Welcome to Sott.net
Tue, 02 Nov 2021
The World for People who Think

Puppet Masters
Map

Star of David

Top House Dems warn Netanyahu against promise to annex West Bank settlements - still pushing dead two-state solution

Allison Deger
Mondoweiss
Sat, 13 Apr 2019 17:51 UTC
Havat Ma’on armed illegal settlers

On March 10 at 11.00 am, more than 30 armed settlers from the illegal Israeli outpost of Havat Ma’on invaded the Palestinian village of At-Tuwani.
Days after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu emerged as the clear victor of Israel's elections and will lead the country for a fifth term, a campaign promise he made to annex Israeli settlements in the West Bank is catching ire from House democrats

Taking the unusual step of publicly criticizing Israel and Netanyahu, today Eliot L. Engel, Nita Lowey, Ted Deutch, Brad Schneider, all supporters of the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, issued a statement cautioning against any "unilateral steps" to declare occupied Palestinian territory part of the state of Israel:
"As strong, life-long supporters of Israel, a U.S.-Israel relationship rooted in our shared values, and the two-state solution, we are greatly concerned by the possibility of Israel taking unilateral steps to annex the West Bank. Every one of Israel's frontiers plays an important role in its security, and Israel's ability to guard itself from threats is non-negotiable. We hope that any security measures are implemented within the context of preserving the eventual possibility of a two-state solution. Two states for two peoples, negotiated directly by the two sides, with mutually agreed upon land swaps, is the best option to achieve a Jewish, democratic, secure Israel living side-by-side with a democratic, de-militarized Palestinian state.

"This will not be easy. Palestinian leadership has been unwilling to accept any reasonable peace proposal or even to negotiate seriously toward a solution. To paraphrase Abba Eban, the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. And instead of negotiating, they have pursued unilateral statehood through the United Nations.

"Our fear is that such unilateral steps-whether from Israelis or Palestinians-would push the parties farther from a final, negotiated settlement."

Comment: The spectacle of AIPAC-supporting politician publicly pushing back against the Lobby is interesting. Why now? However, realists know the two-state solution has been unviable since Ariel Sharon's injunction to the illegal settlers in 1998 to "grab all the hilltops" in the West Bank:
"Everybody has to move; run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements, because everything we take now will stay ours. Everything we don't grab will go to them." . ~ Ariel Sharon
"Jews should live in and around every Arab population centre... Jews should not leave a single place where they don't live and have freedom of movement." - Ariel Sharon
Nothing of course, about Palestinian freedom of movement.
Sharon recounted standing on a dune near Gaza with cabinet ministers, explaining that along with military measures to control the Strip he wanted "fingers" of settlements separating its cities, chopping the region in four. Another "finger" would thrust through the edge of Sinai, helping create a "Jewish buffer zone between Gaza and Sinai to cut off the flow of weapons" and divide the two regions in case the rest of Sinai was ever returned to Egypt. That legacy disfigured and isolated Gaza, even years after Sharon implemented his policy of unilateral "disengagement" in 2005. He relocated the settlers to other illegal colonies in the West Bank and imposed a hermetic siege on the Strip, the consequences of which remain suffocating and deadly.


      Read More...
Clock

How the statute of limitations will be hotly disputed in Assange case

Andrew C. McCarthy
National Review
Thu, 11 Apr 2019 18:16 UTC
assange arrest
© Global Look Press / Alberto Pezzali
UK police arresting WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange in London, April 11, 2019
The indictment that the Justice Department filed against Julian Assange in the Eastern District of Virginia charges him with a conspiracy to commit computer fraud. The conspiracy statute is Section 371 of the penal code, and the computer fraud offenses that were the objectives of the conspiracy are parts of Section 1030.

According to the indictment, Assange and Manning (then known as Bradley, now as Chelsea) conspired in 2010. Manning was prosecuted by the armed forces. The Justice Department's indictment against Assange was not returned until 2018 - eight years later.

The five-year statute of limitations that applies to most federal crimes is prescribed for both conspiracy and computer fraud.

