Sunday, February 24, 2019

Spain ‘issues arrest warrant’ for Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu over 2010 Gaza flotilla attack

0

by  Loulla-Mae Eleftheriou-Smith, The Independent:

‘We consider it to be a provocation. We are working with the Spanish authorities to get it cancelled’ 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and seven other former and current government officials are at risk of arrest if they set foot in Spain, after a Spanish judge effectively issued an arrest warrant for the group, it has been reported.

According to the Latin American Herald Tribune, Spanish national court judge Jose de la Mata ordered the police and civil guard to notify him if Mr Netanyahu and the six other individuals enter the country, as their actions could see a case against them regarding the Freedom Flotilla attack of 2010 reopened.

The other men named in the issue are former defence minister Ehud Barak, former foreign minister Avigdor Leiberman, former minister of strategic affairs Moshe Yaalon, former interior minister Eli Yishai, minister without portfolio Benny Begin and vice admiral maron Eliezer, who was in charge of the operation.

The case – which was put on hold by Judge de la Mata last year – was brought against the men following an attack by Israeli security forces against the Freedom Flotilla aid ships in 2010, which was trying to reach Gaza.

It concerns the Mavi Marmara ship, the main civilian vessel in a fleet of six that were attempting to break an Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. The six ships were carrying around 500 passengers, humanitarian aid and construction materials. The Israeli Defence Force stormed the ship in a raid that left nine human rights activists dead. A tenth activist died later that month due to wounds sustained in the raid.

Read More @ Independent.co.uk

The Bioterroism Threat to Our Vulnerable Food Supplies

0

by Dave Hodges, The Common Sense Show:

If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”

Thomas Jefferson

If the Deep State, does what many of us in the media believe they are going to do, they will soon provoke a crisis, declare martial law and use food as the ultimate weapon to subjugate an unruly population. This article provides an assessment of these possibilities.

This article will examine past history and archival information in order to look for a pattern of behavior which suggests that the Deep State in this country plans to use food as a weapon against the people. This will be followed by an analysis of a current state of affairs in order better assess the immediacy of any such threat.

The Historical Precedent of Using Food As a Weapon

The two most notable examples of dictators using food as a weapon in order to destroy the free will of their people, comes from the regimes of Stalin and Hitler.

Josef Stalin engaged in his own Soviet-style Holocaust when, in 1932 and 1933, an estimated six to 20 million people in the Ukraine died from starvation when Stalin implemented his prescription of “hope and change” policies in order to eliminate the Ukrainian’s desire for becoming their own nation-state.

Upon assuming power, the Stalinist Communist regime rapidly nationalized the food industry and forced all of the region’s farms into collectives. This is exactly what is happening under the Obama administration and the dramatic rise of corporately owned farms.

Stalin’s version of the Holocaust came to fruition in what history has dubbed, the “Holodomor,” in which millions perished in only a two year period when the Soviet government began to exterminate the Ukrainian population by taking control of food and food production. And why would Stalin do such a thing to his own people? The Ukrainians were discussing and publicizing some very dangerous ideas about freedom, liberty and the ability to act on their desire for political autonomy. Americans would be wise to heed this warning as despots hate freedom. The parallel between Stalin and collectivist farms and American corporately owned farms is very disturbing.

Hitler proclaimed that food could be used as a tool “…to discipline the masses” and he did not hesitate to use the control of food as a type of carrot and stick in which he would reward accomplishment and punish failure as well as to ferment preferential class distinctions in which his armed forces received the largest food ration cards. Skilled workers who were engaged in industries critical to the building of the German war machine, received food ration cards which were slightly less in value. And, finally, the prisoners and the Jews received the lowest valued Nazi food ration cards. Food ration cards were also utilized as incentives to increase industrial production and were also increased in value when productive Nazi workers would be promoted. Food ration cards were diminished in value for the failure to meet Nazi production goals. Hitler’s use of what psychologists refer to as classical conditioning techniques reduced the will of the German population to a pack of Pavlovian dogs who were conditioned to be totally dependent upon the government for their survival. The presence of 50 million Americans on food stamps would certainly make an applicable parallel to Hitler’s practices and the potential for Obama, or another future president to follow in Hitler’s footsteps with regard to food management.

