Mar 20

Today’s News 20th March 2018

  • France: Toward Total Submission To Islam, Destruction Of Free Speech

    Authored by Guy Milliere via The Gatestone Institute,

    After the murders of much of the staff at the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris on January 7, 2015, the hostage-taking and slaughter at a kosher supermarket two days later confirmed what was already obvious: France was a target of Islamic terrorism. A huge demonstration, organized in Paris on January 11, brought together a million and a half people, with politicians from around the world in attendance.

    For a brief moment, France seemed to be the country where the multitudes were ready to stand up for freedom of speech, and the government was ready to fight for Western values.

    Unfortunately, that impression did not last long.

    For years, freedom of speech in France has been in the process of being crushed, particularly regarding Islam and Islamic terrorism. Journalists who said that Islam often did not look much like a religion of peace but more like a religion of war were systematically and harshly prosecuted. Charlie Hebdo‘s new director and editor-in-chief were also not spared: they were sued as early as 2006, the year the magazine republished the Danish Mohammed cartoons. They were sued again in 2007, 2012 and 2013. The writer Michel Houellebecq was summoned to court in 2010 for saying that Islam is a “stupid” religion. The first judicial sentence against the polemist Éric Zemmour dates from 2011. The website Riposte Laïque was established in 2007 to fight censorship, defend secularism, and preserve the right to criticize Islam. Lawsuits against its founder, Pierre Cassen, immediately became overwhelming.

    Judicial harassment against those who still dared to speak “incorrectly” about Islam did not stop after the murders at Charlie Hebdo: rather, they intensified. The terrorist attacks that took place in France in November 2015 and in July 2016 did not lead to any demonstrations; merely to displays of sadness, fear and resignation. French politicians used empty words, spoke of the dangers of “fanaticism” and said that France was “at war” — but they never named an enemy. Journalists and writers who said that terrorists attacking France were Muslim, and that “Islamism” was not foreign to Islam, had to answer for their words in court and were fined thousands of euros.

    Both Éric Zemmour and Pierre Cassen have spent hours on trial providing conclusive evidence — in vain.

    Since the election of President Emmanuel Macron a year ago, the situation has become worse. On June 20, 2017, at the end of a post-Ramadan iftar dinner he shared with Muslim leaders, President Macron stated that “…no one should make believe that Islam is not compatible with the Republic”; that ” no one should say that France reject Muslim faith” and that “attempt to give Islam the image of a religion condoning murder and terror” must be condemned. Most French critics of Islam got the message and cautiously chose silence. Riposte Laïque did not, but here were consequences.

    On January 20, 2018, Pierre Cassen was convicted of “incitement to hatred against Muslims” and a fine of $12,000 was imposed on him. He was also given a three-month suspended prison sentence. He will soon be tried again for repeating the same “crime”, and could be sent to prison.

    Several European governments have made it clear that criticizing Islam may lead to prosecution and conviction. Recently, British, Danish and German citizens have been handed suspended sentences. If Pierre Cassen is imprisoned, it will be the first time that someone in a Western democracy is sent to jail for criticizing a religion.

    Worse, Cassen is not even the author of the article targeted by the judges, and the article only says what is obvious: that extremist Muslims are at war with France and the West, and that incitement to kill infidels is present in the Qur’an. Cassen was sentenced as the editor of Riposte Laïque; since 2012, however, Riposte Laïque has been hosted by Switzerland and has a Swiss editor. Pierre Cassen no longer even has an official role in the organization. He is just easy prey because he lives in France. Pierre Cassen, clearly a victim of prosecutorial abuse, is planning to apply for political asylum in Switzerland.

    Two members of the French National Assembly, Gilbert Collard and Marine Le Pen, a former presidential candidate who secured 35% of votes in the May 2017 run-off, were also recently charged with “inciting violence”. They did not even publish texts criticizing Islam. After a journalist compared their party (National Front) to the Islamic State, they tweeted photos showing atrocities committed by the Islamic State, and added under the photos: “This is the Islamic State”. They are also facing serious fines and prison sentences. The photos they tweeted are not even secret: they are widely available on the internet.

    Originally, Collard and Le Pen were protected by parliamentary immunity. Their parliamentary immunity, however, was revoked by an almost unanimous vote in the French National Assembly. This is the first time that members of a democratic Western government risk being imprisoned for publishing widely available photos of Islamic crimes.

    French laws are being used more and more often by the French justice system to suppress any criticism of Islam. Furthermore, in a dangerous inversion of reality, critics of Islamic terrorist violence are now systematically presented by French judges as examples of incitement to hatred and violence. The threat of jail time is added to the threat of fines.

    Consequently, those who criticize Islam — or who just show the results of Islamic terrorism — are victims of fierce prosecution, while hate-filled, racist organizations are never touched. The Islamic “Natives of the Republic” movement, for instance, regularly publishes texts saying that ” greedy Jews control the global financial system” and that “Zionists kill Palestinian children for pleasure” but are never condemned. Houria Bouteldja, the spokesperson for the movement, published a book describing Jews as vicious supporters of “Islamophobia”, and stating that the Holocaust is “infinitely less than a detail” of history. She recently took part in anti-Israel demonstrations where flags of Hamas and Hezbollah were waved and portraits of murderers of Jews were held up. Jewish organizations expressed their indignation and filed complaints — to no avail.

    The French government and the French justice system claim to treat all religions equally, but they treat Islam as if it were “more equal than others” — able to enjoy special privileges.

    In France, attacks against Islam are benign and rare, but lead to severe convictions: in January 2016, a man dropped slices of ham in front of a mosque. He was immediately sent to jail for several weeks. Attacks against Christianity, however, are countless, sometimes violent, but almost never lead to any conviction. French theaters produce anti-Christian shows almost every year. In a play called “On the Concept of the Face of God,” currently on tour throughout the country, for almost two hours, a large portrait of Jesus Christ is insulted and covered with matter that is supposed to be feces. The French Ministry of Culture subsidizes the tour. No theater director, however, would imagine producing an anti-Islam show.

