Thursday, October 01, 2020

Things that are really other things

Gosztola.  Stefania Maurizi.  An example:
"9. what I find it jaw-dropping about the prosecution's arguments on #UCGlobal:Prosecution argues there is basically no problem if the investigation on #UCGlobal confirms that US acquired advanced info on JA's legal strategy thanks to #UCGlobal's spying activities:US won't use it"
and:
"10. I'm not exaggerating: this is what Kromberg argues in his statements: if US actually got legally privileged info thanks to #UCGlobal's spying, US won't use it against JA. Imagine if police catch a thief who stole millions $ and the thief tells police:I won't use that money"
Sheldon's spying, in any non-corrupt trial, would be enough by itself to have the entire matter thrown out.

"Your Man in the Public Gallery: Assange Hearing Day 21" (Murray).  By allowing all this material in without cross examination, the prosecution is essentially indicating that they know it will have no effect whatsoever on the final determination by this 'judge'.  The decision is no doubt already on her laptop, having been kindly written for her by the CIA.

"LETTER FROM LONDON: The Surreal US Case Against Assange" (Mercouris).  In a fair trial, the CIA would have fallen between the cracks of the three indictments.
"The case against Assange has its origin in the calamitous “War on Terror” launched by the Bush administration in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

That “war” provided the cover for a series of violent military aggressions, primarily in the Middle East, by the U.S. and its closest allies, first and foremost Britain but also including other countries such as Saudi Arabia and France.

The result has been a series of wars in a succession of Middle East countries — Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen— fought by the U.S. and its allies and proxies, which have caused the devastation of whole societies, and the death and dispersal of millions.

In the process the U.S. has become drawn increasingly into practices which it once condemned, or at least said it condemned. These include the “extrajudicial killing” (i.e. murder) of people — who have included children and U.S. citizens — by drone strikes, a practice which has now become routine; the kidnapping of individuals and their detention without trial in places like Guantanamo, a practice which despite unconvincing protestations that “extraordinary rendition” no longer happens almost certainly continues; and the practice of torture, at one time referred to as “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which almost certainly still continues, and indeed appears to have become normalized.

All of this activity straightforwardly violates international (and domestic U.S.) law, including war crimes law and human rights law, and does so moreover in fundamental ways.

It also requires, in order to implement the policies that result in these unlawful acts, in the creation of a vast and ultimately unaccountable national security apparatus of a sort that is ultimately incompatible with a democratic society. Inevitably its activities, which have become routinely unlawful, are becoming unlawful within the territory of the United States, as well as outside it.

This manifests itself in all sorts of ways, for example through the vast, indiscriminate and illegal bulk-surveillance program exposed by the whistleblower Edward Snowden, and by the systemic FISA surveillance abuse exposed over the course of the Russiagate “scandal.”

The extent to which the very existence of the national security apparatus, required to implement various U.S. illegal activities and to achieve its foreign policy goals, has become incompatible with a democratic society, is shown by one of the most alarming of recent developments, both in Britain and in the United States.

This is the growing complicity of much of the media in concealing its illegal activities. Obviously without that complicity these activities would be impossible, as would the serial violations of international law, including war crimes law and human rights, which the United States and some of its allies now routinely engage in.


All this explains the extreme reaction to Julian Assange, and the determined attempts to destroy him, and to pulp his reputation.

Julian Assange and his organization WikiLeaks, have done those things which the U.S. government and its national security apparatus most fear, and have worked hardest to prevent, by exposing the terrible reality of much of what the U.S. government now routinely does, and is determined to conceal, and what much of the media is helping the U.S. government to conceal.

Thus in a series of astonishing revelations Julian Assange and WikiLeaks have exposed in the so-called embassy cables the extraordinarily manipulative conduct of U.S. foreign policy; in the Vault 7 disclosures the instruments the CIA uses in order to — as U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said, “lie” and “cheat” — and, most disturbingly, in collaboration with Chelsea Manning, the rampant war crimes and egregious human rights abuses carried out by the U.S. military during the illegal war and occupation of Iraq.

This is an extraordinary record for a journalist, and for an organization, WikiLeaks, which was only set up in 2006. Not surprisingly, the result has been that the pursuit of Assange by the U.S. government has been relentless, whilst the media, much of which has been complicit in covering up its crimes, has preferred to look the other way."
Wars For The Jews are what's really on trial here, which is why the (((media))) is pretending nothing is going on, and Adelson has taken such a big role in the illegal surveillance.

"Navalny ‘is working with CIA’: Kremlin makes explosive allegation after opposition figure blames Putin for alleged poisoning" (MacDonald).

"The Leahy Laws: why Biden’s promise to Israel is illegal" (Baroud) (my emphasis in red):
"In 1998, the first of what are known as the Leahy Laws were established by Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy. The first institution of this resides in the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) of 1961 in Section 620M, and the second in the Department of Defence appropriations bill/the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014. Essentially, the law states that foreign military assistance must be suspended or discontinued if there exists credible information that the recipient foreign security force unit has committed a gross human rights violation. A “gross human rights violation” is defined by the FAA as: “Cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment; prolonged detention without charges and trial; causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons; and other flagrant denials of the right to life, liberty, or the security of person.”

Since 1946, the American government has provided billions in military aid to Israel, as well billions in loan guarantees to help Israel develop its qualitative military edge which it uses almost exclusively to torment and slaughter Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Specific infractions include Israeli prisons holding around 700 Palestinian children, over 75 per cent of whom report being tortured and physically abused; the use of white phosphorus on civilian targets in Gaza; and the bullets that have murdered and disabled thousands of peaceful Palestinian demonstrators
In theory, a single violation is enough to have military aid revoked from the violating unit — in this case Israel — as per the Leahy Laws. The most reputable human rights organisations have reported on and recorded details of Israel’s violations extensively. However, aid packages to Israel have been increased annually, with the help of Joe Biden. Only a single publically known investigation has ever taken place against Israel, in 2006, even though the author of the law, Senator Leahy, requested that the State Department investigate Israeli human rights violations in 2016."
"The Politics That Led to the “Worst Debate”" (Ford).  It is difficult to forget that Barry mobilized the blacks to knife Bernie in the back and install Biden.

"Russian options in the Karabakh conflict" (The Saker).  Comment by Jamshyd:
"Russia will not do anything. This fight has nothing to do with Russia.
Israel is the one selling arms to Azerbaijan and stoking this conflict. Today a fourth missile landed on Iranian soil.
This conflict is about destabilizing the Iranian border, just like the Afghan and Iraq wars.
More missiles will “accidentally” land in Iran, until one hits a village and kills some Iranians. Then Iran will have to open up yet another battle front.
Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, and soon Gharabagh.
They want to see how thin they can spread Iran’s resources. Russia will help the empire, just like they’ve been helping Israel in Syria."
Israel versus the Turkey-Iran-Qatar bloc:  "The Time of Troubles in Transcaucasia – Part 1" (Bhadrakumar)
blog comments powered by Disqus