Read More @ TheCommonSenseShow.com

What Happened to CNN?

0

from Mark Dice:

One Statistics Professor Was Just Banned By Google: Here Is His Story

0

from ZeroHedge:

Statistics professor Salil Mehta, adjunct professor at Columbia and Georgetown who teaches probability and data science and whose work has appeared on this website on numerous prior occasions, was banned by Google on Friday.

What did Salil do to provoke Google? It is not entirely clear, however what is clear is that his repeated attempts at restoring his email, blog and other Google-linked accounts have so far been rejected with a blanket and uniform statement from the search giant.

Here is what happened, in Salil Mehta’s own words.

Dont do a googol of evil

Freedom is not free unless corporations who exert a large influence in our lives believe in our well-being.  I am a statistics professor and understand that there needs to be reasonable standards to control a large social network and make sure everyone is able to enjoy it freely.  Invariably people disagree (we all see this), but some principles, such as simply showing probability and statistics with the sole hope of educating others, should be acceptable and in the middle of the distribution.  I am for a higher standard, and a higher purpose.  There is great care that I have taken to make sure that people treat one other well, admit faults, and present math and probability education to a wide audience.

On Friday afternoon East Coast Time by surprise, I was completely shut down in all my Google accounts (all of my gmail accounts, blog, all of my university pages that were on google sites, etc.) for no reason and no warning.  A number of us were stunned and unsure, but clearly we know at this point it wasn’t an accident.  Here are some examples commented from best-selling author Nassim Taleb, and they have been retweeted by government officials, and the NYT and WSJ journalists. 

My ads-free blog itself is a probability theory site, with 27 million reads and has somewhere near 150k overall followers.  It’s been read by Warren Buffett, Elon Musk, Nobel Laureates, multiple governments, celebrity athletes around the world, deans of many universities (on the syllabi of same), and a number of TV news anchors.  So it’s been a great boon for Google to be noticed so kindly by essentially a charitable site promoting math education.  What great people from all corners of the world and at all levels who can enjoy Google, until it suddenly died Friday afternoon.

My background is clean, and without a political or social agenda.  I am not promoting any specific viewpoint.  I teach probability math and that’s it.  Have worked with both the Obama administration and advised on polling statistics for the Trump campaign, am an adjunct professor at three top universities, an editor of the peer-reviewed journal of the American Statistical Association, and wrote a best-selling statistics book (all the proceeds of which I gave to charity!) https://www.amazon.com/Statistics-Topics-Salil-Mehta/dp/1499273533

The NYT has a popular print article this weekend and they cited my Google blog, but alas it not links to an embarrassing malfunction, for many to see: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/19/business/the-stock-market-has-been-magical-it-cant-last.html

This doesn’t look good.  Now instead of mathematics, reporters have turned to this latest circus nightmare from Google as an example of how they are compounding bad decisions on good people anywhere and at any time. 

Can they not differentiate me from an evil person?  Can they not see the large and reputable people and institutions that have relied on my work?  Do they have better people who can coach them on how to make decisions with much better taste and finesse?  What’s next, all CEOs and professors and politicians are going to be shut down from social media whenever it is least expected?  Overnight hi-tech lynching squads are a thing of the past.  We can’t have kangaroo courts and hope to lead with moral authority.

There is a lot of energy being spent right now thinking about how this happens to your best customers, just like that.  Fear is running wild about who is next and on what other social media platforms.  Have used Google for 11 years with no issue.  Have driven enormous free traffic to your products and properties.  But now that’s been severely damaged as the trust/reputational value has been crushed, and I have to re-emerge quickly elsewhere and deal with this fall-out.  I have many students, family, coworkers, etc who typically send me e-mails each day and all of it is vanishing with a kicked-back “user doesn’t exist” error.  And that’s totally unacceptable.  Through my many companies have business accounts on different social media and have no issue getting a marketing line, but one needs to know who they are dealing with and not treat them this badly.  The wrongs here are not being done by me.

Read More @ ZeroHedge.com

Opening Round NAFTA Fissures Over the Meaning of “Substantial”: What’s the Best and Worst That Can Happen?

