Britain is a key facilitator of corrupt money flows across the world, according to a leading anti-corruption academic.

Professor Paul Heywood of Nottingham University told Parliament's International Development Committee (IDC) the role of Britain and the City of London "in allowing corrupt money to flow should not be underestimated."

A report published by the committee on Wednesday called on Britain to persuade overseas territories to create public registers of beneficial ownership in a bid to tackle corruption.

It urged the government to do more to combat the lack of transparency in its overseas territories else it risks hampering global anti-corruption efforts.

Failed attempts to convince overseas dependencies and territories, such as the British Virgin Islands, to create such registers were described as a missed opportunity to fight money laundering.

What is the Purpose?

On May 18, 2016, the Argentine government and the U.S military reached an agreement, which granted the United States permission to build two new bases in the Tierra del Fuego region and on the triple border between Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay. While many officials are asserting that the Tierra del Fuego base would be used mainly for scientific work, the U.S. strategy actually has two main objectives. First, Washington is creating National Security Bases (NSB) for defense and strategic purposes. Secondly, the United States is establishing stations for joint military exercises, which are providing security resources and conducting training operations not only for Argentina, but for the rest of Latin America as well. However, the installation of these bases is inherently controversial. The head of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), Ernesto Samper has called for the U.S. military bases to "leave the continent."[i] Instead, Samper is seeking improved U.S-Latin American relations through diplomacy and dialogue, but building military strategic bases is nothing new to U.S. foreign policy. As noted by Aliana Navarez, a writer for Pulsamerica, "US bases installed in Central America and the Caribbean, added to those in Colombia, Peru, Chile and Paraguay, plus NATO in the Falklands and the British detachment in [South] Georgia Islands, all host multiple benefits to North America and its local allies."[ii] For example, in 2009, the Colombian government and the U.S military signed the 2009 Defense Cooperation Agreement to build land bases in Tolemaida and Larandia, as well as sea bases in Cartagena and Bahia Malaga. Opposition to this agreement was immediately raised in South America, even though the United States claimed that their purpose was to facilitate anti-drug operations in the area. In Colombia, the United States has continued to cooperate with the Santos Administration on bilateral security issues related to the recently-ended Colombian armed conflict with the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia - FARC) and Ejercito de Liberación Nacional (National Liberation Army - ELN).

The text of Hillary Clinton's speeches to Goldman Sachs have now been published. Go ahead, read them for yourself. It's perfectly legal to do so, despite what the mainstream media liars would like you to believe.

When you do, you will find a transcript of an interesting conversation between Hillary and Lloyd Blankfein (yes, that Lloyd Blankfein) that took place in October 2013 at Goldman's "Builders and Innovators Summit" in Arizona. After drawing on her expertise to enlighten the audience about diplomatic hotspots and trends in American foreign policy, Clinton focuses in on the South China Sea:

"48 percent of the world's trade, obviously that includes energy but includes everything else, goes through the South China Sea. Some of you may have seen the long article in the New York Times Magazine on the South China Sea this past weekend, an issue that I worked on for the entire time was in the State Department because China basically wants to control it. You can't hold that against them. They have the right to assert themselves. But if nobody's there to push back to create a balance, then they're going to have a chokehold on the sea lanes and also on the countries that border the South China Sea."

When it comes to commenting on Russia, Barack Obama and facts have long been strangers. But Tuesday's complete reversal of his previous opinion on the country's strength was still astounding.

The US president has had a few notable things to say about Russia in recent years. For instance, how it's a "regional power [that] doesn't make anything" with its "economy in tatters" which is "isolated." He also believed for a long time that it had no immigrants - despite being the second most popular migration destination in the world.

This week, Obama has suddenly changed his stance. And Russia has been upgraded, in his estimation, from a puny Danny De Vito to a towering Arnold Schwarzenegger. He told reporters in Washington how "we think that Russia is a large, important country with a military that is second only to ours."

Now, while his new stance is a bit more accurate, not to mention sure to go down well in Moscow, it also confirms how all over the shop Obama is when it comes to understanding Russia.

Fragile history

Especially if you consider what he said next. Obama criticized Donald Trump for flattery toward a Kremlin supremo, which Obama said was "unprecedented" in US politics. Completely forgetting the time when a gravely ill Franklin D. Roosevelt travelled to Tehran to meet Josef Stalin, who refused to venture to Cairo. His successor, Harry Truman, later agreed to visit Yalta for the post-World War II peace conference because the Soviet leader didn't fancy flying.

US-led coalition airstrikes, targeting civilians instead of Daesh positions, occur too often, the Russian Defense Ministry said Wednesday, commenting on alleged Belgian airstrike against a Syrian village in northern Aleppo.

The Russian center for Syrian reconciliation said Tuesday it had received local reports of an airstrike on the Syrian village of Hassajek that killed six people and wounded at least four. According to its bulletin, Russian or Syrian aircraft did not operate in the area at the time of the strike while air traffic control systems detected two F-16 fighter jets of the Air Force of the Kingdom of Belgium at the time of the strike.