    Six to eight million Muslims live in France, and the number is increasing. France’s 400,000 remaining Jews have not yet left France, but every year their the numbers shrink. Practicing Christians vanish; churches are often empty.

    Polls show that a significant proportion of the French population thinks that Islam is a threat, but French authorities choose to harass those who speak of this threat.

    In 2005, the situation was already serious. Muslim riots took place throughout the country. French President Jacques Chirac asked imams to restore calm and began to abandon the French government’s sovereignty over many districts. A few years later, President Nicolas Sarkozy claimed to organize an “Islam of France”, based on a structure he had created in 2003 when he was Minister of the Interior. He asked French Muslim leaders to call for “moderation”. He failed: French Muslim leaders said unanimously that “Islam is not violent” and “does not need moderation”. He promised to end “no-go zones” and to take back the districts abandoned under Jacques Chirac. He also failed; in 2006 there were already 751 no-go zones in France, and “as of last count,” that number is no different. President François Hollande did nothing and let the situation rot. President Emmanuel Macron now speaks of the need to “reorganize the Islam of France” but instead appears to surrender.

    In 2005, Muslim riots took place throughout France. President Jacques Chirac began to abandon the government’s sovereignty over many districts. Pictured: Riot police watch as a warehouse burns in the Paris suburb of Aubervilliers on November 4, 2005, on the eighth consecutive night of rioting. (Photo by Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images)

    Macron recently said he wants to create the post of “Grand Imam of France”, a man who would be the “spiritual leader” of Islam in France. He added that he would like to see the construction of large “cathedral mosques” in every important French city. He also wants the Arabic language to be taught in every high school, to maintain a relationship between Muslims and the language of their religion. He promises affirmative action in favor of Muslims and a more resolute fight against “those who attack Islam”. He never uses the words “radical Islam”. He speaks of “radicalization”, but says that the main danger is the “radicalization of secularism“. He does not hide that those who defend secularism — and a clear separation between the government and Islam (Riposte Laïque, for example) — are an obstacle on the path he intends to follow. Clearly, the fight against “radicalization of secularism” is in high gear!

    Marwan Muhammad, spokesman of the “Collective against Islamophobia in France” said in 2011:

    “Who has the right to say that in thirty to forty years, France will not be a Muslim country? No one in this country has the right to extinguish our right to hope for a society that is globally faithful to Islam “.

    Every day in France, men such as Marwan Muhammad have more reason to hope.

    Prominent Islamic preacher Tariq Ramadan is presently being held at the Fleury-Mérogis prison near Paris: judges could not dismiss the overwhelming charges against him of rape. Some French Muslims still claim he is being unfairly accused. Many others say he is an impostor and seem ready to get rid of him. They say it is urgent to create “authentic French Islamic institutions” fully “recognized by the French government”. President Macron could not have said it better. The Islamization of France will not stop.

    President Macron recently said he wants a law against “fake news”. If the law is adopted, all online magazines in France that do not broadcast what the government defines as “true news” could be subject to immediate government suspension. If they are located outside France, access to them would be blocked. Islamic online magazines and websites are not on the list of “fake news” providers. What online magazines and websites top the list? Those that question Islam.

  • Paul Craig Roberts: War Is On The Horizon

    Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

    Have Washington and its British vassal set a stage for testing whether Russia has the stomach for war?

    How else do we interpret the announcement by General Sergey Rudskoy, chief of the Operational Directorate of the Russian General Staff,  that

    “we have reliable information at our disposal that US instructors have trained a number of militant groups in the vicinity of the town of At-Tanf, to stage provocations involving chemical warfare agents in southern Syria. They are preparing a series of chemical munitions explosions. This fact will be used to blame the government forces. The components to produce chemical munitions have been already delivered to the southern de-escalation zone under the guise of humanitarian convoys of a number of NGOs.

    The provocations will be used as a pretext by the United States and its allies to launch strikes on military and government infrastructure in Syria.”

    Don’t expect to hear anything about this in the totally discredited Western presstitute media, which is a propaganda ministry for war.

    The Russian government must be kicking itself that it again failed to finish the job in Syria and instead permitted Washington to expand its Syrian presence, arm and train its mercenaries, provide chemical weapons, and assemble its fleet to attack Syrian forces in order to prevent their reconquest of Syrian territory.

    The question before us is:

    If the information that General Rudskoy cited is correct, what will Russia do?

    Will Russia use its missile defences and air superiority to shoot down the US missiles and aircraft, or will Russia accept the attack and again denounce the illegality of Washington’s action and protest to the UN?

    If Russia accepts the attack, Washington will push harder. Sooner or later Russia will be unable to accept another push, and war will break out.

    If war breaks out, will it be a limited conventional war or will Washington use the excuse to launch nuclear ICBMs against Russia? These questions must be going through the minds of Russia’s leadership. Russia faces the grave danger that Washington’s Fifth Column inside Russia, the Atlanticist Integrationists, those Russians in the political and business leadership who believe Russia must be, at all costs, integrated into the Western world, will lock the government in indecision and expose Russia to a nuclear first strike.

    So far Russia has continued to defeat itself by playing according to the rules of diplomacy and international law despite the obvious fact that Washington has no respect for either. During the past week, Washington’s British vassal, a country of no military or political significance, demonstrated total contempt for Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin. In other words, the insult to Russia came from a mere vassal state of Washington’s empire. An alleged poisoning by an alleged Russian nerve gas, the very existence of which is doubted by US and UK experts, of an inconsequential former spy and his daughter has been blamed, without a shred of evidence, on Russia by the British prime minister, defense minister, and foreign minister.

