(We) can do better

Just how effective is the power of prayer? For many of us who are poor and helpless, prayer is the only WMD that we can get our hands on.

Prayer is our AK-47, our Uzi, our nuclear missile, our Glock. It is the only defense that we have against the slings and arrows that are constantly aimed at our hearts by those more rich and powerful and brutal than we are.

In Mexico City, the Sacred Heart of Jesus has become our bunker, our NORAD, our Marine Corps and even our numbered bank account in the Caymans.

But are we -- the victims, the vulnerable, the unprotected, the powerless -- are we actually being armored and protected by prayer or is it just wistful thinking because we have nothing else? Who knows.

Are the poor and defenseless in places like Yemen, Ferguson, Honduras, Tibet, Syria, Ukraine, Standing Rock, Afghanistan, Gaza and Libya actually being protected by their prayers to Yahweh, Allah, God, Buddha, Shiva, the Great Spirit, etc.?

Will my own heartfelt and constant prayers for world peace ever be answered? Who the freak knows? They haven't been so far. However, realistically, do we who are the meek and wretched of the earth really have any other choice?

And here in Mexico City, like everywhere else, the defenses of we the defenseless are limited too -- and yet here in both the grand cathedrals and the humble churches by the side of the road, the defenseless grandmothers and beggars and disabled and working stiffs and vulnerable salt of the earth all continue to pray.

PS: Here's another thing that we clearly need to pray about: America's government!

According to The Saker, a trustworthy political blog site, there is currently a huge clash of Titans going on far above our heads -- as the neo-con Deep State struggles to discredit, impeach, assassinate and/or eliminate (wait for it!) Donald J. Trump. Any way that they can. Apparently those guys really really really hate The Donald -- even more than the Left in America hates him. And that's saying a lot.

With regard to the phony intelligence document recently leaked by John McCain, The Saker warns us that, "After several rather lame false starts, the Neocons have now taken a step which can only be called a declaration of war against Donald Trump... This is a political coup d’etat."

But. "If a coup is staged against Trump and some wannabe President à la Hillary or McCain gives the order to the National Guard or even the US Army to put down a local insurrection, we could see what we saw in Russia in 1991: a categorical refusal of the security services to shoot at their own people. That is the biggest and ultimate danger for the Neocons: the risk that if they give the order to crack down on the population, the police, security and military services might simply refuse to take action." http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46202.htm

PPS: Let us also pray that the police, security services and National Guard in North Dakota finally refuse to take action against the brave Standing Rock protesters too. http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/12/standing-rock-police-militarized-emergency-management-assistance-compact-north-dakota

And also let us pray for the soggy and cold protesters on the much-raided "Poor Tour" in my hometown of Berkeley, CA. They are protesting the criminalization of being homeless in America and need all the help they can get. You don't have to go thousands of miles away to find something to pray for these days. https://www.facebook.com/firsttheycameforthehomeless/

********
Stop Wall Street and War Street from destroying our world.

And while you're at it, please buy my books! http://straitwellbooks.blogspot.com/2016/04/our-top-best-seller-right-now-is-bring.html

Sheikh Nawaf al-Bashir, the highest figure in the western fabricated opposition in Syria, the chief of Baggara Tribe in northeast Syria, [has] returned to Damascus and declared his loyalty to the Syrian people, the Syrian leadership and praised the Syrian Arab Army and put himself under the command of the Syrian president Dr. Bashar Al-Assad. Original source of this article by Arabi Souri: http://www.syrianews.cc/top-opposition-figure-nawaf-al-bashir-repents-returns-syria/.

With 1.2 million tribesmen and women in his Der Ezzor base, he left them behind and joined the ranks of makeshift opposition individuals convinced by Qatari officials that the days of the ‘regime’ are numbered and if they defect now they’ll reserve a place for them in the future Syria. Some were bribed with tens of millions of dollars, others were seduced with leading post-Assad posts, and the vast majority who couldn’t be bought or deceived were intimidated, only few fell for any of those.

A parliament member 1990 – 1994, the 63 years old who heads his large tribe since he was 28 after his late father, had a very controversial political career, served as an ambassador to Iraq and yet was a member of the first ‘Arab Springing‘ of the Syrians the so-called ‘Damascus Declaration’.

Sheikh al-Bashir in a statement he personally read before a group of people who went to greet him at his home said: “I return to Syria and I publicly declare that we stand with our people, and with our homeland, and with its leadership against the obscurantist terrorism, which is represented by ISIS, Nusra and the Muslim Brotherhood and their supporters, and to restore the security of the country, its safety and its territorial integrity.”

He was an essential figure in the ‘regime’ he denounced and now returned to. Most of the leaders of the opposition who fled abroad were essential figures of the ‘regime’ but the ones who were mostly corrupt: Abdul Halim Khaddam, the long-serving vice president of Syria and the one with the worst record of corruption in the country when he was relieved from his office he became an opposition figure and sought refuge in France, like Rifaat Assad (president Bashar’s uncle and his father’s deputy and foe!!), Tlass and his sons Firas and Manaf, and so on.

When he joined the opposition in Turkey, they celebrated him being the most prominent person in the country to join and who leads a huge tribe, when he returned now and almost instantly he became in their eyes: ‘opportunist’, ‘dumb’, ‘thug’, ‘traitor’.. and all similar descriptions.

This could be a game-changer for many in his province Der Ezzor which borders the ISIS declared capital Ragga and borders the hotbed and birthplace of Al-Qaeda Levant and ISIS itself in Iraq Anbar province. Der Ezzor countryside and parts of the city itself is infested with herds of ISIS.

A U-turn in politics is not unusual when a power shift occurs and the traitor does not wish to remain a loser in exile. When this one realized he would not return to Syria on a parade float, he chose to offer an apology, hoping to get back some of what he forfeited.

The Liberation of Aleppo didn't stop the Opposition juggernaut and its propaganda machine - now its '100,000 civilians under siege' on the outskirts of the capital, and four million hostages in Damascus... Article first published on Russian InsiderJanuary 6, 2016. Republished here with author's permission.

The 'liberation of Aleppo' didn't just free tens of thousands of people from oppression and intimidation by violent militants and mercenaries; it also freed hundreds of thousands in Western Aleppo from a four-year long regime of terror. As the citizens of European countries become increasingly paralysed by the terrorist attacks on public gatherings in some cities, they might spare a thought for the millions of Syrians who have been living with this threat every day since the US and its allies launched the 'War OF Terror' on Syria in 2011.

But there may be another welcome change brought by Aleppo's liberation; that the Syrian Opposition and its supporters are now living on borrowed time. The propaganda juggernaut that was unleashed against the Syrian Army and its allies - Russia, Iran and Hezbollah - had gained so much momentum that it simply kept going, despite being mortally wounded. And even as the last militants were forced from their hold out in Aleppo's old city, a literal juggernaut of aid was being dispatched from Europe to help them stay there.

Barely pausing to acknowledge that Aleppo had indeed 'fallen' - as they described it - a new narrative was rapidly developed to sustain the 'Syrian Revolution' both in its supporters' minds and on the ground. As the real Syrian civilians in need of food and medical care streamed into reception centres set up by the Russian and Syrian governments in West Aleppo, the mythical 'quarter of a million civilians besieged by Assad's and Putin's bombs' in East Aleppo were urgently relocated to Idlib province, where they could again be used as human shields to protect the dwindling insurgent army.

They weren't actually relocated of course, as the evacuations showed quite dramatically that these masses of anti-Assad Syrian civilians had never been there in the first place. Even some of the fighters in the East deserted the fake revolution, bravely accepting the government's amnesty and re-joining their liberated fellow Syrians.

Adding insult to the injury of watching Syrians across the country celebrate the dramatic new gains in Syria's War on Terror, Russian and Turkish diplomats had talks with representatives of some Syrian armed groups and negotiated a nationwide ceasefire with them, later ratified by the UN Security Council. The jihadists who had just been bussed out of East Aleppo with their families into the remaining 'rebel-held' territory around Idlib evidently weren't party to the ceasefire agreement, having refused to cease firing in East Aleppo. But for the insistence of the UN, and the necessity to force an agreement to end the 'rebel' siege, those recalcitrant extremists would have been imprisoned or executed. Such punishment was certainly deemed reasonable by most Syrians, many of whom had lost relatives from their violent criminal attacks.

So what to do? How to sustain the fake 'revolution' when the revolutionaries have been so comprehensively exposed, not just as violent terrorists no different from those involved in attacks in European cities, but as mercenaries being assisted by the coalition of Syria's enemies in the West. For not only did the clearance of the last jihadists from East Aleppo allow people to go back and see what remained of their dear city - they also discovered what had really being going on there, particularly in the last few months.

Hospitals and schools had become military bases and weapons factories, and basements were used to torture prisoners and hostages and to store weapons and ammunition. Most extraordinarily, the 'rebels' had been forced to leave behind an arsenal of weapons that filled seven warehouses, as well as betraying the sponsors of the 'democratic revolution'. Truckloads of missiles and ammunition, and even tanks, all shipped in from the West via Turkey were brought out for display to the World's media...

And the 'World's' media? They lost interest a few days before the siege was ended. In a collective act of diversion, reminiscent of 'displacement activity', all those Western media organisations who had been so recently hysterical about 'saving Aleppo's children' suddenly found other urgent or trivial events to focus on. Having been prepared to support a full-scale military attack on Syrian Defence forces and their allies, if only leaders could be persuaded to launch one, the many foreign false 'Friends of Syria' could barely even admit to themselves what had just happened.

Not only had their concocted false narrative been exposed as criminally fraudulent, but their endless attacks on Russia, Syria and their allies for 'brutal carelessness' and 'war crimes' had also been betrayed by events on the ground. Unlike examples from recent history, where the breaking of sieges was accompanied by huge 'collateral damage' - one thinks of Fallujah in 2004 or Sirte in 2012 - the death toll of civilians sustained in the Syrian Army's operation in East Aleppo appears to have been minimal. Indeed the greatest number of casualties that could be claimed by supporters of the insurgency was less than 100, and most of those appear to have been prisoners or civilians trying to escape who were killed by the militants.

The widely broadcast warnings from the likes of Samantha Power, that this was going to be another 'Guernica' or 'Sbrenica', were revealed as merely desperate and grotesque attempts to save the West's fast-collapsing regime-change project.

But sadly that is not the end of it.

Even before the siege was over Al Jazeera was preparing to continue its daily 'Aleppo Onslaught' news broadcast with an 'Idlib Onslaught' one. We may remember how in the last days opposition armed groups refused to accept the agreed liberation of villages Foua and Kefraya, setting fire to 25 buses sent to bring out residents and holding the drivers hostage. This was an indication of the nature of the armed groups holding power west of Aleppo and around Idlib, and even Western commentators acknowledged they were dominated by Jabhat al Nusra. But Al Jazeera continued to provide global media support to their terrorist 'brothers under siege' in East Aleppo, and intended to follow them as they were finally expelled from their to Idlib province.

While Al Jazeera and its partner organisations have continued with this unconvincing theme - that 'civilians' and 'moderate rebels' in Idlib will be endangered by Syrian and Russian airstrikes against Al Qaeda linked militants not covered by the ceasefire agreement - support groups in the UK, and proabably elsewhere seem to have come up with a better scheme.

A group calling itself 'Syria Solidarity UK' claims to have received a statement from 'local community organisations' in Wadi Barada, which is a valley extending north-west from Damascus that contains the ancient spring of Ain al Fijeh that supplies 70% of the city's water.

Reliable Syrian sources reported that militants occupying the valley had poured diesel into the water, forcing authorities to cut off the supply to Damascus about ten days ago. The Syrian Army and Hezbollah allies ( the area is close to the Lebanese border) are now trying to kill the armed jihadists - Jabhat al Nusra - in the villages close to the spring, following the evacuation of remaining civilians in the area. Along with the nearby 'rebel' hold-outs of Madaya and Zabadani, Wadi Barada has been under opposition control since 2012, and attempts to negotiate ceasefire settlements in this area have so far failed. The success of such negotiations in many other towns and cities, including suburbs of Damascus, Homs and now Aleppo, mostly hinged upon an 'escape clause' for the Islamist extremist groups and their families, and it is imporant to understand how this bizarre policy could work and why it was necessary.

Most of the fighters in these liberated areas were prepared to accept the Government amnesty, which guaranteed that no punitive action would be taken against those who surrendered their arms. The determined jihadists who refused were given safe passage, with their families and even their weapons to Idlib province, which was and remains under 'rebel' control. This was a very hard pill to swallow for loyal Syrians, and particularly for Syrian soldiers who had seen their comrades slaughtered by suicide bombers and IEDs, or tortured and executed while trying to defend the community from the mostly foreign and foreign-armed terrorists.

But in Madaya, which became well-known in the West as a place 'under siege' where residents were alleged to be dying of starvation, no such evacuation agreement was reached, thanks mostly to the massive propaganda campaign supporting the extremist groups who controlled the town - Ahrar al Sham and Jabhat al Nusra. As in Aleppo, these militants were actually the ones responsible for the siege, taking control of UN-provided Food Aid and shooting civilians trying to escape.

When a UN aid convoy finally arrived in Madaya a year ago, many residents jumped at the opportunity to escape, but Ahrar al Sham survived with its remaining 'human shields'. Now that the scheme to protect their terrorist brothers in East Aleppo has failed, it is Ahrar and its allies around Madaya who are called on to carry the torch of the fake revolution forward.

This is the vital context, and the context missing from Western news and media, which is now reporting the exact narrative prepared by Al Jazeera, Syria Solidarity UK and other leaders of the propaganda war on Syria.

