• All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out.

  • I.F. Stone

zaterdag 30 augustus 2014

NATO WANTS WAR 5

De gekte wordt almaar groter. Moet het Nederlandse parlement niet eers toestemming geven op dit NATO-initiatief of is onder dit VVD/PVDA kabinet de democratie helemaal opgeheven en zitten de volksvertegenwoordigers er als spek en bonen bij? Kennelijk hoeft er niet bezuinigd te worden op het militair industrieel complex.

'Nederland in interventiemacht als antwoord op Rusland'

Nederland stapt samen met Groot-Brittannië en nog vijf andere NAVO-leden in een nieuwe interventiemacht, die wordt opgericht als antwoord op de Russische agressie in Oekraïne. 

'Nederland in interventiemacht als antwoord op Rusland'Foto:  NU.nl/Koninklijke Luchtmacht
Dat schrijft de krant Financial Times zaterdag op basis van bronnen die betrokken zijn bij de voorbereiding van de legermacht.
Het gaat volgens de krant om een macht van minimaal tienduizend man, waarin behalve grondtroepen ook luchtmacht- en marine-eenheden worden opgenomen.
http://www.nu.nl/binnenland/3864983/nederland-in-interventiemacht-als-antwoord-rusland.html

U.S. Militarized Police 4



UN Condemns U.S. Police Brutality, Calls For 'Stand Your Ground' Review

Posted: Updated: 
453768716



* Panel issues recommendations after review of U.S. record
* Says killing of Michael Brown "not an isolated event"
* Decries racial bias of police, pervasive discrimination
* ACLU calls for addressing racial inequality in America
GENEVA, Aug 29 (Reuters) - The U.N. racism watchdog urged the United States on Friday to halt the excessive use of force by police after the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager by a white policeman touched off riots in Ferguson, Missouri.
Minorities, particularly African Americans, are victims of disparities, the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) said after examining the U.S. record.
"Racial and ethnic discrimination remains a serious and persistent problem in all areas of life from de facto school segregation, access to health care and housing," Noureddine Amir, CERD committee vice chairman, told a news briefing.
Teenager Michael Brown was shot dead by a white police officer on Aug. 9, triggering violent protests that rocked Ferguson - a St. Louis suburb - and shone a global spotlight on the state of race relations in America.
"The excessive use of force by law enforcement officials against racial and ethnic minorities is an ongoing issue of concern and particularly in light of the shooting of Michael Brown," said Amir, an expert from Algeria.
"This is not an isolated event and illustrates a bigger problem in the United States, such as racial bias among law enforcement officials, the lack of proper implementation of rules and regulations governing the use of force, and the inadequacy of training of law enforcement officials."
The panel of 18 independent experts grilled a senior U.S. delegation on Aug. 13 about what they said was persistent racial discrimination against African-Americans and other minorities, including within the criminal justice system.
U.S. Ambassador Keith Harper told the panel that his nation had made "great strides toward eliminating racial discrimination" but conceded that "we have much left to do".
Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, who shot Brown, has been put on paid leave and is in hiding. A St. Louis County grand jury has begun hearing evidence and the U.S. Justice Department has opened its own investigation.
Police have said Brown struggled with Wilson when shot. But some witnesses say Brown held up his hands and was surrendering when he was shot multiple times in the head and chest.
"STAND YOUR GROUND" LAWS
In its conclusions issued on Friday, the U.N. panel said "Stand Your Ground" Laws, a controversial self-defense statute in 22 U.S. states, should be reviewed to "remove far-reaching immunity and ensure strict adherence to principles of necessity and proportionality when deadly force is used for self-defense".
Ron Davis, father of Jordan Davis, a 17-year-old shot dead in a car in Jacksonville, Florida during an argument over loud rap music in November 2012, attended the Geneva session. Sybrina Fulton, mother of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teen killed in Miami, Florida by a neighborhood watch volunteer, testified.
The U.N. panel monitors compliance with a treaty ratified by 177 countries including the United States.
"The Committee remains concerned at the practice of racial profiling of racial or ethnic minorities by law enforcement officials, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Transportation Security Administration, border enforcement officials and local police," it said, urging investigations.
The experts called for addressing obstacles faced by minorities and indigenous peoples to exercise their right to vote effectively. This was due to restrictive voter identification laws, district gerrymandering and state-level laws that disenfranchise people convicted of felonies, it said.
Jamil Dakwar of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said the U.N. recommendations highlighted "shortcomings on racial equality that we are seeing play out today on our streets, at our borders and in the voting booth.
"When it comes to human rights, the United States must practice at home what it preaches abroad," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/30/un-police-brutality-stand-your-ground_n_5740734.html

