Monday, July 23, 2018

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis Weighs Using “Kinetic Weapon” On North Korea

0

by Aaron Kesel, Activist Post:

 

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis hinted at using a kinetic weapon on Tuesday while discussing tensions with North Korea when he made a Freudian slip.

Mattis was asked whether there was “any military option the US can take with North Korea that would not put Seoul at grave risk,” Mattis responded, “Yes, there are, but I will not go into details.”

Later during the press conference, another reporter questioned Mattis and caught him off-guard:

“Just to clarify, you said that there were possible military options that would not create a grave risk to Seoul,” a reporter asked. “Are we talking kinetic options as well?”

“Yes, I don’t want to go into that,” Mattis responded.

Previously, Mattis stated that a war with North Korea would “involve the massive shelling of an ally’s capital, (South Korea) which is one of the most densely packed cities on earth.”

U.S. President Donald Trump in a speech to the United Nations on Tuesday threatened to “totally destroy North Korea” if Pyongyang didn’t quit its nuclear testing and threats.

Read more @ activistpost.com

Unmasked: Trump Doctrine vows carnage for new axis of evil

by Pepe Escobar, The Asia Times:

North Korea, Iran, Venezuela are targets in “compassionate” America’s war on the “wicked few.” It’s almost as though Washington felt its hegemony threatened

his was no “deeply philosophical address”. And hardly a show of  “principled realism” – as spun by the White House. President Trump at the UN was “American carnage,” to borrow a phrase previously deployed by his nativist speechwriter Stephen Miller.

One should allow the enormity of what just happened to sink in, slowly. The president of the United States, facing the bloated bureaucracy that passes for the “international community,” threatened to “wipe off the map” the whole of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (25 million people). And may however many millions of South Koreans who perish as collateral damage be damned.

THE DAILYBrief

Must-reads from across Asia – directly to your inbox

Multiple attempts have been made to connect Trump’s threats to the madman theory cooked up by “Tricky Dicky” Nixon in cahoots with Henry Kissinger, according to which the USSR must always be under the impression the then-US president was crazy enough to, literally, go nuclear. But the DPRK will not be much impressed with this madman remix.

That leaves, on the table, a way more terrifying upgrade of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Trump repeatedly invoked Truman in his speech). Frantic gaming will now be in effect in both Moscow and Beijing: Russia and China have their own stability / connectivity strategy under development to contain Pyongyang.

The Trump Doctrine has finally been enounced and a new axis of evil delineated. The winners are North Korea, Iran and Venezuela. Syria under Assad is a sort of mini-evil, and so is Cuba. Crucially, Ukraine and the South China Sea only got a fleeting mention from Trump, with no blunt accusations against Russia and China. That may reflect at least some degree of realpolitik; without “RC” – the Russia-China strategic partnership at the heart of the BRICS bloc and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) – there’s no possible solution to the Korean Peninsula stand-off.

In this epic battle of the “righteous many” against the “wicked few,” with the US described as a “compassionate nation” that wants “harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife,” it’s a bit of a stretch to have Islamic State – portrayed as being not remotely as “evil” as North Korea or Iran – get only a few paragraphs.

The art of unraveling a deal

According to the Trump Doctrine, Iran is “an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence, bloodshed and chaos,” a “murderous regime” profiting from a nuclear deal that is “an embarrassment to the United States.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted: “Trump’s ignorant hate speech belongs in medieval times – not the 21st century UN – unworthy of a reply.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov once again stressed full support for the nuclear deal ahead of a P5+1 ministers’ meeting scheduled for Wednesday, when Zarif was due to be seated at the same table as US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Under review: compliance with the deal. Tillerson is the only one who wants a renegotiation.

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani has, in fact, developed an unassailable argument on the nuclear negotiations. He says the deal – which the P5+1 and the IAEA all agree is working – could be used as a model elsewhere. German chancellor Angela Merkel concurs. But, Rouhani says, if the US suddenly decides to unilaterally pull out, how could the North Koreans possibly be convinced it’s worth their while to sit down to negotiate anything with the Americans ?

What the Trump Doctrine is aiming at is, in fact, a favourite old neo-con play, reverting back to the dynamics of the Dick Cheney-driven Washington-Tehran Cold War years.

This script runs as follows: Iran must be isolated (by the West, only now that won’t fly with the Europeans); Iran is “destabilizing” the Middle East (Saudi Arabia, the ideological foundry of all strands of Salafi-jihadism, gets a free pass); and Iran, because it’s developing ballistic that could – allegedly – carry nuclear warheads, is the new North Korea.

That lays the groundwork for Trump to decertify the deal on October 15. Such a dangerous geopolitical outcome would then pit Washington, Tel Aviv, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi against Tehran, Moscow and Beijing, with European capitals non-aligned. That’s hardly compatible with a “compassionate nation” which wants “harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife.”

Afghanistan comes to South America

The Trump Doctrine, as enounced, privileges the absolute sovereignty of the nation-state. But then there are those pesky “rogue regimes” which must be, well, regime-changed. Enter Venezuela, now on “the brink of total collapse,” and run by a “dictator”; thus, America “cannot stand by and watch.”