0

by Mish Shedlock, Mish Talk:

Trump is bound and determined to have his way in NAFTA negotiations whether or not anyone agrees with him. Ironically, not even the auto manufacturers do. The first round of negotiations, now underway, has hit a snag already. The meaning of “substantial” is in play.

The Wall Street Journal reports U.S., Canada and Mexico Wrap Up Nafta First Round.

Opening-round talks to remake the North American Free Trade Agreement revealed early fissures dividing the U.S. from Mexico and Canada, including a Trump administration proposal to require a “substantial” portion of autos and auto parts produced under the pact be made in the U.S.

The renegotiation of the trade deal, which was one of President Donald Trump’s main campaign promises and a key pillar of his “America First” agenda aiming to revive U.S. manufacturing and reduce the country’s trade deficit, is likely to face many hurdles. Auto makers in all three nations generally oppose the stricter rules floated by the U.S. negotiator, and pro-business lawmakers in Congress don’t want to see the pact significantly altered.

Early tensions over areas such as the so-called rules of origin—a major issue for the automotive industry—signaled the tough bargaining that lies ahead as the three nations try to wrap up a deal by early next year.

The chief U.S. negotiator, Robert Lighthizer, came into the talks Wednesday saying the U.S. would insist on tightening the rules of origin, and adding a provision covering U.S. production, an idea quickly dismissed as unworkable by Mexican and Canadian officials.

At this early stage of the talks, it is difficult to measure the depth of the disagreement. Opening rounds generally set the tone and schedule for negotiations. The U.S. has yet to release specifics on some of its most controversial positions, including measures to reduce the U.S. trade deficit, prevent currency manipulation, favor U.S. companies in government contracts, known colloquially as Buy America, and rework rules governing arbitration panels.

The U.S. feels that its most significant leverage in the talks is Mr. Trump’s threat to withdraw from Nafta if the U.S. doesn’t get the changes it wants. North American trade is far more significant to the Canadian and Mexican economies than it is for the U.S.

Mexican negotiators say they are prepared to scrap Nafta rather than accede to demands they consider harmful to their economy.

What’s the Best That Can Happen?

That’s a softball question. The best thing that can possibly happen is the trade talks collapse and Trump backs down on his promise to revoke the deal.

Nearly as good would be minor tweaks that don’t really do anything. One might even argue this is a better alternative as it would allow Trump to save face while bragging about nothing.

What’s the Worst That Can Happen?

The worst is the trade talks collapse, Trump abandons NAFTA and starts a global trade war.

Read More @ MishTalk.com

Angela Merkel is being Called a Traitor for the Refugee Crisis

by Martin Armstrong, Armstrong Economics:

The EU has abandoned Italy while simultaneously demanding that the refugees must be taken care of. Nearly 100,000 refugees have arrived in Italy since the start of this year alone. The Italian government cannot cope with the refugee crisis and Brussels said they cannot exempt them from the restraint of busgets. That means that money for Italians must be diverted to the refugees and they keep coming.

Italy is being pushed to the limit and cannot possible cope with this burden alone while Brussels refuses to compensate them. Let any country refuse to accept refugees and Brussels is quick to condemn them, but wont pay for them itself.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is solely responsible for the refugee crisis. She is starting to be greeted with shouts of “traitor” by discontent German protesters. Nevertheless, Merkel continues to defend her decision to allow hundreds of thousands of refugees into the Germany.

Merkel only received 16,233,642 votes during the 2013 election which was  37.2{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the popular vote of Germany. So the majority of Germans are really not supporting Merkel. Because they get to form collation governments, that someone who received less that any President in the political history of the USA gets to run Euorpe. Even Donald Trump won  46.1{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of the American popular vote. So someone who would never get into office under the USA system gets to dominate Europe.

Read More @ ArmstrongEconomics.com

Geoengineering Is Causing Lethal UV Radiation Exposure

0

by Dane Wigington, Geoengineering Watch:

Does the sun feel scorchingly hot? Does it feel much more intense than in decades now past? It is not your imagination. Not only are UV-B radiation levels escalating exponentially, so is the even more dangerous UV-C spectrum. All official UV monitoring sources tell us that lethal UV-C radiation from the sun is stopped 100,000 feet up by our atmosphere. Official agencies tell us that no UV-C radiation penetrates the atmosphere below 100,000 feet of elevation. These are blatant, glaring, and very dangerous lies. GeoengineeringWatch.orgcontinues to work directly with a former NASA aeronautics engineer (a veteran of 40 years in the field of atmospheric study and ozone depletion) who is doing his best to sound the alarm on the critical UV radiation danger. Ongoing covert global climate engineering programs are destroying Earth’s protective ozone layer. Many mainstream sources confirm ozone damage “will” occur from geoegineering (along with countless other consequences), though such sources still will not admit geoengineering has long since been fully deployed.

