define as money and pleasure — and outsource my costs and pain.

Here’s how it will work. Invite me to your house for dinner. I’ll accept. When the appointed evening arrives, I’ll show up, bringing nothing, or at most a cheap-ass bottle of wine. You will see that I brought a bag of trash — better to dump it at your house and use your trash service. That old gasoline and leftover paint I’ve been stuck with? I’ll dump it in your yard, not mine.

You might catch me plugging in my iPhone to charge it up on your utilities bill. I will plug up your toilet, not mine — might even take a shower on your water bill and use your towels. I’ll make sure to fill the two water bottles I happen to have brought. When dinner arrives, I’ll eat as much as I can and fill a doggy bag or two for my non-existent dog. I’ll stay as long into the night as I can, to burn your electricity rather than mine. (“Let’s watch all 15 new episodes of Arrested Development! No, I’m not on Netflix — why don’t yousign up?”)

After telling you that I did all this for you, “like a good neighbor,” I’ll ask for a ride home, with a few detours (I have errands to run). If you get upset, I’ll cheerfully say, “That’s just how friendship works.” And you’re going to just have to accept that you need to put up with my crap if you don’t want me to go find some new friends I can mooch off of.

Walmart says, “Save money. Live better.” McDonald’s crows, “I’m lovin’ it.” Lockheed Martin claims: “We never forget who we’re working for.” Yes, Brian J. Foley, Inc. is saving money, living better, and never forgetting who (sic) it’s working for.

I’m lovin’ it, but are you loving your new incorporated friend? I hope “business friendly” Americans start to understand that this “friendship” is a one-way street that ends at the edge of a cliff.

Brian J. Foley is a law professor and humorist. He’s the author of the satirical financial self-help book, A New Financial You in 28 Days! A 37-Day Plan.  Email him at brianjfoleyinc@gmail.com

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

US Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, who killed 16 Afghan civilians, plans to plead guilty in a deal with military prosecutors to avoid a death sentence.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

In Plato’s Trial and Death of Socrates Socrates is charged with corrupting the youth for the ghastly crime of encouraging his students to ask questions. The philosopher defended himself by saying he is actually a gift to Athens because like a gadfly to a horse, he stirs the citizens to life, and without his pestering questions the citizens of Athens would remain asleep to the true nature of Athenian society. Like Socrates, journalists and whistleblowers question accepted truths and help illuminate the mechanisms of power in their society. When people understand the actors that are responsible for injustice, they may just take action to change society. This is why Obama’s war on whistleblowers is such a dangerous development.

But now as the mainstream media rap on endlessly about the fake IRS and fake Benghazi scandals, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) seizing of the AP phone records seems to have been mostly forgotten.

Yet the AP scandal is only the most recent in a long line of attacks on leakers and journalists. The history of Obama’s commitment to government secrecy is most exemplified by his use of the espionage act six times against leakers with Julian Assange possibly becoming the seventh. That’s twice as many times as all other presidents combined. Obama has used the espionage act against: Shamai Leibowitz, Thomas Drake, Bradley Manning, Stephen Kim, Jeffery Sterling, and John Kiriakou. Other leakers have had prosecution attempted by the DOJ, and still others suspected of leaking have had their careers ruined–by having security clearances revoked–and have been intimidated by the Obama administration.

The freedom of information activist Aaron Swartz, who was a major figure behind the mobilizations against the Internet censorship bills CISPA and SOPA, faced a “needlessly cruel” prosecution from the DOJ. His family believed the prosecution might have led to his suicide. But now Obama has even formally accused the journalist, James Rosen, who was simply reporting information a government official told him.

Lest you think Obama’s battle against journalists hasn’t extended outside the United States, an article by Jeremy Scahill describes how the jailed Yemeni journalist, Abdulelah Haider Shaye, was about to be pardoned by the Yemeni president, but Obama called him and persuaded him not to.

Most of the espionage cases back in the U.S. are still ongoing, but Leibowitz and Kiriakou have already been sentenced to jail time, and the very use of the espionage act signifies the DOJ wants serious punishment for the others indicted. Bradley Manning faces life in prison when his trial begins June 3 and Julian Assange would likely face the same or worse if the US could get a hold of him.

When one looks back at the pernicious actions the Obama administration has taken against whistleblowers and journalist, it’s clear the government wants to crush any prominent voices that question the government’s official narrative regardless of how many lives are destroyed in the process. But why is Obama waging this war on leakers?

Undoubtedly, one of the main reasons for the crackdown on whistleblowers has to do with Wikileaks. When Wikileaks initially released the Afghan War leak in 2010 the U.S. population was told that Wikileaks had endangered national security, but Obama has since claimed the leaks revealed nothing new. Then in January of 2011congressional aides told Reuters the Wikileaks revelations were “embarrassing, but not damaging”.

It’s clear that the minimizing of the Wikileaks effect on U.S. interests is simply an attempt to publicly deny the extremely significant blows the U.S. suffered to its imperialist policies. The truth is the Iraq War Leak was one of the major factors that forced the U.S. to abandon its combat operations in Iraq. The cables revealed that in 2006 U.S. troops executed 10 Iraqi civilians and used an air strike to destroy the evidence. This information received a great deal of attention in Iraq and made it politically impossible for the Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri al-Maliki, to agree to a status of forces agreement, which left U.S. troops outside the jurisdiction of Iraqi courts. With U.S. troops potentially facing trials for their inevitable crimes, the U.S. was forced to leave Iraq.

Cablegate’s 250,000 state department cables were one of the other ways Wikileaks damaged U.S. control in the Middle East. Amnesty International, as well as a number of other sources have claimed that the leaked cables exposed–in the most concrete terms–the corruption of the U.S. supported dictators and played a major role in causing the Arab Spring.

The leaks demonstrate that the U.S. government will do anything it can to prevent people–inside the U.S. and out–from knowing what the U.S. and its client governments are doing. The results of the leaks showed what the ramifications can be when people know what their governments are doing.

The other major reason why Obama has been cracking down so much on journalists and whistleblowers is because the U.S. government has created an enormous security and surveillance apparatus since 9-11. The enlarged surveillance started under Bush, and Obama has simply increased these policies. Once a government establishes new initiatives of security and surveillance they tend to find individuals to prosecute–legitimate or otherwise. These prosecutions justify the existence of the surveillance and serve a dual purpose of frightening the population. In other words, when institutions of power consolidate their power they don’t give it back. This is the reason imperial powers never give up their colonies unless they’re forced to.

Understanding these reasons behind the attacks on leakers is important because it signifies the attacks are unlikely to end. The longer Obama’s P.R. strategy of playing “nice guy” under the lights while saving his most brutal acts for the darkness continues to fool people, the more damage Obama will be capable of doing. Already he has taken serious actions to begin dismantling one of American society’s proudest achievements–freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is protected in the U.S. at a level unparalleled in the world. Yet Obama, like Socrates’ dikasts, has decided to silence inconvenient questioning of the state and harshly punish those who attempt to pull the masks off centers of power. The question now is, will American citizens be stirred to life like Socrates’ horse from the gadflies of today and realize there is a serious and continued erosion of their freedoms taking place, or will they remain asleep until Obama has handed out his last cup of poison hemlock?

Paul Gottinger is a writer from Madison, Wisconsin where he edits whiterosereader.org, which is where this article first appeared. He can be reached at paul.gottinger@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

May 16, 2013
 |

The following is an excerpt from Create Your Own Religion: A How-To Book Without Instructions. Reprinted with permission.

The whole notion of creating one’s own religion goes against the claim made by many religions that they alone possess the Only Truth revealed to them by the deity of their choosing. In their eyes, religion is to be followed by human beings, but is never created by them. Countless people have been burned at the stake for simply urging others to challenge religious dogma and question beliefs. While this injunction is no longer followed literally, Jewish scriptures sanction the murder of anyone inviting us to change religious outlook. The Inquisition, which lasted over 600 years, fills the history of Christianity with plenty of mass killings of people whose only crime was holding unconventional opinions in matters of religion. Still today, in some Muslim countries, any Muslim who decides to abandon Islam faces the death penalty for apostasy.

Why such venom and brutality? Because many of those claiming to be speaking for God have little patience for people who want to figure out for themselves what life is about. What is so terrible about it? Because you should not search for what is wise and good. You should listen to what we tell you is wise and good.

In light of these attitudes, it should become clear why a call to “create your own religion” is by its very nature quite radical. But it doesn’t have to be that way. OK, since you are a most pleasant reader, I’ll share a secret with you. Lean toward me so that I may whisper it in your ear. . . . Everyone already creates their own reli­gion. Some people just don’t lie about it.

