from J Noir Channel:
by Dave Hodges, The Common Sense Show:
Hillary Clinton and John McCain have a lot in common. Besides undermining the US Constitution and working against the interests of the United States, they share three similar variables: (1) They are undeniably supporters of ISIS and each had a hand in the creation of the most dangerous terrorist entity on the planet; (2) They both sustained supposed injuries to the same foot at the exact same time and we wearing the exact same orthodic boot; and (3) Both parties are the target of very vicious and persistent rumors that beneath their walking boots are GPS locators which are placed on the ankles of indcted suspects of serious crimes who may be a flight risk.
Hillary has been a supporter of ISIS since its inception.
WikiLeaks continued to reveal criminal and outright treasonous behavior on the part of Hillary Clinton. WikiLeaks, with their “retrieval” of Clinton emails continues to show ties between Clinton and foreign governments, criminally corrupt corporations and serious human rights violations.
At the center of the WikiLeaks revelations of Clinton’s treason and criminal behavior demonstrates undeniable links to Lafarge. Lafarge paid taxes to ISIS in order that they could protect its cement factory from destruction. The factor is located approximately northeast of Aleppo, Syria.
Another criminal investigation conducted by a Syrian news agency, Zaman al-Wasl, an independent news organization, stated that Lafarge bought oil from ISIS on a consistent basis.
In a 2007 Washington Post article, at a time, when Clinton provided the bulk of the Clinton family income. in the 1990’s before husband Bill was elected President of the United States. Hillary Clinton, at that time, was “earning more than $100,000 a year from her law firm salary and corporate board fees.” At the time, she served on Lafarge’s board, making about $31,000 a year from the company. the year 2007, was the year that Lafarge built its cement plant in Syria.
In some respects, it could be said that Hillary Clinton has calmed down since her days on the Rose Law Firm and subsequently serving on the Lafarge Board of Directors, which she did from 1990-1992. Clinton’s record on the Board consists of extreme human rights violations and treason to the United States of America, who had placed an embargo on weapons shipments to Iraq, of any kind, during the time that Clinton was working for Lafarge. Hillary did not obey the laws of the United States and her actions led directly to the establishment of ISIS as a force to be reckoned with.
From the Canary:
Lafarge’s Ohio subsidiary was caught burning hazardous waste to fuel cement plants. Clinton defended the decision at the time.
Then just before her husband, Bill Clinton, was elected president in 1992, Lafarge was fined $1.8 million by the Environmental Protection Agency for these pollution violations. Hillary Clinton had left the board of Lafarge in spring, just after her husband won the Democrat nomination. A year later, under Bill’s presidency, the Clinton administration reduced Lafarge’s EPA fine to less than $600,000.”
From the American Spectator:
The American Spectator report from November 1996 cited sources confirming that Hillary Clinton did legal work for Lafarge in the late 1980s before she became a director. The report also claimed that Lafarge’s US subsidiary:
“…provided key services for the covert arms export network that supplied Saddam Hussein. To prevent exposure of that secret supply line, and collateral damage to Hillary Clinton – who joined Lafarge board in 1990, just as the arms pipeline was being shut down… the Justice Department was told to bury the investigation… But investigators from other US government agencies who worked on the case say they were ‘waved off’ whenever they got too close to exposing the direct involvement of the intelligence community in the arms export scheme.” (Ed. Note: This is would be the poison gas shipments to Hussein that my Benghazi source spoke of.)
Poison gas used in the Iran-Iraq War was manufactured using ingredients reportedly supplied by LaFarge. Five thousand Kurds were gassed to death by chemicals supplied by the very company that Hillary Clinton was working for while serving on their board of directors. As stated, she was paid for her role in these activities.
In a major conflict of interest, at a 2013 annual meeting of the Clinton Foundation, Lafarge’s Executive Vice President for Operations, Eric Olson, was a “featured attendee.” The influence pedaling did not stop in 2013. For the fiscal years of 2015 and 2016, Lafarge was listed as a donor to the nefarious Clinton Foundation. Hillary Clinton has facilitated the growth of ISIS, as evidenced by what is presented here. Clinton’s involvement in Benghazi links directly to supporting the shipping of arms to ISIS. And now, Clinton and McCain are joined at the hip with regard to ISIS.