The Russians Are Coming? NATO Propaganda

anzi heeft een nieuwe reactie op uw bericht "NAVO Crimes 4" achtergelaten: 

Trojan Horse That Never Was: Western Lies and Russian Humanitarian Convoy

RIA Novosti 


Analysis & Opinion

Trojan Horse That Never Was: Western Lies and Russian Humanitarian Convoy

Topic: Russian Humanitarian Aid Convoy for East Ukraine

Trucks of a Russian convoy carrying humanitarian aid for Ukraine, drive in the direction of the Ukrainian border near the town of Donetsk, in Russia's Rostov Region, August 22, 2014.
19:09 25/08/2014
Tags: humanitarian aidinformation warfareNATOUnited StatesUkraineRussia

MOSCOW, August 25 (RIA Novosti) – Although Russia's humanitarian mission has been successfully accomplished despite gloomy predictions of a Russian invasion,' made by NATO top officials and western media sources, the West continues to spread a false narrative about the Russian convoy.
"Despite fact that the humanitarian nature of the mission had been confirmed (and Kiev had again been caught in a lie) the White House today described the convoy in terms that purposely suggested it was a military Trojan horse," wrote Daniel McAdams, the Executive Director of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, in his article "US/NATO slam Russian Aid to Eastern Ukraine," published on August, 22.
Mr. McAdams cited the official statement made by Washington, as saying: "Today, in violation of its previous commitments and international law, Russian military vehicles painted to look like civilian trucks forced their way into Ukraine." Commenting on the White House's claims Daniel McAdams asked rhetorically: "The type and color of vehicles matter more than the contents?"
Meanwhile the BBC and the CNN has reported that the convoy returned from the eastern Ukraine to Russia. However, they are still expressing concerns regarding the convoy, suggesting that it could contain military equipment. However, no clear evidence has been presented by the media outlets. The Foreign Policy underscores that only 34 trucks had been inspected by Ukrainian customs in its article "A White Shining Lie," written by columnist Michael Weiss. The question remains open why other trucks had left unexamined since the Ukrainian customs service had enough time and opportunity to inspect them.
"Several days ago western journalists were offered the opportunity to inspect any of the vehicles at random and none discovered the military Trojan horse that the Kiev government insisted was packed away in the vehicles," stressed Daniel McAdams, adding that even journalists from media outlets highly critical of Russia admitted that the trucks contained humanitarian aid.
Mr. McAdams also pointed out that NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen falsely accused Russia of entering Ukraine "without any involvement of the International Committee of the Red Cross." The Executive Director of Ron Paul Institute emphasized that the ICRC and the Russian Red Cross had praised the mission. On the other hand Michael Weiss admits that Raisa Lukutsova, the head of Russia's national Red Cross Society, "supported Moscow's decision to dispatch the convoy," according to Interfax.
However, ICRC representatives refused to accompany the convoy, referring to the threat posed by heavy shelling. 
"In other words, Rasmussen's own allies in Kiev had prevented ICRC involvement in the mission by their shelling of Lugansk," stressed Daniel McAdams.
One other fact sparks conspiracy theories spread by western media sources.
Trucks "were found to be much lighter in load than they needed to be," claims Michael Weiss, adding that "according the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine …vehicles were loaded to two-thirds of their capacity."
Michael Weiss, however, does not clarify why he considers this fact suspicious. It should be noted that two weeks ago a representative of the humanitarian mission explained that the trucks were filled half or two-thirds of their capacity in order to transport the cargo in case if some of trucks broke down. He added that due to the hard conditions of the cargo transportation the speed of the column was as well critical: evidently, "half-empty" trucks could move faster, he stressed.
Still, rational explanations do not satisfy those who are inclined to consider any Russia's move as "aggression." Russian military vehicles moving on the territory of Russia looked suspicious for international correspondents:

The Telegraph's Roland Oliphant and the Guardian's Shaun Walker claimed that Russian military column crossed the border of Ukraine. Surprisingly, no photographic or video evidence had been attached to their tweets.

Polish news station TVN24's Wojciech Bojanowski published a photo, claiming it was taken exactly in a place where Russian military crossed the Russo-Ukrainian border:

Alas, this "evidence" did not look convincing:

NATO and western mass media have been reporting of the non-existent Russia's aggression for months, but yet none of them have presented any proof.


NATO and western mass media have been reporting of the non-existent Russia's aggression for months, but yet none of them have presented any proof.

NATO Crimes 4


Eén vraag aan de Nederlandse volksvertegenwoordigers en aan mijn collega's van de mainstream media:

wat is de rechtvaardiging van toekomstig westers geweld wanneer we nu onomstotelijk bewijs hebben dat de massale NAVO-interventies in Afghanistan, Irak, Libië, en de bemoeienis in Syrië en Oekraïne in totale chaos zijn geëindigd?






NATO Crimes 3

Reckless Consequences of the Iraq War

By John Gittings, former assistant foreign editor and chief foreign leader-writer at The Guardian and author of 'The Glorious Art of Peace: From the Iliad to Iraq' (Oxford University Press, 2012)
 
This article first appeared on the author's blog, posted on 26 August 2014 and is reproduced with his kind permission. British forces are once again facing the prospect of greater involvement in Iraq after Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the NATO Secretary General recently said any request for military assistance from Iraq would be “considered constructively”.  “The international community has a responsibility to stop the advance of the so-called Islamic state,” Rasmussen added.
 
As Iraq is falling apart or, more accurately, as Iraq is falling further apart, some politicians who supported the 2003 invasion are beginning to acknowledge that it might not have been the wisest decision. But they couch their regret in the most limited of terms. Asked in The Observer whether the current chaos made him regret supporting the war as a minister in Blair's government, David Miliband says: "I regret it because I made a decision on the basis of upholding the norms of respect to weapons of mass destruction, and there were none."
 
And Hillary Clinton has written in her new book Hard Choices: “I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I could with the information I had,” she wrote. “And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong. But I still got it wrong.”
 
Strategic experts and commentators often talk in similar terms these days about the spread of Al Qaeda extremism as an “unintended consequence” of the war or, in the term favoured by the CIA, as “blowback”.
 
These are all dubious alibis for having made the wrong, perverse, and fatal decision back in 2003 to launch what the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan rightly called an illegal war. They are dubious for two reasons:
 
First, the claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction or, if he still had the remnants of ones previously made, or the precursors to making new ones, that this issue could not be dealt with by the UN inspectors, was widely challenged on good evidence by critics of the war. Their scepticism was bolstered by numerous signs that the case against Saddam was being dressed up, as in the notorious “dodgy dossier”.
 
We should recall what Robin Cook said in his resignation speech on the eve of the House of Commons (18 March 2003) debate:”Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term—namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target. It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s…Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years? Only a couple of weeks ago, Hans Blix told the Security Council that the key remaining disarmament tasks could be completed within months….”
 
Second, there was no shortage of predictions at the time that unleashing a Western war on a key Middle Eastern country in the Muslim world would pour fuel on the flames. As Tam Dalyell said in the Iraq debate: “What could be more calculated to act as a recruiting sergeant for a young generation throughout the Islamic and Arab world than putting 600 cruise missiles—or whatever it is—on to Baghdad and Iraq?”And from Charles Kennedy, then leader of the LibDems: “The big fear that many of us have is that the action will simply breed further generations of suicide bombers.”
 