Did I say something offensive or shocking? It’s a dirty job, but somebody’s got to do it. At the risk of raising the blood pressure of some modern wannabe inquisitors, let’s look at the ugly truth for what it is. Despite their professed devotion to a text or a teacher or a path, even members of established religions don’t observe literally the dictates of their religion of choice. Many believers claim to be strict followers of their traditions, and some actually believe they are. But the reality is that they all are engaged to some degree in a selective reading of their sacred texts, adopting what suits them and rejecting the rest. It’s a simple process, really. Pick up the sacred books of your religion, look for passages supporting your values, and adapt them a little to your liking. Then highlight their importance in the overall balance of the religion, and conveniently forget all those other unsavory passages that either downright contradict your values or support behaviors and attitudes that don’t fit with your inclinations. Rather than having the guts to admit what they are doing and openly defend their right to pick and choose the passages they want to live their lives by, most people prefer hiding under the fable that their particular take on religion is the only correct one. All other people who put the accent on different messages and values contained in the same scriptures, they claim, are heretics who are twisting the essence of the religion. If this strikes you as intellectually dishonest, it’s because it is.

Hey Bolelli, are you really accusing billions of orthodox believers worldwide of being consummate liars? Not necessarily. Some don’t lie consciously. They just happen to be masters at self-delusion, so skilled at lying to themselves that they can do it without ever becom­ing aware of it. Why would they do this? you may ask. Because it would be too scary to take responsibility for choosing which values, among so many, to live by. It’s much more reassuring to go on pre­tending that one’s values are the only true eternal ones that enjoy God’s stamp of approval.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 27, 2013
 |

When was the last time you watched a porn flick? It doesn’t matter whether you are a man or woman, straight or gay, or whether it was a “romantic” or a “gonzo” video. Chances are you watched it on a digital TV, computer or mobile device like a smartphone or tablet, and that you accessed it via an Internet connection.

According to one estimate, there are nearly 25 million porn sites worldwide and they make up 12 percent of all websites. Sebastian Anthony, writing for ExtremeTech, reports that Xvideos is the biggest porn site on the web, receiving 4.4 billion page views and 350 million unique visits per month. He claims porn accounts for 30 percent of all web traffic. Based on Google data, the other four of the top five porn sites, and their monthly page views (pvs) are: PornHub, 2.5 billion pvs; YouPorn, 2.1 billion pvs; Tube8, 970 million pvs; and LiveJasmin, 710 million pvs. In comparison, Wikipedia gets about 8 billion pvs.

Anthony also reports that men make up more than four-fifths (82%) of porn viewers while women consist of less the one-fifth (18%). He estimates the average length of time spent on Xvideo at 15 minutes. From an aesthetic perspective, he notes that most people receive their digital video feeds using low-resolution streaming.

Sometimes the porn industry recalls Mark Twain’s famous line, “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.” In June 2012, Guardian columist Louis Theroux analyzed “the declining economics of the pornography industry.” Reporting on the January 2013 Adult Entertainment Expo, David Moye, writing at the Huffington Post, picked up the chant and warned, “porn industry in decline.” But is the porn industry in decline or yet again restructuring due to technological innovation and marketplace changes?

The porn business is like an old Sally Rand fan dance performance, with performers suggesting a lot while showing very little. It is nearly impossible to get real numbers from porn companies, as few are publicly traded. Estimates as to the size of the business range across the board. The website TopTenReviews claims that, in 2006, the worldwide porn market topped $97 billion, with the U.S. making up $13.3 billion. It argues, “the internet is not the most popular form of pornography in the United States. Video sales and rentals accounted for $3.62 billion in revenue in 2006 while internet pornography raked in $2.84 billion. Magazines were the least popular.” The world has changed since ’06.

The Guardian’s Theroux does not offer an estimate as to the size of the porn industry, but warns, “some time around 2007, the ‘business of X’ started going into a commercial tailspin.” Huffington’s Moye cites estimates from Theo Sapoutzis, the head of the Adult Video News (AVN), who claims that the porn business made $10 billion in 2012. Last year, CNBC claimed that porn businesses, led by Vivid Entertainment, Digital Playground and Manwin, “generate roughly $14 billion in revenue per year that in 2012.”

The porn industry is facing a period of significant restructuring. Porn theatres and XXX shops catering to the “raincoat crowd” and the risqué have all but vanished; the DVD, the old cash-cow release platform, is in rapid decline for both porn and conventional movies. Digital video streaming is the 21st-century medium of porn distribution.

Most commentators identify five factors contributing to the predicament now facing the commerical porn industry: (i) the widescale pirating of copyrighted porn and its illegal resale and posting by opportunistic websites; (ii) the ease of producing do-it-yourself (DIY) amateur porn videos; (iii) the enormous increase of “free” porn sites; (iv) the resulting change in business economics; and (v) the ongoing recession with cuts discretionary spending, especially among a certain sector of the male audience.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 28, 2013
 |

When family nurse practitioner Susan Lavelle learned that a neighbor of hers developed the autoimmune disease systemic sclerosis and couldn’t naturally ingest food last year, she became concerned about the feeding tube formula doctors were recommending. The formula, called Ensure, was full of processed, sugary ingredients.

Ensure is produced by Abbot Nutrition–a brand owned by the multinational conglomerate company, Nestle.

To give an example of what Ensure is made of, the first six ingredients–i.e. the most highly concentrated ingredients–of 36 items listed in the Ensure “Powder Vanilla” product are, in order:

“Corn Syrup, Corn Maltodextrin, Sugar (Sucrose), Corn Oil, Sodium & Calcium Caseinates, Soy Protein Isolate and Artificial Flavor.”

 “[Ensure is] a very traditional way the medical system addresses getting calories into people because they can’t swallow or because they need more calories from some disease problem,” says Lavelle, noting that when she worked in hospitals Ensure was the only feeding tube formula she remembers them using.

She continues, “The problem is it’s loaded with sugar. It’s got refined sugar in it, like corn syrup. It’s got the concentrated milk protein casenite. … It’s processed food. Basically, it’s not real food.”

Nestle-owned Abbot Nutrition produces the majority of feeding tube formulas on the market, and Lavelle says hospitals and care facilities typically recommend Ensure and similar products to feeding tube patients.

Lavelle is an instructor through the Physician’s Committee for Responsible Medicine’s “Food For Life” program, and an advocate of unprocessed, whole foods as a means of promoting health. She says she has found it discouraging that the medical system addresses most issues from a pharmacological or procedural standpoint, with little-to-no emphasis on lifestyle interventions like nutrition.

“When I talk to people [about health], I start with food because I think it makes the biggest difference and gets to the root of the problem,” she says.

So, when Lavelle’s neighbor was told to drink Ensure, she asked around the medical and nutrition communities in search of a feeding tube formula that was made up of whole, non-processed foods.

“Everyone said, ‘We can’t help you,” she says.

It was not until this year that Lavelle discovered the first and only shelf-stable, organic, whole foods feeding tube formula on the market. It is called Liquid Hope.

The Story of Liquid Hope

Robin Gentry McGee, a health and lifestyle coach and chef, faced a dilemma when her father suffered a brain injury and coma in 2005. The feeding tube food her father was consuming consisted of what McGee calls “essentially sugar water.”

McGee says very early on in her father’s treatment she picked up the feeding tube formula can he was using at the doctor’s recommendation, read the ingredients list, and realized it was “garbage.” She calls it, “the can that changed her life,” adding that to this day she has kept the can as a reminder.

That can began McGee’s search for a clean, whole foods-based formula to feed her father. After scouring the Internet, health food stores, supermarkets, and everywhere else she could think to look, she couldn’t find anything of the sort. So, McGee, then a chef with a background in whole foods nutrition, decided to create the formula herself.

“I basically created it because I had to,” she says. “I was trying to save my dad’s life, and to me giving him the high fructose corn syrup sugar water was not an option–unless I couldn’t do it myself–but I had to try. And, I was able to successfully create it with the oversight of a doctor who was an internist.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 28, 2013
 |

Police officers, security guards, or self-appointed vigilantes extrajudicially killed at least 313 African-Americans in  2012 according to a recent study. This means a black person was killed by a security officer every 28 hours. The report notes that it’s possible that the real number could be much higher.

The report, entitled “Operation Ghetto Storm”, was performed by the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, an antiracist grassroots activist organization. The organization has chapters in Atlanta, Detroit, Fort Worth-Dallas, Jackson, New Orleans, New York City, Oakland, and Washington, D.C. It has a history of organizing campaigns against police brutality and state repression in black and brown communities. Their study’s sources included police and media reports along with other publicly available information. Last year, the organization published a similar study showing that a black person is killed by security forces every 36 hours. However, this study did not tell the whole story, as it only looked at shootings from January to June 2012. Their latest study is an update of this.

These killings come on top of other forms of oppression black people face. Mass incarceration ofnonwhites is one of them. While African-Americans constitute 13.1% of the nation’s population, they make up nearly 40% of the prison population. Even though African-Americans use or sell drugs about the same rate as whites, they are 2.8 to 5.5 times more likely to be arrested for drugs than whites. Black offenders also receive longer sentences compared to whites. Most offenders are in prison for nonviolent drug offenses.