No standing by, indeed. On Monday, Trump had dinner in New York with the presidents of Colombia, Peru and Brazil (the last indicted by the country’s Attorney General as the leader of a criminal organization and enjoying an inverted Kim dynasty rating of 95{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} unpopularity). On the menu: regime change in Venezuela.

Venezuelan “dictator” Maduro happens to be supported by Moscow and, most crucially, Beijing, which buys oil and has invested widely in infrastructure in the country with Brazilian construction giant Odebrecht crippled by the Car Wash investigation.

The stakes in Venezuela are extremely high. In early November, Brazilian and American forces will be deployed in a joint military exercise in the Amazon rainforest, at the Tri-Border between Peru, Brazil and Colombia. Call it a rehearsal for regime change in Venezuela. South America could well turn into the new Afghanistan, a consequence that flows from Trump’s assertion that “major portions of the world are in conflict and some, in fact, are going to hell.”

For all the lofty spin about “sovereignty”, the new axis of evil is all about, once again, regime change.

Read More @ AsiaTimes.com

Shock Survey: Less Than 1 Out Of Every 4 Republicans In Congress Support A Border Wall

0

by Michael Snyder, The Economic Collapse Blog:

It is time to flush the toilet in Washington D.C., because the professional politicians that we have been sending there just keep betraying us over and over again.  On Wednesday, I was absolutely stunned when I came across a brand new survey that was conducted by USA Today.  They asked all of the members of Congress whether they support a border wall or not, and less than one out of every 4 Republicans said that they did.  This is just another example of why the American people are so deeply frustrated with the Republican Party these days.  Most Republicans are spineless jellyfish that have been compromising for so long that they don’t really stand for anything anymore.

If President Trump had not promised to build a wall, he never would have won the Republican nomination in 2016, and he sure wouldn’t be the president of the United States today.  This is a point that Ann Coulter had made over and over again, and the fact that I strongly support building a wall is a big reason why she is supporting my campaign for Congress.  Conservatives all over the country want a wall, and that is why it is so disturbing to hear that most Republicans in Congress do not support building one

President Trump has been adamant that he needs Congress to approve funding to start building his border wall, but Republicans on Capitol Hill are far less adamant about supporting it. When asked by the USA TODAY Network whether they support the president’s initial $1.6 billion budget request to begin construction, only 69 of the 292 Republicans on Capitol Hill said “yes.” Among the rest, three Republicans said they oppose the money, several evaded a direct answer, and the rest simply refused to respond to the question.

The USA TODAY Network asked the 534 members of the House and Senate whether they support the $1.6 billion down payment approved by the House and found fewer than 25{5f621241b214ad2ec6cd4f506191303eb2f57539ef282de243c880c2b328a528} of Republicans willing to stand up for the plan.

Building a wall seems like such a no-brainer to me.  For decades we have had an immigration policy that is all mixed up.  We have made it exceedingly difficult to come in through the front door, but meanwhile we have been keeping the back door completely wide open.

Today, our system of legal immigration is a complete and total nightmare.  It is extremely confusing, it is very expensive, and it takes way too long.  I once helped someone through that process, and it was so convoluted that I could barely even understand it.

Meanwhile, we have kept the back door totally wide open and have allowed tens of millions of people to enter this country illegally.  So we are actually discouraging good people from coming into our nation legally, and meanwhile we have rolled out the red carpet for criminals, gang members, drug dealers and those that would like to take advantage of the system.

As I discuss in my latest book entitled “Living A Life That Really Matters”, we need to make sure that everyone comes in through the front door.  It has been proposed that we can use “technology” and other methods to secure our borders, and I would love to see something that actually works.  But we do know that walls work, and we know that building a wall on the southern border would dramatically reduce illegal immigration and begin forcing people to come in through the front door.

I have previously written about the tremendous problems that illegal immigration is causing in communities all over the nation.  If we would just secure our borders, we could start significantly reducing levels of human trafficking, violent crime and gang membership, and so I don’t know why anyone would want to be opposed to doing that.

Unfortunately, when USA Today approached Republican members of Congress about a wall, most of them didn’t even want to take a clear stance at all

The overwhelming majority of congressional Republicans refused to take a stance on the wall funding when asked by USA TODAY. Most simply declined to participate in the survey or refused to even respond to queries. Many others offered general positions about the importance of securing the border and requiring employers to verify the immigration status of their workers.

Read More @ TheEconomicCollapseBlog.com

More Thoughts on Trump’s UN Declaration of War Against Iran and North Korea

0

by Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Craig Roberts:

Trump’s UN speech makes it clear that Trump’s presidency, in terms of his campaign promise to remove Washington from the “policeman of the world” role, exit the Middle East, and repair the damaged relations with Russia, is over. The CIA and the military/security complex are in full control of the US government. Trump has accepted his captivity and his assigned role as the enforcer of Washington’s hegemony over every other country. Washington uber alles is the only foreign policy that Washington pursues.