It is not the 'rebels' of Wadi Barada who are responsible for sabotaging Damascenes' drinking water, but Hezbollah and the Syrian Army. The Syrian Army is not targeting Jabhat al Nusra, who don't have a presence or support in Wadi Barada, but is trying to drive out the civilian population and its 'rebel' defenders. And the 'regime' in now holding 100,000 civilians under siege, cut off from food and water and essential supplies.

 But - say the 'defenders of Wadi Barada' - 'we will urgently seek to restore the water supply, and arrange for maintenance persons to come in, as soon as the Syrian Army and Hezbollah cease all their attacks on our citizens.'

 'And if they don't agree to this, then we can no longer recognise the ceasefire..'

   No doubt there will be many Syrians now saying 'why did you let the terrorists go to Idlib and not take them straight to prison?'

  (I have a 'disclaimer' - I work with the Syria Solidarity Movement, which rather like the REAL Syrian Civil Defence works to support Syrians in their fight against Western backed terrorists and their supportive propaganda. We are totally opposed to everything that 'Syria Solidarity UK' stands for and supports, which include the fake 'Syrian Civil Defence' or 'White Helmets', a No Fly Zone over Syria, and the removal of Syria's democratically elected and popular President by whatever means are necessary.)

There is a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Syria and the "western" media ignore it. On December 22 al-Qaeda aligned Takfiris in the Wadi Barada valley shut down the main water supply for the Syrian capital Damascus. Since then the city and some 5-6 million living in and around it have to survive on emergency water distributions by the Syrian government. That is barely enough for people to drink - no washing, no showers and no water dependent production is possible. Article originally published at Moon of Alabama. Sources of pictures and enlargements also available there.

This shut down is part of a wider, seemingly coordinated strategy to deprive all government held areas of utility supplies. Two days ago the Islamic State shut down a major water intake for Aleppo from the Euphrates. High voltage electricity masts on lines feeding Damascus have been destroyed and repair teams, unlike before, denied access. Gas supplies to parts of Damascus are also cut. A similar tactic was used by the Zionist terrorists of the Haganah who in 1947/48 poisoned and blew up the water mains and oil pipelines to Palestinian Haifa.

Wadi Barada is a river valley some 10 miles west of Damascus at the mountain range between Lebanon and Syria. It has been in the hands of local insurgents since 2012. The area was since loosely surrounded by Syrian government forces and their allies from Hizbullah.

Two springs in the area provide the water for Damascus which is treated locally and then pumped through pipelines into the city's distribution network. Since the early 1990s there is a low level conflict over the water diversion of the Barada river valley to the ever growing Damascus. The drought over the last years has intensified the problems. Local agriculture of the water rich valley had to cut back for lack of water as this was pumped into the city. But many families from the valley moved themselves into the city or have relatives living there.

The local rebels had kept the water running for the city. Al-Qaeda aligned groups have been in the area for some time. A propaganda video distributed by them and taken in the area showed (pic) the choreographed mass execution of Syrian government soldiers.

After the eastern part of the city of Aleppo was liberated by Syrian government forces, the local rebels and inhabitants in the Barada river valley were willing to reconcile with the Syrian government. But the al-Qaeda Takfiris disagreed and took over. The area is since under full al-Qaeda control and thereby outside of the recent ceasefire agreement.

On December 22 the water supply to Damascus was suddenly contaminated with diesel fuel and no longer consumable. A day later Syrian government forces started an operation to regain the area and to reconstitute the water supplies.

Photos and a video on social media (since inaccessible but I saw them when they appeared) showed the water treatment facility rigged with explosives. On Dec 27th the facility was blown up and partly destroyed.

Suddenly new organized "civil" media operations of, allegedly, locals in the area spread misinformation to "western" media. "There are 100,000 civilians under siege in Wadi Barada!" In reality the whole area once had, according to the last peacetime census, some 20,000 inhabitants. The White Helmets propaganda organization now also claims to be in the area. "The government had bombed the water treatment facility," the propaganda groups claimed.

That is a. not plausible and b. inconsistent with the pictures of the destroyed facility. These show a collapse of the main support booms of the roof but no shrapnel impact at all. A bomb breaking through the roof and exploding would surely have left pocket marks all over the place. The damage, in my judgement, occurred from well designed, controlled explosions inside the facility.

Some insurgents posted pictures of themselves proudly standing within the destroyed facility and making victory signs.

There is more such cheer-leading by insurgents on social media. Why when they claim that the government bombed the place?

On December 29 the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs issued an alarm about the water crisis:

The United Nations is alarmed that four million inhabitants in Damascus and surrounding areas have been cut off from the main water supply since 22 December. Two primary sources of drinking water- Wadi Barada and Ain-el-Fijah-which provide clean and safe water for 70 percent of the population in and around Damascus are not functioning, due to deliberate targeting resulting in the damaged infrastructure.

One of the two springs, Al-Feejeh, has now been retaken by the Syrian army. 1,300 civilians from Ain AlFeejeh, the nearby town with the treatment facility, have fled to the government held areas and were taken in by the Syrian Red Cross. The other spring and the treatment facility are still in Takfiri hands. The government has said that it will need some ten days to repair the system after the Syrian army has gained control of the facilities. That will still take some time.

Western media have hardly taken notice of the water crisis in Damascus and their coverage seems to actively avoid it. A search for Barada on the Washington Post website brings up one original piece from December 30 about the freshly negotiated ceasefire. The 6th paragraph says:

Airstrikes pounded opposition-held villages and towns in the strategically-important Barada Valley outside Damascus, activists said, prompting rebels to threaten to withdraw their compliance with a nationwide truce brokered by Russia and Turkey last week.

Then follow 16 paragraphs on other issues. Only at the very end of the piece comes this (mis-)information:

The Barada Valley is the primary source of water for the capital and its surrounding region. The government assault has coincided with a severe water shortage in Damascus since Dec. 22. Images from the valley’s Media Center indicate its Ain al-Fijeh spring and water processing facility have been destroyed in airstrikes. The government says rebels spoiled the water source with diesel fuel, forcing it to cut supplies to the capital.

On December 29 a piece  by main WaPo anti-Syria propagandist Liz Sly did not mention the water crisis or the Barada valley at all.

The New York Times links a Reuters pieces about the UN alarm about the water crisis. But I find nothing in its own reporting that even mentions the water crisis. One piece on December 31 refers shortly to attacks on Wadi Baradi by government forces at its very end.

A Guardian search for Barada only comes up with a piece from today mixed from agency reports. The headlines say "Hundreds of Syrians flee as Assad's forces bomb Barada valley rebels". The piece itself says that they flee to the government side.  In it the Syrian Observatory (MI-6) operation in Britain confirms that al-Qaeda rules the area which "Civil society organisations on the ground" deny. Only the very last of the 12 paragraph piece mentions the capital:

The Barada valley is the primary source of water for the capital and its surrounding region. The government assault has coincided with a severe water shortage in Damascus since 22 December. The government says rebels spoiled the water source with diesel fuel, forcing it to cut supplies to the capital.

Surely a few people "fleeing" (to the government side) "as Assad's forces bombs" are way more important than 5 million people in Damascus without access to water. That the treatment facility is destroyed seems also unimportant.

All the above papers have been extremely concerned about every scratch to any propaganda pimp who had claimed to be in then rebel held east-Aleppo. They now show no concern at all for 5 million Syrians in Damascus who have been without water for 10 days and will likely be so for the rest of the month.

Posted by b on January 2, 2017 at 02:42 PM | Permalink

Interviews with Syrians in Aleppo regarding how they perceive the defeat of the 'rebels', whom they call terrorists. They feel they have been liberated and they consider that France and its allies (US-NATO) were keeping them imprisoned by supporting the terrorists. Arabic, French and English, with French and English subtitles. A number of christian church officials are interviewed.

Good News: Washington Frozen Out of Syria Peace Plan

"As the US mainstream media obsessed last week about Russia's supposed “hacking” of the US elections and President Obama’s final round of Russia sanctions in response, something very important was taking place under the media radar. As a result of a meeting between foreign ministers of Russia, Iran, and Turkey last month, a ceasefire in Syria has been worked out and is being implemented. So far it appears to be holding, and after nearly six years of horrible warfare the people of Syria are finally facing the possibility of rebuilding their lives." [...]

"The fact is, it is often US involvement in “solving” these crises that actually perpetuates them. Consider the 60-plus year state of war between North and South Korea. Has US intervention done anything to solve the problem? How about our decades of meddling in the Israel-Palestine dispute? Are we any closer to peace between the Israelis and Palestinians despite the billions we have spent bribing and interfering?" Ron Paul. Read more here: Good News: Washington Frozen Out of Syria Peace Plan

Just a quick update for our authors and readers to explain how and why candobetter.net disappeared without explanation for several days after Christmas. We were hacked, yet again, by miserable varmints who don't seem to believe in freedom of the press and especially hate the alternative media. Our thanks to LVPShosting for their help in recovering the site. We have replaced nearly all the lost articles now. We will be establishing more secure sites over the next few weeks. We have had to close all the writers' accounts temporarily. If you are an author, please contact Sheila to have your account reopened and be sure then to reset your password. Seasons Greetings to all (except the keyboard spiders).

The UN has concluded its investigation of the 19 September bombing of a UN aid convoy in Syria. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon released the summary of the Board of Inquiry’s report on 21 December, but it received virtually no publicity, unlike the wall-to-wall reporting of the USA’s and UK’s hysterical accusations at the time that Russia deliberately bombed the convoy. The lack of publicity is doubtless because the report proves there was no evidence for the accusations against Russia.

Following is a chronology of the incident:

On 11 September, Russia and the USA agreed to a ceasefire in Syria, which Barack Obama insisted must last seven days before any further Russian-US cooperation in the five-year conflict. Senior officials in the Obama administration, including Defence Secretary Ash Carter, were known to be opposed to any cooperation with Russia.

On 17 September, US, Australian and other members of the US-led coalition in Syria bombed Syrian Arab Army soldiers holding a position against ISIS at Deir ez-Zor. More than 62 soldiers were killed in an attack that lasted more than an hour, and when a Russian officer called the US military’s emergency hotline to inform them they were attacking the Syrian army, the Russian officer was put on hold for 27 minutes! The USA later claimed the attack was an “accident”. (The CEC launched a petition demanding the Australian government withdraw its presence from Syria, as it was only assisting ISIS.)

On 19 September, a UN convoy transporting aid for Aleppo was bombed in an area controlled by rebels. The attack occurred at precisely the moment that the al-Qaeda-led rebels in Aleppo launched a furious offensive to break the Syrian Army lines. It was reported as a bombing, but the burnt out trucks remained intact, and there were no craters or other signs of aerial bombardment. The eyewitness reports that the attack was an aerial bombing came from the so-called White Helmets—British- and American-funded jihadists masquerading as civilian rescuers. The USA and Britain accused Russia of a war crime, and—ignoring the attack on the Syrian army two days earlier—of destroying the ceasefire!

Hysterical propaganda

A 20 September Guardian headline blared: “Russian planes dropped bombs that destroyed UN aid convoy, US officials say”. It cited a Reuters report: “Russian jets carried out strike on Syria aid convoy: U.S. officials”.

The most hysterical accusations came from the British government and Parliament, in an 11 October emergency debate. They were also the most hypocritical and cynical. Conservative MP Andrew Mitchell, who moved the debate, compared Russia’s actions in Syria to those of the Nazis in the Spanish Civil War.

Greens leader Caroline Lucas asked Mitchell: “Does he agree that our own Government should follow the example of the French in supporting a referral of Russia to the International Criminal Court?”

Blairite (a crony of disgraced former PM Tony Blair) Labour MP Ann Clwyd—the politician who first publicised the notorious Iraq war lie, that Saddam killed people in a human shredding machine, yet remains completely unapologetic for the illegal invasion of Iraq—called for the UK to take the same approach to Syria as it did to Iraq! “We do not have to wait for the International Criminal Court”, Clwyd urged. “Indict, an organisation that I chaired, collected evidence on Iraqi war crimes years before they were heard. That can be done again, for example through the Foreign Office.” (Emphasis added.)

When Labour’s Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry at least attempted to inject into the debate the reality that the rebels were predominantly al-Qaeda jihadists, another shameless Blairite Labour MP, Ben Bradshaw, erupted in contrived outrage, and attacked his own colleague: “We had a ceasefire; it was brutally blown apart by Russian and Syrian air power. I still have not heard from my hon. Friend a clear and unequivocal condemnation of Russia’s and Assad’s action. I have not heard her call it out as it is—a war crime!” (Bradshaw is another with the blood of Iraqis on his hands, having aggressively prosecuted the fraudulent case for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and later having voted against convening Sir John Chilcot’s Iraq inquiry into that criminal and disastrous decision.)

Yet another Blairite, John Woodcock, was the most unhinged in hurling wild accusations against Russia for the attack on the convoy: “There is no doubt as to who was the perpetrator of this grotesque war crime. It was President Putin of Russia. He was sticking two fingers up to the United Nations and the international community of which he still has the audacity to claim he is a working part.” (Woodcock is close to Britain’s biggest private defence contractor, BAE Systems—its al-Yamamah arms deal with the brutal Saudi dictatorship has been exposed as having generated a $100 billion slush fund that financed al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attack and the spread of al-Qaeda and ISIS terrorism generally.)