The Malcolm X Grassroots Movement is not the only group challenging police violence against African-Americans. The Stop Mass Incarceration Network has been challenging the policy of stop-and-frisk in New York City, in which police officers randomly stop and search individuals for weapons or contraband. African-American and Latino men are disproportionately stopped and harassed by police officers. Most of those stopped (close to 90%) are innocent, according to the New York Civil Liberties Union. Stop Mass Incarceration also organizes against the War on Drugs and inhumane treatment of prisoners.

Along with the rate of extrajudicial killings, the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement report contains other important findings. Of the 313 killed, 124 (40%) were between 22 and 31 years old, 57 (18%) were between 18 and 21 years old, 54 (17%) were between 32 and 41 years old, 32 (10%) were 42 to 51 years old, 25 (8%) were children younger than 18 years old, 18 (6%) were older than 52, and 3 (1%) were of unknown ages.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 29, 2013
 |

The following article first appeared in the American Prospect. 

Two 21-year-old college students sit down in a coffee shop to study for an upcoming test. Behind the counter, a barista whips up their double-shot lattes. In the back kitchen, another young adult washes the dishes and empties the trash.

These four young adults have a lot in common. They are the same age and race, each has two parents, and all grew up in the same metropolitan area. They were all strong students in their respective high schools. But as they enter their third decade, their work futures and life trajectories are radically different–and largely determined at this point.

The culprit is the growing role of inherited advantage, as affluent families make investments that give their children a leg up. Combined with the 2008 economic meltdown and budget cuts in public investments that foster opportunity, we are witnessing accelerating advantages for the wealthy and compounding disadvantages for everyone else.

One of the college students, Miranda, will graduate without any student-loan debt and will have completed three summers of unpaid internships at businesses that will advance her career path. Her parents stand ready to subsidize her lodging with a security deposit and co-signed apartment lease and will give her a no-interest loan to buy a car. They also have a network of family and professional contacts that can help her. While she waits for a job with benefits, she will remain on her parents’ health insurance.

Ten years later, Miranda will have a high-paying job, be engaged to another professional, and will buy a home in a neighborhood with other college-educated professionals, a property that will steadily appreciate over time because of its location. The “parental down-payment assistance program” will subsidize the purchase.

The other collegiate, Marcus, will graduate with more than $55,000 in college debt, a maxed-out credit card, and an extensive résumé of part-time food-service jobs that he has taken to pay for school, both during summers and while in college, reducing the hours he can study. Though he will obtain a degree, he will graduate with almost no work experience in his field of study, lose his health insurance, and begin working two part-time jobs to pay back his student loans and to afford rent in a shared apartment.

Ten years later, Marcus will still be working in low-paying jobs and renting an apartment. He will feel occupationally stuck and frustrated in his attempts to network in the area of his degree. He will take on additional debt–to deal with various health and financial problems–and watch his hope of buying a home slip away, in large part because of a credit history damaged during his early twenties.

Tony, the barista, has the benefit of not taking on mega-debt from college. He will eventually enroll in some classes at a local public university. But his income and employment opportunities will be constrained by not having a college degree. He will make several attempts to learn a building trade and start his own business, eventually landing a job with a steady but low income.

The good news for Tony is that his parents, while not college educated or wealthy, are stable middle-class with modest retirement pensions and a debt-free house, acquired by Tony’s grandfather with a low-interest Veterans Administration mortgage. They are able to provide a bedroom to their son. That home will prove to be a significant factor in Tony’s future economic stability, as he will eventually inherit it.

Cordelia, working in the kitchen, has even less opportunity than Tony for mobility and advancement. Neither of her parents went to college nor have significant assets, as they rent their housing. Though she was academically in the top of her urban high-school class, she did not consider applying to a selective college. The costs seemed daunting, and she didn’t know anyone who went away to college. There were no adults or guidance professionals to help her explore other options, including financial aid available at private colleges, some of which would have paid her full tuition and expenses to attend. Instead, she takes courses at the local community college where she sees many familiar faces. Cordelia will struggle with health issues, as lack of adequate health care and insurance means she will delay treatment of several problems. Over time, she will have a steady and low-wage job, but she will also begin to take more responsibility for supporting members of her family who are less fortunate.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 29, 2013
 |

The following article first appeared in Pacific Standard Magazine. 

Infant mortality within a three-mile radius around one of the nation’s best children’s hospitals, in Cleveland, Ohio, is worse than that in some third-world countries, Dr. Michele Walsh, neonatology director of Rainbow Babies & Children’s Hospital, claimed in a radio interview last week. The hospital anchors the relatively affluent University Circle neighborhood, home to Case Western Reserve University, on the east end of an otherwise pretty impoverished city. (Seventy percent of the infants that enter Walsh’s intensive care unit are on Medicaid.)

Infant mortality rates higher than those of countries like Japan or Sweden are one thing– several reports in recent years found the United States to have a slightly higher rate than many such peers–but Uzbekistan? The Gaza Strip? That would mean communities around the hospital far outstrip the national rate of 6.7 deaths per 1,000 live births. Understandably disturbed by the claim, Politifact Ohio confirmed it using a Case Western regional social and economic research database:

Infant mortality in the University Circle neighborhood … was slightly above 69 deaths per 1,000 live births. That exceeds the rate in countries that include, among others, Bangladesh, Haiti, Burma, Cameroon, Djibouti, Sudan, Kenya, Nepal, Pakistan, Rwanda, and Uganda.

The 69 deaths per 1,000 live births statistic is from 2009 only; taking a three-year average still yields 18.6 deaths, higher than many Caribbean and Eastern European countries. But here’s the real gut-punch: Looking within University Circle communities like Hough and Mount Pleasant, PolitiFact found “infant mortality rates above 27 per 1,000–worse than in North Korea, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Samoa, Maldives, or the Gaza Strip.”

Based on these findings, Politifact rated Walsh’s statement as true.

It would be easy to chalk this up to intractable inequalities we’ve been living with for a long time. But it’s hard to not perceive communities like Hough and Mount Pleasant as canaries in a bigger coal mine for a society that has screwed its youth since the ’80s, when young Americans’ health, measured by everything from infant mortality to drug addiction to disease rates, started systematically deteriorating relative to peer nations.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 29, 2013
 |

I met my husband, Jimmy, at my very first AA meeting. I stumbled into the 14th Street Workshop, bloated and reeking of booze from the night before, in my pajamas. I hadn’t showered in days, and I was wary of the people in the room. I didn’t trust anyone.

Jimmy recognized that I was new (it wasn’t hard to spot), and he put out his hand to shake mine, welcoming me and giving me a meeting list. I don’t remember much about that first meeting, but Jimmy’s kindness stayed with me.

A few days later, I was walking down 14th Street with a beer in a brown bag when I saw Jimmy in front of the Workshop. I tried to hide the beer, thinking he would be angry or disappointed with me. Instead, he told me not to be embarrassed, and welcomed me to come back to the meetings anytime I wanted.

After being used and abused by so many sleazy men in bars, this kind man was a new animal to me. He radiated the philosophy of “Let us love you until you can love yourself.” He had no ulterior motive in being kind to me; he wasn’t trying to get in my pants. He was simply another alcoholic offering his experience, strength and hope–no strings attached.

I made a commitment to go to the 12:30 Beginner’s meeting at the Workshop every day. A group of us always went to the Little Poland diner to fellowship afterward. Jimmy always bought my lunch. He was the elder statesman of the group with about five years sober. I remember laughing with him one of those early days at the diner and realizing, This is the first time I’ve laughed this hard in years.

I noticed that Jimmy helped a lot of homeless guys get off the streets–bringing them into his home and cleaning them up, getting them into detoxes and rehabs. I asked him if I should be doing this. He smiled and said that we each find our niche in sobriety where we can be of service. This brand of 12-stepping worked for him because of his experience. In time, he told me, I would find ways my experience could benefit others.

As I struggled through early sobriety, I was angry and depressed, and suffered from severe mood swings from untreated bipolar disorder. I should say that Jimmy suffered from my mood swings too, because I could be combative. He put up with a lot of abuse, but seemed to understand that this was my process of getting clean. He saw something in me that was good, that I couldn’t see in myself. He was very forgiving.

We had fun, too. On my birthday I mentioned to him that I had never seen snow on the beach. He came up with the idea of going to Coney Island to see the snow and go for an icy dip in the ocean. I remember how warm the sun felt on my skin after jumping in the freezing water for a couple of seconds. I felt myself coming back to life.

After a few relapses, I finally put the plug in the jug and managed to stay sober. A big part of the reason for that was Jimmy’s support and absence of judgment.