    The British prime minister violated law and agreements to which Britain is partner by giving Russia 24 hours to respond to an accusation for which no evidence was provided. Law and the agreements require that the country making an accusation share the evidence with the accused country, which has 10 days to assess the evidence and reply. The British government refused to abide by the agreement to which it is partner. Moreover, the British foreign minister Boris Johnson personally accused Russia’s President Putin of ordering the attempted murder of the inconsequential spy. For more information on the former spy and his lack of consequence and the absurdity of the orchestrated event, see recent postings on my website.

    Not content with the unprecedented insult to Russia and its President, the British defense minister of a country that has no capability whatsoever of defending itself against Russia, even with its liege lord’s help, said in response to Russia’s rejection of the unsupported-by-any-evidence charge that “Russia should shut up and go away.”

    This was too much for the Russian Ministry of Defense. General Igor Konashenkov replied:

    “The rhetoric of an uncouth shrew demonstrated by the Head of the British Ministry of Defense makes his utter intellectual impotence perfectly evident. All this confirms not only the nullity of all accusations towards Russia we have been hearing from London for the last several years but also that the ‘accusers’ themselves are nonentities.

    “The ‘Great’ Britain has long turned not only into a cozy nest for defectors from all over the world but also into a hub for all sorts of fake news-producing agencies: from the British ‘Syrian Observatory for Human Rights’ to the created by a British intelligence officer pseudo-Syrian ‘White Helmets’.

    “As to boorish words of the British Defense Minister regarding Russia, it seems that in the absence of the real results of professional activity, rudeness is the only weapon remaining in the arsenal of the Her Majesty’s Military.” 

    Note the total dismissal of ‘Great’ Britain by the Russian Ministry of Defence as a military and political power. From the Russian military’s standpoint Washington’s British vassal state is a total nonentity. This suggests that the Russian military is focused on Washington and is unlikely to tolerate Washington’s agents in Russian government and business circles if they attempt to leave Russia exposed by indecision.

    Perhaps the Russians will decide it is past time for them to demonstrate their superior military capabilities, and they will take out not only the US missiles and airplanes but also the fleets from which the attack is launched while putting their nuclear forces on high alert. What then would Washington do? Can a government composed of bullies drunk on hubris come to a sensible decision, or would people so arrogant as to think themselves “exceptional” and “indispensable” condemn the world, including the plants, animals, birds, and all creatures who have no idea of the murderous lunatics that rule the Western world, to death?

    There is no greater threat to life on earth than Washington. Constraining Washington’s determination to destroy life on earth is the greatest challenge humanity has faced. If we fail, we all die, every one of us and all creatures.

    Despite Russia’s military superiority, the humanity of the Russian government places it at a disadvantage as there is no concern for humanity in Washington.

  • Hillary Resurfaces, Offers No Apology To "Racist" Trump Voters, Insults "White Women" With Husbands

    Hillary Clinton has finally accepted personal responsibility for her historic loss against Donald Trump, apologized for calling half of America racist and misogynist, admitted the whole Russia thing was a smokescreen, and promised the Democratic party she’d stop undermining their efforts to rebrand ahead of Midterms.

    Just kidding.

    In a verbose weekend screed on Facebook – one week after she said Trump voters don’t like black people “getting rights” or women “getting jobs,” the closest Clinton came to the word “apologize” is that she “meant no disrespect to any individual or group” – before proceeding to suggest that weak white women might not have thought a “powerful woman” could lead, and simply voted for Trump because their husbands did:

    Democrats need to do better with white women, because I know in my heart that Democrats have much more to offer them. Do I believe that some women look at a powerful woman and question whether she can lead, maybe voting for the man their husband is voting for instead? It may not be universally true or easy to hear, but yes, it’s a dynamic still at play in our society. –Hillary Clinton

    “[T]here is anecdotal evidence and some research to suggest that women are unfortunately more swayed by men than the other way around,” Clinton insisted. “As much as I hate the possibility, and hate saying it, it’s not that crazy when you think about our ongoing struggle to reach gender balance – even within the same household.”

    Clinton also said that Trump’s message during the election was “looking backwards,” and that she won states “that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward.” 

    And so Hillary somehow once again manages to insult entire states, including those key swing states that turned red in 2016.

    No wonder Democrats – including her former campaign manager – want her to stick a cork in it.

    Incidentally, one assumes that Clinton dictated her non-apology to an assistant as the former Secretary of State fractured her wrist falling in the bathtub shortly after slipping twice down 15 unassuming stairs.

     

  • Nomi Prins: Jared Kushner, R.I.P., A Political Obit For A President's Son-In-Law

    Authored by Nomi Prins via TomDispatch.com,

    Here we are a little more than a year into the Trump presidency and his administration’s body count is already, as The Donald might put it, “unbelievable, perhaps record-setting.”

    Among the casualties are Secretary of State Rex Tillerson; my former boss at Goldman Sachs, economic policy chief Gary Cohn; National Security Advisor Michael Flynn; FBI Director James Comey; White House Press Secretary and Communications Director Sean Spicer; four other communications directors including Hope Hicks who, having been Ivanka Trump’s confidante, was elevated to the status of the president’s “real daughter” before her own White House exit; chief strategist Steve Bannon; Chief of Staff Reince Priebus; a bunch of other instant relics of Trumpian political history, and a partridge in a pear tree. (Actually, a 200-year-old magnolia uprooted from the White House grounds thanks to the first lady.)

    Responding to Hope Hicks’ departure and, perhaps subliminally, the rumored future exile of son-in-law Jared Kushner, the president typically half-lamented and half-quipped, “So many people have been leaving the White House. It’s invigorating, since you want turnover. I like chaos. It really is good. Who’s going to be the next to leave? Steve Miller or Melania?”

    Melania has been unavailable for comment on her own possible future place among the fallen of the Trump era.  Perhaps, though, she’ll hang around and offer her husband a little comfort in Stormy weather, as rumors continue to circulate that his perfectly real daughter and her all-too-real husband may be ousted from the premises.