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said: “All the available evidence therefore points to Russian responsibility for the atrocity. I trust that the UN board of inquiry will establish exactly what happened, and we in the United Kingdom Government stand ready to help.” Johnson’s speech made headlines for his reiteration of Ann Clwyd’s call for anti-war protestors to demonstrate outside of the Russian embassy in London. It is worth noting that Johnson was interrupted by a question from Prince Charles’s close friend Sir Nicholas Soames, demanding war crime prosecutions for the attack. Another toady for the British arms industry, Soames is notorious for his threats against Princess Diana when she spearheaded the international campaign against land mines just before her death in 1997. (The inquest ruled Diana’s death an “unlawful killing”, which is effectively a verdict of murder, where the perpetrators are not identified.)

The only contributor to this House of Commons debate who emerged with any credibility intact was Labour Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry, who exposed the self-righteous hypocrisy of the other contributors by insisting that the UK could not condemn the alleged crimes in Syria while simultaneously arming Saudi Arabia to bomb civilians in Yemen.

UN’s finding

Following are excerpts of numbered sections from the UN Headquarters Board of Inquiry Report summary that Ban Ki-moon released 21 December. While the report still assumes an aerial attack that many experts insist could not have been possible, nevertheless it absolves Russia of a war crime. The findings include:

The area where the convoy was attacked was under the control of Islamist jihadists:

“11. The SARC compound, the incident site, is located approximately 1.5 km east of the town of Urem al-Kubra.”

“13. On the date of the incident, Urem al-Kubra was under the control of armed opposition groups, with Jaish al-Mujahideen being the predominant group in the area. The Board was informed that other groups, including Nour al-Din al-Zenki also had a presence there. In addition, the Board received reports of a Jabhat al-Nusra presence in the area.”

Nour al-Din al-Zenki is one of the so-called “moderate” rebel groups backed by the US, members of which filmed themselves beheading a 12-year-old Palestinian boy in July (the same cameraman later took the staged photo of the five-year-old Aleppo boy in an ambulance that suckered the world media). Jabhat al-Nusra is the Syrian branch of al-Qaeda.

The White Helmets’ claim that a hospital was bombed was bogus:

“33. Despite initial reports that a medical clinic had been destroyed, the Board found no evidence of a medical clinic neighbouring the SARC compound.” (Emphasis added.)

This is an important finding, as the most oft-repeated accusation against Russia is that its aircraft deliberately targeted hospitals in Aleppo. The US and UK-financed White Helmets were the source of these claims, which were always baseless. Not only did they claim dozens of times that the “last hospital” in Aleppo had been destroyed, the recent liberation of Aleppo has proved that almost every site they called a hospital was just a jihadist stronghold.

If the Syrian Arab Air Force (SAAF) were responsible for the attack, given the convoy’s location in a jihadist-controlled area they most likely thought it was a military target:

“36. … The Board considered that the location of the SARC compound, on the outskirts of a populated area, in an industrial zone and astride one of the two primary roads leading to southwestern Aleppo, made it a realistic possibility that the buildings around it were used by armed opposition groups prior to the date of the incident. Therefore the Board considered that it had most likely been attacked by pro-Government forces.”

The UN found no evidence to prove that SAAF perpetrated the attack; an SAAF attack does not implicate Russia:

“39. The Board stated that it had received reports that information existed to the effect that the SAAF was highly likely to have perpetrated the attack, and even that the attack was carried out by three Syrian Mi-17 model helicopters, followed by three unnamed fixed-wing aircraft, with a single Russian aircraft also suspected of being involved. However, the Board did not have access to raw data to support these assertions and, in their absence, it was unable to draw a definitive conclusion.”

“40. The Board noted in this connection that there were technical issues pertaining to a hypothesis of the incident being a result of a joint Syrian Arab Air Force/Russian Federation strike. The Board had been informed that that the Russian Federation did not conduct joint strikes. A high degree of interoperability and co-ordination would also be required for two air forces to operate in the same airspace, targeting the same location.”

The UN found no evidence of a war crime:

“42. The Board stated that it did not have evidence to conclude that the incident was a deliberate attack on a humanitarian target.”

Since the US presidential election, the Anglo-American establishment and their corporate media lackeys have coined the term “fake news” for anything that contradicts their lies. In fact, many times since the genocidal fiasco of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, it is they who have been exposed as the real peddlers of fake news. The most extreme example is their litany of lies against Russia, but those lies are also the most dangerous, as they have pushed the world towards nuclear war. Thankfully, with Aleppo now liberated from the USA’s and UK’s terrorists, and a change of government in the USA, there is a chance to turn away from the policies of permanent war, and achieve a just international order based on respect for national sovereignty and a commitment to peace through cooperative economic development. As we approach 2017, all people of good will should resolve to ensure that it happens.

NOTES

Although candobetter.net's philosophy of land-use and population policy reform runs counter to that of the Citizens Electoral Council, we are pleased to publish this press release about Syria and Russia.

The source of this article was a press release dated 30 December 2016, from Craig Isherwood‚ National Secretary of the Citizens' Electoral Council
PO Box 376‚ COBURG‚ VIC 3058
Phone: 1800 636 432
Email: [email protected]
Website: http://www.cecaust.com.au

Here it is, that time of year,
When we look back and shed a tear
To me the facts are very clear
That better times are in the rear

The world around me is going bats
Replacing houses and gardens with big ugly flats
Digging caverns for cars - are they underground bunkers?
Melbourne's traffic increasing by ever more clunkers

Further afield every bit of space
is under attack from those seeking a place
For ever more cars and bicycle wheels
Thru our peaceful parks where we once cooled our heels

Small pieces of land with scatters of trees
Are deemed surplus to needs and sold off in the breeze
"No one will notice" behind closed doors they say
But the community loses a little each day

On a national scale we had an election,
It threw up an amazing Senate confection!
Such a surprise, One Nation arise!
Who else can the poor, disaffected turn to?

In the US t'was the same situation
though they really did it to utter perfection
Not just a loud voice from the red gallery
A developer star from reality TV

Over in Britain, they put in a lady
to mop up the spillage, (we won’t call her Sadie)
from a sudden and brutal and final exit
From the EU by a disgusted proletariat

Meanwhile in a wedge between India and France
We just can’t ignore that there isn’t a chance
Of stopping the wars in the Middle East
Or all sitting down to a peace giving feast

Until all are united in stamping out ISIS
or Da’esh or any damned name in a crisis.
With this situation let’s watch this space
We really don’t know quite what we will face.

Next year’s an unknown in international affairs
If you are religious then please say your prayers
Can it be worse ? Well may you wonder.
Lets hope that Trump, as he promised, will cast war asunder.

Syria is on the cusp of peace, but the propaganda war is still raging in the west. What about Bashar al-Assad's reputation in the west as a torturer? Does the evidence of this mean that the Syrian state has no right to defend Syria?

To paraphrase from the Russian Marxist Plekhanov who wrote about this kind of "moral" argument in 1901 in his essay "Cant Against Kant", it is one thing to morally object to violence, torture, etc. But it is another thing to use this objection to then say that someone attacked in the street should then be forced to fight with their hands tied behind their backs.

The point I am making is not to endorse torture but to say that whatever moral objections one might have to things done by many governments (and certainly Syria has nothing on the US with its Abu Ghraib and secret prisons all over the world and its invasion and occupation of one country after another) the important thing about what is happening in Syria is not whether there is torture or no torture but that the country is being attacked by terrorists in the interests of imperialism and so Syria has the right to fight back.

In terms of characterizing the Syrian government, torture has been used by both "good" and "bad" governments, as abhorrent as it may be, so that does not tell us very much about Syria. But Syria has many policies that many on the left in imperialist countries only dream about for their own countries. To list some:

- parliament seats are 50%+1 reserved for workers and peasants
- city council seats are 25% reserved for low-income residents
- retail prices are capped by popular committees
- the country's loan capital prioritized public infrastructure and investment so much that private businesses had to go to Europe for loans because they were lower in priority, compare this to crumbling underfunded infrastructure in the US
- university education has nominal (practically free) or low cost
- generally free health care for most people

These are things those in the US want for their "own" countries which Syria already has, so that should give us an idea that the US or the West has no moral superiority over Syria. Even with the Maher Arar case it was after all at the US's request, and as mentioned the US has tortured far worse.

About the Author

Saleh Waziruddin is an Indian/Pakistani (South Asian)-Canadian who grew up in Saudi Arabia. He is on the executive committees of the Canadian Peace Congress and also the Canadian Network on Cuba.

Published on Dec 13, 2016, "Syriennes" - "Syrians" is a beautiful documentary made in Syria by Julien Rochedy for TV Libertés, about how Syrian girls and women feel about the prospect of a 'rebel' win. It includes an interview with an Australian-Syrian woman who returned to Syria when the war began. Girls in Damascus and the regions not controlled by the US-NATO-backed rebels are currently free to study, to follow their passions and to exercise their professions, but they live in fear of a 'rebel' win in the Syrian conflict. We see how many women in Damascus wear western clothes and bare heads, walk freely down the street and eat in cafes alone, just like girls in Sydney or Brisbane. The film also interviews women in Damascus who have escaped the 'Free Syrian Army', Daesh/ISIS and Al Nusra. Their tales are chilling. It is obvious that no woman could benefit from a victory by the militia that the US and NATO support. Women are 50% of Syria's population, so why does Australia and the US NATO support the 'rebels', who are all 'takfiris', that is, Islamic fundamentalists? And what excuse does the west have for the crippling and illegal sanctions imposed on Syria for decades now. It is pointed out that Iraq was subject to similar sanctions for ten years before the US invasion, and that tens of thousands of children died because of this. This film about the most bloody conflict of the early 21st century permits us to understand a much more complex reality than the mainstream media paints.

Article by Leith van Onselen. Dick Smith is a national treasure. Yesterday he used his own money to fund an ad in Australia’s major newspapers challenging Lucy Turnbull – the chief commissioner of the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) – on mass immigration, and asking her what her eventual plans are for the population of Sydney – querying whether it could be 16 or even 100 million.

Below is the ad:

The response from Lucy Turnbull’s office was pathetic. From The Australian:

The Australian sought comment from Ms Turnbull, through the Greater Sydney Commission. Commission chief executive Sarah Hill responded that Sydney’s rate of population growth was the “hallmark of all successful cities around the world”, and the group based its planning on a middle range of growth forecast, prepared by the state’s demographers.

“More than half of this growth is through natural increase,” Ms Hill said. “Our responsibility is to plan for this to make our city more liveable, sustainable and productive, rather than to debate the facts.”

So, “more than half of this growth is from natural increase”, according to the GSC? Not according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). As shown in the below charts, net overseas migration (NOM) into NSW (read Sydney) accounted for 67% of population growth in financial year 2016, and has done so on average over the past 30-plus years:

However, the above charts significantly understate the true impacts of immigration on Sydney’s population growth because “natural increase” captures the children of migrants. That is, NOM brings with it an immediate direct boost to population as well as a subsequent boost as new migrant arrivals have children (subsequently classified as “natural increase”).

For this reason, the Productivity Commission this year estimated that Australia’s population would peak at 27 million by 2060 under zero NOM, versus 41 million under NOM of 200,000 – a difference in population of 14 million! This comes despite only 9 million of this population increase coming directly from NOM. The other 5 million comes from migrants and the decedents of migrants having children (see next chart).

These are “the facts”, which the GSC seems only too willing to ignore: it is primarily mass immigration that is causing Sydney’s infrastructure woes, as well as pressuring housing.

Clearly, the best way for Lucy Turnbull to make Sydney “more livable” is to tap her husband on the shoulder and convince him to rein-in Australia’s mass immigration program.

Because as far as high immigration goes, the buck stops with the federal government. If you are in local or state government then you don’t have much choice but to cope with continuing mass immigration putting an ever-increasing strain on already stretched infrastructure, housing and public services.

Lucy Turnbull is in a unique position to influence federal policy and effect change for the betterment of both Sydney and Australia. But like her husband she is a mouthpiece for the ‘growth lobby’ that gains from never-ending population expansion at the expense of the rest of us.

[email protected]

This article, by Leith van Onselen, was first published at http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2016/12/the-turnbulls-population-credibility-collapses-under-dick-smith-barrage/. Republished with author's permission.

President Bashar al-Assad : “[The ]West is telling Russia that Syrian Army went too far in defeating terrorists … Daesh could only attack Palmyra the way it did with supervision of U.S. alliance”. President Obama’s announcement of a waiver for arming unspecified rebel groups in Syria came shortly before the terrorist group Islamic State launched a massive attack on Palmyra. Syrian President Bashar Assad believes it was no coincidence, he told RussiaToday. In the interview, the Syrian leader explained how his approach to fighting terrorism differs from that of the US, why he believes the military success of his forces in Aleppo was taken so negatively in the West, and what he expects from US President-elect Donald Trump. [Full Video and Transcript]

“The announcement of the lifting of that embargo is related directly to the attack on Palmyra and to the support of other terrorists outside Aleppo, because when they are defeated in Aleppo, the United States and the West, they need to support their proxies somewhere else,” Bashar al-Assad said.

“The crux of that announcement is to create more chaos, because the United States creates chaos in order to manage this chaos,” Assad added.

He added that Islamic State (Daesh, IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) forces “came with different and huge manpower and firepower that ISIS never had before during this attack, and they attacked on a huge front, tens of kilometers that could be a front of armies. ISIS could only have done that with the support of states. Not state; states.”

Russia Today (Maria Finoshina): Mr. President, thank you very much for agreeing to speak with us.

President Bashar al-Assad: You’re most welcome in Damascus.

RT: We start with Aleppo, of course. Aleppo is now seeing what is perhaps the most fierce fighting since the war started almost six years ago here in Syria, but the Western politicians and Western media have been largely negative about your army’s advance. Why you think this is happening? Do they take it as their own defeat?

