Tuesday, January 31, 2017

We Owe Trump!

Discrimination, bans, and hostilities have been the hallmark of US government. This does not justify what Trump is doing at all. But it is also worth noting that Obama ended the "Muslim registry" on December 22, 2016! It started with George W. Bush. My point being that US policy is continuous whether the occupant of the White House is white, black, or orange. its the implementation of these horrific policies that make the difference. In a sense, the world owes Donald Trump for removing the mask and showing America for what it really is. Those who are 'with it' are the devil's disciples.

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Facebook Blocks RT

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a guarantee of freedom of expression: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. This right includes freedom to hold opinions, without interference, and to seek, receive and impact information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

However, in the same Article, there are provisions for restrictions:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

Facebook is violating International Law.  Given that it is collaborating with governments (Israel, US) how will this law apply to it?  We know from September 2016 that "Facebook Is Collaborating With the Israeli Government to Determine What Should Be Censored."

As importantly, what do Trump fans who think that he will have good relations with Russia react to  FB/Israel collaborate on censorship and Trump is in Israel's pocket?

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Views of Trump

RT interviews John Pilger and the future of US Russian relations.   Pinger is one person I admire greatly. But my admiration does not mean I never question or challenge. So I am puzzled that even an intellectual like him should make a few points that struck me as odd. Criticizing Obama (and rightly so) he states that Obama said he would reduce the nukes but has spent the most increasing them. Why would he not think that Trump would follow the same path (he has already talked about it). Why would anyone think that a US President is autonomous, that he makes foreign policy decision when in the same breath Pilger talks about the Establishment wanting Clinton? How can one ignore the fact that US national interests take a back seat to Israel and yet ignore the Trump-Netanuyahu-Evangelical connection? In fact, it has been very prominent (and infamous) American Jews that had devised plans to dominate Euroasia, to prevent a Russian rise, etc. So how this be reconciled with Trump's unconditional support and his son-in-law in the White House? How can we embrace Trump when he seems lenient toward Russia but ignore his attack on China, Moslems, Latins, etc.
How did the same media that wanted Clinton and managed to find an ancient tape about Trump and his remarks about grabbing women ..... but failed to show Trump's video promoting Netanyahu for president in 2013 see link ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm5Je73bYOY . How did this same media fail to mention that Trump had questioned 911 and thought there must have been demolition see  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt-ldMj9y9w
I am just dumbfounded as to why the "hostile" media would not reveal any of these important facts. 
All I can think is that he will be a continuation. We are given to think that elections have always been fair in the US - but they are rigged, and if the 'establishment' had wished it, they would have rigged this one as well. Recall all the machines in 2000, 2004, etc. just go back to 2012. So many articles came out that millions of dead had voted or registered to vote. So why not rig them this time if they did not want Trump?
Just questions .... Something is just not right. 
I think Hillary would have been a disaster, but I also believe Trump is no different, simply different tactics, but the goal/s have not changed.

Monday, January 9, 2017

WINEP advice on Turkish Role in Syria

AIPAC's offshoot, WINEP, has been directing the war against Syria - so it would appear if one reads their policy papers which seem to get carried out.  In their latest, ONCE AGAIN, they recommend Turkey's support of invading Syria (and against Kurds by implication).  When will Syria's allies (and the rest) take note of the fact Turkey is still in bed with Washington and it is NATO Turkey that is invading Syria with help from, and under the watch of Washington and NATO?

Why did Russia start drawing down?

THE BATTLE FOR AL-BAB IS BRINGING U.S.-TURKISH TENSIONS TO A HEAD
By Fabrice Balanche
Policy Alert
January 9, 2017

Read this article on our website.

Helping Erdogan take the city could greatly decrease the civilian death toll and preserve U.S.-Turkish cooperation in Syria, but Washington will still need to decide what to do with the Kurds, its other key ally against the Islamic State.
On January 5, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan threatened to close Incirlik Air Base to the international coalition against the Islamic State, citing the lack of U.S. support for his efforts to take the IS-held Syrian city of al-Bab. That battle will likely force Washington to make some hard choices about which ally is most important in the anti-IS campaign -- Turkey or the Kurds.

AL-BAB PROVING MORE DIFFICULT THAN JARABULUS
Since November 14, the Turkish army and allied Syrian rebel forces have been advancing on al-Bab. By December 10, they had entered the city's western suburbs, seizing Sheikh Aqil hill on December 20. Turkish forces likely assumed that this position would allow them to put IS under fire and compel the group to flee, much like it did during the battle for Jarabulus.

For maps illustrating the situation in al-Bab, go to the web version of this article.

On December 22, however, IS retook the hill, inflicting heavy losses on Turkish and rebel forces. Fourteen Turkish soldiers were reportedly killed; IS also burned two Turkish military prisoners alive, and video of their grisly deaths was widely disseminated on social networks.

In response, Turkish jets heavily bombed al-Bab, reportedly causing the deaths of 72 civilians on December 23. In total, 173 civilians have been killed by Turkish-led operations against the city since November 14, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights
On January 4, Erdogan announced that the battle would be finished quickly, deploying troop reinforcements and additional tanks to the area. Turkish press reports have noted that 8,000 army troops are participating in the campaign, and their latest movements suggest Erdogan now intends to encircle al-Bab and cut off its links with the IS "capital" of Raqqa.