    Not surprisingly, personnel issues seem to be on the president’s mind these days.  On March 6th, in the East Room of the White House and flanked by the Swedish prime minister, he boasted, “So many people want to come in. I have a choice of anybody. I could take any position in the White House, and I’ll have a choice of the 10 top people having to do with that position. Everybody wants to be there.”

    However, with constant media conjectures about yet more departures including National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and possibly even White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, there seems to be a predisposition to move out of, not into, this Oval Office.  In a remarkably short space of time, President Trump has already achieved a record 43% turnover rate for top-level staff members, some of whom may be jumping ship in hopes of emerging with reputations relatively untarred, while avoiding lengthy prison sentences.

    As collateral damage in his world mounts, it seems as if the only members of the Trump Empire, White House division, guaranteed job security are his lawyers and perhaps Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. Even that most nuclear of families — his — seemed in peril of exploding, as the countdown to Kushner’s exit approaches the zero hour. It looks as if we may all have scored front-row seats for the latest you’re-fired episode in the White House reality show.

    Given the not-if-but-when nature of Kushner’s departure from the White House, it’s none too soon for media outlets to prepare themselves.  With that in mind, here is a prospective political obituary for him.

    Bringing Peace to a Riven World

    The political career of Jared Kushner met a slow death from unparalleled incompetence, conflicts of interest, and financial sleights of hand. He is survived by his father-in-law Donald Trump and — though no one knows for how long — his wife, Ivanka. At age 37, he had held the role of White House senior adviser and assistant to the president since the day Donald Trump entered the Oval Office. Just two months later, his wife agreed to take a similar advisory position.  Though together they were reported to be worth a mere $740 million, they generously offered to do their new jobs without pay from a sense of duty to country and the kindness of their hearts — and also perhaps to avoid running afoul of an anti-nepotism law passed in 1967 when Lyndon B. Johnson was president.

    Jared’s year-plus in the White House proved another Trump-style record setter, a pro bono financial odyssey of a sort no previous White House had ever witnessed.  While traveling the globe to carry out his “duties” and hobnob, negotiate, and pose for endless photo-ops with world leaders from Iraq, China, Israel, and a host of other countries — a role once upon a time filled by the secretary of state — the overworked adviser somehow found a few moments to cash in his diplomatic air-miles big time.

    In his Rolodex of titles, he would also serve as head of a completely fabricated new entity, the White House Office of American Innovation. In both capacities, he stood ready to change the world, a goal he achieved handily — if the world you happen to be talking about was his own financial one. And that was no small thing.  After all, it’s not easy to oversee and advance (or, in his case, even potentially depth charge) your private business interests while lending a hand running the country, not to speak of the world, and freeing your father-in-law to work on his golf stroke.

    For example, Kushner attempted to extract from investors in Qatar a modest half-billion dollars in bailout funds for a cratering Manhattan skyscraper, 666 Fifth Avenue, that he had purchased for his family business while still in the private sector. Unfortunately, that particular deal fell through, after which Kushner and his father-in-law happily backed the Saudis in their blockade and quarantine of Qatar.

    Taking his business-oriented focus on the road as the White House liaison for peace in the Middle East, Kushner was also tasked with the simple goal of brokering the settlement of the Israel-Palestine conflict. His familiarity with the region was significant since, among other things, he had gotten at least four major loans from Bank Hapoalim, Israel’s largest bank, for the Kushner family real estate company. (Hapoalim is undergoing a criminal probe by the U.S. government for tax evasion services it reportedly provided to its wealthy clients.) Shortly before President Trump’s visit to Israel in May 2017, Kushner Companies also received a $30 million investment from Menora Mivtachim, one of Israel’s largest insurers — and what could be more peaceable than that? As everyone knows, Kushner himself left office just as peace was settling over the region (and the U.S. was moving its embassy to Jerusalem).

    China, of course, had been a longtime target of Donald Trump until — in a similarly diplomatic frame of mind — Kushner helped organize a fabulous Dover sole dinner at the president’s Mar-a-Lago club with Chinese President Xi Jinping last April.  He would also prove to be a key figure in smoothing the way for better relations with that rising global superpower — an approach that just happened to fit perfectly with the Kushner family business.  Only a month after that dinner, for example, his sister, Nicole Meyer, was already reportedly pitching the glories of One Journal Square, a Jersey City housing project the Kushner family owns that was in need of $150 million in investments, to a gathering of 100 potential Chinese investors at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Beijing. As part of that pitch, while dropping her brother’s name, she offered them a path into the U.S. EB-5 visa program, sometimes referred to as a “citizenship for sale” program, which they could enter through Kushner properties for a mere $500,000 each.

    Building brilliantly on his Chinese portfolio, Jared Kushner, too, held private meetings with elite potential Chinese investors in… well, properties like his family’s and spent copious time with the Chinese ambassador to the U.S. during and after the election campaign. He allegedly also attended high-level meetings with the chairman of Anbang Insurance Group during the Trump transition period.  At the time, Anbang just coincidentally was considering making an investment in 666 Fifth Avenue.  Unfortunately, no deal resulted. Since then, the company has been seized by the Chinese government and its chairman prosecuted for “economic crimes.”  For Kushner, refinancing that single building in New York proved no easier than making peace in the Middle East.

    But give him credit: while advising the president, he never stopped looking out for those closest to him (i.e., his family) and never forgot his role as a junior mogul on the make.  In the process, he entertained a cast of key bank executives.  In an office only doors from the Oval Office, he regularly connected with some of the biggest players on Wall Street, including those at bailout-prone Citigroup, scandal-ridden Deutsche Bank, and the asset-management goliath Blackstone Group. As the Wall Street Journal reported, he also remained in undisclosed business relationships with Goldman Sachs, investor George Soros, and billionaire venture capitalist Peter Thiel. All three had business stakes in a “real-estate tech startup called Cadre that Kushner co-founded and currently partly owns.”

