I've long since noticed that our people have developed an interesting way of understanding the most complex, confusing, and obfuscated situations. This method is very simple and effective. Here is its essence: if you don't know whom to support, look who the pro-Western liberals and the journalists from "Echo" and "Rain" are supporting, and support the opposite.

This method works flawlessly, as we've seen with the example of the Turkish putsch. Once the first reports of the coup in Turkey began to appear, our liberal crowd rushed in hordes to support the coup. In fact, it is quite funny that our Westernizers rejoiced over Erdogan's overthrow together with the pseudo-patriots whose personal hatred for Erdogan is completely disconnected from any kind of logic.

I know that the theory that there wasn't actually a coup, but that it was all a hoax by Erdogan, is now making its rounds through social networks. But I don't believe in this version. It is difficult to imagine staging such a large-scale coup, moreover with the participation of 200 corpses as props, downed helicopters, and the storming of the presidential hotel and the shelling of government buildings with tanks. This was a real coup, albeit one simply made in an extreme hurry.

The militants who seized the police station in Yerevan are demanded concessions from the authorities. 5 hostages are still in the hands of the bandits. The deputy head of the Armenian police, Major-General Vardan Yeghiazaryan and Deputy Chief of Yerevan Police, Colonel Valery Osipyan, are among the hostages. A group of radicals unsuccessfully tried to join militants at Monday.

A US air strike killed more than 85 civilians, including children, in Syria on Tuesday after the coalition mistook them for Islamic State fighters.

Some eight families were hit as they tried to flee fighting in their area, in one of the single deadliest strikes on civilians by the alliance since the start of its operations in the war-torn country.

Pictures of the aftermath of the dawn strikes on the Isil-controlled village of Tokhar near Manbij in northern Syria showed the bodies of children as young as three under piles of rubble.

The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the strikes appeared to have been carried out in error, with the civilians mistaken for Islamist militants.


It is thought Tuesday's bombing was among the first by jets taking off from Incirlik air base in Turkey since it reopened after the failed coup.

The area has seen intense fighting between extremists and members of the US-backed Syria Democratic Forces (SDF) that have been advancing towards the Isil stronghold of Manbij under the cover of intense airstrikes by the US-led coalition.

The coalition has carried out more than 450 air strikes around the city since the operation to take the town began in May.

The SDF, an alliance of Kurdish and Arab fighters, is trying to seize the last territory held by Islamic State on the frontier with Turkey.

At least for a moment, Donald Trump seriously considered picking retired General Michael Flynn, fired as DIA chief for correctly predicting that Obama's covert Syrian intervention would generate a jihadist monster such as ISIS. Hillary Clinton meanwhile is reportedly pondering the selection of retired Admiral James G. Stavridis, a former Rumsfeld lickspittle who helped destroy Libya and thinks it would be a fine idea to hook up with Al Qaeda in Syria. Clinton's putative defense secretary, Michelle Flournoy, herself an ardent proponent of escalation in Syria and elsewhere, acclaims him as "one of the finest military officers of his generation." One might think that for a candidate politically burdened by her vote for the invasion of Iraq, not to mention the Libyan disaster, Stavridis, currently Dean of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, might not be the best choice.

Stavridis' military record exhibits all the signs of an accomplished courtier, ably negotiating the reefs and shoals of service politics as he shinned up the ranks faster even than David Petraeus. The key accelerant on his progress came in 2004, when he was picked by the odious Larry di Rita, Rumsfeld's Svengali-spokesman , as the secretary's Senior Military Assistant. In the process, he was "frocked," vaulting from his former rank of one-star admiral straight to three stars - an almost unprecedented leap. Occupying this immensely powerful post, Stavridis oversaw the secretary's schedule, travel and, crucially, controlled the flow of information reaching Rumsfeld's desk. Reveling in the perks of his lofty position, Stavridis insisted on the provision of a special car for himself in motorcades, while junior officers, whom he importuned to do his shopping when traveling, staggered under the weight of his bags.

A federal judge on Monday declined to order the deposition of Hillary Clinton over whether she deliberately thwarted federal record-keeping laws — but did not rule out the possibility that the former secretary of State may yet be forced to testify.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said he would issue a ruling "as soon as I can," prolonging the uncertainty in a protracted legal battle over Clinton's use of a private email server while in office.

The conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, which has brought a bevy of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against the State Department, argued before Sullivan that Clinton needs to be deposed to answer its questions about how and why the unauthorized system was created and maintained.

The group has requested three hours of testimony.

Lawyers representing both the former secretary of State and the State Department pushed back on the request, insisting that there is no legal basis to force Clinton to testify in the case — and that further, there is no new information to be gained that is not already a matter of public record.

I have been a defence lawyer most of my working life and am not used to gathering evidence for a prosecution, but circumstances impelled me to open a file for the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, or perhaps some future citizen's tribunal, in which is contained the evidence that the NATO leaders are guilty of the gravest crime against mankind, the crime of aggression. I would like to share with you some brief notes of interest from that file, for your consideration.