B.A.: Actually, after they failed in Damascus, because the whole narrative was about “liberating Damascus from the state” during the first three years. When they failed, they moved to Homs, when they failed in Homs, they moved to Aleppo, they focused on Aleppo during the last three years, and for them this is the last most important card they could have played on the Syrian battlefield. Of course, they still have terrorists in different areas in Syria, but it’s not like talking about Aleppo as the second largest city which has the political, military, economic, and even moral sense when their terrorists are defeated. So, for them the defeat of the terrorists is the defeating of their proxies, to talk bluntly. These are their proxies, and for them the defeat of these terrorists is the defeat of the countries that supervised them, whether regional countries or Western countries like United States, first of all United States, and France, and UK.

RT: So, you think they take it as their own defeat, right?

B.A.: Exactly, that’s what I mean. The defeat of the terrorists, this is their own defeat because these are their real army on the ground. They didn’t interfere in Syria, or intervened, directly; they have intervened through these proxies. So, that’s how we have to look at it if we want to be realistic, regardless of their statements, of course.

RT: Palmyra is another troubled region now, and it’s now taken by ISIS or ISIL, but we don’t hear a lot of condemnation about it. Is that because of the same reason?

B.A.: Exactly, because if it was captured by the government, they will be worried about the heritage. If we liberate Aleppo from the terrorists, they would be – I mean, the Western officials and the mainstream media – they’re going to be worried about the civilians. They’re not worried when the opposite happens, when the terrorists are killing those civilians or attacking Palmyra and started destroying the human heritage, not only the Syrian heritage. Exactly, you are right, because ISIS, if you look at the timing of the attack, it’s related to what’s happening in Aleppo. This is the response to what’s happening in Aleppo, the advancement of the Syrian Arab Army, and they wanted to make this… or let’s say, to undermine the victory in Aleppo, and at the same time to distract the Syrian Army from Aleppo, to make it move toward Palmyra and stop the advancement, but of course it didn’t work.

‘ISIS could only attack Palmyra the way it did with supervision of US alliance’

RT: We also hear reports that Palmyra siege was not only related to Aleppo battle, but also to what was happening in Iraq, and there are reports that the US-led coalition – which is almost 70 countries – allowed ISIL fighters in Mosul in Iraq to leave, and that strengthened ISIL here in Syria. Do you think it could be the case?

B.A.: It could be, but this is only to wash the hand of the American politicians from their responsibility on the attack, when they say “just because of Mosul, of course, the Iraqi army attacked Mosul, and ISIS left Mosul to Syria.” That’s not the case. Why? Because they came with different and huge manpower and firepower that ISIS never had before during this attack, and they attacked on a huge front, tens of kilometers that could be a front of armies. ISIS could only have done that with the support of states. Not state; states. They came with different machineguns, cannons, artillery, everything is different. So, it could only happen when they come in this desert with the supervision of the American alliance that’s supposed to attack them in al-Raqqa and Mosul and Deir Ezzor, but it didn’t happen; they either turned a blind eye on what ISIS is going to do, and, or – and that’s what I believe – they pushed toward Palmyra. So, it’s not about Mosul. We don’t have to fall in that trap. It’s about al-Raqqa and Deir Ezzor. They are very close, only a few hundred kilometers, they could come under the supervision of the American satellites and the American drones and the American support.

RT: How strong ISIS is today?

B.A.: As strong as the support that they get from the West and regional powers. Actually, they’re not strong for… if you talk isolated case, ISIS as isolated case, they’re not strong, because they don’t have the natural social incubator. Without it, terrorists cannot be strong enough. But the real support they have, the money, the oil field investment, the support of the American allies’ aircrafts, that’s why they are strong. So, they are as strong as their supporters, or as their supervisors.

RT: In Aleppo, we heard that you allowed some of these terrorists to leave freely the battleground. Why would you do that? It’s clear that they can go back to, let’s say, Idleb, and get arms and get ready for further attacks, then maybe attack those liberating Aleppo.

B.A.: Exactly, exactly, that’s correct, and that’s been happening for the last few years, but you always have things to lose and things to gain, and when the gain is more than what you lose, you go for that gain. In that case, our priority is to protect the area from being destroyed because of the war, to protect the civilians who live there, to give the chance for those civilians to leave through the open gates, to leave that area to the areas under the control of the government, and to give the chance to those terrorists to change their minds, to join the government, to go back to their normal life, and to get amnesty. When they don’t, they can leave with their armaments, with the disadvantage that you mentioned, but this is not our priority, because if you fight them in any other area outside the city, you’re going to have less destruction and less civilian casualties, that’s why.

‘Fighting terrorists US-style cannot solve the problem’

RT: I feel that you call them terrorists, but at the same time you treat them as human beings, you tell them “you have a chance to go back to your normal life.”

B.A.: Exactly. They are terrorists because they are holding machineguns, they kill, they destroy, they commit vandalism, and so on, and that’s natural, everywhere in the world that’s called as terrorism. But at the same time, they are humans who committed terrorism. They could be something else. They joined the terrorists for different reasons, either out of fear, for the money, sometimes for the ideology. So, if you can bring them back to their normal life, to be natural citizens, that’s your job as a government. It’s not enough to say “we’re going to fight terrorists.” Fighting terrorists is like a videogame; you can destroy your enemy in the videogame, but the videogame will generate and regenerate thousands of enemies, so you cannot deal with it on the American way: just killing, just killing! This is not our goal; this is the last option you have. If you can change, this is a good option, and it succeeded. It succeeded because many of those terrorists, when you change their position, some of them living normal lives, and some of them joined the Syrian Army, they fought with the Syrian Army against the other terrorists. This is success, from our point of view.

RT: Mr. President, you just said that you gain and you lose. Do you feel you’ve done enough to minimize civilian casualties during this conflict?

B.A.: We do our utmost. What’s enough, this is subjective; each one could look at it in his own way. At the end, what’s enough is what you can do; my ability as a person, the ability of the government, the ability of Syria as a small country to face a war that’s been supported by tens of countries, mainstream media’s hundreds of channels, and other machines working against you. So, it depends on the definition of “enough,” so this is, as I said, very subjective, but I’m sure that we are doing our best. Nothing is enough at the end, and the human practice is always full of correct and flows, or mistakes, let’s say, and that’s the natural thing.

‘West’s cries for ceasefire meant to save terrorists’

RT: We hear Western powers asking Russia and Iran repeatedly to put pressure on you to, as they put it, “stop the violence,” and just recently, six Western nations, in an unprecedented message, they asked Russia and Iran again to put pressure on you, asking for a ceasefire in Aleppo.

B.A.: Yeah.

RT: Will you go for it? At the time when your army was progressing, they were asking for a ceasefire.

B.A.: Exactly. It’s always important in politics to read between the lines, not to be literal. It doesn’t matter what they ask; the translation of their statement is for Russia: “please stop the advancement of the Syrian Army against the terrorists.” That’s the meaning of that statement, forget about the rest. “You went too far in defeating the terrorists, that shouldn’t happen. You should tell the Syrians to stop this, we have to keep the terrorists and to save them.” This is in brief.

Second, Russia never – these days, I mean, during this war, before that war, during the Soviet Union – never tried to interfere in our decision. Whenever they had opinion or advice, doesn’t matter how we can look at it, they say at the end “this is your country, you know what the best decision you want to take; this is how we see it, but if you see it in a different way, you know, you are the Syrian.” They are realistic, and they respect our sovereignty, and they always defend the sovereignty that’s based on the international law and the Charter of the United Nations. So, it never happened that they made any pressure, and they will never do it. This is not their methodology.

RT: How strong is the Syrian Army today?

B.A.: It’s about the comparison, to two things: first of all, the war itself; second, to the size of Syria. Syria is not a great country, so it cannot have a great army in the numerical sense. The support of our allies was very important; mainly Russia, and Iran. After six years, or nearly six years of the war, which is longer than the first World War and the second World War, it’s definitely and self-evident that the Syrian Army is not to be as strong as it was before that. But what we have is determination to defend our country. This is the most important thing. We lost so many lives in our army, we have so many martyrs, so many disabled soldiers. Numerically, we lost a lot, but we still have this determination, and I can tell you this determination is much stronger than before the war. But of course, we cannot ignore the support from Russia, we cannot ignore the support from Iran, that make this determination more effective and efficient.

‘Stronger Russia, China make world a safer place’

RT: President Obama has lifted a ban on arming some Syrian rebels just recently. What impact you think could it have on the situation on the ground, and could it directly or indirectly provide a boost to terrorists?

B.A.: We’re not sure that he lifted that embargo when he announced it. Maybe he lifted it before, but announced it later just to give it the political legitimacy, let’s say. This is first. The second point, which is very important: the timing of the announcement and the timing of attacking Palmyra. There’s a direct link between these two, so the question is to whom those armaments are going to? In the hands of who? In the hands of ISIS and al-Nusra, and there’s coordination between ISIS and al-Nusra. So, the announcement of this lifting of that embargo is related directly to the attack on Palmyra and to the support of other terrorists outside Aleppo, because when they are defeated in Aleppo, the United States and the West, they need to support their proxies somewhere else, because they don’t have any interest in solving the conflict in Syria. So, the crux of that announcement is to create more chaos, because the United States creates chaos in order to manage this chaos, and when they manage it, they want to use the different factors in that chaos in order to exploit the different parties of the conflict, whether they are internal parties or external parties.

RT: Mr. President, how do you feel about being a small country in the middle of this tornado of countries not interested in ending the war here?

B.A.: Exactly. It’s something we’ve always felt before this war, but we felt it more of course today, because small countries feel safer when there’s international balance, and we felt the same, what you just mentioned, after the collapse of the Soviet Union when there was only American hegemony, and they wanted to implement whatever they want and to dictate all their policies on everyone. Small countries suffer the most. So, we feel it today, but at the same time, today there’s more balance with the Russian role. That’s why I think we always believe the more Russia is stronger – I’m not only talking about Syria, I’m talking about every small country in the world – whenever the stronger Russia, more rising China, we feel more secure. It’s painful, I would say it’s very painful, this situation that we’ve been living, on every level; humanitarian level, the feeling, the loss, everything. But at the end, it’s not about losing and winning; it’s about either winning or losing your country. It’s existential threat for Syria. It’s not about government losing against other government or army against army; either the country will win, or the country will disappear. That’s how we look at it. That’s why you don’t have time to feel that pain; you only have time to fight and defend and do something on the ground.

‘Mainstream media lost credibility along with moral compass’

RT: Let’s talk about media’s role in this conflict.

B.A.: Yeah

RT: All sides during this war have been accused of civilian casualties, but the Western media has been almost completely silent about the atrocities committed by the rebels… what role is the media playing here?

B.A.: First of all, the mainstream media with their fellow politicians, they are suffering during the last few decades from moral decay. So, they have no morals. Whatever they talk about, whatever they mention or they use as mask, human rights, civilians, children; they use all these just for their own political agenda in order to provoke the feelings of their public opinion to support them in their intervention in this region, whether militarily or politically. So, they don’t have any credibility regarding this. If you want to look at what’s happening in the United States is rebellion against the mainstream media, because they’ve been lying and they kept lying on their audiences. We can tell that, those, let’s say, the public opinion or the people in the West doesn’t know the real story in our region, but at least they know that the mainstream media and their politicians were laying to them for their own vested interests agenda and vested interests politicians. That’s why I don’t think the mainstream media could sell their stories anymore and that’s why they are fighting for their existence in the West, although they have huge experience and huge support and money and resources, but they don’t have something very important for them to survive, which is the credibility. They don’t have it, they lost it. They don’t have the transparency, that’s why they don’t have credibility. That’s why they are very coward today, they are afraid of your channel, of any statement that could tell the truth because it’s going to debunk their talks. That’s why.

RT: Reuters news agency have been quoting Amaq, ISIL’s mouthpiece, regarding the siege of Palmyra. Do you think they give legitimacy to extremists in such a way? They’re quoting their media.

B.A.: Even if they don’t mention their news agencies, they adopt their narrative anyway. But if you look at the technical side of the way ISIS presented itself from the very beginning through the videos and the news and the media in general and the PR, they use Western technique. Look at it, it’s very sophisticated. How could somebody who’s under siege, who’s despised all over the world, who’s under attack from the airplanes, who the whole world wants to liberate every city from him, could be that sophisticated unless he is not relaxed and has all the support? So, I don’t think it is about Amaq; it’s about the West adopting their stories, sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly.

RT: Donald Trump takes over as US President in a few weeks. You mentioned America many times today. What do you expect from America’s new administration?

B.A.: His rhetoric during the campaign was positive regarding the terrorism, which is our priority today. Anything else is not priority, so, I wouldn’t focus on anything else, the rest is American, let’s say, internal matters, I wouldn’t worry about. But the question whether Trump has the will or the ability to implement what he just mentioned. You know that most of the mainstream media and big corporate, the lobbies, the Congress, even some in his party were against him; they want to have more hegemony, more conflict with Russia, more interference in different countries, toppling governments, and so on. He said something in the other direction. Could he sustain against all those after he started next month? That’s the question. If he could, I think the world will be in a different place, because the most important thing is the relation between Russia and the Unites States. If he goes towards that relation, most of the tension around the world will be pacified. That’s very important for us in Syria, but I don’t think anyone has the answer to that. He wasn’t a politician, so, we don’t have any reference to judge him, first. Second, nobody can tell what kind of pattern is it going to be next month and after.

‘Western countries only sent aid to terrorists’

RT: The humanitarian situation in Syria is a disaster, and we hear from EU foreign policy chief, Madam Mogherini, that EU is the only entity to deliver humanitarian aid to Syria. Is that true?