    Being the statesman he was, however, there can be little doubt that Kushner attended such meetings purely to explore the state of banking and investment for the sake of the economic well-being of the American people. After all, no portfolio, from the secretary of state’s to infrastructure and the opioid crisis, was beyond his skills.

    In his brief time in the White House, one thing can be said: his generosity of spirit was second to none. He opened his arms to any financial firm that wanted to help him put the United States on a path back to being great again.  (Whatever multi-million-dollar loans to the Kushner family business occurred in the process surely represented no more than a random confluence of events.) Last November, for example, Apollo Global Management, one of the world’s largest private equity firms, loaned $184 million to Kushner’s family real estate company in order to refinance a mortgage on a Chicago skyscraper. That was after its founder, an adviser to the Trump administration on “infrastructure,” met numerous times with Kushner in the White House.

    When that sum proved less than adequate for the family’s dreams, a far larger company, one that the U.S government had bailed out during the financial crisis of 2007-2008, stepped in and offered his family firm an even bigger loan.  It came from Citigroup, which lent Kushner Companies $325 million to help finance office buildings in Brooklyn.  As the New York Times reported, “That loan was made in the spring of 2017, shortly after Mr. Kushner met in the White House with Citigroup’s chief executive, Michael L. Corbat.”

    In all such situations, the appearance of impropriety was at best circumstantial. In his year-plus in the White House, Kushner unfortunately became the subject of “fake news,” above all by reporters pushing the absurd idea that his family business had somehow profited by his unpaid position in the Trump administration.

    Death in a Revolving Door

    Only in February did things start going truly badly for the young presidential adviser.  Having held only an interim top-secret security clearance for more than a year while his background check stalled (reportedly due to fears that he might be manipulated by foreign powers over his family’s finances), he was suddenly downgraded to “secret” by White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, considered anything but a “Javanka” ally. Such a functional demotion meant that he suddenly had less access to key documents and crucial information of governing than the White House calligrapher.  In the process, he got pummeled in the media (through no fault of his own, of course).  

    President Trump was reportedly “frustrated” by that media browbeating, but no less so by Kushner himself.  According to the New York Times, Trump now viewed his son-in-law “as a liability because of his legal entanglements, the investigations of the Kushner family’s real estate company, and the publicity over having his security clearance downgraded.” It even began to be rumored that the president had privately asked Chief of Staff Kelly to begin the process of pushing not just Kushner but his own daughter out of the White House. Given the president’s well-documented predisposition to turn his back on former loyalists, that proved to be the end of the road.  In Trumpian terms, Kushner quickly found himself not six feet out of power, but six feet under it.

    It was with deep regret that Jared Kushner left behind his cozy office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and his unfinished masterpiece: peace in the Middle East (and possibly the world). He did, however, retain the Washington residence that the first daughter and he had occupied for $15,000 a month. That humble abode was owned by Chilean mogul Andrónico Luksic, whose mining company happens to be mired in a dispute with the U.S government over billions of dollars (which, it goes without saying, had no bearing on the Kushners’ choice of a dwelling).

    In his post-political life, Kushner faces another problem he couldn’t solve while in the White House: by January 2019 the Kushner family organization needs to cough up $1.2 billion to save its flagship New York property from defaulting, a building that, despite Kushner’s well known savvy when it comes to… well, everything, has been losing money since it was purchased for a record $1.8 billion in 2007.  Fortunately, who knows better than the Trump family and by extension the Kushners that, after every possible investor is exhausted, bankruptcy court is always an option.

    In the end, Kushner’s White House journey was through a door revolving around the instability of Donald Trump’s judgment.

    And so Jared Kushner’s political career ended. Of course, he’ll always have, if not Paris, then Jerusalem and the odd trip to Mexico.

    He is survived in the White House by his father-in-law and, for the time being, his wife. Meanwhile, that revolving door continues to spin.

  • Big Brother Arrives: China Bans People With "Bad Social Credit" From Planes, Trains

    Two years ago, we reported that various cities throughout China are currently piloting a “social-credit system” that will assign a “personal citizen score” to every single person based on behavior such as spending habits, turnstile violations and filial piety.

    Hangzhou’s local government is piloting a “social credit” system the Communist Party has said it wants to roll out nationwide by 2020, a digital reboot of the methods of social control the regime uses to avert threats to its legitimacy.

    More than three dozen local governments across China are beginning to compile digital records of social and financial behavior to rate creditworthiness. A person can incur black marks for infractions such as fare cheating, jaywalking and violating family-planning rules. The effort echoes the dang’an, a system of dossiers the Communist party keeps on urban workers’ behavior.

    In time, Beijing expects to draw on bigger, combined data pools, including a person’s internet activity, according to interviews with some architects of the system and a review of government documents.

    Input data for the social credit system comes from a variety of government sources.

    We warned at the time that this ‘score’ could be used to blacklist citizens from loans, jobs, or travel, for example.

    Algorithms would use a range of data to calculate a citizen’s rating, which could then be used to determine all manner of activities, such as who gets loans, or faster treatment at government offices or access to luxury hotels.

    So, imagine our shock, following China’s massive censorship efforts over the last few weeks surrounding Xi’s successful push to become emperor for life, when China said this week it will begin applying its so-called social credit system to flights and trains and stop people who have committed misdeeds from taking such transport for up to a year.

    As Reuters reports,  people who would be put on the restricted lists included those found to have committed acts like spreading false information about terrorism and causing trouble on flights, as well as those who used expired tickets or smoked on trains, according to two statements issued on the National Development and Reform Commission’s website on Friday.

    China has flagged plans to roll out a system that will allow government bodies to share information on its citizens’ trustworthiness and issue penalties based on a so-called social credit score.

    However, there are signs that the use of social credit scoring on domestic transport could have started years ago.

    In early 2017, the country’s Supreme People’s Court said during a press conference that 6.15 million Chinese citizens had been banned from taking flights for social misdeeds.