Critics of the war were derided then for suggesting, as the dissenting Conservative MP Douglas Hogg had in the debate, that “the probability is that thousands and maybe tens of thousands of people will be killed or injured on all sides.” But they have been proved disastrously right, and the correct phrase should not be tens but “hundreds of thousands”. We should regard these wrong decisions, taken in the teeth of reasoned doubt and opposition, as leading not to “unintended consequences” but to “reckless consequences”. It was wrong from the start -- which means the original Afghan war against Soviet occupation – to support such armed insurgency, and we may reflect on the following tale.
 
In 1986 Margaret Thatcher welcomed to London the Afghan mujahidin leader Gulbadin Hekmatyar, a man with a reputation for savagery, praising him as a “fighter for freedom”. In 2002 the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, injured during the US invasion of Afghanistan, made his escape with the help of Hekmatyar, now an Afghan warlord. And in 2003 Al Zarqawi founded the extremist group which has become the “Islamic State” and is terrorising whole regions of Syria and Iraq. 

De Oekraïne 81

“Russia Invades Ukraine”, Strategic NATO Public Relations Stunt. Where are the Russian Tanks?

Global Research, August 29, 2014


Read the London tabloids. Russia has launched “a full-scale invasion”. A vast propaganda campaign has been launched. Where is the evidence?
The media is spreading “fake evidence” in the week leading up to the Wales NATO Summit.
The objective is to herald Russia as the aggressor.
What is at stake is a strategic public relations stunt.
Sixty countries will be represented at the NATO Summit in Wales on 4-5 September including the 28 NATO member states.
NATO Summit Wales 2014The media lies “fit the military agenda” already formulated by the Pentagon in consultation with NATO and Her Majesty’s Government.
US-NATO requires “evidence” to build a political consensus at the Wales NATO Summit on September 4-5 hosted by Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron. According to PM David Cameron in a letter addressed to heads of State and heads of government of NATO member states ahead of the Summit:
“Leaders [of NATO countries] must review NATO’s long term relationship with Russia at the summit in response to Russia’s illegal actions in Ukraine.
“And the PM wants to use the summit to agree on how NATO will sustain a robust presence in Eastern Europe in the coming months to provide reassurance to allies there, building on work already underway in NATO.” (See PM writes to NATO leaders ahead of NATO Summit Wales 2014)
A pretext for an all out war on Russia under a humanitarian cloak? The West coming to the rescue of civilians in Eastern Ukraine?
In late July in consultation with the Pentagon, NATO’s Europe commander General Philip Breedlove had (ahead of the Wales NATO meeting) already called for “stockpiling a base in Poland with enough weapons, ammunition and other supplies to support a rapid deployment of thousands of troops against Russia”.(RT, July 24, 2014). According to General Breedlove, NATO needs “pre-positioned supplies, pre-positioned capabilities and a basing area ready to rapidly accept follow-on forces”:
“He plans to recommend placing supplies — weapons, ammunition and ration packs — at the headquarters to enable a sudden influx of thousands of Nato troops” (Times, August 22, 2014, emphasis added)
Breedlove’s “Blitzkrieg scenario” which could escalate into a World War III scenario is part of NATO’s summit agenda in Wales next week. In substance it is a “copy and paste” of the draft Russian Aggression Prevention Act (RAPA) (in the US Senate) which directs President Obama to initiate the militarization of Eastern Europe with a view to confronting Russia.
The Convoy of Russian Tanks. Where is It?
In support of NATO’s planned deployments to Eastern Europe, the Western media is claiming without evidence that a large convoy of Russian tanks has crossed the border into Ukraine and are operating under Russian command inside Ukraine.
The satellite images released by NATO show tanks and vehicles inside Ukraine, within an area controlled by Donbass forces. Where did they come from?
While media reports (with extensive photographic evidence). confirmed the entry into Ukraine of a convoy of Russian “white vans” which were part of Russia’s humanitarian initiative, nobody actually saw the tanks entering Ukraine.
With regard to the NATO satellite images, there is no indication as to where these tanks and armored vehicles came from and whether they were operated by the Russian military.
The Daily Mail online featured an unconvincing 20 second video of an alleged Russian tank inside Ukraine (see still image above).