At the UN Trump actually threatened to wipe North Korea off of the face of the earth. He added to this threat threats against Venezuela (http://stephenlendman.org/2017/09/trump-threatens-venezuela/) and Iran. He demonized these countries as “rogue states,” but it is Washington that is playing that role. Washington has destroyed in whole or part eight countries in the young 21st century and has 3 to 5 more in its crosshairs.

One question is: why did not the UN audience shout Trump down, a man standing before them telling obvious lies? The answer, of course, is money. The US taxpayers pay roughly one-quarter of the UN’s annual budget, leaving the other 130+ countries a light load. Washington is succeeding in driving the world to Armageddon, because the world’s leaders prefer money to truth, to justice, to survival. The UN diplomats see in their cooperation with Washington the opportunity to make money by sharing in the West’s exploitation of their own countries.

Washington, absorbed in its effort to destroy Syria, left it to its Saudi Arabian puppet to destroy Yemen. The Saudi autocracy, a major sponsor with the US of terrorism, has done a good job, thanks to US supplying the weapons and to the US refueling the Saudi attack airplanes. This totally gratuitous war has helped to maximize the profits of the American military/security complex, a collection of evil never before present on the face of the earth. UNICEF reports that one million Yemeni children will be the victims of “American compassion” of which Trump bragged in the CIA’s UN speech.

One wonders if the Russians and Chinese are so absorbed in getting rich like America’s One Percent that they are unaware that they are on the list of countries to be eliminated for not accepting Washington’s hegemony. Really, where was the Russian government when Washington overthrew the Ukranian government? It was at a sports event. And I call Americans insouciant. Where was the Russian government? How could it have not known?

To be frank. The point is this. Unless Russia and China can take out the US, the US will take out Russia and China. The only question is who strikes first. The only way to avoid this is for Russia and China to surrender and accept Washington’s hegemony. This is the firm undeviating path on which the neoconservatives, the CIA, and the military/security complex have set the United States. The entire point of North Korea is US nuclear missiles on China’s border. The entire point of Iran is US nuclear missiles on Russia’s border.

As far as I can ascertain, hardly anyone is aware that Armageddon is just around the corner. There is no protest from the Western presstitutes, a collection of whores. In the US the only protests are against ancient “civil war” statues, which the ignorant rabble say are symbols of black slavery. There is no peace movement and no peace marches. In London the transgendered and the radical feminists are protesting one another, engaging in fist fights in Hyde Park. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4891484/Fists-fly-politically-correct-rally.html No one seems to have any awareness.

In US online propaganda websites such as Americans for Limited Government—funded by who? serving who?—endorse Trump’s destabilizing UN speech as a non-threat to world peace:

Read More @ PaulCraigRoberts.org

Kremlin Says Morgan Freeman Suffering From “Stress” After ‘War With Russia’ Video

by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars:

The Kremlin reacted to a video featuring Morgan Freeman that announces the U.S. is at war with Russia by asserting that the actor is suffering from “stress”.

The two minute clip features Freeman announcing that Russia attacked the United States by interfering in the presidential election.

The group behind the video, the Committee to Investigate Russia, claims to be “non-partisan” yet is made up of with Never Trump neo-cons like Max Boot and David Frum.

 

James Clapper, Obama’s spymaster who was caught lying about the Trump campaign being wiretapped after yesterday’s revelations about Paul Manafort, is also involved.

The group is also represented by Hollywood director Rob Reiner, seen in photos kissing Hillary Clinton, who has called for an “all out war” to resist Donald Trump.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Freeman’s words were “purely emotional” during a press conference conference earlier today and that the video couldn’t be taken seriously because it was “not based on real information”.

“Many creative people fall prey to emotional stress without real information about the real state of things,” he was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency.

Peskov added that the campaign was ” a continuation of a form of McCarthyism,” and that “with time this will pass.”

Read More @ Infowars.com

New Emails show Hillary Clinton invited Vladimir Putin to Clinton Foundation Gala

0

by Alex Chrisoforou, The Duran:

For all her “Putin tried to destroy me” rhetoric, Hillary Clinton was eager to hang out with the Russian President during the Clinton Foundation good ol’days.

Emails recently obtained and released by conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch show that Hillary Clinton invited Vladimir Putin to a Clinton Foundation Gala back in 2009.

Which makes all of Hillary’s “Russia” whining complete bullshit…and a total acting job by the sore loser presidential candidate.

Here is the Judicial Watch PDF download of HRC gushing at a chance to have Vladimir Putin attend a Clinton Foundation Gala.

Via The Gateway Pundit

Just a couple months into Hillary Clinton’s term as Secretary of State, the Clinton Foundation invited Vladimir Putin and other leaders to the Clinton Global Initiative’s 2009 annual gathering.

The email containing the list of leaders who were invited was forwarded in March of 2009 from the Director of Foreign Policy of the Clinton Foundation Amitabh Desai to former Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro. Shapiro then forwarded it to Hillary’s foreign policy advisor Jake Sullivan showing a conflict of interest between the Clinton Foundation and the federal government.