Article 8bis of the Rome Statute, the governing statue of the International Criminal Court states:

For the purpose of this Statute, "crime of aggression" means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter on the United Nations.

The NATO communiqué issued from Warsaw on July 9th is direct evidence of such planning and preparation and therefore of a conspiracy by the NATO leaders to commit acts of aggression against Russia, and would be the subject of an indictment of the International Criminal Court against the leaders of the NATO military alliance, if the prosecutor of the ICC was in fact independent, which she is not, and of course, if the articles relating to crimes of aggression were in effect which will not take place until January 1, 2017, if at all, under the articles of the Rome Statute.

Nevertheless, the technical issue of jurisdiction that prevents the issuance of an indictment against the NATO leaders at this time does not legitimate the planning and preparation of acts of aggression as are contained in the NATO communiqué nor reduce the moral weight of the crime of aggression set out in the Statute and the Nuremberg Principles, for the crime of aggression is the supreme crime of war.

Against the background of the ever mounting number of terrorist attacks around the globe, including the recent tragic events in Nice, a particular emphasis should be laid on the strengthening of anti-terrorist efforts. Certain positive results can be attributed to the anti-terrorist operations in Iraq and Syria, that are being carried out by the so-called "coalition forces". ISIS forces are not simply suffering losses, they found themselves unable to coordinate their operations properly. The continuous bombardment of the illegal oil infrastructure in Syria and Iraq has deprive terrorists of financial incomes, which resulted in ISIS being unable to pay its militants for their "services."

In the previous years terrorists were pretty comfortable in their ability to capture swiftly new territories and create new formation in Libya, Saudi Arabia and other neighboring states. It's been reported that ISIS units have even reached Afghanistan. However, as both Russian and American forces stepped their efforts up against ISIS, the surviving terrorists started searching areas of the Middle East where they won't fall victims of military actions against them. Given the fact that the anti-terrorist actions against ISIS remain uncoordinated between the leader of the coalition, while the regional contradictions remain unresolved, ISIS militants are taking full advantage of the fact that they can enjoy relative security in certain areas of the world.

It has been noted by numerous analysts that a growing number of foreign jihadists are starting to return to the countries of their origin or even looking for alternatives that would allow them to hide from counter-terrorist efforts of the coalition.

In the wake of the mass murder in French city of Nice, President Francois Hollande and his Prime Minister Manuel Valls have reiterated dire warnings that France is in a permanent state of war.

Valls quoted by Le Journal du Dimanche said: "I have always told the truth about terrorism: a war is underway, there will be more attacks. It's hard to say, but other lives will be lost."

Nine months ago, Hollande made similar grim forebodings of "France at war" following the Paris gun attacks in which 130 people were killed by five jihadist suicide attackers.

The State of Emergency declared after the November 13 atrocity was extended at the weekend by a further three months after 84 people were killed in Nice on Thursday night. In that attack a man plowed a 20-ton articulated truck into thousands of pedestrians watching the Bastille Day fireworks display in the French Riviera resort.

Some 120,000 police and troops are now reportedly deployed across France, up from the already record high level of 115,000 security personnel on alert during the Euro 16 football championship. A further 12,000 police reservists are being called called up.

The UK Parliament on Monday voted to renew Trident, Britain's aging nuclear weapons system.

Update:

The U.K. House of Commons on Monday voted to renew the Trident nuclear weapons system, 472-117.

As the BBC explains, "the MPs' vote approves the manufacture of four replacement submarines at a current estimated cost of £31bn"—though campaigners have put the cost much higher.

"Which part of the non-proliferation treaty do they not understand?" wondered Vicki Hird, campaigns and policy director at War on Want, in a statement after the vote. "Trident renewal is a reckless and criminal act and any MP voting for it should to be ashamed."

"Rather than seeking to waste billions on nuclear weapons, whose use would be illegal under almost every conceivable circumstance and would certainly lead to a huge number of civilian casualties, the U.K. government should make a clear statement for global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, by not renewing the system," she said.

Reports by WADA lawyer cast doubt on his own report but the Western media reaction suggests that a ban is already decided irrespective of the outcome of the court case in Lausanne. McLaren, the Canadian lawyer who drafted the WADA report, has given a very interesting interview to RT. I presume RT is reporting it correctly. He admits he did not speak to or question the Russians before writing his report and he also refuses to disclose key parts of his evidence.

The prosecutor presents his case and then delivers his verdict without disclosing his evidence (which in the circumstances we can be forgiven for wondering whether it even exists) or interviewing the accused, who is thereby denied the right to state his case or respond to the charges brought against him. Yet we are asked to accept McLaren's report as objective and impartial.

Unfortunately the probability is that most people in the West will do so. Here in Britain the media has been unbelievably selective in reporting this story. For example they have not reported that Russian athletes have appealed the ban to the Court of Arbitration in Lausanne or their grounds for doing so. Nor have they disclosed that the test samples provided by Russian athletes are now being tested in Britain.