  Tree die-off is rapidly increasing all over the world. Shasta County, California. Photo credit: Jovyde Wigington
Tree die-off is rapidly increasing all over the world. Shasta County, California. Photo credit: Jovyde Wigington

How dire is the situation? Far worse than almost any yet imagine. The chart below was assembled for GeoengineeringWatch.org by our NASA engineer colleague. To make the severity of the UV-C radiation exposure crystal clear, the chart was kept as basic as possible. Note that the baseline for the chart UV-C level is 0.00, this is the stated level of UV-C radiation from ALL official UV metering sources (many of the same agencies that officially deny the ongoing climate engineering reality). The chart’s skyrocketing red line of actual UV-C measurement speaks for itself.

  The UV-C radiation reading shown in the chart above was taken on 1-1-17. Ongoing measurments are in a similar range. The danger UV-C radiation exposure poses to the entire web of life cannot be overstated.
The UV-C radiation reading shown in the chart above was taken on 1-1-17. Ongoing measurments are in a similar range. The danger UV-C radiation exposure poses to the entire web of life cannot be overstated.

The August 5th, 2017, UV metering graph below reveals the increasing spikes of ever more lethal UV radiation spectrums.

  The ozone destruction / UV radiation increase equation is extremely non-linear, this fact must be remembered and considered.
The ozone destruction / UV radiation increase equation is extremely non-linear, this fact must be remembered and considered.

Below is a direct quote from a World Health Organization (WHO) publication on UV radiation, the total denial of UV-C radiation reaching the surface of Earth is nothing less than a lethal lie.

Short-wavelength UV-C is the most damaging type of UV radiation. However, it is completely filtered by the atmosphere and does not reach the earth’s surface.

What does a Stanford University Study tell us about dangerous UV-C radiation? Yet another lie.

The UV-C region of the UV spectrum includes wavelengths below 280 NM; these highly energetic wavelengths are effectively absorbed by ozone in the stratosphere.

Read More @ GeoengineeringWatch.com

The US Visa “Suspension” for Russians is an inconvenient administrative rerouting

0

by Andrew Kotybko, The Duran:

It was just announced earlier today that the US is suspending the processing of non-immigrant visas to Russians in all of its consulates in the country on 23 August, which caused a knee-jerk social media reaction that America was essentially banning Russians from visiting. That’s not the case, at all, and anyone who read beyond the headlines would know this. According to the US’ official statement:

“…all nonimmigrant visa (NIV) operations across Russia will be suspended beginning August 23, 2017.  Visa operations will resume on a greatly reduced scale.  Beginning September 1, nonimmigrant visa interviews will be conducted only at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.  NIV interviews at the U.S. Consulates in St. Petersburg, Yekaterinburg, and Vladivostok are suspended until further notice.”

Basically, the US is just inconveniencing Russians by having them go to Moscow to receive their visa as opposed to the much closer consulates in whichever part of the country they live in. This might be problematic for some because of the attendant transportation and time costs inherent in, such as the case of Vladivostok, going halfway across Eurasia just to get a tourist visa, and that’s all before undergoing the planned trip to the other side of the world in the opposite direction afterwards.

There are also more technical details to the US’ announcement concerning visa fees that were already payed and a prohibition on transferring people’s applications to a closer US Embassy outside of the country instead, but these aspects are only relevant if an individual doesn’t want to travel to Moscow to complete the final stage of their visa process. While it’s understandably troublesome for some people to do this, it’s a far cry away from the exaggerated hype that the US banned Russians from visiting the country.