    President Xi Jinping’s plan, based on the principle ‘once untrustworthy, always restricted’, will come into effect on 1 May…

    The system is designed to automatically provide “green lanes” for faster access to government services for “well-behaved” citizens while levying travel bans and other punishments on those who get out of line. 

  • Former FBI Agent: To Preserve His Integrity, Mueller Must Step Aside

    Authored by Kenneth Strange, op-ed via The Hill,

    It was painful to witness. One of our own – a deputy FBI director no less – was fired barely a day or two away from retirement and a certain pension. And now Andrew McCabe faces possible federal charges for lying to other federal agents, charges that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller knows all too well and is wielding with great effect in the Russian collusion case.

    Still, I wonder about Mueller. McCabe, Peter Strzok and James Comey all are public servants who former FBI Director Mueller mentored, supervised or knew well. It has got to be hugely disappointing for Mueller to stand by and watch the people who he managed, who worked for and were loyal to him, and who he was fond of become a part of this train wreck. As a former supervisor, Mueller is accountable for those people he supervised — for the good and the bad. How does he feel about it? We don’t know. He remains mute.

    We all know about Mueller’s stellar career in the military, in the Department of Justice and with the FBI. Mueller played a key role in enhancing the FBI’s image at a seminal moment in bureau history. And he should be and has been lauded for his courage and tireless service to the country. Everyone I know at the bureau and at the DOJ has had good things to say about Mueller. More importantly, the consensus among law enforcement and beyond is that Bob Mueller is a man of unquestionable integrity.

    But that was then and this is now. 

    Mueller’s first mistake was in having Strzok as part of his “dream” team of lawyers and investigators. I thought Mueller would have been a better judge of character. It also begs the question why Strzok would be selected to work on both the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the Russian collusion case. It should have been one or the other – that’s common sense. 

    In fairness to Mueller, when he discovered that Strzok, one of his favorite investigators, was involved in conduct unbecoming an FBI agent, he acted immediately and removed him from his team. But Mueller kept that news quiet and away from the public for several months. That, in itself, seems out of character for Mueller.

    While Peter Strzok still lurks in the basement of the Hoover Building, the optics could not be worse for Mueller and his impartial investigation. His team has worked diligently and for long hours to find “the goods” on an array of unsuspecting and discrete individuals. It would be a shame to have their good work impugned by those who would accuse Mueller of a conflict of interest — that he is perceived as too close to the same people who initiated the allegation of Russian collusion.

    As it stands now, the credibility of the special’s counsel’s investigation is steadily eroding. The longer it goes on with Mueller, the man behind the curtain, the less effective the investigation and its results.

    Mr. Mueller, show the American people what my colleagues in law enforcement already know — that you are a man of great wisdom and integrity. Do the honorable thing and recuse yourself from the Russian collusion investigation. The DOJ requires a special prosecutor without ties to Jim Comey, Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok. The investigation will get done; don’t worry about that. Your team will see to it. 

    Mr. Mueller, are you listening? You restored public confidence in the bureau.

    Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) called you a “great American.” You are still thought of highly. Step aside with dignity and let the investigation play itself out without any further controversy about you, the FBI and your team. The American people deserve no less.

    *  *  *

    Kenneth Strange served the FBI as a member of the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Newark, New Jersey and as Special Agent in Charge of the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General in Los Angeles. He is presently the vice president of business development for an international investigative services company.

  • Top US General Says American Troops Should Be Ready To Die For Israel

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…” This is the oath of enlistment that every American military service member or federal employee takes upon entry into government service (with slight variation for commissioned officers).

    With the largest joint U.S.-Israeli air defense exercise ever conducted having recently concluded, which involved over 2,500 American service personnel, and in the midst of heightened Israeli involvement in the Syrian war, we find ourselves asking…

    Are US troops ready to fight and to die for America’s Israel’s defense? …We think not, but there are US generals out there enthusiastically promoting the idea.

    Brig.-Gen Zvika Haimovitch, the head of the IDF’s Aerial Defense Division and US Air Force 3rd AF Commander Lt. Gen. Richard Clark. Image source: Jerusalem Post.

    Earlier this month, in the midst of the 9th annual 12-day massive joint exercise named “Juniper Cobra” which was hailed in Israeli media as the largest of its kind, simulating a “battle on three fronts” (namely, Syria-Lebanon-Gaza Strip) US Third Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Richard Clark spelled out just such a scenario wherein US troops could be asked to fight and to die for defense of America Israel – even to the point of being placed under Israeli commanders responsible for battlefield decision making. 

    While major joint military exercises involving significant troop deployments are nothing new for the US and its allies (Juniper Cobra itself has been conducted annually for nearly a decade), Lt. Gen. Clark’s words to Israeli media are truly precedent setting and shocking, especially as he is among the highest ranking military officers in the US armed forces.

    It is well worth reading the alarming scenario Gen. Clark laid out while speaking to the Jerusalem Post in its entirety:

    “The United States and Israel enjoy a strong and enduring military-to-military partnership built on a trust that has been developed over decades of cooperation,” said USAF Third Air Force commander Lt.-Gen. Richard Clark, who also serves as the commander for the deploying Joint Task Force – Israel.

    “The Juniper Cobra exercises continue to strengthen this relationship, providing us with the opportunity to bolster interoperability and develop seamless integration with our Israeli partners.”

    According to Clark, the US and Israeli troops will work side-by-side under each other’s relevant chain of command.

    But this is where Clark pushes far across the normative “military-to-military partnership” characteristic of joint drills with other allied nations. He says that US troops should be prepared to die for the Jewish State:

    “As far as decision-making, it is a partnership,” he continued, stressing nonetheless that “at the end of the day it is about the protection of Israel – and if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to Zvika [Brig.-Gen. Zvika Haimovitch, head of the IDF’s Aerial Defense Division].”