Via SHTF Plan

In newly released emails which the mainstream media is willfully ignoring, Hillary Clinton invited Russian president Vladimir Putin to a Clinton Foundation event. The Russian collusion between Hillary Clinton is becoming very apparent.

Hillary Clinton likes to talk a tough game about Russian President Vladimir Putin. And she likes to put him on the list of those at fault for her loss in the election last November to Donald Trump. But that didn’t stop her from inviting him and other top Russian officials to a Clinton Foundation gala right after she became Secretary of State.

Read More @ TheDuran.com

Prosecutors Unveil Full Details Of Anthony Weiner’s Pedophilia

0

from Zero Hedge:

Earlier today we reported that as part of the government’s sentencing memorandum (published at the bottom), federal prosecutors asked that disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner, and the man Hillary Clinton has quietly added to the nearly infinite list of reasons why she lost the presidential election, be sentenced to about two years in prison for engaging in sexting with an underage, 15-year-old girl. Prosecutors filed paper in Manhattan Federal Court on Wednesday in advance of Weiner’s sentencing. In the document, prosecutors asked that the judge use the sentencing as an opportunity to send a message to other perverted politicians:

The Government respectfully submits this memorandum in connection with the sentencing of Anthony Weiner, which is scheduled for September 25, 2017, following his guilty plea to transferring obscene material to a minor. Although the defendant’s self-destructive path from United States Congressman to felon is indisputably sad, his crime is serious and his demonstrated need for deterrence is real. The non-custodial sentence that Weiner proposes is simply inadequate; his crime deserves time in prison. For the reasons set forth below, the Government respectfully requests that Court sentence Weiner to a term of imprisonment within the range of 21 to 27 months.

Weiner’s sentencing will take place almost exactly a year after the New York Post published a story about him sexting with another woman who wasn’t his wife. Weiner said he would plead guilty in May after prosecutors brought charges following revelations that he also sexted with the 15-year-old, whom he met over Twitter. Both the girl and her father told the Daily Mail that Weiner knew she was underaged when they were corresponding.

And just to make sure that Weiner does end up in jail, the US Attorney for the district of New York, Joon Kim, laid out in vivid – and gruesome detail – the circumstances of his pedophilia. As taken from the prosecutor memorandum:

In the evening of January 23, 2016, a 15-year-old girl (the “Minor Victim”) initiated contact with the defendant by sending him a direct message on Twitter. Over the next several hours, the Minor Victim and Weiner exchanged a series of messages, ranging from the mundane to the provocative. Early in the exchange, the Minor Victim revealed to Weiner that she was in high school. Despite knowing he was communicating with a high school student, Weiner participated in increasingly suggestive exchanges, telling the Minor Victim, among other things, that he thought she was “kinda sorta gorgeous.” Their communications continued the next morning on Facebook messenger, then moved to Kik, and at some later point, Confide and Snapchat. The latter three all are messaging and photo-sharing applications that delete messages and images once viewed.

 

As January turned to February, their intermittent exchanges grew more lascivious. This was despite the fact that there could be no reasonable doubt in Weiner’s mind that he was chatting with a minor – in addition to having revealed that she was a high school student, the Minor Victim told Weiner that she was getting her learner’s permit. She explained in Facebook chats that she has “parents that wouldn’t approve of some of the things” she does, and that she likes “older guys,” “[b]ut that’s illegal.” The defendant correctly observed, “You are young,” in one Kik message.

 

Against that backdrop, between February 17 and 23, 2016, Weiner and the Minor Victim participated in three video chat sessions on Skype.

 

There is no dispute that the Minor Victim repeatedly suggested that she and the defendant participate in video chats on Skype. Those suggestions were not, however, one-sided. For example, Twitter records reveal that during their first exchanges the night of January 23, 2016, at some point after the Minor Victim had suggested that they Skype, the defendant said “Leave the complex stuff for Skype.” That night as well, after a suggestive exchange, the defendant said “Maybe Skype someday.” Thus, although it was the Minor Victim who initially sought out Weiner, as the Government readily concedes, Weiner immediately responded to the Minor Victim’s overture and willingly participated in the offense conduct thereafter.

 

It was then that the Minor Victim made clear that she was not just a minor – she was, in fact, only 15 years old. That did not stop Weiner. During the latter two Skype sessions, on February 18 and 23, 2016, and in a Snapchat communication on March 9, 2016, the defendant used graphic and obscene language to ask the Minor Victim to display her naked body and touch herself, which she did. He also sent an obscene message to the Minor Victim on Confide, describing what he would do to her, if she were 18. Part and parcel of these disturbing – and criminal – exchanges, the defendant also sent the Minor Victim adult pornography. In approximately March 2016, after several months of intermittent exchanges, communications between the defendant and Minor Victim largely stopped. The Minor Victim made efforts to re-engage, but was met with limited responsiveness.

 

The instant conduct was revealed to the public and law enforcement in September 2016, when the Daily Mail published the Minor Victim’s account of her communications with Weiner after she participated in a paid interview.