Earlier in the day, Belgian Defense Minister Steven Vandeput dismissed claims regarding the country's responsibility for the airstrike on the village of Hassajek near Aleppo that killed six people.

"Russia has effective air defense means, which ensure round-the-clock monitoring of the air situation practically over all the territory of Syria and beyond," ministry's spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said.

Konashenkov stated that targeting mistakes by the member countries of the international coalition, including Belgium, unfortunately, occur regularly. "Weddings, funerals, hospitals, police departments, humanitarian convoys and even Syrian troops, fighting against Daesh terrorists near Deir ez-Zor, become targets for coalition airstrikes," Konashenkov stressed.

Speaker of the People's Council of Syria, the country's legislative authority, Hadiya Khalaf Abbas, told Sputnik she considered Crimea an integral part of Russia which rejoined the country following expression of free will in referendum.

"Due to the events which unfolded after the collapse of the Soviet Union until present times, this [federal] subject returned to its roots [Russia] after the expression of free will of the people at a Crimean referendum... We accept that Crimea is an integral part of Russia," Abbas said.

At least six people were killed in an airstrike on a village in northern Syria's Aleppo province, the Russian Defense Ministry said, adding that two Belgian F-16 combat jets were operating in the area.

According to information handed over to the Russian Reconciliation Center in Syria by the local council of the Syrian city of Afrin, the village of Hassadjek suffered an air attack in which six people died and four more were injured.

The Russian Defense Ministry stressed that neither Russian nor Syrian air forces were carrying out any missions in the area.

At the same time, the ministry said that Russian data recorders detected two Belgian F-16 fighter jets in the area within the specified time.

The United Nations says government forces are responsible for a growing share of civilian casualties in the Afghan conflict.

In a report published on October 19, the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan says at least 2,562 civilians died and another 5,835 were wounded in the fighting in the first nine months of this year.

A similar number of civilian casualties occurred in the same period in 2015, indicating that rates may be leveling off at near-record levels after steadily increasing over the previous years.

Antigovernment elements remained the highest cause of civilian casualties, the report says, but casualties caused by pro-government forces rose 42 percent compared to last year.

That includes a spike of 72 percent in casualties from air strikes by the Afghan Air Force and its allies.

"Increased fighting in densely populated areas makes it imperative for parties to take immediate steps to ensure all feasible precautions are being taken to spare civilians from harm," said Tadamichi Yamamoto, the UN secretary general's special representative for Afghanistan.

A year since the start of the Russian antiterrorist operation in Syria, Sputnik asked Syrian parliamentary speaker Hadiyeh al-Abbas to assess Russia's position on ending the conflict and restoring peace in her war-torn country.

"We always knew that Russia would come to our help and take a stand for what would be in the best interest of our two countries. Russia has always sided with the oppressed, with the victims of aggression. This means that the well-deserved respect Russia enjoys worldwide simply cannot be questioned and its interests ignored," Hadiyeh al-Abbas said.

She added that "we trust Russia in everything it does" because Russia stood up for Syria's interests as if they were its own. "Relations between our two countries will never differ from what they are now. We have a shared goal - to build a common front against the [scourge of terrorism] that is a threat to all mankind."

(Scroll down for updates.)

Continuing our coverage of the Mosul offensive (see: Iraq Launches Major Op to Retake Daesh-held Mosul), the U.S. coalition envoy Brett McGruk says the "steady advance towards Mosul" is continuing. The combined forces of the Iraqi army, Kurds, and PMU are reaching their objectives ahead of schedule, despite some losses on all sides (including a Daesh military commander, Dwud Abdul Wahab, and a Kurdish commander, Fahmi Mohamed Qadir). Despite the fact that most Daesh fighters have already left the city, Obama still says "Mosul will be a difficult fight, and there will be advances and there will be setbacks." We guess that means the coalition will drop a few bombs here and there and pretend they're facing massive resistance on the ground. But there's a point to such rhetoric. Obama is talking up the Mosul offensive in advance of creating 'facts on the ground' through US participation in the offensive itself. The point being, if the US is directly involved in or has a controlling stake in the operation, it will be in a position to influence the future geopolitical game of competing oil and gas pipelines that this entire conflict and ISIS is all about.

The Kurdish Peshmerga cleared nine villages (200 square kilometers), moving the front line 8km closer to Mosul, Iraqi troops retook Nimrud and recaptured 50+ oil wells, and coalition jets hit 17 targets (destroying four explosive-rigged vehicles), the main obstacle being booby traps and "suicide bomber trucks" - vehicles packed with explosives that some brainwashed jihadi deliberately drives towards enemy troops before detonation. One Peshmerga major told AP his fighters are afraid to step out of their vehicles due to the dangers. While the Kurds agreed not to enter Mosul itself, they have apparently been given permission to retain control of the villages they liberate. The spoils of war...

Meanwhile, despite all their bluster, the Turks still haven't involved themselves in the operations. I guess that means Erdogan plans to move to "Plan B", whatever that is.