Proposal draws bipartisan fire from Congress, but agency officials say the criticism is overblown

A CIA plan to erase tens of thousands of its internal emails - including those sent by virtually all covert and counterterrorism officers after they leave the agency - is drawing fire from Senate Intelligence Committee members concerned that it would wipe out key records of some of the agency's most controversial operations.

The agency proposal, which has been tentatively approved by the National Archives, "could allow for the destruction of crucial documentary evidence regarding the CIA's activities," Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Dianne Feinstein and ranking minority member Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., wrote in a letter to Margaret Hawkins, the director of records and management services at the archives.

But agency officials quickly shot back, calling the committee's concerns grossly overblown and ill informed. They insist their proposal is completely in keeping with - and in some cases goes beyond - the email retention policies of other government agencies. "What we've proposed is a totally normal process," one agency official told Yahoo News.

The source of the controversy may be that the CIA, given its secret mission and rich history of clandestine operations, is not a normal agency. And its proposal to destroy internal emails comes amid mounting tensions between the CIA and its Senate oversight panel, stoked by continued bickering over an upcoming committee report - relying heavily on years-old internal CIA emails - that is sharply critical of the agency's use of waterboarding and other aggressive interrogation techniques against al-Qaida suspects in the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attacks.

In this case, however, Chambliss - a conservative Republican who has sided with the CIA on the interrogation issue - joined with Feinstein in questioning the agency's proposed new email policy, which would allow for the destruction of email messages sent by all but a relatively small number of senior agency officials.

At least 600 Palestinian children were arrested in Jerusalem since last June. Of these children, nearly 40% were reportedly exposed to sexual abuse during arrest or investigation by the Israeli authorities, according to a report by the Palestinian Prisoners Club (PPC).
The PCC says that the daily arrest campaigns constitute a collective punishment against Palestinian residents of Jerusalem.

Attorney with the PCC, Mufeed al-Haj, said that other violations were reported during the apprehension of children, including but not limited to night and predawn raids on family homes, physical and sexual abuse.

According to WAFA, Al-Haj added that, under the applicable laws, minors undergoing investigation should be accompanied by their parents, yet Israeli authorities pay no respect to these laws in many cases.

Forces often ignore laws and arrest Palestinians without even having warrants.

Since last June, Israel has arrested hundreds of Palestinians in Jerusalem and the West Bank, most during predawn and night raids on their family houses.

Russia reinforced what Western and Ukrainian officials described as a stealth invasion on Wednesday [August 27], sending armored troops across the border as it expanded the conflict to a new section of Ukrainian territory. The latest incursion, which Ukraine's military said included five armored personnel carriers, was at least the third movement of troops and weapons from Russia across the southeast part of the border this week.

None of the photos accompanying this New York Times story online showed any of these Russian troops or armored vehicles. The story continued:

The Obama administration ... has asserted over the past week that the Russians had moved artillery, air-defense systems and armor to help the separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk. 'These incursions indicate a Russian-directed counteroffensive is likely underway', Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said. At the department's daily briefing in Washington, Ms. Psaki also criticized what she called the Russian government's 'unwillingness to tell the truth' that its military had sent soldiers as deep as 30 miles inside Ukraine territory.

Thirty miles inside Ukraine territory and not a single satellite photo, not a camera anywhere around, not even a one-minute video to show for it. "Ms. Psaki apparently [sic] was referring to videos of captured Russian soldiers, distributed by the Ukrainian government." The Times apparently forgot to inform its readers where they could see these videos.

President Barack Obama announced an executive order on immigration reform Thursday, which he will sign on Friday. The actions will affect up to 5 million undocumented immigrants in the US, many of whom are the parents or spouses of legal residents.


Obama announced his plan for unilateral action on immigration via a prime-time address from the White House. He will sign the executive order during a rally in Las Vegas on Friday. Because the plan will not be passed by Congress, it could also be easily reversed by a new president after Obama's term runs out in just over two years.