It’s always unfortunate when regular folks are caught in the middle of a diplomatic crisis between two countries, and the only losers are the Russian people themselves who simply wanted the convenience of processing their visa applications in a US consulate near the region that they live, but the fact is that the US might no longer have the personnel capacity to handle these tasks after complying with Russia’s request that they downscale their staff.

One should remember that Russia only issued this order months after former President Obama unilaterally seized the country’s diplomatic property and expelled its diplomats on the false pretext that they “hacked” the 2016 election, so Moscow’s response was proportionate and fair, to say nothing of being somewhat overdue. That said, however, Russia isn’t responsible for how the US decides the sovereign management of its consular and embassy activities.

Whether the US is scaling back its nonimmigrant visa operations as a snide move to punish the Russian people or if this is a genuine response to their newfound lack of staff to process such requests, the fact remains that this nevertheless isn’t anything more than a 9-day “suspension” of operations and their administrative rerouting to the Moscow Embassy from the three consulates across the country.

In no way whatsoever does this amount to the US “banning” Russians from visiting, even if it does make it more inconvenient for them to do so.

Read More @ TheDuran.com

Internet Party Anti-Spy Bill Hosts John Kiriakou, CIA Whistleblower

0

by Elizabeth Vos, Disobedient Media:

Suzie Dawson of the Internet Party hosted the second Anti Spy Bill event late yesterday. During the proceedings, Kim DotCom spoke with CIA Whistleblower John Kiriakou regarding the CIA’s torture program and the methods used by authorities to target whistleblowers.

The Internet Party will continue to host weekly events in order to continue work on the Anti-Spy Bill.

John Kiriakou, Suzie Dawson and Kim DotCom discussed the need for oversight in regards to the CIA. Kiriakou stated that the agency required strong oversight, as he said the CIA was constantly pushing moral, legal and ethical boundaries. Kiriakou discussed having witnessed the instigation of a CIA torture program in the wake of the September 11th 2001 terror attacks, which he described as having inspired a radical culture shift within the agency.

Kiriakou spoke about a 2007 media appearance where he had revealed the existence of the CIA’s illegal torture program. He described the interview as having utterly changed the course of his life after he revealed publicly for the first time that the CIA tortures its prisoners, torture was official government program, and that this program had been personally approved by President Bush.

Although legally cleared during the Bush Presidency, Kiriakou described his surprise that President Obama had allowed the FBI to secretly investigate him, eventually charging him with five felonies, including espionage. Kiriakou expressed deep surprise that he had been the only person who had spoken publicly about the torture program. He stressed the importance of transparency, emphasizing that the American public must know what is being done in its name. Kiriakou described the authorities’ investigation as having culminated in an effort to entrap him due to a lack of evidence against him.

Kiriakou also described having sent an open letter to Edward Snowden in the wake of his groundbreaking publication of surveillance methods, warning Snowden not to cooperate with the FBI.

Kim Dotcom told Kiriakou: “Every once in a while these organizations run into people like us, smart people who understand what’s going on, who understand there are other people fighting against this unjust system and want to reform this injustice. Our duty is to fight these cases to the end to remind people what is going on, because that’s the only way to let people know what is happening. If we don’t do this, no one else will.”

Suzie Dawson observed during the event that CIA torturers were reported to have been selected specifically based on histories of domestic and sexual violence. Kiriakou responded that it requires a special kind of monster to inflict that kind of physical, psychological and emotional harm on a person without losing their soul.

Read More @ DisobedientMedia.com

At Least One Dead After Van Crashes Into 2 Bus Shelters in Marseille, France in “Deliberate” Crash

0

by Jim Hoft. The Gateway Pundit:

At least one person is dead after a car deliberately crashed into two different bus stops in the city of Marseille, France.

The suspect was known to police but not on the terror list.

One woman was killed in the attacks.
Metro reported:

A woman has died after being hit at a bus stop in a ‘deliberate act’ in France’s second city.

She was killed at around 9am by a man in a Renault van that is reported to have been been reported stolen.

Another person is seriously injured after the incident in Marseille, a coastal city in the South of France.

Initially police would not confirm whether it was being treated as a terror attack. Prosecutors later confirmed that it was not related to terrorism.

A source said the man was known to police for minor crimes.

ISIS barbarians were celebrating.