Jimmy and I went through a lot together over the years. I was in and out of psych wards, and he was always the first to visit me. He had his demons, too, and I tried to be as supportive as he was. I moved to New Mexico, and later to Virginia. We always stayed in touch.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 29, 2013
 |

It’s been a tumultuous spring semester at Dartmouth College, thanks to a highly publicized student protest and widely supported Clery Act complaint, both of which accused the college of mishandling violations of sexual assault, homophobia, and racism. This week, Dartmouth responded by…charging undergrad protesters for rallying in a dining hall. Somehow, we’re not surprised.

To recap: in April, a group of Dartmouth undergraduates interrupted a presentation for 550 accepted students to protest the above issues, among other grievances. Both administrators and fellow students were pissed, since it’s not fab PR to tell prospies that the college they’re considering has larger problems than a disappointing cafeteria salad bar. Some of the upset Ivy Leaguers responded by posting online death and rape threats about the protestors – a few suggested lynchings and public executions.

Afterwards, Interim President Carol Folt and Dean of the College Charlotte Johnson cancelled classes for a day to soothe campus tensions and, according to Dartmouth senior Karenina Rojas, promised several protesters that they wouldn’t receive disciplinary action. Rojas said local police also claimed Dartmouth College wouldn’t press charges.

On May 23, over 30 students and alums filed a Clery Act complaint with the Department of Education, alleging that Dartmouth College was in violation of the Clery Act, citing “violations of sexual assault, LGBT, racial and religious discrimination, hate crimes, bullying and hazing,” according to The Dartmouth. Things were heated, but moving right along!

Until May 28th – the day before the last day of classes and right before The Dartmouth winds up for the academic year – when around two-thirds of protesters at the prospie student show received an email from the head of Undergraduate Judicial Affairs letting them know that they were being charged with a violation of “Standard IX – Failure to Comply: Directions,” because college officials told us not to enter the dining hall where the protest was held.

The possible repercussions – a letter of Warning, Reprimand or a maximum sanction of probation – aren’t huge, but protesters believe it sends a clear message about whose side the administration is really on. “There is a belief among some of the protesters that the Dartmouth administration finally caved in to pressures to punish us, despite the fact that no one, to our knowledge, has been punished for harassing us or for publishing threats online against us,” Rojas told Jezebel in an email, citing “calls from prominent alumni to punish us, particularly at a conference that they just held two weekends ago” (Here’s aDartmouth article with some pretty ignorant alumni quotes.)

Rojas has reported homophobic harassment and said the perpetrators received no punishment, and “certainly” no disciplinary hearing. Yet: protestors are in trouble for entering a dining hall. “Several people I know have been sexually assaulted, went through the official college disciplinary process, and the perpetrators were found guilty–yet no disciplinary action beyond a warning or probation was taken against them,” Rojas added.

Will this story blow up like UNC student Landen Gambill’s, who was punished by the Office of Student Conduct for “intimidating” her rapist by speaking to the press about her sexual assault earlier this year? Her case was eventually dropped by the chancellor’s request – and after #standwithLanden trended nationally. It seems by the timing of Dartmouth’s response that they’re hoping it doesn’t.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

May 29, 2013
 |

Colorado took a major step toward implementing a legal system for dispensing recreational marijuana, as Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) signed into law on Tuesday several pieces of legislation on the licensing, cultivation, and taxing of marijuana. The ballot initiative to legalize and regulate marijuana passed by voters last November immediately eliminated criminal punishment for possession by those 21-and-over of less than an ounce of pot and for growing up to six plants. But a legal system for dispensing cannabis will not take effect until producers and dispensaries can be licensed. And although Hickenlooper opposed the ballot initiative, his signature signals his willingness to implement the will of the voters. The laws passed Tuesday set up a state licensing authority that will set more specific rules for the marijuana industry, and enable the law to fulfill its stated purpose of regulating and taxing marijuana like alcohol to minimize criminal activity while protecting public health. Here are six of the ways it achieves that:

1. Marijuana dispensaries will have time, place, and number restrictions. The law authorizes local “time and place” restrictions on marijuana dispensaries and limits on the number of dispensaries, which will likely take the form of zoning laws. Statewide, it prohibits marijuana businesses from siting within 1,000 feet of schools, drug treatment facilities, or child care facilities, mirroring similar restrictions in many state marijuana laws. Also particularly noteworthy is that the law permits local jurisdictions to not only implement their own independent licensing schemes, but also to entirely ban retail marijuana establishments, a move that has been controversial and subject to court challenge in other states.

2. Colorado limits who may obtain a marijuana license. Among those prohibited from obtaining a license are all sorts of law enforcement officers, those with a criminal history that indicates “he or she is not of good moral character,” and anyone who plans to site a marijuana business in a food establishment.

3. Products will be subject to state oversight and testing. Licensed suppliers and retailers are required to provide a sample of their product to a state testing facility, which will likely verify the purity, potency, and safety of the products and eliminate the risk of black market purchases sometimes laced with other drugs.

4. Colorado will limit interstate purchases. Recognizing the significant concern of the Department of Justice that states with recreational marijuana laws not become suppliers for those around the country, Colorado law permits licensed marijuana retailers to  sell only ¼ of an ounce per transaction to nonresidents.

5. Retailers, producers, and consumers will pay a hefty tax. The law Hickenlooper signed would impose a 15 percent excise tax and a 10 percent sales tax. The first $40 million of this revenue will go toward school construction. But state voters will have to vote on whether to approve this tax scheme during the 2014 election. Additional state and local taxes on all products may result in a total tax rate in excess of 30 percent.

6. Colorado has finally implemented driving under the influence regulations for marijuana. After years of wrangling over a DUI law that would both protect drivers and ensure that those who use medical marijuana regularly would not be criminally punished, Colorado now has a law limiting THC levels to 5 nanograms while driving. Those charged, however, will have the opportunity to rebut a DUI allegation with evidence that their driving was in no way impaired.

Among the most controversial provisions in the set of laws is one to keep marijuana magazines behind the counter, like pornography. This first-of-its kind provision raises serious First Amendment flags by limiting marijuana speech in the same way as “indecent” sexually explicit material, and several publications are already queueing up legal challenges to this measure.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Iranâ„¢s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (R) meets with former Lebanese President Emile Lahoud in Tehran, May 29, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Portuguese demonstrators protest against austerity measures in Lisbon, May 25, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

An independent study has found that the UK military’s presence in Afghanistan’s Helmand province, where most British troops are based, has cost the country more than 37 billion pounds so far, local media reported.

The author of the damning study entitled Å“Investment in Blood” said failing, bloody campaign in Afghanistan has cost £2,000 per UK household or 15 million pounds a day.

Frank Ledwidge said the study also projects that the cost of the war will top 40 billion pounds by 2020.

The equivalent of £25,000 will have been spent for every one of Helmand’s 1.5 million inhabitants, more than most of them will earn in a lifetime, according to the study.

This is while that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has tried to undermine the estimates, claiming that true costs of conducting military operations in Afghanistan would be about 25 billion pounds.

By 2020, the author of the new book says, Britain will have spent at least £40 billion on its Afghan campaign, enough to recruit over 5,000 police officers or nurses and pay for them throughout their careers.

And the human cost of the war? More than 440 British troopers have been killed in Afghanistan since the UK joined a US-led occupation of the country began back in 2001.

Ledwidge, who has also been a civilian adviser to the British government in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, says Helmand is no more stable now than when thousands of British troops were deployed there in 2006. Opium production that fell under the Taliban, is increasing, fuelling corruption and the coffers of warlords.

“Rendering the Afghan armed forces capable of securing the province [Helmand] is regarded by many ordinary British soldiers as little short of ridiculous,” Ledwidge writes.

Though British and other foreign troops were sent to Afghanistan to stop al-Qaeda posing a threat to Britain’s national security, “of all the thousands of civilians and combatants, not a single Qaeda operative or ‘international terrorist’ who could conceivably have threatened the United Kingdom is recorded as having been killed by NATO troops in Helmand,” Ledwidge writes.

The real beneficiaries of the war, he suggests, are development consultants, Afghan drug lords, and international arms companies. Much of British aid to Afghanistan is spent on consultancy fees rather than those Afghans who need it most.

MOL/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranâ„¢s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (R) meets with former Lebanese President Emile Lahoud in Tehran, May 29, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Portuguese demonstrators protest against austerity measures in Lisbon, May 25, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

An independent study has found that the UK military’s presence in Afghanistan’s Helmand province, where most British troops are based, has cost the country more than 37 billion pounds so far, local media reported.

The author of the damning study entitled Å“Investment in Blood” said failing, bloody campaign in Afghanistan has cost £2,000 per UK household or 15 million pounds a day.

Frank Ledwidge said the study also projects that the cost of the war will top 40 billion pounds by 2020.

The equivalent of £25,000 will have been spent for every one of Helmand’s 1.5 million inhabitants, more than most of them will earn in a lifetime, according to the study.

This is while that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has tried to undermine the estimates, claiming that true costs of conducting military operations in Afghanistan would be about 25 billion pounds.