Spinning a Russian Invasion
This is not the first time that the media is spinning a “Russian Invasion”. Earlier reports in June alluded to State Department sources that:
“three aging Russian T-64 tanks had been sent to Ukraine,” and that the Ukrainian government was claiming that there were 10 more tanks. The Times also noted:
Adding to Western concerns, the senior Obama administration official said, artillery has been moved to a deployment site inside southwest Russia and may soon be shipped across the border.
Not only are the anonymous claims of one official the source of the information–they also provide the analysis of that information, floating a slightly-too-perfect theory that Russia is handing over old equipment in order to make it seem like they’re not actually doing so (Peter Hart, Ukraine Tips From Nameless US Officials: Good Enough for the New York Times, Global Research, June 27, 2014, http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-tips-from-nameless-us-officials-good-enough-for-the-new-york-times/5388916
It should be noted that this as well as previous “Russian invasions” have been the object of sizable speculative gains on financial markets.
Where are the alleged Russian Tanks?
While various explanations are put forth concerning the alleged Russian tanks and armored vehicles, what is never mentioned in Western media reports is that the Donbass militia do not need Russian tanks.
In the course of the last two months, the Donbass militia have acquired a significant arsenal of tanks and armored vehicles captured from Ukrainian forces.
Separatist rebels operate a tank in eastern Ukraine (Rob Stothard/Getty Images)
Rebels operate a tank in eastern Ukraine (Rob Stothard/Getty Images)
The large loss of military equipment is confirmed by the Ukraine Ministry of Internal Affairs, either destroyed or captured by Donbass forces.
Official Ukraine sources acknowledge a significant loss of tanks and armored vehicles.
Based on a two week period in July, 35 Ukraine Army tanks and 96 Armoured Battle Vehicles were either confiscated or destroyed by Donetsk and Lugansk forces, according to an official brief signed by Arsen Avakov (Minister of Internal Affairs) and V. Gritsak (Head of ATO [Anti-Terrorism Operation])
  1. Tanks: 35
  2. Armoured Battle Vehicles: 96
  3. Artillery: 38
  4. Aircraft: 7
  5. Helicopters: 2
  6. Automobiles: 104
While the above figures do not distinguish between confiscated and destroyed military equipment, Cyberberkut, provides the following data based on leaked official information.
According to Cyberberkut: some 65 tanks and 69 armoured battle vehicles were captured by the Donbass militia over a period of less than 2 months (from June 20 to August 15).
tanks T-64 – 65 units;
infantry fighting vehicles (BMP) – 69 units;
armored personnel carriers (BTR) – 39 units;
combat reconnaissance patrol vehicles (BRDM) – 2 units;
airborne combat vehicles (BMD) – 9 units;
multiple artillery rocket systems (RSZO) BM27 Uragan – 2 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S4 “Tyulpan” – 2 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S9 “Nona” – 6 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S1 “Gvozdika” – 25 units;
howitzers D-30 – 10 units; 82 mm. caliber mortars – 32 units; anti-aircraft mounts ZU-23-2 – 18 units; wheeled vehicles – 124 units.
While we are not in a position to fully corroborate the Cyberberkut report, the figures collected over the period of June 20 to August 15 are broadly consistent with the official release.
What these two sets of figures confirm is that rebel forces in Donesk and Lugansk possess a significant military arsenal and this arsenal did not originate from Russia. It was captured from Ukraine forces as confirmed by official Ukraine sources.
This information is of crucial significance because it refutes the accusations by Washington and NATO that the tanks and armored vehicles identified in Donbass came from Russia.
Moreover, there is evidence that entire Ukrainian battalions have surrendered to the Donetsk and Lugansk militia, Large number of Ukrainian soldiers who have abandoned the battlefield have fled to Russia or have the Donbass militia:
“The 72nd Brigade for all intents and purposes has ceased to exist [in early August] due to ammunition and food rations running out. They held on while they still had resources and then began to exit into the territory of the Russian Federation – at first in separate groups, followed by the surviving remnants of the once full-fledged brigade.
The hardware was all abandoned at their positions, which continue to be controlled by Junta troops that have not yet surrendered. When militiamen would drive up on tanks as close as 400 metres away from the positions of the Junta, there was no return fire – there is simply nothing to fire back with. Some of the soldiers of the 72ndBrigade had no rounds left during the surrender; others had 1-2 magazines per automatic rifle. (Entire Ukraine Military Brigade Abandons the Battlefield and Surrenders to Donbass Militia, The Surrender of the 72nd Brigade, Global Research, August 4, 2014)
More generally, the Western media has failed to cover the war theater in Donbass. More than 2000 civilians have been killed as a result of shelling and bombing by Kiev forces, close to a million Ukrainians are refugees in Russia.
The humanitarian crisis is invariably not mentioned by the media and when it is, the blame is placed on Russia.
BuMtBF6IQAAPmQi.png-large
Entire battalions of the Ukraine forces have surrendered.