    Washington and Israel have signed an agreement which would see the US come to assist Israel with missile defense in times of war and, according to [Israeli commander] Haimovitch, “I am sure once the order comes we will find here US troops on the ground to be part of our deployment team to defend the State of Israel.”

    And those US troops who would be deployed to Israel, are prepared to die for the Jewish state, Clark said. “We are ready to commit to the defense of Israel anytime we get involved in a kinetic fight there is always the risk that there will be casualties. But we accept that – as every conflict we train for and enter, there is always that possibility,” he said.

    And it appears that both military leaders are in agreement on this point – that they are ready and willing to put US troops in harm’s way in pursuit of Israeli defense policy.

    Disturbingly, Clark acknowledges willingness for life-and-death battlefield decisions impacting American soldiers to be placed in the hands of the Israeli chain of command in saying: “if there is a question in regards to how we will operate, the last vote will probably go to [Israeli General] Zvika.”

    While in more stable times in the Middle East, Clark’s words might possibly be dismissed as hyperbole and misplaced enthusiasm for “the mission” – his words come as Israel is already actively involved on two fronts: Gaza and Syria. And according to many analysts and reports, including one recently leaked internal Israeli defense memo, Israel is ramping up for devastating engagement along a third front as Tel Aviv continues to view Lebanese Hezbollah to its north as the prime threat to Israeli security.

    Should broader war break out between Israel, Hezbollah, Iran, and Syria, will US troops who find themselves working closely with the IDF be forced to obey the commands of Israeli generals, even to the point of death? We can’t find anything in the oath of enlistment or the Constitution [federal statute in 10 U.S.C. 502, and based in Article VI of the Constitution] that requires US citizens or soldiers to defend and fight for a foreign nation.

  • Six Things We Can Learn About US Plutocracy By Looking At Jeff Bezos

    Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

    I often look at Jeff Bezos when trying to understand how American oligarchy functions for a few reasons.

    Firstly, currently occupying the number one slot on Forbes’ billionaires list, he is the top dog. He figured out how to play the plutocracy game quickly, and how to play it better than anyone else.

    Second, our civilization is currently headed on a clear trajectory deeper and deeper into Orwellian tech dystopia if we don’t turn things around or drive humanity into extinction first. The new money tech plutocrats own the foundation of that dark future, and we should all keep a very, very close eye on them on general principles as well as to get a read on where things are headed.

    Lastly and most importantly, as a new money plutocrat Bezos has had to build his empire with high visibility in the information age. The old money plutocrats built their kingdoms in much darker times, with some families setting the foundations of their rule hundreds of years ago when there was very little in the way of newspaper coverage, and certainly no alternative media scrutinizing power. Bezos’ wheelings and dealings are above ground to a much greater extent, because he’s had to do everything in the public eye.

    With that in mind, here are six things we can learn about how US plutocracy operates by looking at Jeff Bezos.

    1. The rich rule America because of a system wherein money translates directly into political power.

    Amazon has increased its spending on Washington lobbying by 400 percent in the last five years, far in excess of its competition. Bezos hasn’t been doing this to be charitable. With growing antitrust concerns, taxation to avoid, lucrative Pentagon deals to secure, and what some experts are describing as an agenda to control the underlying infrastructure of the economy, he needs Washington on his side.

    Plutocrats do not pour large fortunes into lobbying campaigns without reason. They do it because it works.

    A 2014 study by Princeton University found that while wealthy Americans have a great deal of sway over US policy and behavior, ordinary Americans have virtually none. This is because corporate lobbying and campaign financing have made the bribery of public officials perfectly legal as plutocrat-championed legislation like 1976’s Buckley v. Valeo, 1978’s First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti as well as the infamous Citizens United v. FEC has created a system where money translates directly into political power.

    2. Because money equals power and power is relative, plutocrats are naturally incentivized to keep the public poor.

    Plutocrats necessarily rule such an oligarchic system as surely as kings rule a kingdom. But if everyone is king, then no one is king. If your entire empire is built on a system where money equals power, then you are necessarily incentivized to keep money out of the hands of the public while amassing as much as possible for yourself.

    The larger the Amazon empire grows, the more of its competition dies and the lower wages get. At the hottest point in the 2016 Democratic party primary, Bezos’ Washington Post ran sixteen smear pieces in sixteen hours against Senator Bernie Sanders, who is largely responsible for bringing the word “oligarchy” into mainstream consciousness.

    Sanders famously ran a campaign powered by small donations averaging 27 dollars. The less money people have, the less of those kinds of donations they can afford to make, and the less political influence the masses can wield. With a majority of Americans already unable to afford even a thousand dollar emergency, it doesn’t take much more squeeze to kill all hope of another populist insurgency of that sort.

    Power is relative and money is power, so the poorer you are, the more powerful the plutocrats become.

    3. Controlling the media is very important to plutocrats.

    Jeff Bezos, the most crafty plutocrat alive, did not purchase the Washington Postin 2013 because he expected newspapers to make a lucrative resurgence. He purchased it so that he could ensure exactly what WaPo did to Bernie Sanders in 2016. The neoliberal Orwellian establishment that Bezos is building his empire upon requires a propaganda mouthpiece, so Bezos purchased a long-trusted US newspaper to accomplish that. WaPo is now easily the most virulently pro-establishment among all large mainstream publications, not just defending establishment narratives but actively attacking anyone who challenges them.

    The current system which only serves the wealthy and the powerful cannot exist without nonstop advertising convincing the American public that the status quo is in their best interest. Plutocrat-owned corporate media is used to manufacture consent for that system; for the economic system, for the wars which prop it up, for the politicians which the plutocrats own and operate, for the political system which they have infiltrated every level of. The ability to manipulate the way the public thinks is an essential part of plutocratic rule.