By 2020, the author of the new book says, Britain will have spent at least £40 billion on its Afghan campaign, enough to recruit over 5,000 police officers or nurses and pay for them throughout their careers.

And the human cost of the war? More than 440 British troopers have been killed in Afghanistan since the UK joined a US-led occupation of the country began back in 2001.

Ledwidge, who has also been a civilian adviser to the British government in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, says Helmand is no more stable now than when thousands of British troops were deployed there in 2006. Opium production that fell under the Taliban, is increasing, fuelling corruption and the coffers of warlords.

“Rendering the Afghan armed forces capable of securing the province [Helmand] is regarded by many ordinary British soldiers as little short of ridiculous,” Ledwidge writes.

Though British and other foreign troops were sent to Afghanistan to stop al-Qaeda posing a threat to Britain’s national security, “of all the thousands of civilians and combatants, not a single Qaeda operative or ‘international terrorist’ who could conceivably have threatened the United Kingdom is recorded as having been killed by NATO troops in Helmand,” Ledwidge writes.

The real beneficiaries of the war, he suggests, are development consultants, Afghan drug lords, and international arms companies. Much of British aid to Afghanistan is spent on consultancy fees rather than those Afghans who need it most.

MOL/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

On Thursday analysts expect Russian floors to open with moderate gains as buybacks of the biggest Wednesday losers occur. However with negative international sentiment and stalled oil prices, the market is likely to slip later in the day.

On Wednesday the Russian
floors slumped to 1360 points area. The MICEX ended the day at
1361.43, losing 2.6 percent, while the RTS closed at 1360.06
short of 2.8 percent. Equities of Russia’s major natural gas
company Gazprom slipped to a four-year-low, setting a new
anti-record, while the shares of Russia’s biggest bank — Sberbank
— fell lower than 100 rubles ($3) per share.

European stock markets also retreated on Wednesday. Investors’
sentiment was affected by global news, which pointed to weak
growth and rising bond yields. 

The losses came after the Organization of Economic Cooperation
and Development and the IMF lowered their global growth
forecasts. The International Monetary Fund cut its 2013 growth
outlook for China to “around 7.75 percent”, against previous
estimates of 8.0 percent in the world’s second-biggest economy
this year.

Meanwhile the OECD cut its growth forecast for the world’s
leading economies, except Japan. The organization however noted
that growth should pick up later this year. Unemployment in
Germany increased in seasonally adjusted terms in May, but the
labor market is continuing to hold up relatively well to the
eurozone debt crisis, official data showed on Wednesday. 

On growing concerns with global growth, shares in most European
markets fell. London’s FTSE 100 index of leading companies lost
1.99 percent to 6,627.17 points. In Frankfurt the DAX 30 lost 1.7
percent to close at 8,336.58 points, and in Paris the CAC 40
dropped 1.89 percent to 3,974.12 points. Stocks in Milan dropped
1.61 percent, while Madrid slid 0.82 percent.

Concerns with global economic growth and ongoing uncertainty of
the US Federal Reserve’s plans for unwinding its bond-buying
program sent the US stocks downwards Wednesday. 

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 0.68 percent to close at
15,304.64. The broad-based S&P 500 slid 0.7 percent ending at
1,648.50. The NASDAQ Composite dropped 0.61 percent to 3,467.52.

On Thursday investors will be eyeing US’ revised data on first
quarter economic growth, in addition to the weekly report on
initial jobless claims and data on home sales.

Most Asian markets fell Wednesday on growing concerns that the
Fed will be withdrawing its aggressive stimulus program soon.
Japan’s Nikkei 225 index fell 2.8 percent to 13,932.92. Hong
Kong’s Hang Seng lost 0.2 percent to 22,518.85. Australia’s
S&P/ASX 200 dropped 1.5 percent to 4,900.90. Benchmarks in
Singapore, Taiwan, Indonesia, and the Philippines also fell.
South Korea’s Kospi rose adding 0.2 percent to 2,005.99.

Already on Friday Japan is expected to release official data on
household spending and inflation as well as preliminary data on
industrial production, a leading economic indicator.

Oil prices have stalled, showing little movement this week. Brent
is currently trading 0.2 percent higher at $102.6, while WTI is
0.04 percent lower trading at $93.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Letters mailed to New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg tested positive for the poison ricin, officials said Wednesday. Multiple sources reported that one of the letter contained references to the national gun control debate.

Investigators told the New York Times they believe both letters
were sent by the same person. The second letter was addressed to
the Washington building that hosts Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a
gun control lobby group Bloomberg helps lead.

“The writer, in letters, threatened Mayor Bloomberg, with
references to the debate on gun laws,” Pual J. Brown, the
chief spokesman for the New York Police Department, told
reporters Wednesday.

Both letters were intercepted before reaching Bloomberg and no
reports of illness have surfaced. Members of the police
department’s Emergency Service Unit who found the letter at a New
York mail facility were examined as a precaution. Both envelopes
were postmarked in Louisiana, according to CBS News.

The toxin can be fatal if ingested. 

The Joint Terrorism Task Force and the police department’s
Intelligence Division are investigating the situation.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Three young women from the women’s rights group Femen were detained as they staged a topless protest in the Tunisian capital of Tunis — their first public stunt in the Arab world.

The spectacle culminated in scuffles outside the capital’s main
courthouse, as the group’s one German and two French female
members stood by the railings shouting the slogan “Free
Amina,” in reference to the young Tunisian woman who was
earlier arrested and is hours away from being tried for
protesting the policies of hardline Islamists.

Wearing only skimpy denim shorts, their bodies bearing the
inscriptions “Brest Feed Revolution” and “Femen
Extremist”, the ladies were quickly snatched up by
authorities and taken inside the courthouse, as journalists stood
by, observing the scene.  

Tunisia, being a socially conservative country, saw a number of
witnesses, including lawyers, try to cover up the young women and
attack some of the journalists, claiming they were giving the
activists a platform for their antics. Once inside the building,
the lawyers followed the police and the women, singing the
country’s national anthem and shouting “Get out!” — the
words often heard during Tunisia’s own Arab Spring of January
2011.

Six of the journalists (among them one from Reuters and another
from France’s Canal+) were also detained, but let go after giving
statements about the event.

“An inquiry has been opened and they will be placed under
arrest and brought to trial,” said the justice ministry’s
spokesman to AFP, also noting that indecency in Tunisia is
punishable by six months in prison, adding that the female
activists will not escape trial.

Martine Gambard-Trebucien, the French consul in Tunisia, has
testified to the women’s condition, telling the reporters they
were “fine.”

“It is the first action that we have taken in the Arab
world… I prepared this international team in Paris and they
were sent yesterday to Tunis,” said Femen leader Inna
Shevchenko to AFP in a phone conversation. “These countries
and these totalitarian regimes prey on women. We don’t take any
notice of this kind,” she concluded.

Despite this being the first show of such action in the Arab
world, some of the group’s most recent run-ins with police also
included the Turkish capital, Istanbul.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and German Chancellor Angela
Merkel also could not avoid getting an eyeful of bare-breasted protest at the Hannover Messe
technology show in April of this year, whereupon the president
later joyfully remarked to journalists, “We knew it was
coming. You should thank the Ukrainian girls for helping you
promote the fair.”

This article originally appeared on: RT

The American soldier behind one of the worst atrocities during the war in Afghanistan, which resulted in the deaths of 16 villagers during a nighttime rampage, has agreed to plead guilty in a deal designed to avoid the death penalty.

Staff Sgt. Robert Bales was charged with 16 counts of
premeditated murder and six counts of attempted murder for an
attack on two villages in Kandahar Province in March of 2012.
Among the victims were nine children.

John Henry Browne, an attorney representing Bales, announced on
Wednesday that his client had agreed to plead guilty in order to
avoid a death sentence. According to the AP, the sentencing phase
of the trail is currently set for September, and assuming that
the judge overseeing the trial as well as the commanding general
of the base where he is being held approve the plea deal, Bales
would then face life in prison.

“The judge will be asking
questions of Sgt. Bales about what he did, what he remembers and
his state of mind,” Browne said.

“The deal that has been worked
out … is they take the death penalty off the table, and he
pleads as charged, pretty much,” he added.

The March 2012 incident, during which Bales slipped away from his
southern Afghanistan posting at Camp Belambay armed with an M-4
rifle outfitted with a grenade launcher, incited angry protests
so serious that the US temporarily halted combat operations.

Bales was serving in his fourth combat zone, and although he had
allegedly been drinking, snorting Valium and taking steroids just
before the attack his defense team determined that he would not
be able to plead insanity following a psychiatric evaluation.

Though Army prosecutors initially sought the death penalty
against Bales, the ongoing controversy over the toll that
back-to-back deployments was taking on army personnel was thought
to make that outcome unlikely. As the AP also reports, the
American military justice system has not executed anyone since
1961.

Relatives of the massacre victims interviewed in April were
incensed at the notion that Bales might avoid a death sentence.