So how is the Justice Department able to prosecute Assange on an indictment filed three years after the prescribed limitations period?

It appears that the Justice Department is relying on an exception, in Section 2332b of the penal code, that extends the statute of limitations to eight years for "acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries."

Comment: See also:

      Read More...
Star of David

Delusional Pompeo assures CNN Netanyahu's vow to annex West Bank won't harm peace plan


Sputnik
Sat, 13 Apr 2019 17:15 UTC
pompeo netanyahu
© AP Photo / Thomas Coex
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said he does not believe Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's vows to annex the West Bank will hurt the US-led Mideast peace process.

"I don't, I think that the vision we'll lay out is going to represent a significant change from the model that's been used", Pompeo said on Friday when asked by CNN if he has any concerns that Netanyahu's statement may potentially hurt US efforts to propose a two-state solution.

Earlier on Friday, US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel and Congressmen Ted Deutch, Brad Schneider, and Nita Lowey said in a joint press release that they are concerned Netanyahu's statement could be detrimental to achieving peace in the Middle East.

Comment: It's hard to believe the Trump-Kushner 'peace plan' can be anything but a flop given what has come until this point. Jerusalem, Golan, cutting UN aid... And it's hard to imagine what major concessions from Israel would be required in order for the Palestinians to accept the official annexation of West Bank, for instance. Either way, this plan is going to be spectacular: either spectacularly unexpected, or a spectacular failure.

      Read More...
Stop

Maduro warns Brazilian Army to resist 'fascist rookie' Bolsonaro's orders to intervene in Venezuela


RT
Sat, 13 Apr 2019 10:53 UTC
Nicolas Maduro and Jair Bolsonaro (L) Federico Parra /(R) Adriano Machado
© Adriano Machado Reuters / AFP
Nicolas Maduro and Jair Bolsonaro (L) Federico Parra (R)
Venezuela will strongly retaliate against Brazil, the nation's leader Nicolas Maduro has said, calling on the Brazilian Army to resist President Jair Bolsonaro's attempts to intervene in its neighbor's affairs.

The people of Venezuela stand united against the "threats of war and military intervention" voiced by the Brazilian right-wing leader, Nicolas Maduro said on Saturday. He blasted Bolsonaro as "a fascist rookie" and "a Hitler imitator," and warned that Caracas will find ways to retaliate against any attacks coming from its neighbors.

Maduro also called on the Brazilian Army to "stop the madness" and thwart the attempts to create a conflict in the region.

A former army captain, Bolsonaro has never hidden his deep animosity towards the socialist government of Venezuela. Under his tenure, Brazil was among the first nations to openly back the opposition leader Juan Guaido as the 'interim president' during his standoff with Maduro.

Comment: See also:

      Read More...
Camcorder

What's REALLY Happening in Libya: Popular Revolt Against UN and US-backed Terrorist Occupation

James & Joanne Moriarty
Libyan War The Truth
Fri, 12 Apr 2019 16:32 UTC
Libyan national army LNA Tripoli
In 2011, an evil scheme was hatched by agents of the Western Order, aka New world Order: the manufactured color revolution known as the "Arab Spring". One of the targets of this scheme was the destruction of sovereign Libya. The motives for this were manifold, but it was primarily done because Libyan leader Muammar Ghadafi had set in motion a gold-backed currency for selling Middle Eastern and African resources on the world markets called the gold dinar, a financial project which all Arab countries and most African countries had signed up to by 2011. Needless to say, the full implementation of this dinar would have heralded meant The End for the toilet-paper bankers who control most of the world with their American petrodollar.

The premise of "humanitarian intervention" used by spokesmen of the Western Order in 2011 was "the need to protect innocent Libyan civilians from an oppressive regime." It was a complete and utter lie, used to foment the invasion and destruction of Libya so that "the head of the snake" of the gold dinar was cut off and pan-African and pan-Arab economic integration would be set back a generation or more. In the meantime, "ISIS Caliphate" goons made a mockery of Gaddafi's realistic gold-backed currency plan by attempting to mass produce 'gold dinars' in the style of early Islamic coins (while really only accepting US dollars as payment).