In an appearance on Fox News Monday, McCain was asked to respond to Ron Paul’s comments earlier in the day, when the libertarian leaning Senator told CBS’ This Morning that arming Syrian rebels would only empower ISIS in the long run.
And that’s when things got weird and John McCain impulsively responded with the following:
“Has Rand Paul ever been to Syria? Has he ever met with ISIS? Has he ever met with any of these people? No, no, no,” McCain said, clearly in reference to his own visit to Syria in 2013, where he was photographed with leaders of the Free Syrian Army, the fighters violently opposed to the Assad regime.
Read More @ TheCommonSenseShow.com
by Kenneth Whittle, Disobedient Media:
According to a report by the Daily Caller, former Democratic IT aide, Imran Awan, used his position as a congressional IT aide to to pressure local police to drop fraud charges against his father for writing seven fraudulent checks during the course of multiple land purchases.
One of the victims, Mohammad Abid, claimed that the reason the authorities dropped the charges is because Ashraf Awan’s son, Imran “had easy access to the corridors of power”. Abid further allegedthat Regional Police Officer (RPO), Ahmed Raza Tahir, was backing Imran and his father.
According to DAWN, sources stated that Imran was using his political influence to influence the police to charge those who had filed complaints against his father, even leading to the arrest of Asim Sheikh, the attorney representing the complainants.
It was further alleged that, “’power muscles’ in the federal capital as well as in the provincial capital had phoned the local police to lend all sorts of help to the US national and his father.”
According to a Democratic IT aide, Imran told him that he had persuaded former White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, to intervene in the matter.
Imran was also said to have been sending money and gifts to government officials in Pakistan, and received protection from Pakistani police. The Daily Caller further reports that Imran was also sending IT equipment to Pakistan during the same period of time in which fraudulent purchase orders for that equipment were filed, and in which over $120,000 of congressional equipment was signed away by the chief of staff for Democratic Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY).
This is troubling, not only because it shows how Awan was able to influence high-ranking political figures in the U.S. to intervene in he and his family’s personal matters, but it further shows that Imran was able to use his position to influence high-ranking Pakistani government officials as well.
Because Imran and his brothers had access to some of the most important, classified informationrelating to our national security, and had attempted to wire $283,000 from the Congressional Federal Credit Union to a bank account in Pakistan, it begs the question: Were they selling our secrets to a foreign country known for harboring the likes of Osama bin Laden?
At a moment of widespread acknowledgement that the short-lived Islamic State is no longer a reality, and as ISIS is about to be defeated by the Syrian Army in its last urban holdout of Abu Kamal City in eastern Syria, the US is signalling an open-ended military presence in Syria.On Monday Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon that the US is preparing for a long term military commitment in Syria to fight ISIS “as long as they want to fight.”
Mattis indicated that even should ISIS loose all of its territory there would still be a dangerous insurgency that could morph into an “ISIS 2.0” which he said the US would seek to prevent. “The enemy hasn’t declared that they’re done with the area yet, so we’ll keep fighting as long as they want to fight,” Mattis said. “We’re not just going to walk away right now before the Geneva process has traction.”
Mattis was referring to the stalled peace talks in Geneva which some analysts have described as a complete failure (especially as the Geneva process unrealistically stipulates the departure of Assad), as the future of Syria has of late been increasingly decided militarily on the battlefield, with the Syrian government now controlling the vast majority of the country’s most populated centers.
Ironically just as some degree of stability and normalcy has returned to many parts of the county now under government control, Mattis coupled the idea of a permanent US military presence with the goal of allowing Syrians to return to their homes. He said, “You keep broadening them. Try to (demilitarize) one area then (demilitarize) another and just keep it going, try to do the things that will allow people to return to their homes.”
Meanwhile Turkey once again reiterated that the US has 13 bases in Syria, though the US-backed Syrian YPG has previously indicated seven US military bases in northern Syria. The Pentagon, however, would not confirm base locations or numbers – though only a year-and-a-half ago the American public was being assured that there would be “no boots on the ground” due to mission creep in Syria.
During the last year of the Obama administration, State Department spokesman John Kirby was called out multiple times by reporters for tell obvious and blatant lies concerning “boots on the ground” in Syria.