And some further commentary from the proscuting attorney:

This is not merely a “sexting” case. The defendant did far more than exchange typed words on a lifeless cellphone screen with a faceless stranger. With full knowledge that he was communicating with a real 15-year-old girl, the defendant asked her to engage in sexually explicit conduct via Skype and Snapchat, where her body was on display, and where she was asked to sexually perform for him. That offense – transmitting obscenity to a minor to induce her to engage in sexually explicit conduct by video chat and photo – is far from mere “sexting.” Weiner’s criminal conduct was very serious, and the sentence imposed should reflect that seriousness.

 

The defendant claims that he “responded to the victim’s request for sexually explicit messages not because she was a teenager, but in spite of it.” While the Government does not contend that Weiner engaged in inappropriate sexual exchanges with other minors or that he is a pedophile, his professed ambivalence towards the Minor Victim’s age is belied by the defendant’s own statements to the court-appointed evaluator during his evaluation. Moreover, the defendant has acknowledged an interest in legal, adult, teen-themed pornography. In the context of this admitted interest, his insistence that he deserves a lighter sentence because the Minor Victim’s age meant nothing to him rings hollow. Even if the Court were to credit Weiner’s claim of ambivalence to the Minor Victim’s age, that purported ambivalence is part of the problem. That his victim was a minor – and therefore his conduct a serious crime – did not deter Weiner from forging ahead.

 

The defendant’s submission repeatedly makes note of the 15-year-old Minor Victim’s various motives for communicating with Weiner and her profit from sharing those communications with the media. While careful not to cast blame on the Minor Victim outright or disclaim ultimate responsibility for his crime, he relies, in part, on the circumstances of their communications in arguing for a sentence of probation. That argument should be rejected, and Weiner should be sentenced for what he did – not what motived the Minor Victim. Weiner, a grown man, a father, and a former lawmaker, willfully and knowingly asked a 15-year-old girl to display her body and engage in sexually explicit conduct for him online. Such conduct warrants a meaningful sentence of incarceration.

Defense lawyers had portrayed the girl as an aggressor, saying she wanted to generate material for a book and possibly influence the presidential election. Prosecutors responded that Weiner should be sentenced for what he did, and his victim’s motives should not influence his punishment. A defense lawyer declined to comment Wednesday

Read More @ ZeroHedge.com

HILLARY CLINTON SAYS SHE’S THE MODERN DAY PAUL REVERE

0

by Steve Watson, Infowars:

“The Russians are coming!”

Hillary Clinton continued her ‘won’t shut the hell up or go away’ tour Tuesday night on The Late Show, and declared to the country that she is the modern day Paul Revere.

Speaking with Trump-hating, Nazi-saluting host Stephen Colbert, while sipping chardonnay, Hillary relived how “painful” and “horrible” it was to lose the election to Donald Trump, saying that she feels the need to be “open and candid” about it.

Hillary declared that she is “trying to come to grips as I write in the book about everything from, you know, sexism and misogyny, to voter suppression, to the unusual behavior of the former director of the F.B.I., and the Russians!”

Ah, the Russians… again.

Hillary admitted that despite the total lack of any evidence, she still believes that Vladimir Putin cost her the Presidency.

“I don’t know what the congressional investigation and I don’t know what the special counsel investigation are going to find. I’m going to wait for that.” Hillary said.

“But I don’t think anybody can with a straight face say that the Russians did not set out to influence our election, and they did so. This latest revelation about the way they bought ads on Facebook and targeted them, we’re going to find out a lot more, Stephen.” she continued.

“Putin really doesn’t like democracy, he thinks its inconvenient messy policy. … He wants to undermine how we see each other, how we respect each other. I believe they had a good outing in 2016, and will in 2018 and 2020 unless we stop them.” Hillary added, claiming that Putin had built up an army of “fake Americans with fake news and fake stories and fake demonstrations.”

She then compared herself to Paul Revere, the patriot who warned in the dead of the night that British invaders were on their way to attack.

“And I am saying as clearly as I can — I feel like I’m a bit of a, you know, ‘Paula Revere,’” Hillary exclaimed. “I’m trying to sound the alarm about this.”

Strange because no one remembers Paul Revere actually inviting those ‘foreign invaders’ to fundraising galasprofiting from huge sales of energy assets to them, or taking vast amounts of money from them for appearances.

Read More @ Infowars.com

Libyan chessboard: whom should you rely on in the cause of peace and salvation of statehood?

0

Contributed by Correspondent Adel Karim, via SGT Report.com:

Several power centers were formed in Libya as a result of the fall of Muammar Gaddafi’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and the destruction of the statehood. None of them has a national legitimacy. The pursuit of personal interests by some political leaders to the detriment of the general state is intertwined with territorial fragmentation. The historic regions – Tripolitania, Cyrenaica and Fezzan – have de facto separated from each other. The Libyan phenomenon of the city-state arose (Misrata, Al-Zintan, Sirte, etc.). The separatist tendencies of the tribes grew stronger.