    4. Plutocrats form alliances with defense and intelligence agencies.

    Jeff Bezos is a contractor with the CIA and sits on a Pentagon advisory board. He is doing everything he can to cozy up and ingratiate himself to the establishment on which his empire is built, up to and including kicking WikiLeaks off Amazon servers in 2010. This dances very creepily with Amazon’s involvement in surveillance systems and digital “assistance” devices like Alexa.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    If you want to be a millionaire in the current system, you can probably do so with luck, privilege, talent and hard work. If you want to be a billionaire, you’ve got to learn how to collaborate with existing power structures. Due to the extreme opacity of those power structures in America hidden behind the veil of government secrecy, it is hard to know exactly what forms those alliances take, but they clearly do happen as a glance at Bezos’ career shows.

    5. The people willing to do anything it takes to get to the top are the ones who get there.

    Normal human beings would have a difficult time knowing businesses are dying and workers are getting poorer as their empire grows. Jeff Bezos just keeps growing. He will happily collaborate with depraved intelligence agencies, manipulate and propagandize Americans, and expand the gulf between the rich and the poor just to be king of the world.

    This is the sort of person who rises to the top in unregulated capitalist systems. Money rewards people who have shut down (or are born without) that part of themselves which empathizes and is made uncomfortable by exploiting and harming others. In a system where money rewards sociopathy and money equals power, that means we necessarily wind up in a system that is ruled by sociopaths. Those plutocrats form alliances with each other and with defense and intelligence agencies to ensure the continuation and expansion of their empires, and that alliance is currently king of America.

    6. It will never be enough for them.

    Jeff Bezos is worth 131.5 billion dollars as of this writing, and he is getting moreambitious, not less. He doesn’t need that money to buy more stuff; it isn’t about money for him. It’s about power. The impulse to rise to the top of your monkey tribe is an impulse buried deep within our evolutionary heritage, and when that impulse isn’t checked by empathy for your fellow man it creates an unquenchable drive to grow and grow in invincible power no matter what kind of suffering that creates.

    This explains why the world is the way it is today, with billionaires making so much money last year alone that they could end extreme poverty for our entire planet seven times over, but don’t. With Americans dying of underinsurance and exposure on the streets while billions of dollars are poured into bombing poor people overseas. With tensions escalating between two nuclear superpowers over some petty geopolitical agendas. With the Arctic warming at an astonishing rate while rainforests and biodiversity vanish perhaps forever.

    It will never be enough. They will keep taking and taking and taking and taking, killing and killing and killing and killing, until they have it all and everything is dead. They lack the part of themselves which stops that from happening. This is a vehicle with no brakes.

    We need to change the system which enables these depraved individuals to rise to the top and rule over us. Governments should serve people, not omnicidal, ecocidal sociopathic oligarchs. We must take our world back from these monsters.

    *  *  *

    Thanks for reading! My daily articles are entirely reader-funded, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following me on Twitter, bookmarking my website, checking out my podcast, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

  • Obama's Former Campaign Director Makes Bombshell Claim: Facebook Was "On Our Side"

    The recent controversy and escalating scandal over Facebook’s decision to ban Trump-linked political data firm Cambridge Analytica over the use of data harvested through a personality app under the guise of academic research has opened a veritable Pandora’s box of scandal for the Silicon Valley social media giant. 

    Carol Davidsen, who served as Obama’s director of integration and media analytics during his 2012 campaign (in her LinkedIn profile she says she was responsible for “The Optimizer” & “Narwhal” big data analytics platforms), claims – with evidence, that Facebook found out about a massive data-mining operation they were conducting to “suck out the whole social graph” in order to target potential voters. After Facebook found out, they knowingly allowed them to continue doing it because they were supportive of the campaign. 

    “[M]ore than 1 million Obama backers who signed up for the [Facebook-based app] gave the campaign permission to look at their Facebook friend lists. In an instant, the campaign had a way to see the hidden young voters. Roughly 85% of those without a listed phone number could be found in the uploaded friend lists. What’s more, Facebook offered an ideal way to reach them,” reads an article Davidsen posted as a prelude to her postings. 

    In a series of Sunday night tweets, Davidsen explained how the Obama campaign was able to use Facebook data to “append to our email lists.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    When Facebook found out about the data mining for political purposes – the same thing they just banned Cambridge Analytica for doing, they “didn’t stop us.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Facebook even “came to office in the days following election recruiting & were very candid that they allowed us to do things they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.”  

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    So – it seems that Facebook has selective standards when it comes to their data collection policy. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Cambridge Analytica bought data harvested using a personality app called “thisisyourdigitallife,” created by two psychology professors. When CA was asked to stop and delete all of the harvested data, they did – however Facebook banned Cambridge Analytics and their parent company SCL after an anonymous source which Facebook won’t disclose reported that not all of the data had been deleted. 

    So the 2012 Obama campaign was scraping data from Facebook, got caught, and was specifically told they were allowed to do things “they wouldn’t have allowed someone else to do because they were on our side.“

    Davidsen then tweeted “I am also 100% positive that Facebook activity recruits and staffs people that are on the other side.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Funny she should say that!

    Turns out one of the two founding directors of Global Science Research (GSR), which sold the data to Cambridge Analytics, is employed by Facebook!

    Joseph Chancellor was one of two founding directors of Global Science Research (GSR), the company that harvested Facebook data using a personality app under the guise of academic research and later shared the data with Cambridge Analytica.

    He was hired to work at Facebook as a quantitative social psychologist around November 2015, roughly two months after leaving GSR, which had by then acquired data on millions of Facebook users.

    Chancellor is still working as a researcher at Facebook’s Menlo Park headquarters in California, where psychologists frequently conduct research and experiments using the company’s vast trove of data on more than 2 billion users. –The Guardian.

    And as the broader public has merely scratched the surface of the tangled webs politicized social media platforms weave, Facebook’s Chief Security Officer has already decided to get the hell out of dodge. One can only imagine what some real digging would unveil.

Digest powered by RSS Digest