Remember this? “We are not going to be involved in a large scale combat mission on the ground in Syria. That is what the president [Obama] has long said.”
Last summer, in a move that angered the US administration, Turkish state media leaked the locations of no less than ten small scale American military bases in northern Syria alone (revelations of US bases in southern Syria began surfacing as well). As another recent Pentagon press conference further acknowledged, these bases – though likely special forces forward operating bases – require a broad network of US personnel operating in various logistical roles inside Syria and likely now includes thousands of US troops deployed on the ground, instead of the Pentagon’s official (and highly dubious) “approximately 500 troops in Syria” number.
Mattis’ declaration of an open ended military commitment in Syria came the same day that the BBC confirmed that the US and its Kurdish SDF proxy (Syrian Democratic Forces) cut a deal with ISIS which allowed for the evacuation of possibly thousands of ISIS members and their families from Raqqa.
According to yesterday’s bombshell BBC report:
The BBC has uncovered details of a secret deal that let hundreds of Islamic State fighters and their families escape from Raqqa, under the gaze of the US and British-led coalition and Kurdish-led forces who control the city. A convoy included some of IS’s most notorious members and – despite reassurances – dozens of foreign fighters. Some of those have spread out across Syria, even making it as far as Turkey.
Read More @ ZeroHedge.com
by Alex Christoforou, TheDuran:
Twitter continues to show its liberal left teeth, undermining its own terms and privacy in an effort to derail Trump’s presidency.
The Atlantic published private messages between Wikileaks and Trump Jr. under the headline and excerpt…
“The Secret Correspondence Between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks”
The transparency organization asked the president’s son for his cooperation—in sharing its work, in contesting the results of the election, and in arranging for Julian Assange to be Australia’s ambassador to the United States.
The Atlantic notes that, “The messages, obtained by The Atlantic, were also turned over by Trump Jr.’s lawyers to congressional investigators.”
Via The Gateway Pundit…
Despite overwhelming evidence the Democrats colluded with Russia during the 2016 election, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) recently asked Twitter hand over the WikiLeaks boss’ direct messages to prove Trump officials teamed with the Kremlin. Congressional investigators believe Assange’s private correspondences may hold the key to linking Trump campaign officials to Russia. A new report shows private Twitter messages between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks were leaked.
How do we know Congress leaked Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks’ DMs?
“The messages, obtained by The Atlantic, were also turned over by Trump Jr.’s lawyers to congressional investigators,” the magazine says.
Leaked transcripts of private messages between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks appears to show Twitter, the Democrats and the mainstream media have all teamed up in an attempt to kick up more Russia collusion hysteria.
There’s just one problem…
The Atlantic piece states “Though Trump Jr. mostly ignored the frequent messages from Wikileaks, he at times appears to have acted on its requests.”
The magazine’s “big bombshell,” admits Trump Jr. cared little about what WikiLeaks had to say and then goes on to speculate that he acted on their advice. Newsflash — WikiLeaks’ ‘Podesta Email Series’ helped to expose Clinton’s corrupt ways. Disseminating information derived from the emails does not mean Trump Jr. acted on the organization’s advice. Rather, Trump Jr. was doing what any person would do with verifiable damning information — Get it out there. That’s What Trump Jr. did with WikiLeaks emails and articles from other publications, as well.
The Atlantic reports…
The messages, obtained by The Atlantic, were also turned over by Trump Jr.’s lawyers to congressional investigators. They are part of a long—and largely one-sided—correspondence between Wikileaks and the president’s son that continued until at least July 2017. The messages show Wikileaks, a radical transparency organization that the American intelligence community believes was chosen by the Russian government to disseminate the information it had hacked, actively soliciting Trump Jr.’s cooperation. Wikileaks made a series of increasingly bold requests, including asking for Trump’s tax returns, urging the Trump campaign on Election Day to reject the results of the election as rigged, and requesting that the president-elect tell Australia to appoint Julian Assange ambassador to the United States.
On October 3, 2016, Wikileaks wrote again. “Hiya, it’d be great if you guys could comment on/push this story,” Wikileaks suggested, attaching a quote from then-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton about wanting to “just drone” Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange.