Let's put this in perspective:

A huge invasion force professing to protect the Libyan people causes one sixth of their population of 6.5 million to become dead or missing, while another two million Libyans must live in exile to preserve their lives. Their entire infrastructure - which was highly developed, by Western standards - is destroyed, with hundreds of thousands of bombs dropped on the country. Power plants, water treatment plants, hospitals, universities, roads, agricultural areas, homes, etc. were all wiped off the face of the Earth. Financially, the destruction in Libya runs into the trillion-dollar range. The occupation force of some - by our estimates - 250,000 terrorist mercenaries that were brought into Libya in 2011 by the CIA, Mossad, MI6, and lackeys, was left behind in Libya by Western 'military specialists' to enjoy the spoils of rape and pillage, thus maintaining the destabilization of the country for a decade. These occupying forces have enjoyed the full support of weapons delivery, money and training over the past 8 years, courtesy of the US, UN, NATO, the UK, Italy, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel.
      Read More...
Heart - Black

American values: Embassies are for chopping up journalists; protecting them...not so much

Bryan McDonald
RT
Sat, 13 Apr 2019 16:32 UTC
Arrest Assange, Saudi consulate Istanbul
© REUTERS/Osman Orsal, Ruptly
Arrest of Julian Assange in London (L), Saudi Arabia's consulate in Istanbul (R)
Fair-minded people across the world have rightly condemned the US-ordered arrest of Julian Assange. However, few have noted how it fits part of a pattern of American hypocrisy when it comes to the treatment of journalists.

Only six months ago, Jamal Khashoggi was murdered and hacked to pieces by Saudi agents at the kingdom's consulate in Istanbul. He was a columnist at the Washington Post and editor-in-chief of the Al-Arab News Channel, known for his sharp criticism of the illegal US-backed Saudi war on Yemen.

Despite a CIA conclusion that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the gruesome assassination, President Donald Trump stood by his ally and no meaningful sanctions or penalties were directed towards Riyadh.

Turkey itself remains a NATO member, and close US partner, despite holding more journalists behind bars than any other nation on earth. This figure stood at 68, at the end of last year, around one-quarter of the global total of 251.

Now we have the indictment of Assange, which seeks to criminalize basic functions of journalism. For instance, keeping sources anonymous or deleting records of conversations. Indeed, it also appears to be a breach of America's own First Amendment.

Comment: George Galloway: 'Julian Assange exposed great crimes & now a great crime is committed against him'

      Read More...
Star of David

Trump pays his Adelson dues: Warns ICC against prosecuting Israeli actions


Haaretz
Thu, 11 Apr 2019 17:05 UTC
trump
© Agence France-Presse
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks speaks to the press during a meeting with South Korean President Moon Jae-in at the Oval Office at the White House, April 11, 2019.
U.S. president promises 'swift and vigorous response' to any attempt to charge Washington and its allies after court rejects investigation of possible American war crimes in Afghanistan

The International Criminal Court's unanimous rejection of a request to investigate U.S. forces for possible war crimes in Afghanistan is a "major international victory", U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday.

Trump however warned the court against trying to prosecute Israelis or Americans following a complaint by Palestinians, which have called for an ICC investigation of Israel.

Comment: Not the first threat to the ICC. Neocon crazy John Bolton has said the same kind of things:

      Read More...
Chart Pie

China's Belt and Road Initiative benefits the global economy, says IMF director


Xinhua Net
Fri, 12 Apr 2019 17:04 UTC
Changyong Rhee
© Xinhua/Liu Jie
Changyong Rhee, director of the Asia and Pacific Department at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), speaks during an interview in Washington D.C., the United States, April 2, 2019.
The China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a "very important contribution" to the global economy, the Director of the Asia and Pacific Department at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Changyong Rhee said.

The BRI has benefited the world in fostering infrastructure need in the low-income countries and also promoting regional cooperation and connectivity in trade investment, human mobility and finance, Rhee told Xinhua in a recent interview on the sidelines of the Spring Meetings of the IMF and the World Bank.

