woensdag 3 januari 2018

The Republicans’ Fake Investigations



Afbeeldingsresultaat voor logo the new york times

Continue reading the main story

The Republicans’ Fake Investigations

Harry Campbel

A generation ago, Republicans sought to protect President Richard Nixon by urging the Senate Watergate committee to look at supposed wrongdoing by Democrats in previous elections. The committee chairman, Sam Ervin, a Democrat, said that would be “as foolish as the man who went bear hunting and stopped to chase rabbits.”
Today, amid a growing criminal inquiry into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, congressional Republicans are again chasing rabbits. We know because we’re their favorite quarry.
In the year since the publication of the so-called Steele dossier — the collection of intelligence reports we commissioned about Donald Trump’s ties to Russia — the president has repeatedly attacked us on Twitter. His allies in Congress have dug through our bank records and sought to tarnish our firm to punish us for highlighting his links to Russia. Conservative news outlets and even our former employer, The Wall Street Journal, have spun a succession of mendacious conspiracy theories about our motives and backers.
We are happy to correct the record. In fact, we already have.
Three congressional committees have heard over 21 hours of testimony from our firm, Fusion GPS. In those sessions, we toppled the far right’s conspiracy theories and explained how The Washington Free Beacon and the Clinton campaign — the Republican and Democratic funders of our Trump research — separately came to hire us in the first place.
We walked investigators through our yearlong effort to decipher Mr. Trump’s complex business past, of which the Steele dossier is but one chapter. And we handed over our relevant bank records — while drawing the line at a fishing expedition for the records of companies we work for that have nothing to do with the Trump case.
Republicans have refused to release full transcripts of our firm’s testimony, even as they selectively leak details to media outlets on the far right. It’s time to share what our company told investigators.
We don’t believe the Steele dossier was the trigger for the F.B.I.’s investigation into Russian meddling. As we told the Senate Judiciary Committee in August, our sources said the dossier was taken so seriously because it corroborated reports the bureau had received from other sources, including one inside the Trump camp.
The intelligence committees have known for months that credible allegations of collusion between the Trump camp and Russia were pouring in from independent sources during the campaign. Yet lawmakers in the thrall of the president continue to wage a cynical campaign to portray us as the unwitting victims of Kremlin disinformation.
We suggested investigators look into the bank records of Deutsche Bank and others that were funding Mr. Trump’s businesses. Congress appears uninterested in that tip: Reportedly, ours are the only bank records the House Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed.
We told Congress that from Manhattan to Sunny Isles Beach, Fla., and from Toronto to Panama, we found widespread evidence that Mr. Trump and his organization had worked with a wide array of dubious Russians in arrangements that often raised questions about money laundering. Likewise, those deals don’t seem to interest Congress.
We explained how, from our past journalistic work in Europe, we were deeply familiar with the political operative Paul Manafort’s coziness with Moscow and his financial ties to Russian oligarchs close to Vladimir Putin.
Finally, we debunked the biggest canard being pushed by the president’s men — the notion that we somehow knew of the June 9, 2016, meeting in Trump Tower between some Russians and the Trump brain trust. We first learned of that meeting from news reports last year — and the committees know it. They also know that these Russians were unaware of the former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele’s work for us and were not sources for his reports.
Yes, we hired Mr. Steele, a highly respected Russia expert. But we did so without informing him whom we were working for and gave him no specific marching orders beyond this basic question: Why did Mr. Trump repeatedly seek to do deals in a notoriously corrupt police state that most serious investors shun?
What came back shocked us. Mr. Steele’s sources in Russia (who were not paid) reported on an extensive — and now confirmed — effort by the Kremlin to help elect Mr. Trump president. Mr. Steele saw this as a crime in progress and decided he needed to report it to the F.B.I.
We did not discuss that decision with our clients, or anyone else. Instead, we deferred to Mr. Steele, a trusted friend and intelligence professional with a long history of working with law enforcement. We did not speak to the F.B.I. and haven’t since.
After the election, Mr. Steele decided to share his intelligence with Senator John McCain via an emissary. We helped him do that. The goal was to alert the United States national security community to an attack on our country by a hostile foreign power. We did not, however, share the dossier with BuzzFeed, which to our dismay published it last January.
We’re extremely proud of our work to highlight Mr. Trump’s Russia ties. To have done so is our right under the First Amendment.
It is time to stop chasing rabbits. The public still has much to learn about a man with the most troubling business past of any United States president. Congress should release transcripts of our firm’s testimony, so that the American people can learn the truth about our work and most important, what happened to our democracy.