“Already did that earlier today,” Trump Jr. responded an hour-and-a-half later. “It’s amazing what she can get away with.”
Two minutes later, Trump Jr. wrote again, asking, “What’s behind this Wednesday leak I keep reading about?” The day before, Roger Stone, an informal advisor to Donald Trump, had tweeted, “Wednesday@HillaryClinton is done. #Wikileaks.”
Read More @ TheDuran.com
by Joshua Caplan, The Gateway Pundit:
Disgruntled Republican lawmakers are beginning to voice the same displeasure over the inaction of Attorney General Jeff Sessions as many conservatives have for months. The calls for Sessions to investigate the corruption surrounding Hillary Clinton and James Comey are growing louder.
The people want justice.
On Monday, GOP Congressmen Jim Jordan and Matt Gaertz called on Sessions to probe the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton private email use or resign.
Washington Times reports:
So, they said, was Mr. Comey’s handling of the anti-Trump dossier. They said if it was so concerning, the director should have briefed the president-elect well before the Jan. 6 briefing Mr. Comey delivered.
And the congressmen said the 2010 deal that saw the U.S. approve sale of uranium to Russian interests demands a more thorough investigation, saying it calls into question the independence of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is probing Trump campaign figures’ work with Russia.
In a fiery speech on the House floor Wednesday, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) warned the U.S. is “at risk of a coup d’etat,’ unless Special Counsel Robert Mueller resigns or is fired.
Gaetz’s concern about Mueller mirrors his views Clinton. Unless Mueller, Clinton and Comey face accountability, the corruption they engaged in will go unpunished.
"I'm calling for Mr. Mueller's resignation or his firing" pic.twitter.com/rEpobJCn8V
— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) November 8, 2017
The Hill reports:
“We are at risk of a coup d’état in this country if we allow an unaccountable person with no oversight to undermine the duly-elected President of the United States,” Gaetz said. “That is precisely what is happening right now with the indisputable conflicts of interest that are present with Mr. Mueller and others at the Department of Justice.”
“I join … in calling for Mr. Mueller’s resignation or his firing,” Gaetz continued.
[…]In his Wednesday speech, Gaetz also called on the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to “investigate the Clinton Foundation, the Uranium One deal and the Fusion GPS dossier.”
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Special Counsel Robert Mueller is under pressure to resign as his investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election drifts further and further away from its core purpose.
Read More @ TheGatewayPundit.com
by Michael Snyder, End Of The American Dream:
What would you do if authorities ordered your church to stop feeding the homeless? And what would you do if your 5-year-old daughter was ordered to get government permission before setting up a lemonade stand? Well, these things are actually happening in America today. With each passing day, America goes further down the road toward becoming a police state. Just yesterday, I wrote about a young mother that was threatened with arrest in California for not properly vaccinating her children. We have entered a time when government bureaucrats are micromanaging all of our lives, and it is time for us to say that enough is enough.
The bigger government gets, the more oppressive it tends to become. But most people don’t understand that there is an inverse relationship between liberty and the size of government. The more government grows, the less freedoms we have, and this is true on the federal, state and local levels.
For example, all over America laws are being passed that make it illegal to feed the homeless. Every new law, rule or regulation restricts our liberties and freedoms in some way, and in this case these sorts of laws restrict our freedom to help our neighbors in need.
Earlier today I came across another example of this. A church in Malibu, California has just been ordered to stop giving food to the homeless…
A Malibu church that has helped the homeless for years has been told to stop feeding people down on their luck.
CBS2’s Craig Herrera spoke to the people at the United Methodist Church about the request.
At various times, the church can serve as many as 70-100 people. They have been serving the meals on Wednesdays since 2014.
Sadly, this feeding program is being shut down right after Thanksgiving when people will need it the most.
This is really a pet peeve for me. I don’t care how many laws they try to pass, if I see someone in need I am going to try to feed them. Helping those that are hurting is always the right thing to do, and the government control freaks that are trying to shut this feeding program down should immediately resign from their positions.
Another pet peeve of mine is when authorities try to shut down lemonade stands run by young children. This happened yet again just the other day in Porterville, California…
In Porterville, California, a five-year-old girl who set up a lemonade stand to raise money to buy herself a new bike has been told four months later that she needed a business license to do it.