“For this one thing, we would
kill 100 American soldiers,” said Mohammed Wazir to the
AP, who had 11 family members killed in the raid, including his
mother and 2-year-old daughter.

“A prison sentence doesn’t mean
anything,” said Said Jan, whose wife and three other
relatives were murdered.

“I know we have no power now.
But I will become stronger, and if he does not hang, I will have
my revenge,” he told the AP.

An Army spokeswoman at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, where Bales is
currently being held, did not return a call seeking comment
Wednesday following news of the potential plea deal.

One of Bale’s lawyers, Emma Scanlan, said via email that he would
plead guilty to premeditated murder charges, and will then stand
before a military jury to determine whether his life term in
prison might include the possibility of parole, assuming the deal
is approved.

Browne, who previously indicated Bales remembered little from the
night of the massacre, has indicated that his client is prepared
to provide a full account of the incident before the judge
determines whether to accept the new plea deal.

This article originally appeared on: RT

An Illinois school board has decided to discipline a high school teacher who it says “mischaracterized” the intentions of administrators by advising students of their Constitutional rights before surveying students in his class.

School administrators in Batavia, Illinois will punish social
studies teacher John Dryden with a letter of remedy, which
outlines certain probationary actions he must compete or else
face more consequences. Only one board member, according to the
Chicago Daily Herald, voted not to punish Dryden, citing only his
“feelings” against doing so. 

Members of the Batavia community and social media users
previously rallied around Dryden, who advised three of his
classes that the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution
guarantees them the right to avoid self-incrimination before they
took a survey regarding drug and alcohol use, as well as their
emotional tendencies. Every survey was marked with an individual
student’s name and was intended, the school says, for review by
counselors and psychologists who were trying to screen students
that may need therapy or extra help. 

Parents were uncomfortable with the school’s decision to share
the results of the survey with the private corporation that sold
the questionnaires. 

Dryden previously admitted it was “dumb luck” he was able
to review the questionnaires before passing them out, and that he
would have consulted administrators if given more time. 

“Somebody needs to remind them they have the ability not to
incriminate themselves,” Dryden said, adding that the real
issue was not his conduct but the aims of the questions. “I
have asked people to talk about the survey. I think I am a
sideshow. I’m not a martyr.” 

Superintendent Jack Barshinger told reporters there was no Fifth
Amendment issue at stake because once students’ names were on the
forms the documents became subject to student records and,
consequently, student privacy laws. An admission of underage alcohol or drug
use is not a punishable offense, Barshinger continued, saying
police would only arrest a student if they are harming other
students.

School board president Cathy
Dremel, after a closed-door meeting where Dryden and several
supporters spoke, said the social studies teacher
“mischaracterized” the intention of the survey, which was
not to invade students’ privacy but to determine how the school
could focus attention on specific students. 

“The board will not support
any employees giving students false impressions about those who
come here every day” to work in the best interest of the
students, Dremel told the Chicago Daily Herald. 

At least some parents – some
of which signed the petition to support Dryden, which attracted
more than 4,000 signatures – stood by their previous assertion
that Dryden was right to remind the students of their
Constitutional rights. 

“I was not made aware a
survey was going to be issued to my son, and basically was not
given any opportunity to protect his privacy rights,” said
one mom, who also works at Batavia High School. But Dryden
was joined in his stance that the entire conversation should have
been shifted from himself to the goals of the survey, which he
previously said was “rushed and wasn’t
vetted.” 

Scott Bayer, a wrestling coach
at the school who also teaches social studies, said when the
issue surfaces again both sides need to communicate better, with
each other and the community. 

“We as teachers were put in
a situation where we were forced to react,” he said.
“Things were not communicated very well, students were
apprehensive and had questions, and we couldn’t give
answers.”

This article originally appeared on: RT

Ibragim Todashev, who was killed during an FBI interview last week, was unarmed when he was fatally shot, according to law enforcement officials. Civil rights activists are now calling for independent investigation of the death.

Todashev, who knew Boston Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan
Tsarnaev, had neither gun nor knife when he was shot by the FBI,
two law enforcement officials, who did not disclose their names,
told the Washington Post on Wednesday.

Before that, investigators offered conflicting accounts of what
happened in Todashev’s final minutes. One federal agent
claimed Todashev was shot after trying to grab an agent’s
sidearm. A second agent claimed Todashev brandished a knife. A
Bureau statement issued on the day of the incident said only that
an “individual” being interviewed was killed when a “violent
confrontation was initiated by the individual.”

Investigators now say that the matter will be the subject of a
probe that is expected to last for several months.

“The FBI takes very seriously any shooting incidents involving
our agents and as such we have an effective, time-tested process
for addressing them internally,” FBI spokesman Paul Bresson
said in a statement Wednesday.

“The review process is thorough and objective and conducted as
expeditiously as possible under the circumstances.”

Meanwhile a Florida office of the Council on American-Islamic
Relations (CAIR), a civil rights group, thinks that the efforts
by the FBI itself are not enough. The organization is calling on
the Department of Justice to step in and review the circumstances
under which Todashev was shot. 

“Our call for an independent investigation of this disturbing
incident is not just about the victim and his family, but is also
about constitutional rights and the rule of law,” said
CAIR-Tampa Executive Director Hassan Shibly.

Todashev associated with Tamerlan Tsarnaev within mixed martial
arts and boxing circles in the Boston area before he moved from
Cambridge, Massachusetts, to Orlando, Florida. FBI officials
maintained he was never a suspect in the Boston Marathon bombing.

Law enforcement officials, speaking anonymously, claimed Todashev
implicated himself and Tsarnaev in connection with a triple
murder in Waltham, Massachusetts, on September 11, 2011. On
September 12, police found three dead men in a well-kept rental
home. Their throats had reportedly been slit and their bodies
covered in marijuana.

The spokeswoman for Middlesex County’s district attorney’s office
only told the Post that the investigation was ongoing, refusing
to speculate as to whether Todashev or Tsarnaev were suspects.
Sources close to the investigation said Todashev was friends with
one of the victims.

This article originally appeared on: RT

This article originally appeared on: RT

Israel will reportedly build more than 1,000 new homes in East Jerusalem as part of its ongoing ethnic cleansing program in the occupied territories. It comes amid the latest complaints by Palestinians that their homes have been illegally bulldozed.

Construction contracts for 300 homes in the northeastern
settlement of Ramot were signed, and another 797 land plots in
the much larger settlement of Gilo in Jerusalem were listed for
sale. Danny Seidemann, a director of the Jerusalem settlement
watchdog group Terrestrial Jerusalem, told AFP that the building
was quietly ordered last year by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu. 

The housing project is certain
to draw the ire of the international community, which cites
international law nullifying Israel’s domain over the region,
which the country annexed after the 1967 Six-Day
war. Netanyahu has reportedly pushed the project under the
carpet temporarily so as not to impact US Secretary of State John
Kerry’s efforts to bridge peace talks between Israel and
Palestine. 

The news of the land purchases
is said to have been leaked by Israeli Housing and Construction
Minister Uri Ariel in an effort to pressure the prime
minister. 

“This does not mean that
the show is over, it does mean that Netanyahu’s minister of
construction is trying to achieve that,” Seidermann told the
AFP. “There is a de facto freeze at the moment, there have
been no new units since the elections. This is an attempt to
force Netanyahu’s hand.” 

The leak coincides with news
that Israeli forces demolished two Palestinian homes in Beit
Hanina, in East Jerusalem. The destruction was closed off to
media and pedestrians but Badran al-Salameh, who owns the homes,
told the Palestinian Ma’an News Agency he was not given prior
notice of the demolition. 

“My son’s wife and his two
kids were the only ones inside the house,” he said. “I
tried to reach my home when I heard from neighbors but Israeli
officers banned me. I wanted to take out my wife’s gold and money
from one of the drawers.” 

The incident in question came
as a result of the Salameh family reportedly lacking Israeli
building permits, a justification Tel Aviv has used to
forecefully displace over 1,630 non-Jewish families since
1967. 

Palestinian leaders have
demanded a halt to Israeli settlement construction before the
continuation of so-called peace talks, which have remained
stagnant for nearly three years. Despite Kerry’s four trips to
the region since being made Secretary of State, those close to
the situation say the instability is unlikely to be
resolved. 

“Kerry is still unable to
put pressure on the Israeli government to meet its obligations
under the terms of the peace process,” Palestinian negotiator
Nabil Sha’ath told the Jerusalem Post Wednesday. “This is not
because Kerry does not want but because he is unable to exert
pressure on Israel. Israel is responsible for obstructing the
peace process.”

This article originally appeared on: RT

Though the US dollar continues to reign as the foreign reserve currency of choice, a new International Monetary Fund analysis shows that the currency has slumped to a 15-year low, heightening concerns that it may lose that status.