B.A.: Actually, all the aid that any Western country sent was to the terrorists, to be very clear, blunt and very transparent. They never cared about a single Syrian human life. We have so many cities in Syria till today surrounded by and besieged by the terrorists; they prevented anything to reach them, food, water, anything, all the basic needs of life. Of course, they attack them on daily basis by mortars and try to kill them. What did the EU send to those? If they are worried about the human life, if they talk about the humanitarian aspect, because when you talk about the humanitarian aspect or issue, you don’t discriminate. All the Syrians are humans, all the people are humans. They don’t do that. So, this is the double standard, this is the lie that they keep telling, and it’s becoming a disgusting lie, no-one is selling their stories anymore. That’s not true, what she mentioned, not true.

RT: Some suggestions say that for Syria, the best solution would to split into separate countries governed by Sunni, Shi’a, Kurds. Is it any way possible?

B.A.: This is the Western – with some regional countries’ – hope or dream, and this is not new, not related to this war; that was before the war, and you have maps for this division and disintegration. But actually, if you look at the society today, the Syrian society is more unified than before the war. This is reality. I’m not saying anything to raise the morale of anyone, I’m not talking to Syrian audience anyway now, I’m talking about the reality. Because of the lessons of the war, the society became more realistic and pragmatic and many Syrians knew that being fanatic doesn’t help, being extreme in any idea, I’m not only talking about extremism in the religious meaning; politically, socially, culturally, doesn’t help Syria. Only when we accept each other, when we respect each other, we can live with each other and we can have one country. So, regarding the disintegration of Syria, if you don’t have this real disintegration among the society and different shades and spectrum of the Syrian society, Syrian fabric, you cannot have division. It’s not a map you draw, I mean, even if you have one country while the people are divided, you have disintegration. Look at Iraq, it’s one country, but it is disintegrated in reality. So, no, I’m not worried about this. There’s no way that Syrians will accept that. I’m talking now about the vast majority of the Syrians, because this is not new, this is not the subject of the last few weeks or the last few months. This is the subject of this war. So, after nearly six years, I can tell you the majority of the Syrians wouldn’t accept anything related to disintegration, they are going to live as one Syria.

RT: As a mother, I feel the pain of all Syrian mothers. I’m speaking about children in Syria, what does the future hold for them?

B.A.: This is the most dangerous aspect of our problem, not only in Syria; wherever you talk about this dark Wahhabi ideology, because many of those children who became young during the last decade, or more than one decade, who joined the terrorists on ideological basis, not for the like of money or anything else, or hope, let’s say, they came from open-minded families, educated families, intellectual families. So, you can imagine how strong the terrorism is.

‘Being secular doesn’t protect a nation from terrorist ideology’

RT: So, that happened because of their propaganda?

B.A.: Exactly, because the ideology is very dangerous; it knows no borders, no political borders, and the network, the worldwide web has helped those terrorists using fast and inexpensive tools in order to promote their ideology, and they could infiltrate any family anywhere in the world, whether in Europe, in your country, in my country, anywhere. You have secular society, I have secular society, but it didn’t protect the society from being infiltrated.

RT: Do you have any counter ideology for this?

B.A.: Exactly, because they built their ideology on the Islam, you have to use the same ideology, using the real Islam, the real moderate Islam, in order to counter their ideology. This is the fast way. If we want to talk about the mid-term and long-term, it’s about how much can you upgrade the society, the way the people analyze and think, because this ideology can only work when you cannot analyze, when you don’t think properly. So, it’s about the algorithm of the mind, if you have natural or healthy operating system, if you want to draw an analogy to the IT, if you have good operating systems in our mind, they cannot infiltrate it like a virus. So, it’s about the education, media and policy because sometimes when you have a cause, a national cause, and people lose hope, you can push those people towards being extremists, and this is one of the influences in our region since the seventies, after the war between the Arabs and the Israelis, and the peace failed in every aspect to recapture the land, to give the land and the rights to its people, you have more desperation, and that played into the hand of the extremists, and this is where the Wahhabi find fertile soil to promote its ideology.

RT: Mr. President, thank you very much for your time, and I wish your country peace and prosperity, and as soon as possible.

B.A.: Thank you very much for coming.

RT: This time has been very tough for you, so I wish it’s going to end soon.

B.A.: Thank you very much for coming to Syria. I’m very glad to receive you.

RT: Thank you.

Sources of this article and transcript were:

Videos by Syrian Presidency and Russia Today, Transcript by Russia Today and SyrianPatriots War Press Info Network at:
https://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2016/12/15/al-assad-to-rt/

Re-publications are welcome, but we kindly ask you, to facilitate the correct information's diffusion, to cite all these original links and sources.

Dick Smith queries Lucy Turnbull’s Perpetual Population Growth Plan. In a half page advertisement featuring in major newspapers tomorrow morning, including the Daily Telegraph in Sydney,
The Sydney Morning Herald, the Financial Review and The Australian, Dick Smith is asking Lucy Turnbull, the chief planner for Sydney, just what her eventual plans are for the population of Sydney – querying whether it could be 16 or even 100 million.

Dick Smith says, “All of the major political parties, including The Greens, spruik perpetual growth. It is easy to see why Pauline Hanson’s policy to reduce immigration from 200,000 per year to a more sustainable 70,000 is gaining more support.”

Dick Smith also asks Lucy Turnbull, “How are we going to find jobs for these extra people?” Pointing out that with modern robotics and automation there are going to be less jobs.

Dick Smith asks Lucy if we are going to come up with a final plan for population, or are we going to “leave it for our children or grandchildren to solve.”

Previously published (13/12/16) on Russia Insider. See also: Reports: Audio recording between ISIS and US before Deir Ezzor massacre found (26/9/16) | Ron Paul Forums, US attack on Syrian Army in Deir Ezzor was ‘coordinated’ (30/11//16) by Paul Antonopoulos | Al Masdar News, Australian jets participated in massacre of Syrian soldiers in Deir ez-Zor (18/9/16) by Paul Antonopoulos | Al Masdar News.

Four wounded Syrians who survived the bombardment of Deir ez-Zor by Aust­ralian, US, British and Danish aircraft on 17 Sep 2016. Sixty-two of their com­patriots perished that day. Whether they intended to bomb the Syrian Army, or ISIS as they claimed, any aerial attack on the territory of a sovereign country like Syria, without the consent of its government, is a violation of international law. ₁

A US investigation found the coalition 'botched' a strike in Deir ez-Zor, hitting the Syrian Army by mistake. Why did they not return to kill the IS fighters who moved in, or the IS fighters who just moved back to Palmyra?

Following a two-month investigation into the US coalition attack on a Syrian Army base in Deir al Zour in September, the Defence departments of the US and Australia concluded that the 'botched' strike was a result of poor information and human error, and no-one will face charges over the 'incident'.

Australia's chief of Joint Military Operations, David Johnston described it thus in a prepared statement:

"Although the identity of those killed or wounded could not be substantiated, the investigation found it was more likely than not that those struck were irregular forces aligned to the Syrian government.

"The situation on the ground in Syria is complex and dynamic. In many ways these forces looked and acted like Da'esh fighters the coalition has been targeting for the last two years. They were not wearing recognisable military uniforms, or displaying identifying flags or markings."

RAAF F-18 fighter bomber of the type which bombed Syria on 17 September

This conspicuously 'false news' from such a well-briefed source is deeply worrying, particularly as its release coincided with the Syrian Army's 'hour of glory' as it liberates Aleppo's trapped civilians from the four-year long insurgent siege.

Despite the lengthy 'investigation', carried out by the very same people who ordered and executed the murderous attack on the Syrian soldiers defending Deir al Zour from IS, the report's conclusions only confirm the false statements made to the press at the time, though embroidering them with an elaborate cover story. For the hundreds of Syrian victims of this dastardly attack and their families, any confidence in the statements and behaviour of their foreign attackers is now permanently destroyed.

How galling for those families, whose heroic husbands, sons and brothers had held their ground for two years against constant assaults from IS insurgents, to read that 'their identities could not be substantiated'. Or that these members of the Syrian Arab Army's 123rd Republican guard were mere 'irregulars aligned to the Syrian government'.

Never mind the testimony of some of the injured soldiers from hospital broadcast on Syrian state TV, describing the aggression and persistence of their attackers, or their still more incriminating statements that IS fighters moved in to take over the base before their comrades blood was even dry.

Although the US coalition's story is a complete travesty, it deserves closer scrutiny both for what it says and what it leaves out.

While novel unsubstantiated and false allegations are made about the nature of the target, the Australian Defence Forces have admitted responsibility for likely causing some of the deaths of Syrian soldiers - claiming that Australian war-planes had launched six laser-guided missiles, at what they identified as Da'esh fighters.

Since Australia 'joined the US coalition against Da'esh' two years ago, training soldiers in the Iraqi army, Australia's position on the fight against Da'esh in Syria has been obscure, and air-strikes within Syria notionally limited to preventing Da'esh from threatening Iraq. The silence of the Australian government, and the failure of the national broadcaster the ABC to ask questions about our actions against terrorist groups in Syria, contrasts sharply with the rhetoric from both sides of government here for the last five years, both against terrorism and against the Syrian government.

Not only has Australia been a central member of the 'Friends of Syria' group, and a vocal supporter of the Syrian external Opposition, but its anti-Russian and anti-Putin statements and actions have made it one of the most important partners in the NATO war on Syria. Some of that anti-Russian rhetoric is connected with Australia's support for Kiev's post-coup government, and reaction to the deaths of 38 Australians on board MH17. A recent agreement to supply Uranium to Ukraine hardly bodes for our future dealings with Moscow.

In the absence of any sensible discussion or analysis in the Australian media about the Deir al Zour attack and its actual consequences, or how the change in US leadership and likely direction in Syria could affect Australia's strategic position and military involvements in the region, some further investigation is now called for.

In the meantime, and as has happened repeatedly during the Syrian conflict, a resolution of that conflict in one area sees a resumption of it elsewhere. This 'two-steps forward, one back' - or three back - progress of the war is largely why it has taken the Syrian Army and its allies over two years to liberate Aleppo from its insurgent grip.

Of particular interest to those seeking to understand the objectives and allegiances of Syria's foreign invaders and their 'puppet-masters', is a surprising and disturbing development - the reappearance of IS forces in Palmyra.

Palmyra, like Deir al Zour, was stoically defended by the Syrian army until IS forces moved in, controversially crossing hundreds of kilometres of open desert without being noticed by the 'US coalition against IS'. (perhaps they were mistaken for Syrian troops?) In one of Russia's first acts demonstrating that it was serious about fighting and killing terrorist forces in Syria, Russian airpower helped the Syrian Army liberate the historic city and adjacent town of Tadmor ten months later.

But in a situation which is almost a mirror image of that existing today, terrorist groups including IS south of Aleppo took advantage of the Syrian Army's focus on Palmyra to seize control over the main highway linking Aleppo with Damascus, cutting off the Syrian Army contingent protecting Western Aleppo from the insurgents in the East.

As Oscar Wilde said: "to lose one parent may be regarded as misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness."

To strike the Syrian Army while targeting IS may be a 'blunder'; to fail to target IS as it again targets the Syrian Army looks like more than carelessness, and a lot like collusion. And we should ask, why did the US coalition forces not immediately return to kill those Da'esh fighters who moved into the Deir al Zour base that they had just inadvertently 'liberated' of its patriotic Syrian forces in September?

Vice Admiral David Johnston didn't answer that question - but neither was he asked it.

As a virtual postscript, and indication that things are really changing on the ground in Syria even while they remain stagnant in the minds of her foreign 'false friends', it appears that Palmyra has already be re-liberated, with many IS fighters killed in a joint Russian-Syrian operation.

And so we won't be subjected to another call to 'intervene to protect Syria's ancient heritage - from IS terrorists'.

#deirEzZorFn1" id="deirEzZorFn1">1. #deirEzZorFnTxt1">↑The images are from the abovementioned Reports: Audio recording between ISIS and US before Deir Ezzor massacre found
(26/9/16) by Ron Paul | Ron Paul Forums.

The ideology, or perhaps the theology of neo-liberalism is partly based on the idea that 'markets', that is to say, the scope of human activity where trade of valuable goods and services occurs, reveals a fundamental truth or reality beyond that scope of immediate trade. One could say modern Capitalism, or Neo-Liberalism is essentially a form of 'Marketism', where market forces rule all, judge all and value all. The exact name employed to describe this isn't as important as the realisation that underlying what we call Capitalism today, or Neo-Liberalism, or Growth or even The Economy and Society, is a fairly rigid belief system that market forces are behind much of how the world works, and that market freedom is among the most important freedoms for human liberation. It is an idea which some may argue over its correct taxonomy, but it is clear that it is a distinct thing. Many of its opponents, often people whom Neo-Liberalism has failed, critique the damage wrought upon the environment, the dog-eat-dog mentality which emerges, the financial crises the erupt like clockwork, but often fail to think outside the frame of reference of 'Marketism'.

I will look at three ways in which Market economics on its own can fail to solve major problems or provide a reasonable, dignified quality of life.

Markets can only provide marketable solutions to problems

The statement that a market system can only provide a marketable solution may seem like a tautology that carries no meaning or profundity, but it only does so if one believes that the limits of the market are the limits of human activity. Free Marketeers argue that the Free Market will provide solutions to problems, because where there is a need, there is the possibility of profit, and therefore an opportunity for someone to benefit by fulfilling that need. This simple analysis seems complete and logical but in doing so disregards quality and places no value on optimal solutions. When people are faced with a problem, a desire, a need or some other challenge which requires a solution, the best solution isn't necessarily the most profitable. We therefore have a disconnect. The most profitable solution, or the most marketable one, is not necessarily the one which most effectively and efficiently addresses the issue, and the more complex the issue, the greater the disconnect between the two is. A market may respond to a need to listen to music while jogging effectively and efficiently, but it is less effective when dealing with problems such as climate change. With this problem, the solution is presented as marketable energy efficient products, "green" technology, carbon credits, things which may at least slightly lower carbon output from what would have otherwise occurred. Missing from these marketable solutions though are caps on carbon output, regulation of industry, cultural change or prioritisation of energy expenditure. The prioritisation of where energy is expended is determined currently by the market, and the market in practice, has not been capable of regulating its use of energy to avert a climate catastrophe.