Palestinian 16-year-old Ahed Tamimi is the latest child victim of Israel’s occupation



Afbeeldingsresultaat voor logo the guardian


Palestinian 16-year-old Ahed Tamimi is the latest child victim of Israel’s occupation

She is neither Joan of Arc nor a Palestinian puppet, but a symbol of a second traumatised generation

Ahed Tamimi Ahed Tamimi confronting an Israeli soldier during a protest in 2012 Photograph: Abbas Momani/AFP/Getty Images


Tue 2 Jan ‘18 


Harriet Sherwood


Alittle over four years ago, I drove to the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh to spend a day with a 12-year-old girl. Her name was Ahed Tamimi, and I was interviewing her for a magazine article, Children of the Occupation: Growing up in Palestine.
We talked about her life in the village, the constant presence of soldiers, the demolition order on her home, mermaids, football and hopscotch. She was elfin, with an uneasy mix of worldliness and naivety. Of the many children I met in the West Bank and Gaza over almost four years of covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the Guardian, I found Ahed one of the most disturbing.
By then, she was well known in pro-Palestinian circles. In 2012 a video showing her angrily confronting an Israeli soldier had gone viral; Ahed was feted. Now, another video of her slapping and kicking an Israeli soldier has led to her being charged with assaulting security forces, incitement and throwing stones. The teenager is in custody awaiting trial.
The video and the charges have polarised opinion. To many pro-Palestinian activists, Ahed is a symbol of resistance, a child hero, a freedom fighter. Comparisons have been drawn to Malala Yousafzai and Joan of Arc. She has been lionised on social media, and publicly praised by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas. On the Israeli side, some have said she is a puppet of political parents, she has been, schooled in violence, and that she deserves stiff punishment.
As usual, it is a little more complicated. Ahed is a member of the second generation of Palestinians to grow up under occupation. Her father, Bassem, was born in 1967 – the year Israel seized the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza and the Golan Heights in the six-day war. He and his children have known only a life of checkpoints, identity papers, detentions, house demolitions, intimidation, humiliation and violence. This is their normality.
Pinterest
Brave Palestinian girl Ahed Tamimi vs Soldier : Where is my brother
The family home is in Area C, the 62% of the West Bank that is under Israeli military control. Their village, Nabi Saleh, has been the scene of frequent protests since Israeli settlers appropriated the local spring a decade ago. Bassem and his wife, Nariman, and other members of the family have often been at the forefront.
Stones have been thrown by the protesters; Israeli forces have responded with teargas, rubber bullets, water cannon and sometimes live ammunition. At least two villagers, including Ahed’s uncle Rushdie, have been killed, hundreds injured, and at least 140 people detained or imprisoned – among them Bassem and Nariman, several times.
Ahed has grown up in this environment. When I asked her how often she had experienced teargas, she laughed, saying she couldn’t count the times. She described military raids on the family home. I observed Ahed and her brothers as, over and over again, they watched footage of their parents being arrested and their uncle writhing on the ground after being shot.
Many of her answers to my questions appeared rehearsed. “We want to liberate Palestine. We want to live as free people. The soldiers are here to protect the settlers and prevent us reaching our land,” she told me. Her parents seemed proud of her profile among anti-occupation activists, a perspective reinforced this week when Bassem described his daughter as “a representative of a new generation of our people, of young freedom fighters … [She] is one of many young women who in the coming years will lead the resistance to Israeli rule.”
Suggestions that Ahed’s recent interaction with the soldiers was partly for the benefit of the rolling camera, that her mother apparently had no qualms about streaming it live on social media, and (according to the Israel indictment) that the teenager suggested that “whether it is a stabbing attack or suicide bombing or throwing rocks, everyone needs to do something and unite in order for our message to reach those who want to liberate Palestine”, reinforce a sense that the Tamimis are a highly politicised family.
Four years ago, alongside the fledgling activist who insisted to me she was not frightened of the armed soldiers she passed every day, there was a little girl anxious about being photographed near a military watchtower, and who – according to her parents – sometimes shouted out in her sleep or woke up sobbing.
Ahed’s experiences are echoed in the lives of hundreds of thousands of children in the West Bank and Gaza. Such a brutal context for childhood can shape attitudes for a lifetime. Frank Roni, a former child protection specialist for Unicef in the Palestinian territories, said he had observed the “intergenerational trauma” of those growing up under occupation. “The ongoing conflict, the deterioration of the economy and social environment, the increase in violence – this all impacts heavily on children. Children form a ghetto mentality and lose hope for the future, which fuels a cycle of despair,” he said in 2013.
At 12, Ahed told me she wanted to become a lawyer when she grew up so she could fight for Palestinian rights. At 16 she could be facing a long prison sentence. Whatever the outcome of the Israeli judicial process, she looks certain to spend the next formative months of her life in prison, rather than studying for exams.
Her story is not just about one child, but a generation – two generations – without hope and security. Tragically and unforgivably, the same bleak prospects could await a third.
 Harriet Sherwood is the Guardian’s religion correspondent, and former Jerusalem correspondent