While the dollar currently constitutes 62 per cent of the $6
trillion in foreign holdings by the world’s central banks, when a
historical view is taken into account, Dick Bove, vice president
of equity research at Rafferty Capital Markets says the dollar’s
actual percentage of total money supply worldwide has gone from
90 per cent in 1952 to about 15 per cent today.

Bove, like many other analysts, believes that the rise of the
Chinese currency, the yuan, is at the expense of the US dollar’s
dominance as a safe haven.

“Generally speaking, it is not
believed by the vast majority that the American dollar will be
overthrown,” says Dick Bove.

“But it will be, and this
defrocking may occur in as short a period as five to 10
years,” he tells CNBC.

The repercussions of the dollar’s decline as the foreign currency
holding of choice would be more than a symbolic hit to America’s
economic standing. With a budget deficit exceeding $1 trillion
per year, if the dollar were to decline against other currencies
the US would find itself in the uncomfortable position of having
to pay back this debt.

Bove goes further, arguing that the deadlock in Congress over the
federal budget, and the now-mandatory cuts designated by the
sequestration, are eroding confidence in America’s fiscal state.

“The ratings agencies are
already arguing that the government’s debt may be too highly
rated. Plus, the United States Congress, in both its houses, as
well as the president are demonstrating a total lack of fiscal
credibility,” says Bove.

Political wrangling over raising the federal debt ceiling was
widely viewed as the primary reason that the US debt’s rating was
downgraded in 2011. At the time, the rating agency Standard &
Poor’s had issued a warning that progress towards balancing the
country’s budget was required for a return to a “stable” outlook.
In that same year Moody’s and Fitch Ratings both downgraded as
well.

According to the Wall Street Journal, New Zealand and China are
currently in talks to make their respective currencies directly
convertible, eliminating the need to convert either country’s
currency into dollars when making or receiving payments.

Though officials told the WSJ that the talks were in the
“very early stages,”
such a plan is likely to sound alarm bells for anyone worried
over the dominance of the US dollar.

“There is no time frame for
concluding an agreement,” said a spokeswoman for New
Zealand’s prime minister to the WSJ.

“We are aware it took Australia
around 12 months to achieve its recent agreement with
China,” she added.

If China is indeed embarking on a project to establish its
currency as more market-oriented, then its swelling trade with
nearby countries such as New Zealand and Australia, which agreed
last month to direct convertibility with the yuan, could well
continue to undermine the greenback.

Beyond simply removing the American currency from trade, direct
convertibility can also make Chinese government bonds more
attractive as foreign-exchange assets. Australia, for one, says
it plans to invest up to 5% of its total foreign-currency
reserves to Chinese government bonds, while New Zealand’s Reserve
Bank has thus far not made any announcements either way.

“The No. 1 security issue we
have as a nation is the preservation of the US dollar as the
world’s reserve currency,” said Michael Pento, president
of Pento Portfolio Strategies to CNBC.

“It’s a thousand times more
important than a nuclear bomb being tested by North Korea. It’s a
thousand times more important that we keep the dollar as the
world’s reserve currency, and yet we are doing everything to
abuse that status,” he added.

This article originally appeared on: RT

With 90 Afghan prisoners being held without charge for a year, the UK’s Afghan jail is being compared to Guantanamo by some, amid political bickering between the two countries and outrage from the detainees’ lawyers, demanding answers.

International Affairs Commentator Jonathan Steele, from Britain’s
Guardian newspaper told RT that while Britain’s concern for the
prisoners’ human rights is understandable, the country’s
treatment of the Afghan conflict as a whole is really to blame.
Twelve years after the invasion, the atmosphere of negligence and
a failure to instill any adequate conditions — political or
otherwise — is causing all manner of problems.

RT: MP Barry Gardner has said the detainees have been
held for 14 months because of paperwork. Is that true?

Jonathan Steele: It’s a problem because they don’t want to hand
them over to the Afghans because it’s well known that in Afghan
detention facilities — whether they’re run by the Afghan police
or by the intelligence agencies — people are tortured:
electrocuted, hung upside-down, blindfolded and so on. And
Britain doesn’t want to collude with that. That’s a real issue.
They shouldn’t be held, on the other hand, they shouldn’t be
transferred. So, the only option is to release them, which is
what the lawyers are demanding. But the Afghan authorities and
the British think that there’s some reason to believe that these
are people, who are involved in insurgency and they don’t want to
put them back on the battlefield, as they say.

RT: So what spurred that move right now? 
 

 

JS: Well, the lawyers for the detainees. I mean there have
been previous cases before and the British High Court has gone
the other way. They’ve argued that prisoners shouldn’t be handed
over to the Afghan authorities because of the risk of torture.
Now were getting a court case where the demand is that they
should be released by the British, but not handed over to the
Afghan authorities.  

RT: We’ve heard lawyers compare Camp Bastion to
Guantanamo. Why do you think the two are fundamentally
different?

JS: I think that there are two differences, actually. In
the case of Guantanamo they should be released, the people in
Guantanamo, but nobody really wants to take them — except in the
case of Yemen that’s been agreed to about 20 or 30 people, who
are Yemenites. But nobody else wants to take these people back.
In this case, the Afghan government wants to take these people
back. They say it’s a question of sovereignty; we should be
holding detainees instead of foreign troops to be holding our own
citizens in prisons and detention facilities. That’s one
difference.

The other difference is that we haven’t yet had credible
allegations that the British are using torture in Afghanistan
themselves. We know that they were using it in Iraq. During the
Iraq war there’s been plenty of cases of that, but nothing yet
credible on Afghanistan whereas it’s the Afghans, who are using
torturing. So there’s another big difference, I think. The
one similarity is the lack of access to lawyers, the lack of
information, the indefinite detention. Whatever the conditions
are like, even if they’re not being tortured by the British, they
are being held in total limbo, with no access to lawyers, family
or anybody.  

 

RT: How justifiable is that?

JS: It’s not justifiable at all and they ought to be
charged or released because under the rules of engagement of the
British in Afghanistan — after 96 hours people have to released
or charged.

RT: British MPs learned about the number of detainees
from the news. Why weren’t they kept in the loop?

JS: I think that’s probably not correct. Because as I said
there’s been a big high Court case here about three years ago on
the same issue. The British tried to get assurances from the
Afghan authorities that there wouldn’t be torture; they would
have access to the Afghan prisons to check on all this. Then the
Afghans rejected British efforts to go to the prisons and etc.
So, it has been known about. There have been previous court
cases. It may not have been known exactly how many people were
being held and exactly, in which place in Afghanistan they were
being held.

RT: Just to clarify again — why do you think that many
of these prisoners were held without legal representation?

JS: I don’t know. I think that it’s a disgrace. And it’s
also very bad that the United Nations, which has been able to
probe in all the Afghan police stations and detention facilities
and has issued various reports on the mishandling of detainees —
the UN does not have access to British, or indeed American
detention facilities. The only outsiders who do are the Red
Cross. And as you know, they have a policy of not talking
publicly about individual cases. So whatever they’ve found,
they’ve kept to themselves…well, they’ve discussed it with the
British government, but not with the wider public.

RT: Prime Minister David Cameron has hailed the
Afghanistan mission a big success. How does that fit in with what
we are hearing now about Camp Bastion being used now as a
detention facility?

JS: It obviously isn’t a success, because Britain’s been
involved for 12 years in Afghanistan since the overthrow of the
Taliban, and one of the pretexts they gave for being there was
“We’re trying to modernize Afghanistan, bring it into the 21st
century: to improve governance, improve health, education, the
police, the prison arrangements. And after 12 years there’s still
widespread torture. It’s a disgrace. The United Nations
interviewed 635 detainees and 326 of them — that’s more than half
— say they have been tortured by the Afghan authorities. If after
12 years you’ve been trying to bring Afghanistan up to better
standards, they’ve clearly failed, if torture’s so widespread.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

This article originally appeared on: RT

On Thursday analysts expect Russian floors to open with moderate gains as buybacks of the biggest Wednesday losers occur. However with negative international sentiment and stalled oil prices, the market is likely to slip later in the day.

On Wednesday the Russian
floors slumped to 1360 points area. The MICEX ended the day at
1361.43, losing 2.6 percent, while the RTS closed at 1360.06
short of 2.8 percent. Equities of Russia’s major natural gas
company Gazprom slipped to a four-year-low, setting a new
anti-record, while the shares of Russia’s biggest bank — Sberbank
— fell lower than 100 rubles ($3) per share.

European stock markets also retreated on Wednesday. Investors’
sentiment was affected by global news, which pointed to weak
growth and rising bond yields. 

The losses came after the Organization of Economic Cooperation
and Development and the IMF lowered their global growth
forecasts. The International Monetary Fund cut its 2013 growth
outlook for China to “around 7.75 percent”, against previous
estimates of 8.0 percent in the world’s second-biggest economy
this year.