Cars are another example of a marketable solution to a problem, but not the most efficient solution. A car represents a sell-able item and exists as a solution to efficient transit. But if the problem to be tackled is moving around the city, this isn't the most practical efficient solution. Our roads are clogged with single passenger vehicles and people are taking longer and longer to traverse the city. One can find better solutions in urban design, public transportation and thoughtful measured placement of residential, commercial and industrial areas. Such a solution though exists outside of the market. Market forces cannot control city design writ large and no single company, entrepreneur, businessman or merchant has the power or inclination to approach the problem from this angle.

Governments and other organisations which act on behalf of a collective are able to implement such solutions, but Free Market ideology argues that the government should do as little as possible, and for many Free Market Libertarians, nothing at all. If Free Marketeers were to have their way, such solutions would never eventuate in the future.

A belief in markets solving problems therefore excludes all non-market solutions to problems, solutions which may be more effective, more efficient, or may be the ONLY effective solutions. The more our culture is framing things in terms of market economics, the narrower our scope for human ingenuity and problem solving becomes. Solutions which may have been trivial decades ago, such as prudent regulation disappear from our scope of thought and we are left with non solutions or a belief that nothing can be done.

Free Market ideology is egalitarian

Equality is seen as an unquestioned positive, and Neo-Liberals use equality in a cynical manner to support their ideological agenda. One of the fundamental tenets of Free Market Libertarianism is that all desires and all market activity is equal. The people who want to trade hardcore pornography have just as much right as people who want to trade pharmaceuticals or food. It is argued that it is left to people to determine what they want to buy, want to sell and want to produce, and that this very act of trade is sacrosanct, and cannot be interfered with. To interfere with it is a violation of someone's rights, and regardless of whether that person is seeking to buy cigarettes, amass residential property for their own petty insecurities, or fund development of software or research into Multiple Sclerosis, their rights are the same. As a result, the resulting transactions are deemed equal, and no one has the right to prioritise one over the other, except when dealing with their own personal transactions. So we observe people's right to buy up the entire street for no other reason than a personal whim to be equal to someone's right to buy shelter for their family. Someone's right to remove trees and wildlife from their property is equal to the rights of others to live in a world with nature. Someone's right to pollute as much as they wish is equal to someone's right to secure a future for their children without the disastrous effects of climate change. This ideology states that one person's situation, no matter how dire, or how much more it affects that person, should not impinge upon anyone else.

This ideology levels human needs, and despite being touted as equality, for most people this means their needs, their quality of life are subject to the whims of merchants and the elite. It stultifies political action by convincing people that they don't have the right to shape society in a way which benefits them and their nation. It is essentially a slave morality, and makes people subject themselves to forces that others control. It is ironic, as people like Ayn Rand promoted market capitalism as a force which empowers people to live in their own best interests, to liberate peoples own will to live from the demands of the masses, but in practice it forces people to voluntarily limit their political and social power, and accept intrusions on their quality of life in the name of the market.

Free Markets degrade the human spirit

Going back to Ayn Rand and many Free Market Libetarian thinkers, there is an emphasis placed upon the right of individuals to support themselves through their own work. The idea, noble enough, is that an individual has the right to the fruit of their own labour, and preventing a person from providing for themselves, and denying them the ability to use their own talents and efforts for their own profit is evil. This idea is the cornerstone of much modern freedom, and anyone who supports human freedom and dignity would support this notion, to a practically reasonable degree. Taken to its absolute thought, it works against the human condition. The original thinkers of the Enlightenment, and of early Liberalism saw this condition in opposition to slavery, feudalism and other systems whereby people worked for someone else. It was argued that it was a natural right for a man to be able to work for himself. This idea has been corrupted in the 20th and 21st century, and Free Market Libetarianism today posits this not only as a right, but as an ideal. Free Marketeers today also take it to an absolute, with many claiming that taxation, any level of taxation at all, is essentially no different to theft by gunpoint. What was a general idea of social organisation is now seen as a set of axioms to be followed dogmatically, even if people don't benefit from them.

Also, this idea has been taken from being one person's right not to be enslaved, either literally or figuratively, to an exaltation of work as a good in and of itself. Human beings are seen as Homo economicus, creatures who exist only to gain profit and in the metrics of what is desirable in life, everything which doesn't fit in with Homo economicus's need for profit is disregarded. Spirituality, nature, security, society, belonging. Only that which people do to trade goods counts, and all other aspects of humanity disappear, as they don't appear on the profit registers. Neo-liberalism therefore sees humanity as nothing more than people seeking to consume, reproduce and consume more, trying to consume more than they produce. There is no other goal than to grow and consume, and human beings therefore are seen as nothing but animals. Society, civilisation, should have no other goals, other than self-perpetuated consumption. Humanity therefore is seen as nothing but an endless competition for resources, with that scramble for resources being more honourable than art, contemplation or self enlightenment. In more enlightened times work was seen as an embarrassing necessity, and the highest act that one could take part in was art, politics, education and religious service. They saw the goal of humanity as not to perfect the art of acquiring wealth but to improve itself. Religion rightfully saw base lusts as desires as sin. It is no coincidence that, of the seven deadly sins, greed, avarice, pride, envy, are the most animalistic. Rather than succumb and nurture these, we should move beyond them. Neo-Liberalism however makes greed a virtue. Human beings are ranked solely on their ability to acquire wealth.

The natural hierarchy which occurs in market societies is therefore based solely on one's skill as a merchant. Regardless of one's ability to build, invent, create art, produce food or goods, teach, write or philosophise, one's success is based on one's ability to do business. Therefore, those who progress in companies and "win" at life are those that can play the corporate game. Whether an artist or writer, you are not judged by your ideas, but by your ability to sell. Banal pop music is put ahead of true art because it has a better marketing team. Even whether one can get a house these days is based on one's ability to play the property market. People absorbed into this culture judge a person's success of failure based on their ability to work a market. As a result, it is the merchant class that has become the elite, as the merchant class consists of those most adept at playing markets. People who have valuable social skills, but no desire or skill at profiteering, are left by the wayside. Teens that can't sell themselves in interviews are judged as lazy and a worthless drain on society. People who aren't competitive may miss out at auctions. People who provide no benefit to society, but are aggressive and acquisitive, are lauded as producers and job creators.

During the 2015-2016 financial year, more than 2600 health workers were brought into Australia via government-sponsored 457 visas on the basis they were needed for jobs that could not be filled by Australians. Of these 1692 were general practitioners and resident medical officers, 228 registered nurses, 35 specialists, 38 psychiatrists, 28 surgeons, 19 anesthetists and 20 midwives.

The high intake of health specialists occurred despite a senate inquiry in June 2015 where the Australian Nurses and Midwife Foundation (AN&MF) stated that there were 3000 unemployed graduate nurses, often with high HECS debts, while about 1 in 4 nursing positions were being filled by 457 skilled migrant intake[1]. They also claimed that many of the overseas nurses were victims of underpayment and exploitation because they live and work under threat of deportation[2]. The inquiry was also told that importing health workers was not solving the shortages of health professionals in rural areas because most imported workers went to the cities.

As of March 2016 there were 177,390 subclass 457 visa holders in Australia. To be eligible for a subclass 457 visa via standard business sponsorship, a worker must have an occupation on the Consolidated Sponsored Occupations List (CSOL) which is uncapped, meaning that there is no limit on how many can enter. Instead the numbers are determined from the applications made by employers. However there is a loophole that will allow employers to hire an unlimited number of foreign workers under a temporary working visa, in a move that unions say will bring widespread rorting of the system and insufficient support for local employment.

This reliance on skilled migration has been a long term policy of, not only our governments, but those of many developed nations, particularly the US, UK and Canada. As a consequence, about a quarter of doctors in Australia are from overseas and in 2010 the U.S. had 265,851 licensed physicians trained in other countries, constituting 32% of the physician workforce. Among these, 128,729 came from countries categorized by the World Bank as being from low- or lower-middle income. The World Health Organization (WHO) published a detailed 40-country study on the magnitude and flow of the health professionals. According to this report, close to 90% of all migrating physicians were moving to just five countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, UK and the USA. Even as far back as 1972, 6% of the worlds physicians were located outside their country of origin.

This poaching of skills or brain drain has been embraced by developed nations because it reduces the expense of training in the host nation. According to the African Capacity Building Foundation, African countries lose 20,000 skilled personnel to the developed world every year. All the developed world's efforts to increase aid to these countries may not matter if the local personnel required to implement development programs are absent. Every year there are 20,000 fewer people in Africa to deliver key public services, drive economic growth, and articulate calls for greater democracy and development. South Africa loses almost half of its doctors to Canada, Britain and Australia and is forced to recruit medical staff from countries like Kenya, Malawi and Zimbabwe. Ghana has lost half of its nurses and has more doctors working outside Ghana than in the country itself. This has cost it an estimated $63million of its training investment while the UK has saved $117m by the recruitment of Ghanaian doctors since 1988 alone. To address some of the concerns of “brain drain” from developing nations, the Commonwealth Code of Practice for the International Recruitment of Health Workers was adopted by Commonwealth Health Ministers in 2003. This serves as a framework within which international recruitment should take place and is intended to discourage the targeted recruitment of health workers from countries which are themselves experiencing shortages. The code also suggests that high-income countries consider how to recompense the donor nations for the recruitment of their health workers.

However there has been been considerable opposition to this approach, with some economists arguing that the transfer of skills is actually beneficial to both nations because many 3rd world nations are highly dependent on the remittances that their nationals return . According to the World Bank, workers from developing countries remitted a total of $325 billion in 2010, and in some countries these remittances are more than 20% of the nations GDP. Which of course is great unless you happen to urgently need the doctor that is now somewhere else. It has also been found that researchers and scientists who migrate are far more effective in their new locality because of better facilities that are available but then again this hardly flows on to benefit the donor nation. Shortages of skilled people in the education sector of developing nations is reducing training capacity and according to a report in the Wall Street Journal the US is to blame for Africa's doctor shortage that made the Ebola epidemic much worse than it should have been[3].

Today there are more doctors from Benin working in France than there are in Benin; more Ethiopian doctors in Washington DC than in the whole of Ethiopia. When you add in the effect of other professions that are poached from these countries under skilled immigration policies, teachers, engineers and others, it becomes plain that the developing nations will stay that way, a supplier of resources and skills to the developed world while ever this policy remains in place.

NOTES

[1] http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/call-for-migration-rort-crackdown-as-data-reveals-foreign-workers-snare-net-job-growth-20140807-3d9ma.html

1 in 3 nursing graduates can’t find work says ANMF report, yet 1 in 4 new nursing jobs going to 457 workers. http://t.co/FHHHQ2TCNH

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/lax-immigration-policy-hurting-australian-job-seekers-20140806-1019tr.html

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/oct/29/revealed-the-systemic-exploitation-of-migrant-workers-in-australia?CMP=share_btn_link

[3] How the U.S. Made the Ebola Crisis Worse: http://on.wsj.com/2cMKN5B
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-27/corruption-and-widespread-rorting-undermining-immigration/7537270?pfmredir=sm

US Congress Quietly Passes Bill Targeting “Russian Propaganda” Websites By Tyler Durden, Global Research, December 03, 2016, Zero Hedge 2 December 2016. On November 30, one week after the Washington Post launched its witch hunt against “Russian propaganda fake news”, with 390 votes for, the House quietly passed “H.R. 6393, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017“, sponsored by California Republican Devin Nunes (whose third largest donor in 2016 is Google parent Alphabet, Inc), a bill which deals with a number of intelligence-related issues, including Russian propaganda, or what the government calls propaganda, and hints at a potential crackdown on “offenders.”

A quick skim of the bill reveals “Title V—Matters relating to foreign countries”,  whose Section 501 calls for the government to “counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in  coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly.”

The section lists the following definitions of media manipulation:

• Establishment or funding of a front group.
• Covert broadcasting.
• Media manipulation.
• Disinformation and forgeries.
• Funding agents of influence.
• Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
• Assassinations.
• Terrorist acts.

As ActivistPost correctly notes, it is easy to see how this law, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used to target, threaten, or eliminate so-called “fake news” websites, a list which has been used to arbitrarily define any website, or blog, that does not share the mainstream media’s proclivity to serve as the Public Relations arm of a given administration.

Read more of Tyler Durdan's article here: US Congress Quietly Passes Bill Targeting “Russian Propaganda” Websites

The momentum has shifted in Aleppo this week as the Syrian Army begin to advance, steadily driving out Western and Gulf-backed terrorist fighters under the command of Al Nusra Front – from their occupied enclaves in Eastern Aleppo. These images and videos will never see the light of day in the corporate media editing rooms because they expose their almost six year narrative on Syria as one of the most criminal propaganda projects ever deployed against a sovereign nation, its people, its state and its national army. This article was first published at http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/11/29/aleppo-updates-tears-hugs-and-smiles-the-relief-of-escaping-imprisonment-in-east-aleppo/ on November 29, 2016.