The president called his actions "a commonsense middle ground approach," as he continued to push Congress to pass a comprehensive bill reforming the country's immigration system. Under the terms of his order, undocumented immigrants who have lived in the US for five years or more, and are parents of American citizens or lawful residents, will be subjected to criminal and national security background checks. Once these are completed, they can pay taxes and defer deportation for three years at a time.

The US will also increase security at the borders and focus deportation efforts on criminals and potential security threats rather than families.

"Mass amnesty would be unfair. Mass deportation would be both impossible and contrary to our character," Obama said in his remarks. "If you meet the criteria, you can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. If you're a criminal, you'll be deported. If you plan to enter the US illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up."

Israeli policy is longstanding. Reflecting anti-Palestinian state terror. Institutionalized racism writ large. Vicious repression.

Brutalizing Muslims for not being Jews. Enforcing militarized occupation harshness. Denying Palestinians rights everyone deserves.

According to Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) director Jeff Halper:

"...(T)he 'Zionist answer' to the downward cycle of senseless violence in which Jerusalem finds itself" includes:

"house demolitions, mass arrests, revoking the 'residency' of native-born Jerusalemites, closing Palestinian neighborhoods with concrete blocks, arming Israeli Jewish vigilantes and cheap shots at the last person who believes in a two-state solution, Abu Mazen (Abbas)."

"Everything, that is, except an end to occupation and a just political solution."

"This is what happens when a powerful country forgoes any effort to address the grievances of a people under its control and descends into raw oppression."

Netanyahu lied. He's a serial liar. Everything he says lacks credibility. Big Lies substitute. Claiming Israel locked in "the grip of a terrorist onslaught."

Palestinians face brutalizing Israeli state terror. Police state barbarism writ large. Provoking justifiable Palestinian anger.

Inciting violence. Able to boil over uncontrollably any time. Perhaps into a third intifada. Or pretext for Israeli all-out war on millions of Palestinians.

The richest Americans hold more of the nation's wealth than they have in almost a century. What do they spend it on? As you might expect, personal jets, giant yachts, works of art, and luxury penthouses. And also on politics. In fact, their political spending has been growing faster than their spending on anything else. It's been growing even faster than their wealth.

According to new research by Emmanuel Saez of the University of California at Berkeley and Gabriel Zucman of the London School of Economics, the richest one-hundredth of one percent of Americans now hold over 11 percent of the nation's total wealth. That's a higher share than the top .01 percent held in 1929, before the Great Crash.

We're talking about 16,000 people, each worth at least $110 million.

One way to get your mind around this is to compare their wealth to that of the average family. In 1978, the typical wealth holder in the top .01 percent was 220 times richer than the average American. By 2012, he or she was 1,120 times richer.

It's hard to spend this kind of money.

As Tuesday's grisly murder of five Israelis in a Jerusalem synagogue by two Palestinian assailants continues to dominate headlines, major media outlets are actively erasing the Israeli violence that preceded the attack and the surging anti-Palestinian assaults that have followed.

In typical fashion, The New York Times buried information alluding to Palestinian death and suffering in the fourteenth paragraph, while CNN disappeared Palestinians from the discussion entirely.

The Washington Post went even further, using the synagogue attack as an opportunity to erase Israeli violence against Palestinians both past and present.

Noting that the attack site is located in what used to be Deir Yassin - a Palestinian village destroyed in 1948 after Zionist militias deliberately executed more than one hundred of its inhabitants, including children - the Post rendered the massacre an unproven accusation against Israel.

Following an uproar on social media, the Post quietly removed the reference to Deir Yassin from the piece without issuing an explanation or correction.

These same media outlets are gleefully painting Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip as heartless monsters based on a marginal celebration that took place in Gaza City.

"Residents of the Gaza Strip paraded in the streets singing victory songs, giving out candy, waving flags," declared The New York Times, eliciting images of widespread jubilation.