zondag 31 december 2017

Iranians chant ‘death to dictator’ in biggest unrest since crushing of protests in 2009



Afbeeldingsresultaat voor the Observer

Iranians chant ‘death to dictator’ in biggest unrest since crushing of protests in 2009

Trump warns Tehran regime to respect freedom of speech as at least two protesters die in demonstrations

Students protested at the University of Tehran yesterday but were outnumbered by pro-government supporters. Students protested at the University of Tehran yesterday but were outnumbered by pro-government supporters. Photograph: STR/AFP/Getty Images

Iranians took to the streets for a third day of anti-government protests in what appeared to be the biggest domestic political challenge to Tehran’s leaders since the 2009 Green movement was crushed by security forces.
At least two protesters were killed in the city of Doroud, in Iran’s western Lourestan province, as the riot police opened fire to contain a group of people said to have been trying to occupy the local governor’s office. Clashes between demonstrators and the anti-riot police became violent in some cities as the demonstrations spread.
The two men killed in Doroud have been identified as Hamzeh Lashni and Hossein Reshno, according to an Iranian journalist with the Voice of America’s Persian service who has spoken to their families. Videos posted online showed their bodies on the ground, covered with blood. Another video showed protesters carrying their bodies to safety. At least two others were also reported to have been killed in Doroud, but this could not be independently verified.
Elsewhere it appeared that the security forces held people back, with sporadic use of teargas. The number of people joining protests increased as night fell, making it difficult for the authorities to target protesters.
“Death to Khamenei” chants, in reference to the country’s supreme leader, featured in many demonstrations. Videos posted on social media from Tehran and at least one other city – Abhar in Zanjan province – showed protesters taking down banners depicting the images of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Such chants and acts of resistance are unprecedented in a country where the supreme leader holds the ultimate authority and criticising him is taboo.
There were also chants in support of monarchy and the late shah. The scale of protests in the provinces appeared bigger than those witnessed in 2009, although more people went on to the streets of Tehran then than have so far been seen this time.
Earlier, the US president, Donald Trump, used Twitter to warn the Iranian government against a crackdown as thousands of pro-government Iranians also marched in long-scheduled protests in support of the leadership. But, for the third day running, ordinary Iranians, frustrated by the feeble economy, rising inflation and lack of opportunity, defied warnings against “illegal gatherings”.