Along with it, the UN attempts to stabilize the situation in the country. In December, 2015, the United Nations brokered the Libyan Political Agreement (LPA), the Presidential Council (PC) was set up and a Government of National Accord (GNA) headed by Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj was formed. The agreement also confirmed the legitimacy of the House of Representatives (HoR) based in Tobruk in eastern Libya while has the support of Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, the Libyan National Army (LNA) commander.

Despite the UN efforts, however, the conflict between Islamist, Anti-Islamist, secular, tribal and simply criminal groups which resulted in another civil war is caused by historic, social, economic and political circumstances including the interests and interference of foreign parties. Only NATO involvement in contravention of UNSC Resolution 1973 turned Libya into a perfect place for terrorist and extremist groups, a center for human trafficking and cheap resources market.

Today, the country is de facto divided by the East-West axis. The eastern regions are under LNA control. In early July, Marshal Haftar’s troops recaptured Benghazi partly stabilizing the situation in the East.

Meanwhile, in the West, the tension between the groups allegedly supporting Fayez al-Sarraj’s Government of National Accord and those who were loyal to Khalifa al-Ghawil’s Government of National Salvation grew into violent clashes. Rival militias have been battling heavily one another in Tripoli since December, 2016.

The South of the once rich and beautiful country became a battlefield of eastern and western sides, tribes and terrorists where Haftar’s supporters were slain by the Misrata-based Third Force militants in early May 2017.

The crisis is aggravating because of various Salafist jihadi groups with different ideologies that are in constant conflict in western Libya. Such groups include Libya Dawn (Libya Fajr), the Benghazi Revolutionaries Shura Council, Ansar al-Sharia, the 17 FebruaryMartyrs Brigade, the Libya Shield Force, the Libyan Petroleum Facilities Guard (PFG), etc.

However, the West, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey possess more powerful tools for destabilizing the region e.g. ISIS, al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and the Muslim Brotherhood.

A key part in counteracting IS and AQIM belongs to general Haftar who is taking measures to eliminate jihadists on the Libyan soil, near Sabha and Sirte cities in particular. Having lost Sirte, the terrorists dispersed in three directions: to the southwest of Sabha, to the west of Sabratah and to the southeast near the Sudan border. The main problem of neutralizing the groups is that they are being reinforced with volunteers from Tunis, Algeria, Mali, Chad and Nigeria and the terrorists fleeing from Syria and Iraq.

However, while the situation in the east has stabilized, the western regions are less stable and prone to changes. Mostly, this is tied to the lack of political will of Sarraj and the GNA, and to the diversity of the ultra-conservative Salafist groups in the west.

Although these opposing factions are nominally loyal to Prime Minister Saraj, experience has shown that they are not associated with any political leader. The most telling example is when at the end of October 2016, the forces of Haitham Tajouri, who heads Tripoli’s largest militia and who was allegedly loyal to the Government of National Salvation, allowed the units of Khalifa al-Ghawil to seize a number of ministries in Tripoli. There is also a question of the legitimacy of supporting these essentially terrorist formations by Fayez al-Sarraj. Probably, the latter uses them as a force capable in the future to counter the rising popularity of Khalifa Haftar among the population of Libya.

Thus, unlike Prime Minister F. Saraj, Marshal H. Haftar is a serious military and political figure on the Libyan chessboard capable of uniting tribes and clans under his banners, limiting the flows of illegal migration to the EU, liquidating the terrorist organizations like ISIS, AKIM and Muslim Brotherhood, thus restoring the statehood in the country.

——-

Adel Karim is an independent investigative correspondent who monitors the situation in the Middle East. Karim notes that he see the growing threat of ISIS spreading all around the Middle East. And although ISIS will be defeated soon in Syria, Islamists are going to create new hotbeds of tension in the Middle East, especially in Libya.

Trump’s UN Speech

0

by Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Craig Roberts:

I listened to part of Trump’s UN speech this morning. I was so embarrassed for him and for my country that I had to turn it off.

I wonder if whoever wrote the deplorable speech intended to embarrass Trump and inadvertently embarrassed America as well, or whether the speechwriter(s) is so imbued with the neoconservative arrogance and hubris of our time that the speechwriter was simply blind to the extraordinary contradictions that stood out like sore thumbs all through the speech.

I am not going to describe all of them, just a couple of examples.

Trump went on at great length about how America respects the sovereignty of every country and the people’s will of every country, and how the US, despite its overwhelming military power, never tries to impose its will on any country. What was the administration thinking, or can it think? What about Yugoslavia/Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, Crimea, Ukraine, Venezuela, Honduras, Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, Argentina, just to mention countries in the 21st century that have been subjected to US military attacks, government overthrows, and removals of political leaders who did not conform to US interests?

Is it respect for the sovereignty of countries to force them to support US sanctions against Iran, Russia, China, North Korea, Venezuela? Is it respect for the sovereignty of countries to impose sanctions on the countries? If this is not imposing Washington’s will on other countries, what is?

Is it respect for other countries to inform them that unless they do as they are told, “we will bomb you into the stone age”?