The new Axis of Evil - The Anglo-Saxons threesome, US, UK, Australia, plus Japan - have accused Vladimir Putin of aggressions in Ukraine, threatening with new sanctions - the usual déjà vu jumbo-tango, no substance whatsoever. But the media repeat it ad nauseam - much of the world believes it. Much of the world isn't even interested in knowing the truth. It's a lie lodged deep under the skin of the comfort zone of the average western European and US citizen.

Mr. Putin is marginalized at the G20 summit in Brisbane Australia. Washington's European vassals are afraid to even get close to the Russian President - it could be ill-seen by Master Obama. Madame Merkel had a brief private conversation with Mr. Putin - the supplier of 30% of Germany's energy. Then, she went on castigating him in public for interfering in Ukraine's democracy. What planet is she from? The others dare aping her critique - after all she represents the strongest nation in Europe - the strongest spineless puppet.

The Kremlin is again blamed for having shot down Malaysian flight MH17 over Ukraine - by world leaders who know very well that they are lying. They cannot have ignored the appalling conclusion of the analysis by the German pilot and airline expert, Peter Haisenko, that MH17 could not have been brought down by a surface-to-air missile, but rather by gunfire of an Ukraine military aircraft, type SU-25, as indicated by shrapnel holes in the cockpit (Global Research July 30, 2014). A plane fitting the description of an SU-25 was spotted near the MH17 by Russian and Kiev airport controllers. Several eyewitnesses on the ground in the conflict zone saw at least one fighter plane approaching the Malaysian airliner, as reported by BBC (though the report was later withdrawn - in an act of BBC self-censuring).

Peter Haisenko's findings were subsequently also confirmed by OSCE analysts. Sadly, the black box that could have further enhanced the analysis is in the hands of the neoliberal Dutch government which in connivance with the White House and to the humiliation of the families of the almost 300 gruesomely murdered passengers of MH17 will not divulge the truth.

Russian President Vladimir Putin recently spoke about countering extremism in the next decade at an expanded Security Council meeting in the Kremlin. As usual, he had some interesting things to say. Here are some highlights, with commentary.

On the inhumanity of extremism

I do not believe there is any need to prove how dangerous the very nature of extremism is and how destructive its ideology is - the ideology of intolerance, hatred and animosity. In all its manifestations, extremism is aggressive in nature, seditious and often violent and linked to terrorism.

It infringes on the rights and freedoms of citizens, often even endangering their very lives; it is a threat to national security, capable of cardinally unbalancing the political, economic and social systems. Such types of extremism as nationalism, religious intolerance and political extremism are especially dangerous for society and for the state. Every crime of this type (usually resonant and heinous in itself) can provoke mass violations of public order.

The western puppet masters also know how dangerous and destructive extremism is, which is why they foment it in regions they wish to control. They also know that ordinary people also know how dangerous and destructive it is. But unlike their leaders, they see this as a bad thing, which is why their governments make a big show about 'fighting terrorism'.

Today, Thursday 20 November, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is set to arrive in Vienna for talks regarding Iran's nuclear program. A year ago, in Geneva, the P5+1 group (comprising Russia, the U.S., UK, France, China, and Germany) resolved to reach a temporary agreement that would guarantee Iran's peaceful intentions by November 24th this year, and, Iran hopes, lead to the lifting of sanctions. Representatives of each country met in Vienna on Tuesday to, in theory, put the final touches to the deal, with a final round of talks planned for the 23rd.

But there are mixed messages and intentions coming from all sides. U.S. State Department Spokesman Jeff Rathke said Washington is willing to suspend the existing sanctions on Iran if a nuclear deal is reached, then terminate them entirely if Iran lives up to its commitments. (Iran, in contrast, wants the sanctions cancelled outright as soon as the deal is signed.) But any agreement reached may leave Obama in a pickle.

Taking the lead in a US Senate threat to block any Iranian nuclear agreement are Senators Robert Menendez (Dem.) and Mark Kirk (Rep.) who are demanding that Iran must totally dismantle its nuclear program in order for the U.S. to even consider reversing sanctions. Last December the two 'hard-ass' senators introduced a bill that called for increasing sanctions on Iran rather than lifting the existing ones.