Her mother received the warning in a citation from city hall which asked her to send back $59, the local fee for applying for a new license plus a fine.
Thankfully the authorities apologized in that case, but in many other cases around the nation that has not happened.
Our founders wanted to create a nation where individual liberties and freedoms would be maximized. That is why they intended for government to be limited, but over time we have swung the pendulum completely in the other direction. We desperately need to rediscover the benefits of limited government, and that is one of the key pillars that I am running for Congress on.
If we continue to go down the path of big government, eventually we will end up like other “socialist paradises” around the globe.
For instance, China has become such a police state that they are actually instituting a “citizen score” for every single person in the country…
China has already implemented its Citizen Score on a voluntary basis but this month government officials released details about how the program will operate in 2020 when it becomes compulsory for all Chinese citizens.
For those who may be curious, think of the Citizen Score, sometimes referred to as a trust score, as akin to a credit score but one that encompasses every conceivable aspect of one’s life. Buy video games and your score drops because the government assumes you are idle, buy diapers and it rises because you seem more stable.
Get a traffic ticket or speak out about the government, and your score drops, but earn a degree or support the Party and your score might rise. Miss paying your bills or don’t support your parents and your score will suffer. Read books that the party doesn’t deem ideologically sound or watch foreign movies, and your score will take a hit.
Is that the kind of society you want?
Read More @ EndOfTheAmericanDream.com
by Daniel McAdams, Russia Insider:
This while the US Justice Department is cracking down on RT for what it says is manipulation of US domestic affairs
Hypocrisy may be the only consistent guiding principle of US foreign policy. Here’s a prime example of the “do as we say, not as we do” that is the core of how Washington does business overseas: In the same week that the the US Justice Department demanded that the Russian-backed RT America network register as a foreign propaganda entity or face arrest, the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DNL) has announced that it is launching a program to massively interfere in NATO-partner Hungary’s internal media.
So the US Justice Department is cracking down on RT America for what it says is manipulation of US domestic affairs while the US State Department announces a new program to manipulate Hungary’s domestic affairs.
The State Department’s new program would send three-quarters of a million dollars to Washington-selected Hungarian media outlets to “increase citizens’ access to objective information about domestic and global issues in Hungary.” On what authority does the United States pick winners and losers in Hungary’s diverse media environment? Since when does one government have the right to determine what news is “objective” in another country? Hungary is not a country to be “regime-changed” — it is a full democracy where the will of the people is regularly expressed at the ballot box and where the media competes freely in the marketplace of ideas.
Washington’s Hungarian media project is clearly meant to interfere in that country’s domestic political environment. Here are the stated objectives of the US government’s Hungary program:
The program should improve the quality of local traditional and online media and increase the public’s access to reliable and unbiased information.
Projects should aim to have impact that leads to democratic reforms, and should have the potential for sustainability beyond DRL resources. (emphasis added)
The State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor identifies its mission in this call for grantees as “promoting democracy and protecting human rights globally.” So what is it doing in Hungary? Hungary has had nearly three decades of democracy since 1989 and hardly needs the United States to tell it what kind of media is allowed (subsidized) and which kind should be suppressed.
In reality this is a US government program to ensure that the Hungarian media follows Washington’s policy line. Hungarians are all too familiar with this kind of toxic interference from an outside superpower: it was called the Soviet Union. Does Washington really seek to take on that role?
Stab in the back
This US government intervention in Hungary’s internal affairs must feel like a stab in the back to Orban and his government. Orban was an early — and rare — supporter of candidate Donald Trump among his European colleagues. Indeed, where Brusssels saw Trump as a gauche loudmouth, Orban openly admired the soon-to-be-president’s position on immigration and particularly on the mass immigration of mostly Muslim “refugees” that has proven to be disastrous for so many European countries. Likewise, Viktor Orban’s Fidesz party has managed to retain a high level of popularity through two election cycles by embracing and promoting the kind of nationalism that characterized Trump’s successful campaign.
Orban’s early support for Trump appeared to have paid off. Where Fidesz had struggled to make any headway at all under GW Bush or Obama’s State Departments, both of which were openly hostile, one of President-elect Trump’s first moves was to invite Orban to the White House. Orban, for his part, hailed Trump on inauguration day, welcoming in an era where national interest takes precedent over multilateralism.