Meanwhile the OECD cut its growth forecast for the world’s
leading economies, except Japan. The organization however noted
that growth should pick up later this year. Unemployment in
Germany increased in seasonally adjusted terms in May, but the
labor market is continuing to hold up relatively well to the
eurozone debt crisis, official data showed on Wednesday. 

On growing concerns with global growth, shares in most European
markets fell. London’s FTSE 100 index of leading companies lost
1.99 percent to 6,627.17 points. In Frankfurt the DAX 30 lost 1.7
percent to close at 8,336.58 points, and in Paris the CAC 40
dropped 1.89 percent to 3,974.12 points. Stocks in Milan dropped
1.61 percent, while Madrid slid 0.82 percent.

Concerns with global economic growth and ongoing uncertainty of
the US Federal Reserve’s plans for unwinding its bond-buying
program sent the US stocks downwards Wednesday. 

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 0.68 percent to close at
15,304.64. The broad-based S&P 500 slid 0.7 percent ending at
1,648.50. The NASDAQ Composite dropped 0.61 percent to 3,467.52.

On Thursday investors will be eyeing US’ revised data on first
quarter economic growth, in addition to the weekly report on
initial jobless claims and data on home sales.

Most Asian markets fell Wednesday on growing concerns that the
Fed will be withdrawing its aggressive stimulus program soon.
Japan’s Nikkei 225 index fell 2.8 percent to 13,932.92. Hong
Kong’s Hang Seng lost 0.2 percent to 22,518.85. Australia’s
S&P/ASX 200 dropped 1.5 percent to 4,900.90. Benchmarks in
Singapore, Taiwan, Indonesia, and the Philippines also fell.
South Korea’s Kospi rose adding 0.2 percent to 2,005.99.

Already on Friday Japan is expected to release official data on
household spending and inflation as well as preliminary data on
industrial production, a leading economic indicator.

Oil prices have stalled, showing little movement this week. Brent
is currently trading 0.2 percent higher at $102.6, while WTI is
0.04 percent lower trading at $93.

This article originally appeared on: RT

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Russia says it may reconsider its commitments to restrictions on the delivery of arms to the Syrian government, following a recent decision by the European Union to end an arms embargo on the militants in Syria.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Lebanese sources have quoted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as saying that Damascus has received the first shipment of S-300 missiles from Russia.

President Assad also said that the second shipment of Russian S-300 missiles will be delivered to his country soon, Lebanon’s Al-Manar TV reports.

SZH/HJL

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Russia says it may reconsider its commitments to restrictions on the delivery of arms to the Syrian government, following a recent decision by the European Union to end an arms embargo on the militants in Syria.

On Wednesday, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Moscow was deeply disappointed by the EU decision.

Å“Every decision has two sides. If one side lifts restrictions, the other may consider itself free from observing earlier commitments,” Shoigu stated at a news conference in Finland.

On May 27, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said the EU foreign ministers had reached an agreement to lift the arms embargo on the militants in Syria, while maintaining other sanctions on the Syrian government.

Russia said on May 28 that it would go ahead with the delivery of S-300 missile systems to the Syrian government, in a bid aimed at deterring foreign intervention in Syria.

Earlier this month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had traveled to Russia in an attempt to dissuade Moscow from delivering the surface-to-air missiles to Syria.

However, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Moscow would not cancel the deal despite strong Western and Israeli opposition.

Syria has been gripped by turmoil since March 2011 and the foreign-sponsored militancy has taken its toll on the lives of many people including large numbers of Syrian soldiers and security personnel.

On Wednesday, the UN Human Rights Council approved a resolution on Syria – pushed through by the United States, Turkey and Qatar – that calls for an investigation into alleged abuses by Syrian government forces.

Russia censured the Å“odious” and Å“unilateral” resolution.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, Å“To my huge astonishment, we have learnt that apart from the co-authors of this resolution… a US delegation is most actively promoting this completely unwholesome idea.”

SZH/HSN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Several people have been killed and injured in a recent blast in Baghdad’s Benook neighborhood, amid the recent upsurge in terrorist attacks across Iraq.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Customer unhappiness with financial firms in the UK has reached a record high.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Bosnian Croat Jadranko Prlic (R) looks at his watch prior to a trial session at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague, the Netherlands, May 29, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

With 90 Afghan prisoners being held without charge for a year, the UK’s Afghan jail is being compared to Guantanamo by some, amid political bickering between the two countries and outrage from the detainees’ lawyers, demanding answers.

International Affairs Commentator Jonathan Steele, from Britain’s
Guardian newspaper told RT that while Britain’s concern for the
prisoners’ human rights is understandable, the country’s
treatment of the Afghan conflict as a whole is really to blame.
Twelve years after the invasion, the atmosphere of negligence and
a failure to instill any adequate conditions — political or
otherwise — is causing all manner of problems.

RT: MP Barry Gardner has said the detainees have been
held for 14 months because of paperwork. Is that true?

Jonathan Steele: It’s a problem because they don’t want to hand
them over to the Afghans because it’s well known that in Afghan
detention facilities — whether they’re run by the Afghan police
or by the intelligence agencies — people are tortured:
electrocuted, hung upside-down, blindfolded and so on. And
Britain doesn’t want to collude with that. That’s a real issue.
They shouldn’t be held, on the other hand, they shouldn’t be
transferred. So, the only option is to release them, which is
what the lawyers are demanding. But the Afghan authorities and
the British think that there’s some reason to believe that these
are people, who are involved in insurgency and they don’t want to
put them back on the battlefield, as they say.

RT: So what spurred that move right now? 
 

 

JS: Well, the lawyers for the detainees. I mean there have
been previous cases before and the British High Court has gone
the other way. They’ve argued that prisoners shouldn’t be handed
over to the Afghan authorities because of the risk of torture.
Now were getting a court case where the demand is that they
should be released by the British, but not handed over to the
Afghan authorities.  

RT: We’ve heard lawyers compare Camp Bastion to
Guantanamo. Why do you think the two are fundamentally
different?

JS: I think that there are two differences, actually. In
the case of Guantanamo they should be released, the people in
Guantanamo, but nobody really wants to take them — except in the
case of Yemen that’s been agreed to about 20 or 30 people, who
are Yemenites. But nobody else wants to take these people back.
In this case, the Afghan government wants to take these people
back. They say it’s a question of sovereignty; we should be
holding detainees instead of foreign troops to be holding our own
citizens in prisons and detention facilities. That’s one
difference.

The other difference is that we haven’t yet had credible
allegations that the British are using torture in Afghanistan
themselves. We know that they were using it in Iraq. During the
Iraq war there’s been plenty of cases of that, but nothing yet
credible on Afghanistan whereas it’s the Afghans, who are using
torturing. So there’s another big difference, I think. The
one similarity is the lack of access to lawyers, the lack of
information, the indefinite detention. Whatever the conditions
are like, even if they’re not being tortured by the British, they
are being held in total limbo, with no access to lawyers, family
or anybody.  

 

RT: How justifiable is that?

JS: It’s not justifiable at all and they ought to be
charged or released because under the rules of engagement of the
British in Afghanistan — after 96 hours people have to released
or charged.

RT: British MPs learned about the number of detainees
from the news. Why weren’t they kept in the loop?

JS: I think that’s probably not correct. Because as I said
there’s been a big high Court case here about three years ago on
the same issue. The British tried to get assurances from the
Afghan authorities that there wouldn’t be torture; they would
have access to the Afghan prisons to check on all this. Then the
Afghans rejected British efforts to go to the prisons and etc.
So, it has been known about. There have been previous court
cases. It may not have been known exactly how many people were
being held and exactly, in which place in Afghanistan they were
being held.

RT: Just to clarify again — why do you think that many
of these prisoners were held without legal representation?

JS: I don’t know. I think that it’s a disgrace. And it’s
also very bad that the United Nations, which has been able to
probe in all the Afghan police stations and detention facilities
and has issued various reports on the mishandling of detainees —
the UN does not have access to British, or indeed American
detention facilities. The only outsiders who do are the Red
Cross. And as you know, they have a policy of not talking
publicly about individual cases. So whatever they’ve found,
they’ve kept to themselves…well, they’ve discussed it with the
British government, but not with the wider public.

RT: Prime Minister David Cameron has hailed the
Afghanistan mission a big success. How does that fit in with what
we are hearing now about Camp Bastion being used now as a
detention facility?

JS: It obviously isn’t a success, because Britain’s been
involved for 12 years in Afghanistan since the overthrow of the
Taliban, and one of the pretexts they gave for being there was
“We’re trying to modernize Afghanistan, bring it into the 21st
century: to improve governance, improve health, education, the
police, the prison arrangements. And after 12 years there’s still
widespread torture. It’s a disgrace. The United Nations
interviewed 635 detainees and 326 of them — that’s more than half
— say they have been tortured by the Afghan authorities. If after
12 years you’ve been trying to bring Afghanistan up to better
standards, they’ve clearly failed, if torture’s so widespread.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

This article originally appeared on: RT

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});