Annex I
July 18, 2014 – Official Ukrainian Military Accounting of Losses for July 9-15, 2014

((1) Ukrainian Version; (2) Translation)BREAKING!
TOTAL UKRAINIAN LOSSES
  1. Killed in Action: 1600
  2. Wounded in Action: 4723
  3. Tanks: 35
  4. Armoured Battle Vehicles: 96
  5. Artillery: 38
  6. Aircraft: 7
  7. Helicopters: 2
  8. Automobiles: 104
TOTAL MILITIA LOSSES
  1. Killed in Action: 48
  2. Wounded in Action: 64
  3. Tanks: 2
  4. Armoured Battle Vehicles: 0
  5. Artillery: 5
  6. Automobiles: 8
TOTAL CIVILIAN LOSSES
  1. Killed: 496
  2. Wounded: 762
SIGNED & SUBMITTED BY: Arsen Avakov (Minister of Internal Affairs) and V. Gritsak (Head of ATO)

Annex II Cyberberkut Report (Translated from Russian)
Having access to classified information of Ukrainian security services, we are able to confirm that the fratricidal war led by the Kiev regime is from a military standpoint in an impasse. The Kiev forces have experienced significant losses.
From the new documents, we are able to confirm that from 8 to 15th of August, the Army of the Southeast has captured:
tanks T-64 – 18 units;
infantry fighting vehicles (BMP) – 24 units;
armored personnel carriers (BTR) – 11 units;
combat reconnaissance patrol vehicles (BRDM) – 2 units; airborne combat vehicles (BMD) – 9 units;
multiple artillery rocket systems (RSZO) BM27 “Uragan” – 2 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S4 “Tyulpan” – 2 units; self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S9 “Nona” – 2 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S1 “Gvozdika” – 10 units; 82 mm. caliber mortars – 6 units;
anti-aircraft mounts ZU-23-2 – 3 units; wheeled vehicles – 44 units.
In total, from June 20 to August 15 during the punitive action, according to the reports of the Ukrainian military, the militia forces captured:
tanks T-64 – 65 units; infantry fighting vehicles (BMP) – 69 units;
armored personnel carriers (BTR) – 39 units;
combat reconnaissance patrol vehicles (BRDM) – 2 units;
airborne combat vehicles (BMD) – 9 units;
multiple artillery rocket systems (RSZO) BM27 Uragan – 2 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S4 “Tyulpan” – 2 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S9 “Nona” – 6 units;
self-propelled guns (SAU) 2S1 “Gvozdika” – 25 units;
howitzers D-30 – 10 units; 82 mm. caliber mortars – 32 units; anti-aircraft mounts ZU-23-2 – 18 units; wheeled vehicles – 124 units.
References