Rhee said he looks forward to participating in the second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation together with IMF managing director Christine Lagarde in Beijing later this month. Representatives from over 100 countries, including about 40 leaders of governments, have confirmed their attendance.

"The IMF is in very close collaboration with the Chinese authorities on sharing the best international practices, especially regarding fiscal sustainability and capacity building," not only for Chinese officials, but also for officials from low-income countries that have joined in the BRI, the IMF official said.

Comment: See:

      Read More...
Chess

Trump offers sanctuary cities an "unlimited supply" of illegal immigrants

Tim Hains
Real Clear Politics
Fri, 12 Apr 2019 15:21 UTC
trump immigrant sanctuary cities
© NBC
"They always say they have open arms. Let's see if they have open arms."
Trump said the Border Patrol is apprehending thousands of people every day and because of current law they are only allowed to be held in custody for 20 days before being released into the U.S.

"But we could fix that so fast if the Democrats would agree," Trump said. "But if they don't agree, we might as well do what they always say they want. We will bring the illegals... to sanctuary city areas and let that particular area take care of it, whether it is a state or whatever it might be."

"California is certainly always saying they want more people, and if they want more people in their sanctuary cities, we will give them more people," Trump quipped. "We can give them an unlimited supply. And let's see if they are so happy."

"They always say they have open arms. Let's see if they have open arms."

Comment: Nancy Pelosi has an attack of NIMBY:
A scuttled White House proposal to release immigrant detainees in San Francisco and other sanctuary cities triggered a fierce backlash Friday from Democrats including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose office called the idea "despicable."

The Washington Post first reported that the White House proposed sending the detainees to sanctuary cities, including Pelosi's district, twice in the last six months. The proposal was first floated in November amid reports of a large migrant caravan from Central America making its way to the southern border. The idea was again considered in February, amid the standoff with Congress over a border wall.

"The extent of this Administration's cynicism and cruelty cannot be overstated," Pelosi spokeswoman Ashley Etienne said in a statement Friday. "Using human beings-including little children-as pawns in their warped game to perpetuate fear and demonize immigrants is despicable, and in some cases, criminal."

She added: "The American people have resoundingly rejected this Administration's toxic anti-immigrant policies, and Democrats will continue to advance immigration policies that keep us safe and honor our values."

Officials stressed that the plan never went anywhere.

A source familiar with the discussions also told Fox News that Democrats who advocate leniency toward illegal immigrants should work with the administration to find ways to transport those set for release, including in their states and districts.

The proposal was apparently rejected both times it came up by immigration agencies.
Hollywood had its meltdown:


While sensible people pointed out the obvious:


Tucker Carlson calls out the hypocrisy:




      Read More...
Attention

Is Julian Assange another Pentagon Papers case?

Alan M Dershowitz
The Hill
Fri, 12 Apr 2019 14:30 UTC
daniel ellsberg, pentagon papers
Before WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange gained asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012, he and his British legal team asked me to fly to London to provide legal advice about United States law relating to espionage and press freedom. I cannot disclose what advice I gave them, but I can say that I believed then, and still believe now, that there is no constitutional difference between WikiLeaks and the New York Times.

If the New York Times, in 1971, could lawfully publish the Pentagon Papers knowing they included classified documents stolen by Rand Corporation military analyst Daniel Ellsberg from our federal government, then indeed WikiLeaks was entitled, under the First Amendment, to publish classified material that Assange knew was stolen by former United States Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning from our federal government.

So if prosecutors were to charge Assange with espionage or any other crime for merely publishing the Manning material, this would be another Pentagon Papers case with the same likely outcome. Many people have misunderstood the actual Supreme Court ruling in 1971. It did not say that the newspapers planning to publish the Pentagon Papers could not be prosecuted if they published classified material. It only said that they could not be restrained, or stopped in advance, from publishing them. Well, they did publish, and they were not prosecuted.

Comment: See also:

      Read More...
Amazon Smile
Revolt! T-shirts