Read More @ TheGatewayPundit.com

Sanctions Are Almost Always a Prelude to War

by Darius Shahtahmasebi, Russia Insider:

Last Wednesday, U.S. President Donald Trump signed new sanctions into law against Russia, Iran, and North Korea. The legislation was supported so overwhelmingly in Congress that President Trump’s ability to veto the legislation was rendered completely ineffective.

Even anti-interventionist Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard voted in favor of the bill, once again proving that Republicans and Democrats always find common ground when it comes to beating the drums of war against sovereign nations who have taken very little unwarranted hostile action — if any — towards the United States.

But these are just sanctions, not acts of war, right? There’s nothing wrong with economically bullying other countries into submission over non-compliance with the current global order, right?

Not quite.

Sanctions are always a prelude to war. Though few are aware, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 was arguably in response to America’s attempt to cripple Japan’s booming economy through embargos and asset freezes, ending Japan’s commercial relationship with the United States and provoking the desperation that led to their attack.

In August 1990, the U.S. began a sanctions regime against Saddam Hussein in Iraq. In 1991, the United States invaded Iraq and completely decimated its armed forces, also directly targeting its civilian infrastructure. Following this devastation, the U.S. extended and expanded these economic sanctions on Iraq as further punishment. The U.N. estimated these sanctions led to the deaths of 1.7 million Iraqi civilians, including between 500,000 and 600,000 children.

When Bill Clinton’s Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was questioned on these statistics, she intimated that the price was “worth it.”

These sanctions only came to an end after the U.S. invaded again in 2003 (and the complete international sanctions regime was only lifted in December 2010).

Libya also faced American-imposed sanctions beginning in the 1990s, as well, and we all know how that story ended.

In May of 2004, the U.S. imposed economic sanctions on Syria, supposedly over Syria’s support for terrorism and its “failure to stop militants entering Iraq” – a country the U.S. destabilized in the first place. In reality, these sanctions were a response to Syria and Iran’s growing relationship as the two countries had reportedly agreed to a mutual defense treaty that same year.

Syria has been the target of a regime change operation since as far back as 2006, and the U.S. has been openly bombing its territory under both Barack Obama and Donald Trump; the U.S. has already bombed the Syrian government multiple times over the past year. If it had not been for the Russian intervention, the U.S. most likely would have ousted the Syrian government by force before Trump even took office.

Iran has been battling with sanctions for some time now, with the anti-Iranian sanctions regime serving as a smokescreen for regime change in the same manner that Libya, Syria, and Iraq were targeted previously.

In the case of Iran, the underlying motives are quite clear: the renewed set of sanctions is designed to undermine the 2015 nuclear agreement, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Even though the Trump administration is aware that Iran is in full compliance with the JCPOA, Trump has made it an official policy of his own to deliberately erode the deal.

Why would he do that?

As explained in the book Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran, authored by an ex CIA analyst who promoted the 2003 invasion of Iraq:

“For those who favor regime change or a military attack on Iran (either by the United States or Israel), there is a strong argument to be made for trying this option first. Inciting regime change in Iran would be greatly assisted by convincing the Iranian people that their government is so ideologically blinkered that it refuses to do what is best for the people and instead clings to a policy that could only bring ruin on the country. The ideal scenario in this case would be that the United States and the international community present a package of positive inducements so enticing that the Iranian citizenry would support the deal, only to have the regime reject it. In a similar vein, any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context – both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer – one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down.” [emphasis added]

This paradigm brilliantly explains why hawkish members of Trump’s team are completely opposed to Trump unilaterally derailing the JCPOA: These officials don’t want the blame to rest on the U.S., as it will ignite new tensions within the international community and directly affect the U.S. dollar.

Read More @ Russia-Insider.com

APPLE JOINS GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK TO EMBRACE SOROS-FUNDED SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER TO CENSOR “HATE SPEECH”

0

by Jerome Corsi, Infowars:

SPLC, the left’s favorite attack dog, aims to shut down conservative websites

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Apple has joined Internet content giants Google and Facebook, as well as the mainstream media, to embrace the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) in a plan designed to censor out “hate speech,” without realizing the Soros-funded organization has a hard-left goal of targeting conservatives as extremists.