I heard Trump complain that the UN Human Rights commission had as members countries with the worst human rights records of our time, and I wondered if he was talking about the United States. Clearly, Trump, the speechwriter(s), the State Department, the National Security Council, the US Ambassador to the UN, indeed the entire administration, do not think that the endless slaughter, maiming, orphaning, widowing, and dispossessing of millions of peoples in many countries, producing waves of refugees, comprise human rights violations.

The arrogance conveyed by Trump’s speech is unprecedented.

After assurances that America respects everyone, Trump then made demand after demand and threat after threat against the sovereignty of Iran and North Korea, demanding that the rest of the world back him up.

Neither country is a threat to the US. Unlike the US and Israel, Korea has not been at war since 1953. Iran’s last war was in the 1980s when Iran was attacked by Iraq. Yet both North Korea and Iran are subjected to constant threats from the US. At the UN Trump threatened North Korea with destruction, and Washington is telling more lies about Iran in order to justify military action.

Here is what former Secretary of State Colin Powell says about how carefully Washington thinks about other peoples:

“We thought we knew what would happen in Libya. We thought we knew what would happen in Egypt. We thought we knew what would happen in Iraq, and we guessed wrong. In each one of these countries the thing we have to consider is that there is some structure that’s holding the society together. And as we learned, especially in Libya, when you remove the top and the whole thing falls apart . . . you get chaos.”

That’s what Washington does. It brings chaos to tens of millions of peoples, destroying their lives and the prospects of their countries. This is the behavior that Trump described as American compassion for others. This is what Trump says is respecting others and the sovereignty of their countries. Washington dresses up its crimes against humanity as a “war on terror.” The tens of millions of slaughtered, maimed, and displaced persons are merely “collateral damage.”

Read More @ PaulCraigRoberts.org

EXPOSED: Hillary Clinton Moved 800K From Her Campaign To Help Fund ANTIFA

0

by Lucian Wintrich, The Gateway Pundit:

Hillary, who long during the campaign trail condemned “dark-money” Super-PACs, has funneled over 800K from her Campaign over to one of these very same outfits. It has been revealed that the failed presidential candidate’s Super-PAC, “Onward Together”, is heavily backing “resistance” and Alt-Left extremist groups such as ANTIFA.

In building investigations, Daily Caller first discovered that Hillary transferred a mass sum of money from her campaign over to Onward Together:

Clinton transferred $800,000 from her failed 2016 presidential campaign to Onward Together shortly before announcing the group’s launch in May, documents the campaign filed with the FEC reveal.

Now, today, it has been revealed by Offended America exactly where that money is going:

Daily Caller reached out to five different Antifa linked groups, and only one was willing to deny donations from Onward Together. Soros-linked group, Indivisible, denied receiving financial support from Clinton or Onward Together.

“Onward Together has not given any financial support to us,” Helen Kalla, an Indivisible spokesperson, wrote to Daily Caller.

Kalla added that Clinton’s group has “been amplifying and highlighting our work through their digital networks,” which she explained has consisted of “retweeting [Indivisible], and they’ve highlighted our work via their emails to their list too.”

According to Federal Election Commission documents, Hillary Clinton transferred $800,000 from her failed political campaign “Hillary for America” to her new Super-PAC “Onward Together”, before she announced the existence of the PAC in May, 2017.

Amid other disturbing details, it’s now been revealed that “Onward Together” is a 501(c)4 “Social Welfare” organization, which means that it’s not required to disclose many of the details of its operations to the public or disclose who its donors are.

By receiving campaign funds, and then furnishing the funds to Antifa terrorist groups, Clinton may have implicated many of her supported in a crime.

Hillary Clinton, now too old to run for office, will go back to doing what she’s always done best, round up money from anonymous sources, and then use that money to influence elections and peddle power.

Read More @ TheGatewayPundit.com

Hillary is SO CRAZY She May Challenge Legitimacy Of Presidential Election

0

from Zero Hedge:

The US presidential election took place nearly one year ago, but to Hillary Clinton it may as well never have ended.

In an interview with NPR, the former first lady said that “if Russian interference turned out to be deeper than previously thought” she wouldn’t rule out challenging its legitimacy or the outcome.

“No, I wouldn’t rule it out,” she said.

Still, even the defeated Democratic nominee admitted that she does not “believe” there is a means to officially challenge the election’s outcome. “I don’t know if there’s any legal, constitutional way to do that,” Clinton said.

“There are scholars, academics, who have arguments that it would be [possible], but I don’t think they’re on strong ground. But people are making those arguments. I just don’t think we have a mechanism,” Mrs. Clinton said. “I think you can raise questions.”

Your sure can, especially if it means staying in the public eye day after day reminding the world how your loss was everyone else’s fault but your own, to the point where even her fellow Democrats have said enough. Monday’s interview is the latest in a whirlwind of appearances the former first lady has given as she promotes her book, “What Happened.”

In addition to Russia, over the past week, she’s continued to blame James Comey, Bernard Sanders and others for her defeat, and she’s also doubled down on her call to end the Electoral College.