Yet this approach raises the question of whether and how Turkey will prevent further harm to civilians. When the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) encircled and conquered Manbij in June-July 2016, they made careful attempts to minimize collateral damage against the city itself and its inhabitants, but they suffered heavy military losses in the process. The commander of the Turkish-backed militia Sultan Murad recently stated that only a few thousand civilians remain in al-Bab, but that claim rings false: before the Turkish campaign, the city had about 100,000 inhabitants, along with 50,000 more in the adjacent towns of Qabasin, Tadef, and Bzaa. And as in Mosul, Manbij, and Ramadi before, IS has prevented local civilians from fleeing, intending to use them as a human shields.

To avoid potential carnage, Erdogan will therefore need the precision of American airpower. The Russian air force has supported some Turkish operations around the city, but it is unclear if they have the local capability or willingness to conduct a comprehensive campaign of precision strikes.

ERDOGAN'S CREDIBILITY, WASHINGTON'S DILEMMA
The battle's outcome will likely affect Erdogan's credibility with the Turkish population. The main goal of his Syrian intervention is to prevent the unification of the two large Kurdish cantons along the northern border, and al-Bab is the key junction point between them. The campaign also plays to Turkish nationalism after the failed coup last July.

Moreover, Erdogan has warned that the Turkish army will retake Manbij from the Kurds after al-Bab. The SDF were supposed to leave the city last year, as Vice President Joe Biden promised Erdogan in August. Ankara may invoke this promise as the battle for al-Bab develops.

Yet telling the Kurds to leave Manbij could end their alliance with the United States -- a troubling prospect given their proven efficiency against IS, seen most recently in the successful SDF offensive toward Thawra Dam, the key to capturing Raqqa. What are Washington's options in this delicate situation?

Doing nothing means upsetting Erdogan, who would not hesitate to withdraw access to Incirlik Air Base. This would make the coalition's task more complicated, but not impossible; allied forces could strike the Raqqa region from bases in Jordan, Iraq, the Gulf states, or Cyprus (albeit with extra hurdles related to distance and route security). Yet Turkey will eventually take al-Bab with or without U.S. help, likely by shelling the city and otherwise causing heavy civilian casualties. Erdogan might then apply the same technique to Manbij if the SDF has not withdrawn by then, leaving Washington with the prospect of major civilian carnage, direct Turkish-Kurdish military confrontation, and further interference by the Russians, who would likely insert themselves as arbiters between Ankara and the Kurds.

Alternatively, if Washington supports Erdogan in al-Bab, it could help limit the death toll by precluding indiscriminate bombardment of civilians. Turkish soldiers and rebels would be assured of quality air support that hits the right targets, encouraging them to make progress in the ground battle against IS.

To be sure, this approach runs the risk of Erdogan building on a victory in al-Bab by attacking Manbij or even the SDF stronghold of Tal Abyad. The latter scenario could foreclose the possibility of Kurdish autonomy in Syria once and for all, even in divided cantons. Convincing the Kurds to leave Manbij voluntarily could avoid that outcome. And while the wider Kurdish goal of unifying their Syrian cantons could die with the fall of al-Bab, U.S. officials need to carefully consider whether supporting that Kurdish political dream is more important than maintaining the U.S. military alliance with Erdogan. Whatever the case, avoiding a Turkish-Kurdish confrontation in Syria is crucial to liberating Raqqa sooner rather than later, particularly if the United States wants to do so without being obliged to cooperate closely with Russia.

Fabrice Balanche, an associate professor and research director at the University of Lyon 2, is a visiting fellow at The Washington Institute.

Monday, January 2, 2017

Trump endorsing Netanyahu


Netanyahu and Trump - bosom buddies

I am not sure how this important news was missed, but now it makes sense as to why the 'establishment' allowed Trump to become President.

Frightening.

In 2013 Donald Trump endorsing Netanyahu



Putin and Netanyahu

It seems that although Netanyahu has threatened relations with all countries that voted against the settlements in the December 2016 UNSC, Netanyahu continues his relations with Putin.   Which explains how the Israeli air force has managed to dodge the S300 and bomb Syria.  Course, the Russian-Turkish proposal passed at the UNSC to promote peace, also calls for dialogue between the opposition.  In other words, if regime change by terrorists did not work, lets do it politically.  Russia is obliging.

Netanyahu-Putin Discuss Syria, Closer Cooperation

JERUSALEM (JTA) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke by telephone to discuss the conflict in Syria and security cooperation.
The conversation Saturday evening, which also included discussion of other developments in the region, was announced by the Prime Minister’s Office in a statement.
“The two leaders discussed developments in the region, with emphasis on Syria and continued security coordination in this sphere, which has already proven itself in preventing misunderstandings,” the statement said.
The Kremlin reportedly said in a statement that Israel initiated the call.
It was the second time Netanyahu and Putin had spoken in a week. Last Sunday, Netanyahu made a sympathy call to Putin following the crash of a Russian military plane that killed 92.
In the spring, Netanyahu and Putin met in Moscow and discussed cooperation on dealing with the Syrian crisis, including preventing clashes between the two country’s air forces over Syria.
Russia was one of the 14 countries that voted in favor of a resolution condemning Israel for continued building in West Bank settlements.