Since its founding in 1971 the SPLC has drawn millions of dollars from scores of charitable foundations, including the Ford Foundation, the J.M. Kaplan Fund, Ploughshares Fund, the Public Welfare Fund, the Vanguard Public Foundation, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, and George Soros’ Open Society Foundation.

According to the group’s IRS Form 990, the SPLC received $50.3 million in contributions and grants in 2015.

SPLC: “The left’s favorite attack dog”

Identified as “the left’s favorite attack dog,” the SPLC is infamous for targeting conservative political activists as “right-wing extremists” and identifying conservative political organizations as “hate groups.”

In its “The Year in Hate and Extremism” for 2017, the SPLC noted the “radical right was more successful in entering the political mainstream last year than in half a century,” arguing that the election of Donald Trump as president “seemed virtually unimaginable since George Wallace ran for president in 1968.”

As part of that list, the SPLC separately identified 623 “active patriot groups in the United States in 2016,” that the SPLC Intelligence Project identified as “extreme anti-government groups” – a list that included many Tea Party organizations.

Included in the SPLC list of extreme antigovernment groups was conservative heroine Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, identified 25 separate time on the list, for 25 different states in which the group is active.

On Feb. 18, 2016, in an article entitled “Does the Southern Poverty Law Center target conservatives,” the Christian Science Monitor noted that in 2014, the SPLC targeted GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson in their “Extremist Files.”

This crated a backlash.

“In February 2015, after criticism of his inclusion, the group apologized to the candidate,” the Christian Science Monitor wrote.  “The SPLC said that while some might consider Dr. Carson’s statements, including several that referenced Adolf Hitler, and comments on gay marriage, to be extreme, he should not have been branded an extremist.”

But just as the SPLC has refused to classify a leftist organization like Black Lives Matter as a hate group, the group also refused to track Occupy Wall Street, even after the “Cuyahoga 5,” a group affiliated with the movement, plotted to blow up a bridge in Cleveland in 2012.

After this incident, Charles C. W. Cook, then editor of the National Review, called up the SPLC to see if the SPLC had any plans to start tracking the Occupy movement as a hate group.

Unsatisfied with the answers he received, Cooke reasoned that for the SPLC, being on the “Left” equals “good,” and “Right” equals “bad,” therefore anything “Left” could not be “bad” unless it were infiltrated by the “Right.”

The SPLC’s obvious hypocrisy left Cooke no alternative but to conclude that the SPLC itself was a hard-left ideologically-driven hate group.

“In my time covering occupy Wall Street, I have seen anti-Semitism, black nationalism, class hatred, and threats of violence; there have been rapes, a few murders, and now some domestic terrorism,” Cooke wrote. “One would have thought that these things would be sufficient warrant for a group like the Southern Poverty Law Center to stand up and take serious note, but, as I learned yesterday, there’s one problem: They’re just ‘not set up to cover the extreme Left.’”

In January 2017, after the election of Donald J. Trump as president, ProPublica, a left-wing non-profit media outlet funded by Soros, decided to partner with SPLC and several other groups “overtly hostile to conservatives” to brand a new project “Documenting Hate,” dedicating a new website to “build authoritative data on hate crimes and bias incidents.”

“The King of the Hate Business”

In April 2013, the conservative Family Research Council in Washington released a video obtained from the FBI in which federal law enforcement officials questioned Floyd Lee Corkins II after he attacked the group’s headquarters with a loaded weapon the previous year.

Corkins told interrogators in the video that he attacked the Family Research Council because the SPLC had listed the Christian organization as an anti-gay “hate group”

The Washington Examiner reported that Corkins who pleaded guilty to terrorism charges, said in court that he hoped to “kill as many as possible and smear the Chick-Fil-A sandwiches in victims’ faces, and kill the guard.”

The Washington Examiner explained “the shooting occurred after an executive with Chick-Fil-A announced his support for traditional marriage, angering same-sex marriage proponents.”

In 2009, after the election of Barack Obama as president, Alexander Cockburn, the editor of the left-leaning Counterpunch.org called Morris Dees, the co-founder of the SPLC, the “king of the hate business,” as well as the “arch-salesman of hate-mongering.”

Cockburn excoriated Dees and the SPLC for peddling hate for dollars ever since the group’s founding in 1971.

Read More @ Infowars.com