None of this is new: Hillary has repeatedly blamed Russia’s efforts to intervene in last year’s election for her loss to Donald Trump, but her latest comments reflect the depth of her frustration with the Kremlin’s efforts which apparently were channeled by Trump himself.  She charged that the president knew the Russians were trying to sabotage her campaign, but that it’s unclear if he can be held accountable at this point.

“[Trump] knew they were trying to do whatever they could to discredit me with emails, so there’s obviously a trail there, but I don’t know that in our system we have any means of doing that, but I just wanted to add to the point you made. There’s no doubt they influenced the election: We now know more about how they did that.”

Clinton also said she would have reacted differently than Trump did and established an “independent commission with subpoena power” to probe it.

“Let me just put it this way, if I had lost the popular vote but won the electoral college and in my first day as president the intelligence community came to me and said, ‘The Russians influenced the election,’ I would’ve never stood for it,” she said. “Even though it might’ve advantaged me, I would’ve said, ‘We’ve got to get to the bottom of this.’” She probably meant disadvantaged.

She then proceeded to psychoanalyze Trump, saying that “I think part of the reason Trump behaves the way he behaves is that he is a walking example of projection. Whatever he’s doing and whatever he thinks is happening he will accuse somebody else of“, she concluded without a trace of irony. 

Well, even if Hillary fails to challenge Trump over Putin’s unprecedented hacking of millions of middle-class Americans, she can always find comfort in the stupendous, fantastic, if just a little fabricated rating of her book on Amazon, which as of today has 4.8 completely unhacked stars out of 5… with Jeff Bezos’ sincerest compliments.

Read More @ ZeroHedge.com

Preparing for America’s New Civil War

0

by Chris Lowe, Bonner and Partners:

With violent protests erupting recently in cities like Charlottesville and Berkeley, civil strife in America is at a fever pitch. Today, Editor at Large Chris Lowe sits down with colleague Nick Giambruno to discuss what’s causing all this violence, and what you can do to protect your family and your finances.

America is headed for a new kind of civil war…

And when it erupts, you and your family are going to need some “freedom insurance” – the ability to get out fast and set up in a more stable country.

That’s the stark warning from today’s expert, Casey Research’s globetrotting analyst Nick Giambruno.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ll know that America is in turmoil.

That was on full display in Charlottesville, Virginia, last month. But it’s not just Charlottesville. There have also been deadly clashes in Ferguson, Charleston, Dallas, St. Paul, Baltimore, Baton Rouge, and Alexandria.

But you don’t just have to sit around and wait for more widespread violence to erupt in America before taking action to protect yourself, your family, and your assets. As Nick explains below, by taking out “freedom insurance” now… you’ll be prepared for whatever is coming down the pike.

Chris Lowe: You’ve been urging folks to diversify internationally. Why is that message so important now?

Nick Giambruno: The U.S. is becoming more and more fragmented, as I’m sure our readers have noticed. I’ve never seen it more polarized.

In fact, I’ve only seen this degree of polarization in countries that have gone through civil wars. It all feels eerily familiar.

I was born in the U.S. and grew up there. But I used to live in Lebanon, which went through a nasty 15-year civil war. More than 120,000 died. Thousands more lost their homes.

And I currently live in Colombia part of the year. The country has a 50-year history of civil conflict.

Chris Lowe: What’s to blame for this situation?

Nick Giambruno: Identity politics are a big factor.

That’s when your religion, race, ethnic background, and so forth are the most important thing in politics. You’re no longer an individual American. You’re part of some group, undoubtedly being victimized by another group.

This naturally leads to collectivism, tensions… and eventually violence between the groups.

Identity politics were a big factor in Lebanon’s civil war. And they’re a big factor in the U.S. right now. This poisonous trend is growing, and it’s probably unstoppable.

The media is another big factor. Most Americans live in a partisan information bubble with these 24-hour news networks and partisan websites. That accelerates the divide.

I lived in Beirut, Lebanon’s capital city, for about three years. It reminds me of the media there. About 6 million people live in Lebanon, but it has about a dozen 24-hour news channels. Each one caters to a different political/sectarian/ethnic group. This allows each group to live in its own media bubble.

Lebanon’s bloody civil war happened in the 1970s and 1980s. But it’s still an extremely divided country. It wouldn’t take much for its civil war to start up again.

The media in Lebanon helps incubate tensions there. Today, the same thing is happening in the U.S.

I don’t mean to sound dramatic, but Americans hate each other right now. And it’s getting worse. We’re just a market crash… a recession… or some other extreme event away from more widespread violence. A new form of civil war is even possible.

Chris Lowe: We’re not talking a return to 1861 – to pitched battles between armies and hundreds of thousands dead. But if you define “civil war” as a situation where you have widespread violence, a rejection of political authority, and the National Guard on the street, it’s easy to see how America gets there.

Nick Giambruno: I agree. I can’t say exactly what it is. But something does seem to be brewing. And it’s not good. That’s why Doug Casey and I urge our readers to internationalize their lifestyles.

Read More @ BonnerAndPartners.com