“Everyone is fed up with the situation, from the young to the old,” said Ali, who lives near the city of Rasht, where there were big protests on Friday. He asked not to be identified. “Every year thousands of students graduate, but there are no jobs for them. Fathers are also exhausted because they don’t earn enough to provide for their family.”
In the capital students gathered near Tehran university chanted “death to the dictator”. Clashes with security forces followed. It was not clear how many were detained in Tehran on Saturday, but scores of protesters are believed to have been arrested in western Kermanshah and eastern Mashhad, the conservative second city of Iran, where the latest unrest began.
Although small-scale economic protests, about failed banks or shrinking pensions, are not unusual in Iran, it is uncommon for demonstrations to escalate across the country or to mix political slogans with other complaints.
“It spread very quickly in a way that nobody had really anticipated,” said Ali Ansari, a professor of Iranian history at the University of St Andrews. “It’s the biggest demonstration since 2009. The widespread nature of it and provincial nature of it has been quite a surprise.”
He thinks the protests were originally sanctioned by hardliners seeking to undermine President Hassan Rouhani, but says their apparently spontaneous organisation makes it hard to predict how they will evolve.
“I think they started something and then they lost control of it; it has taken a life of its own. We have to see if it gains traction. The trouble is that there is no organisation. I don’t know what the outcome will be.”
The state broadcaster Irib covered the protests briefly and they featured on the front pages of many newspapers, unlike in 2009, when most news of protests was kept out of official media.
The Revolutionary Guard, whose Basij militia coordinated the 2009 crackdown, warned that it would “not allow the country to be hurt”. But leaders in Tehran, already facing a government in Washington hostile to them and friendly to the regional rival, Saudi Arabia, know they are under close scrutiny.
On Twitter, Trump wrote: “Many reports of peaceful protests by Iranian citizens fed up with regime’s corruption and its squandering of the nation’s wealth to fund terrorism abroad. Iranian govt should respect their people’s rights, including right to express themselves. The world is watching! #IranProtests.”
That intervention is unlikely to go down well in Iran, where the US is widely believed to be seeking regime change. In June, the US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, told the US Congress that America is working towards “support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government”.
There are already deep frustrations that unilateral US financial sanctions have made most banks wary of processing money for Iran or extending credit to its firms. The 2015 nuclear deal led to the lifting of international sanctions so that Iran could sell oil again on international markets but, without access to capital, it is struggling to unleash the growth that Rouhani and his supporters hoped would follow. The economic problems this creates are serious. Youth unemployment stands at about 40%, more than three million Iranians are jobless, and the prices of some basic food items, such as poultry and eggs, have recently soared by almost half.
“This has started from the bottom of the society, from the less fortunate,” Reza, a Mashhad resident, said. “This is not middle-class protesting, this is lower-class demonstrating, people of the suburbs; many are fed up with situation.”

--------------------------------------------------
My Comments :
That intervention [of USA president Trump] is unlikely to go down well in Iran, where the US is widely believed to be seeking regime change. In June, the US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, told the US Congress that America is working towards “support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government”.
1. This seems to say it all, except from the decisive notion that the claimed peaceful transition, in fact will appear to be an effort of regime change (and geo-political change, by trying to break up the targeted country in different pieces (mostly) along ethnic lines) by way of violence.
2. The classic approach of the USA when they have decided to organise some kind of regime change, is to make contact with opposition groups inside the country of the targeted regime, and try to seduce the opposition to start provocative protest demonstrations.
3. The next step in that scenario is the anticipation of a harsh and violent repression from the regime and most importantly, the necessary steps of calculated escalation of the social unrest into some kind of civil war (!).

4. The calculated initiation of a civil war-scenario, for example by having some imported snipers shooting at the crowd of demonstrators (also to be observed during the western intervention in the Ukraine)  and / or at the Iranian National Guard (only recently proclaimed by the USA to be foreseen to be placed on the list of terrorist organisations) or to have executed a bomb attack on the National Guard.
5. We have seen this pattern of intentionally "organising creative chaos" and "creative destruction" all before (the Condo Rice doctrine) and we all know by now what the strategic aims are supposed to be of waging just another war in the ME.
6. After Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen, Iran apparently will be next in line on the list Wesley Clark
7.. However, since the violent USA/UK regime change exercise in Iran in the fifties, that toppled the democratically chosen nationalist leader Mossadeq - and the replacement of Mossadeq by the cruel western orientated dictator calling himself "the Shah of Persia" - the USA has indeed been a national hate-figure under the Iranian population.
8. So it will not be implausible to suggest in this context, that the USA (and their closest ally in the ME) will try to wage a war by proxy against Shiite Iran, most likely by their favourite Sunni proxy SA, with secretive military, logistical and diplomatic (read : intelligence) assistance by the USA and Co.
9. I also do expect Russia to enter into the (potential) USA regime change endeavour in Iran, so one might be well-advised to anticipate some escalation on the USA-Russian front as well.
10. To complete my speculations, I even might suggest, that the coming (USA) SA-Iranian war - notably the second military confrontation after the western supported proxy war between Iraq and Iran some decades ago - maybe will take place under the protective shadow of a cloud, formed by a possible semi-military conflict between the USA and North-Korea, which in its turn might easily seduce / provoke China to step in.
11. Yes 2018 might indeed become a formidable year on the level of military confrontation between the worlds super powers, with the USA guided these days by the highly dangerous loose canon Donald Trump, who not too long ago dared to declare that he did not understand why the nuclear option would not be treated as an ordinary tactical military tool on the battlefield, in stead of the traditional strategic role in the realms of the international military mutual deterrent doctrine.,,,