The prolonged dehumanization of the majority of the Syrian people, the exploitation of their children as cynical props to further the NATO & Gulf state geo-political objectives in the region, the overt and covert endorsement of NATO State-proxy terrorism, the tacit endorsement of economic terrorism via the illegal US/EU sanctions against Syria, all amount to crimes against Humanity and the Syrian people.

The #FakeNews “regime change” cohorts are seeing their pyramid of lies being dismantled stone by stone, by the very people they have been claiming to “protect” for almost six years.

The linked video shows the reactions of civilians, fleeing their four year imprisonment in East Aleppo, subjugated by various militant factions, funded by NATO states and led by Nusra Front aka Al Qaeda.  The first woman, collapses into tears, as she reaches the journalist.  These touching moments will be sullied by the corporate media reporting and accounting of events, as they desperately try to resuscitate their expiring Aleppo chronicles.

Translation of what is being said by Suleiman Milad

“They are saying God bless the army and they send their greetings to the army. They also said that there was no food and water where they were in eastern Aleppo between terrorist groups , they also said that terrorists treated them very bad and that the army helped them get out to safe areas. They also showed very big happiness seeing the interviewer who is a very famous war reporter in Syrian for Syrian official TV.”

The following images were taken of the fleeing civilians in the last 24 hours.

“Today, more civilians exited terrorists held areas, and reached to Hanano & Al-Sakhour which are under the control of the SAA in Aleppo.”

Sarah Abdallah, analyst and commentator, notes the following:

“Syrian Arab Army’s remarkable east Aleppo advancement continues:

Four more districts freed today, including the pivotal region of Sakhour. In the last 48 hours alone, 12 east Aleppo districts have been liberated. From one area to the next, the “moderate” terrorists are melting down. Most important news today though is the SAA’s recapture of the Suleiman al-Halabi Water Pumping Station. The Aleppo water crisis is over! Since 2012, Turkish-backed “jihadists” have withheld water from Aleppo’s residents as a means of blackmailing them into supporting the “revolution”. This has led to unprecedented levels of sickness and malnourishment. But now, the SAA has restored water to more than one million people as it moves ever-closer to freeing Aleppo entirely.

21st Century Wire will continue to post brief but informative updates as we receive them from known and verified sources on the ground in Aleppo and across Syria or the region.

Fears are increasing that something terrible has happened to Julian Assange, the Australian who founded Wikileaks and exposed power elites in the United States - most recently through 'Pizzagate'. We really hope that these fears are groundless, but police presence has been removed from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where Assange has been sequestered since 2012. The Anonymous video inside this article gives more detail than any other source, analysing and timelining what has happened recently with Assange. You need to start about 37 seconds in to avoid an overly long intro. Please contact candobetter.net if you have information about Assange. The Australian Government should be inquiring into his welfare - but they have failed totally to defend his rights now for years.

Did you know that Great Britain is going down the drain because the citizens want to remain British?

Did you know that the British are inherently racist, jingoistic, bigots, and obnoxious because they don't want to become Pakistanis, Syrians, Africans or some multicultural combination?

Did you know that the British people voted to leave the European Union not because they oppose their loss of sovereignty to a foreign and unelected power in Brussels, but because of their hatred and contempt of foreigners, especially the dark-skinned ones that the EU forces them to accept in unlimited numbers?

If you don't know this, you are not stupid like Brian Cloughley, who lays it out for you in the website strategic-culture.org. Here is the URL for Cloughley's imbecillic article:

Britain Going down the Drain: Racism and Bigotry Are Growing (21/11/16) | Strategic Culture._{#fn1" id="fntxt1">[1]}

While Cloughley calls the white British racists, last May these racists elected a Muslim, Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London. Can you imagine the Mayor of London, England, is a Muslim named Sadiq Khan? Either the British are not racists or the Pakistanis outnumber Englishmen in London, which might before long be renamed New Islamabad.

Cloughley calls the British people every name in the book and then upbraids them for "the racial abuse" of using words such as "Pakis" and "niggers."

Cloughley, obviously a self-hating Britisher, reports that Brexit (the British people's vote to restore their sovereignty by departing the EU) has caused hate crimes to rise by 41 percent. Why would departing the EU cause a rise in hate crimes?

Perhaps the answer is related to the fact that the use of traditional British words, such as "wog," has been criminalized. "Wog" is a British word that according to the English Oxford Dictionaries means simply "a person who is not white."_{#fn2" id="fntxt2">[2] #fn3" id="fntxt3">[3]} Despite this innocent meaning, for a white Britisher to use this word as a description of a not white person or group can result in hate crime charges. What is most peculiar about politically correct speech is that political correctness itself marginalizes non-white people by eliminating the use of words that mean non-white. Political correctness has made it so shameful to be non-white that ordinary words such as negro and wog that mean a non-white person have been turned into slurs. How can non-whites have racial pride when words that mean non-white cannot even be used?

As Cloughley's screed against the British people develops, we see that it is a brief against leaving the EU. As the EU was an OSS (original name of the CIA) initiative, Cloughley, knowingly or unknowingly, is serving as a CIA asset.

Cloughley is at perfect ease calling his fellow British every hateful name, seemingly impervious to the fact that if he were not calling white people names he would be committing hate crimes.

In addition to their loss of sovereignty to an unelected EU commission sitting in a foreign country, what the British people are objecting to is that they have been made second class citizens in their own country. White people in Great Britain have to be very careful about what words they use to describe illegal and legal aliens or they can be charged with "hate crimes" for employing vocabulary formerly used by prime ministers themselves.

Yes, Britain is going down the drain. But not because it is trying to rescue itself at this late date from loss of sovereignty and multicultural hell. Britain is going to hell because, judging by the closeness of the Brexit vote, almost half of the British population have been so brainwashed that they are ashamed to be British.

This article was previously published 28/11/2016 on PaulCraigRoberts.org. It was initially republished only in part here on 28/11/2016, but, now, with the author's kind permission, has been re-published in full.

Footnotes

#fn1" id="fn1">[1]#fntxt1"> ↑ In spite of its publication of this ridiculous article, Strategic Culture also publishes insightful and informative articles about many of the world's current geopolitical conflicts.

#fn2" id="fn2">[2]#fntxt2"> ↑ NOTE (by author, Paul Craig Roberts): I have been reminded from England that WOG stands for Worthy Oriental Gentlemen, a term imposed by British officers on uncouth troops to stop them from using racist names for colonized peoples.

#fn3" id="fn3">[3]#fntxt3"> ↑ (by Candobetter editor): It is some years since I have heard the term 'wog' used, but, in my own experience in Australia, and not in Great Britain, back in the 1960s and 1970's, contrary to what the author has written, 'wog' was considered an offensive and racist term. However, like Paul Craig Roberts, I consider it outrageous that the use of the term should be criminalised.

Article by Prof. Marcello Ferrada de Noli, Chairman, Swedish Doctors for Human Rights –SWEDHR. First published at The Indicter Magazine Summary: Sweden did not succeed in getting Bob Dylan to come to Stockholm to receive the Nobel Prize for Literature. Nevertheless as a consolation the “White Helmets” did arrive to get the Right Livelihood Award. This article examines a likely geopolitical rationale that the Swedish elites had for selecting that organization. Facts suggest a congruence between the stances of those elites on Syria and the declared political aims of the organization White Helmets. The reviewing of the institutions involved in the award-decision and process can also result relevant in pondering the reason for the event. Finally, to inquire into the role of Carl Bildt, as member of the board of directors in the institution ultimately deciding, is interesting against the backdrop of his opposition regarding the participation of  Julian Assange and Edward Snowden in previous international events organized by the same institutions –all of them under the umbrella of the Swedish Foreign Office.