As recently as last month, President Trump praised Viktor Orban, saying that the “strong and brave” Hungarian Prime Minister is “on my guest list.”
Then Trump’s State Department launched a program to undermine Hungary’s national sovereignty by interfering in the Hungarian media market. It seems national sovereignty is a one-way street for Washington no matter who occupies the Oval Office.
Hypocrisy…or policy consistency?
But perhaps it’s inaccurate to accuse the US government of hypocrisy in this case. After all, pressuring RT America with the intent of silencing the news network and spending our tax dollars propping up US-friendly media outlets in the Hungarian countryside are actually two sides of the same coin: the US government will tell you what kind of media you are allowed to consume. If you are a media network in the United States that allows voices who oppose Washington’s neocon-dominated foreign policy they will shut you down. If you are a news outlet in the Hungarian countryside that spews the US party line, they will prop you up. Both cases are the same: your media will toe the US government official line or else.
Read More @ Russia-Insider.com
by Michael Krieger, Liberty Blitzkrieg:
Two years ago, German intelligence warned the world of the unique risks Saudi Arabia posed to the region. I covered it at the time in the post, German Intelligence Warns – Saudi Arabia to Play “Destabilizing Role” in the Middle East. Here’s an excerpt:
Saudi Arabia is at risk of becoming a major destabilizing influence in the Arab world, German intelligence has warned.
Internal power struggles and the desire to emerge as the leading Arab power threaten to make the key Western ally a source of instability, according to the BND intelligence service.
“The current cautious diplomatic stance of senior members of the Saudi royal family will be replaced by an impulsive intervention policy,” a BND memo widely distributed to the German press reads.
Saudi Arabia has previously been accused of supplying arms and funding to jihadist groups fighting in Syria, including Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil).
At the core of this intelligence warning was none other than crown prince Mohamed bin Salman, or MBS. I’ve been warning about the specific dangers presented by his brazen and sociopathic personality for years, and the recent purge finally threw it all into the spotlight for everyone to see.
MBS has already wreaked havoc on portions of the region with his reckless and failed polices with respect to both Yemen and Qatar. Today’s post will focus on the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Yemen, courtesy of the Saudi crown prince.
The New York Times reported last week:
Saudi Arabia’s three-day-old blockade of entry points to Yemen threatens to plunge that war-ravaged country into a famine that could starve millions of people, the top relief official of the United Nations said Wednesday.
The Yemen crisis has worsened since the Saudis imposed the blockade on Monday after a missile was fired deep into their territory by the Iran-backed Houthi rebel group, which has been warring with a Saudi-led military coalition for nearly three years.
Despite Saudi Arabia’s assurances that the measure was temporary while it reviews inspection procedures, virtually all humanitarian deliveries to Yemen have been halted, including at least three United Nations airplanes full of emergency supplies.
Mr. Lowcock said the Saudis must immediately allow the entry of food and medicine at all seaports, permit the immediate resumption of air services to the cities of Sana and Aden, and provide an “assurance of no further disruption to these services.”
Without such steps, he said, Yemen will suffer “the largest famine the world has seen for many decades, with millions of victims.”
The World Food Program, the anti-hunger agency of the United Nations, which has been feeding seven million people a month in Yemen, is now unable to do so, Mr. Lowcock said. “What we need is a winding down of the blockade to save the lives of those people.”
The country is struggling with an acute hunger crisis that has affected at least 17 million people, more than a third of them considered close to famine. Yemen also suffering a cholera scourge that has sickened nearly one million.
“Humanitarian supply lines to Yemen must remain open,” said Robert Mardini, the Red Cross’s regional director for the Near and Middle East. “Food, medicine and other essential supplies are critical for the survival of 27 million Yemenis already weakened by a conflict now in its third year.”
Since then, the Saudis have opened the port of Aden and a crossing at Wadea, but this is woefully inadequate.
As Al Jazeera notes:
On Friday, the UN office for the coordination of humanitarian aid, OCHA, said the coalition was still blocking desperately needed UN aid deliveries to Yemen, despite the reopening of Aden and Wadea.
“Humanitarian movements into Yemen remain blocked,” said OCHA spokesman Russell Geekie.
“The reopening of the port in Aden is not enough. We need to see the blockade of all the ports lifted, especially Hodeida, for both humanitarian and for commercial imports.”
UN aid chief Mark Lowcock told the Security Council this week that unless the blockade is lifted, Yemen will face “the largest famine the world has seen for many decades, with millions of victims”.
Stylianides echoed Lowcock’s concerns.
Yemen “is suffering the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, with more than two-thirds of its population in need of humanitarian assistance”, he said in a statement.
“The EU shares the concerns expressed by… Lowcock and calls for full and unrestrained access to be restored immediately, to avoid Yemen suffering the largest famine in decades,” Stylianides said.
What we’re looking at here is potentially the worst famine in decades, and it’s important for decent U.S. citizens from across the political spectrum to admit our government’s hands are soaked in blood.
As The Intercept reported:
Saudi Arabia relies heavily on the U.S. military for intelligence sharing, refueling flights for coalition warplanes, and the transfer of American-made cluster bombs, rockets, and other munitions used against targets in Yemen.
Congress, however, has never authorized U.S. support for the war, which has caused 10,000 civilian deaths and has spiraled in recent months into one of the worst humanitarian crises of the century. For two years, Saudi Arabia and its allies have imposed a sea and air blockade around Yemen. Now, more than 7 million Yemenis face starvation and thousands, mostly children, are dying from cholera. Coalition warplanes have repeatedly struck crowded markets, hospitals, power plants, and other civilian targets.
Several members of Congress indicated an interest in the issue, noting that the Obama and Trump administrations’ reliance on the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force to justify U.S. involvement in the conflict is absurd. That authorization, after all, was designed to fight the terrorist groups responsible for the September 11 attacks, not to intervene in Yemen’s civil war.
For 16 years, the executive branch has pointed to the AUMF as legal justification for its involvement in conflicts across the Middle East and Africa, a strategy that is legally questionable. But the use of the AUMF in the Yemeni context is especially bizarre given that the AUMF’s target is Al Qaeda, and the group AQAP — Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula –is fighting alongside the U.S.-Saudi coalition against the Houthi rebels.
One bipartisan legislative attempt to force a vote on authorization for the war, H.Con.Res.81, faced a major setback last week after appearing to gain political momentum. On November 1, lawmakers stripped the bill of its privileged status, meaning the bill no longer maintains a fast-track to a floor vote. The legislation was designed to invoke the War Powers Act of 1973 to terminate U.S. involvement in the Yemen War.
Because the bill is no longer privileged, it will head back to the the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which is led by Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., a lawmaker who has expressed deep support for the Saudi-led military campaign. Few expect the legislation to move forward now that it is back in Royce’s domain. In April, the representative read a statement of support for the Saudi-led campaign in Yemen and entered into the congressional record an opinion column written by a Saudi general.
The move to crush H.Con.Res.81 was apparently negotiated by Democratic and Republican leadership. As part of a compromise, there will be some congressional debate over the war, though no on-the-record vote for authorization. As The Intercept previously reported, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the Democratic whip, was among the Democratic leaders opposed to invoking the War Powers Act to bring U.S. involvement in the war to an end.
Still, sponsors of the legislation are hoping to force a debate and an on-the-record vote over the war.
“Our national security interests in Yemen are unclear, yet we are giving money and military assistance to Saudi Arabia so they can continue to wage war in Yemen,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., one of 43 co-sponsors. “This military action was never authorized by Congress and the American people deserve an open debate by their elected officials.”
Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., also a co-sponsor of the resolution, expressed frustration that House Speaker Paul Ryan has refused to allow a vote on the war and disappointment that the compromise solution negotiated by congressional leadership will not include a binding vote.
This is part of my frustration about the fact Congress does not meet its constitutional responsibility when sending young men and women to die for this country, and we have a constitutional duty that we must debate war,” Jones said. “The vote to go to war in Yemen, we can’t even get a vote on this resolution. To me this is the way Congress does not work. We don’t work because we do not uphold the constitution.”
Meanwhile, many of the cretins in Congress can’t be bothered to answer questions about Yemen.
Read More @ LibertyBlitzkrieg.com