#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>[In the image, Swedish Foreign  Minister Margot Wallström and a representative of “White Helmets” that came to Stockholm to receive the Right Livelihood Award]</em></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><span style="color: #993300;">The Hillary Clinton doctrine</span></strong></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Sweden’s awarding a prize to this organization –referred to as “<a href="http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/11/the-murky-white-helmets-to-receive-right-livelihood-award-endorsed-by-the-swedish-institute-of-foreign-affairs/" target="_blank">murky White Helmets</a>’ by Professor Jan Oberg– it might reveal a semi-concealed intervention in support of Hillary Clinton’s doctrine in the dirty war against Syria. In concrete, another means used by Sweden’s elites in uttering their pro-view for the No-Fly Zone campaign in Syria, and gathering support for it.<br />&#10;</strong></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">A main purpose of what I have called the Hillary Clinton doctrine in the Middle East is the ending –by violent means– of the secular governments in the region, to be replaced by fundamentalist dictatorships. That happened in Egypt, Libya, etc. Now it was Assad’s turn. A valuable testimony of both the origin and purpose of this stance by Clinton was given by US Senator Richard Black, who declared <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZlZooXGpcs" target="_blank">in video</a>:</p>&#10;<p style="padding-left: 90px; text-align: justify;">“Hillary Clinton, as secretary of state, put into place a series of actions to overthrow the secular governments in the Middle East and to replace them with radical Islamic regimes. Why she was doing this? I know she has great connections, financial and otherwise, with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Kuwait, with tyrants of the Arab world”.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">To these ends in Syria, the Swedish establishment has comprehensively supported the establishment of a No-Fly zone –precisely as advocated by Hillary Clinton. Beside illustrating Hillary Clinton’s stance on the No-Fly Zone issue, the video below shows also the risk of an all-out war against Russia and Syria, and what such measure would signify for the US Armed Forces (and others supporting the No-Fly Zone, such as the Swedish establishment).</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #ffffff;">.</span></p>&#10;<h6 style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="color: #993300;"><em>Click on the image below  to the see the video <span style="color: #756a65;">where General  Joseph Dunford, c</span></em></span><span style="color: #756a65;"><em>hairman of the U.S. Military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, states: </em></span></strong></h6>&#10;<h6 style="text-align: center;"><strong><span style="color: #756a65;"><em>“For us, to control all of the airspace in Syria will require us to go to war against Syria and Russia”</em></span></strong></h6>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><span style="color: #993300;"><em> </em></span></strong></p>&#10;<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4KTFN4VsM4" target="_blank"><img class="aligncenter wp-image-2438 " src="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/hillary-clinton-advovcated-for-no-fly-zone-in-syria-The-Indocter-Channel.jpg" alt="hillary-clinton-advovcated-for-no-fly-zone-in-syria-the-indocter-channel" srcset="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/hillary-clinton-advovcated-for-no-fly-zone-in-syria-The-Indocter-Channel.jpg 1111w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/hillary-clinton-advovcated-for-no-fly-zone-in-syria-The-Indocter-Channel-300x194.jpg 300w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/hillary-clinton-advovcated-for-no-fly-zone-in-syria-The-Indocter-Channel-768x496.jpg 768w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/hillary-clinton-advovcated-for-no-fly-zone-in-syria-The-Indocter-Channel-644x416.jpg 644w" sizes="(max-width: 805px) 100vw, 805px" width="805" height="520"></a></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">It would be worth to mention in this context the participation of the “neutral and nonaligned” Swedish air Force in the No-Fly Zone operation masterminded by Hillary Clinton –ultimately responsible for the bullets fired at close range against the head of the secular leader of the Libyan government, Muammar Gaddafi, while he was held prisoner and immobilized. “<span id="eow-title" class="watch-title" dir="ltr" title="Hillary Clinton on Gaddafi: We came, we saw, he died"><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y" target="_blank">We came, we saw, he died</a>“, says Hillary Clinton on video, while she laughs. </span></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">Also, it should be reminded that the decision regarding the military participation of Sweden in Libya was taken at the Parliament after a proposition presented by Carl Bildt; a proposal that found uncontested support in ALL political parties of the Swedish political establishment, including the Left Party (the former ‘euro-communists’). Only the Sweden Democrats opposed.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">For the Swedish rulers, as it was for Hillary Clinton, it is not about religion or ideology, or about an “idealistic” solidarity with refugees from the Syrian war (in fact most of those migrants are not ). It is only about money.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">While those Sunni governments financially backed Clinton and the Clinton Foundation (mentioned in the above-quoted testimony by Senator Richard Black), the role of Sweden was to contribute either with direct public funds or with donations by important Swedish companies, such as Lundin Oil or Ericsson. In retribution, they got the kind of favours from Clinton’s State Department, which permitted further expansion of Swedish business in the area, such as  <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/swedish-corporate-interests-linked-to-clinton-foundation-haiti-operations/5558085" target="_blank">Ericsson</a>. Meanwhile, the <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/swedens-unethical-and-unlawful-%C2%ADarms-deals-with-saudi-arabia-a-state-sponsor-of-isis-daesh/5552463" target="_blank">business of Sweden with Saudi Arabia</a>, or Sweden’s arms export to the <a href="http://theindicter.com/following-h-clintons-doctrine-sweden-now-exporting-weapons-to-uae-it-will-help-bombing-yemen/" target="_blank">United Arab Emirates</a>, continues unabated [See my recent articles in “The Indicter” and “Global Research”].</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #993300;"><strong>White Helmets</strong></span></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">Another <a href="http://jinge.se/mediekritik/utrikesminister-wallstrom-twittrar-honoured-to-meet-raed-saleh-of-the-white-helmets-al-qaidas-friend.htm">promoter for a No-Fly Zone in Syria</a> is the organization “White Helmets”. Undoubtedly, there are in that organization, like in any of that kind,  true volunteer-individuals trying to make a humanitarian contribution. However, as organization at large, “White Helmets” is in fact another operation set up and financed by the same forces pressing for an escalation in the military conflict in Syria. In other words, the same factions that financed armed and trained the ‘moderate’ rebels –as the New York Times and the Washington Post call them (also called by the non-partisan media “moderate” terrorists, or “moderate jihadists”).</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">This organization has been boosted and financed by a number of State-donors, all of them implicated in the US-led (Clinton/Obama) political and/or military coalition aimed to depose the presidency of Assad in Syria. Most of these countries count with economic benefits in the planned oil-pipe construction designed to pass through Syria and that Assad opposed; the real cause of the war. For instance, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/germany-ups-financial-support-for-syrias-white-helmets/2016/09/23/dcea7b42-81ac-11e6-9578-558cc125c7ba_story.html">Germany raised recently</a> its financing to the “White Helmets” up to $7.85 million. <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-are-syrias-white-helmets-first-responders-for-the-us-and-natos-al-nusraal-qaeda-forces/5532119">Other examples of funding governments</a> to this so-called “non-governmental organization”: The US government has contributed with $23 million; the UK government with $4.5 million.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://blog.transnational.org/2011/10/jan-obergs-cv/">Professor Jan Oberg</a>, a prominent peace activist who has also worked as senior adviser at the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has recently given a characterization of this group. Following is a text excerpt from Professor <a href="http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/11/the-murky-white-helmets-to-receive-right-livelihood-award-endorsed-by-the-swedish-institute-of-foreign-affairs/" target="_blank">Jan berg’s article</a>:</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"> <a href="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/Prof.-Oberg-on-White-Helmets.jpg" data-rel="lightbox"><img class="aligncenter wp-image-2440 " src="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/Prof.-Oberg-on-White-Helmets.jpg" alt="prof-oberg-on-white-helmets" srcset="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/Prof.-Oberg-on-White-Helmets.jpg 823w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/Prof.-Oberg-on-White-Helmets-300x188.jpg 300w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/Prof.-Oberg-on-White-Helmets-768x482.jpg 768w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/Prof.-Oberg-on-White-Helmets-644x405.jpg 644w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/Prof.-Oberg-on-White-Helmets-80x50.jpg 80w" sizes="(max-width: 723px) 100vw, 723px" width="723" height="454"></a></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">Furthermore, in the analysis “<a href="http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/10/03/white-helmets-save-aleppo-protest-proves-how-easy-it-is-to-dress-up-actors-as-war-victims/">WHITE HELMETS: ‘Save Aleppo’ Protest Proves How Easy it is to Dress Up Actors as ‘War Victims’</a>“, author Vanessa Beeley refers to most elementary techniques –and visually highly effective– used to stage “civilian attack-victims” by activists converted for the occasion into amateur actors. [One example below].</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/This-is-not-aleppo.jpg" data-rel="lightbox"><img class="aligncenter wp-image-2472 " src="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/This-is-not-aleppo.jpg" alt="this-is-not-aleppo" srcset="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/This-is-not-aleppo.jpg 1016w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/This-is-not-aleppo-300x287.jpg 300w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/This-is-not-aleppo-768x735.jpg 768w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/This-is-not-aleppo-644x616.jpg 644w" sizes="(max-width: 493px) 100vw, 493px" width="493" height="472"></a></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">The author summarizes:</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;">“Posing as an impartial rescue force, the “White Helmets” <a href="http://journal-neo.org/2016/09/28/us-in-syria-how-to-build-a-terror-state/">are transparently auxiliaries</a> serving exclusively side-by-side armed militants including US State Department, UN, and EU designated foreign terrorist organizations. Their primary function is not “rescuing” anyone, but to manage a public relations campaign aimed at swaying public and political opinion, leveraging “humanitarian” sympathy worldwide.”</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>One conclusion emerging in this analysis, considering also White Helmets own statements done previously in its home page, is that a main aim of its propaganda endeavour is bringing public opinion’s support to the ‘necessity of establishing a No-Fly Zone in Syria’. This is the geopolitical item that coincides with the one of Sweden’s political establishment pursuing a confrontation of “West” against Russia. And it is in this context where the Swedish award  to “White Helmets” should be understood.</strong></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">The claims for a No-Fly Zone in Syria have been passed through standard psy-ops by the pro-Clinton corporate-owned press. This has been directed not only at American audiences, but also echoed among EU countries  viewed as potential proxies for the escalation of the Syria military conflict. Sweden is, historically considered, the primary government in Europe to react positively to such calls.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">As Sweden now is giving its prestigious award to the White Helmets, the Swedish media have relentlessly reported in the most positive terms the deeds of the organization. None of the international reports denouncing a variety of manipulation techniques in constant use by the White Helmets which have found space in the Swedish media. The image and video below shows how this is done.</p>&#10;<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HCFol7g-FU" target="_blank"><img class="aligncenter wp-image-2451 " src="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/White-Helmets-fake-rescue-video-1.jpg" alt="white-helmets-fake-rescue-video" srcset="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/White-Helmets-fake-rescue-video-1.jpg 1111w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/White-Helmets-fake-rescue-video-1-300x206.jpg 300w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/White-Helmets-fake-rescue-video-1-768x527.jpg 768w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/White-Helmets-fake-rescue-video-1-644x442.jpg 644w" sizes="(max-width: 448px) 100vw, 448px" width="448" height="308"></a></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">The appeals by “White Helmets” are done by fabricating or drastically exaggerating news on ‘war atrocities’. Hence, the suggestion of demolishing ‘air raids’ directed at civilian populations is a favourite number, for instance, in videos uploaded in YouTube. In the videos I have seen, however, such attacks never appear; what we see instead, solely, are rooms filled with smoke, dust, etc., where the same “patients” move constantly in the scene with or without anti-dust protection masks.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #993300;"><strong>Who is the Swedish institution granting the distinction to the White Helmets?</strong></span></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">Right now, as I am typing these lines, the Swedish Institute of International Affairs has removed its web page in English. There is a growing focus on that institution right now because of the Right Livelihood Prize to the White Helmets. So, one reason might be that they are ‘cleaning up’ the page. And they should.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">In the Swedish version of “Swedish Institute of International Affairs” that I have access to, I found that the largest single entity financing this ‘independent’ institution is ultimately the Swedish State.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Carl Bildt, again</strong></p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">Secondly, I have found that the award-granting institution (Swedish Institute of International Affairs) is just a subsidiary section of the <em>Utrikespolitiska Institutet</em>. This in turn is an organization in which Carl Bildt sits on the board of directors.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/carl-bildt-board-member-utrikespolitiska-samfundet.jpg" data-rel="lightbox"><img class="size-medium wp-image-2454 alignleft" src="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/carl-bildt-board-member-utrikespolitiska-samfundet-238x300.jpg" alt="carl-bildt-board-member-utrikespolitiska-samfundet" srcset="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/carl-bildt-board-member-utrikespolitiska-samfundet-238x300.jpg 238w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/carl-bildt-board-member-utrikespolitiska-samfundet-644x811.jpg 644w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/carl-bildt-board-member-utrikespolitiska-samfundet.jpg 733w" sizes="(max-width: 238px) 100vw, 238px" width="238" height="300"></a>For new readers, Carl Bild is a former Swedish PM and FM who has been <a href="http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article14412631.ab">accused of being US agent</a>.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">Apparently Carl Bildt still has some control over Swedish foreign policy. This stretches to such an extreme that when the State-owned TV organized a panel to discuss an emergent geopolitical situation, they invited Carl Bildt and not the current Foreign Minister Margot Wallström. <a href="http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article15647530.ab">One explanation</a> was given by the then press spokesperson of the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Teo Zetterman. “(Swedish) foreign policy is, historically considered, a political area characterized by consensus within domestic politics­ –more than in other spheres”, he said.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">This in its turn would help also to explain a) why the <em>political</em> stance taken by Sweden against WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange has been so consistently negative over the years. The case is a charade perpetuated with the aim of obstructing WikiLeaks in its publishing endeavours; b) how participating institutions in this manoeuvre are predominantly financed or administratively controlled by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. C) Why in some of these activities we find the direct or indirect participation of Hillary Clinton’s US State Department.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">One example of the above was given on the occasion of the Stockholm Internet Forum conference of 2014 called to discuss issues of  “<a href="https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_Internet_Forum">personal integrity, transparency, spying and control</a>”, and where Carl Bildt blatantly blocked the video-link participation of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden – which was suggested by the participants in the conference. What was less known is that even if <a href="http://www.stockholminternetforum.se/about/">The Stockholm Internet Forum</a> is organized by <a href="http://www.sida.se/English/">The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)</a>, a main section of the Ministry of the Foreign Affairs, it is cloned with the International Visitor Leadership Program (<em>IVLP</em>) of the US Department of State.</p>&#10;<p style="text-align: justify;">As the alliance with Hillary Clinton and her doctrine promoted by both Carl Bildt and Margot Wallström flourishes in the Swedish awards to <a href="http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/11/the-murky-white-helmets-to-receive-right-livelihood-award-endorsed-by-the-swedish-institute-of-foreign-affairs/">murky</a> organizations such the White Helmets, Swedish Doctors for Human Rights prepare a new presentation to the Nobel Peace Prize committee for awarding the prize to the organization WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, for their contribution to transparency and democratic processes, cornerstones for world peace.</p>&#10;<p> </p>&#10;<p><a href="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/white-helmets-2-ok-that-was-a-good-take.jpg" lang="en-GB"><img class="aligncenter wp-image-2467 size-full" src="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/white-helmets-2-ok-that-was-a-good-take.jpg" alt="white-helmets-2-ok-that-was-a-good-take" srcset="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/white-helmets-2-ok-that-was-a-good-take.jpg 1222w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/white-helmets-2-ok-that-was-a-good-take-300x271.jpg 300w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/white-helmets-2-ok-that-was-a-good-take-768x694.jpg 768w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/11/white-helmets-2-ok-that-was-a-good-take-644x582.jpg 644w" sizes="(max-width: 1222px) 100vw, 1222px" width="1222" height="1105"></a></p>&#10;<h4>Important readings on this subject:</h4>&#10;<p>Vanessa Beeley: <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/white-helmets-new-breed-of-mercenaries-and-propagandists-disguised-as-humanitarians-in-syria/5473381" target="_blank">White Helmets’: New Breed of Mercenaries and Propagandists, Disguised as ‘Humanitarians’ in Syria</a></p>&#10;<p>Tony Cartalucci: <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/syrias-white-helmets-extensive-and-elaborate-deceptions-of-modern-war-propaganda/5558368" target="_blank">Syria’s “White Helmets”: Extensive and Elaborate Deceptions of Modern War Propaganda</a></p>&#10;<p>Vanessa Beeley: <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-real-syria-civil-defence-exposes-natos-white-helmets-as-terrorist-linked-imposters/5547528" target="_blank">The REAL Syria Civil Defence Exposes NATO’s ‘White Helmets’ as Terrorist-Linked Imposters</a></p>&#10;<p>Mint Press: <a href="http://www.mintpressnews.com/us-propaganda-war-in-syria-report-ties-white-helmets-to-foreign-intervention/209435/">US Propaganda War in Syria: Report Ties White Helmets to US Intervention</a></p>&#10;<p>Prof. Anders Romelsjö [Swedish]: <a href="http://jinge.se/mediekritik/utrikesminister-wallstrom-twittrar-honoured-to-meet-raed-saleh-of-the-white-helmets-al-qaidas-friend.htm">Utrikesminister Wallström twittrar ”Honoured to meet Raed Saleh of The White Helmets” – al-Qaida’s friend</a>. Also image 1 found in Prof. Romelsjö publication.</p>&#10;<p>21st Century Wire: <a href="http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/10/23/syrias-white-helmets-war-by-way-of-deception-part-1/">Syria’s White Helmets, War by Way of Deception – Part 1</a></p>&#10;<p>21st Century Wire: <a href="http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/10/28/part-ii-syrias-white-helmets-war-by-way-of-deception-moderate-executioners/">Syria’s White Helmets, “Moderate” Executioners Part – 2</a></p>&#10;<p>Eva Bartlett: <a href="https://ingaza.wordpress.com/syria/human-rights-front-groups-humanitarian-interventionalists-warring-on-syria/">Human Rights Front Groups Warring on Syria</a></p>&#10;<p>Ron Paul Institute: <a href="http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2015/august/27/syria-the-propaganda-ring/">Syria the Propaganda Ring</a></p>&#10;<p>Ahmad Salah: <a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/syrias-white-helmets-fiction-and-reality/5550964" target="_blank">Syria’s “White Helmets”: Fiction and Reality</a></p>&#10;<p>Simon Wood:<a href="http://www.globalresearch.ca/fact-sheet-on-syrias-white-helmets/5549760" target="_blank"> Fact-Sheet on Syria’s “White Helmets”</a></p>&#10;<p> </p>&#10;<p>__</p>&#10;<div class="entry-content">&#10;<div class="entry-content">&#10;<div class="entry-content">&#10;<div class="entry-content">&#10;<p><strong>The author:</strong></p>&#10;<p class="entry-title" style="text-align: justify;"><a href="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/02/Prof-Marcello-Ferrada-de-Noli-4-Jan-2016-no-glasses-redc-Hanna-to-The_Indicter-644x634.jpg" rel="attachment wp-att-1162"><img class="alignleft wp-image-1162" src="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/02/Prof-Marcello-Ferrada-de-Noli-4-Jan-2016-no-glasses-redc-Hanna-to-The_Indicter-644x634-300x295.jpg" sizes="(max-width: 196px) 100vw, 196px" srcset="http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/02/Prof-Marcello-Ferrada-de-Noli-4-Jan-2016-no-glasses-redc-Hanna-to-The_Indicter-644x634-300x295.jpg 300w, http://media1.theindicter.com/2016/02/Prof-Marcello-Ferrada-de-Noli-4-Jan-2016-no-glasses-redc-Hanna-to-The_Indicter-644x634.jpg 644w" alt="Prof-Marcello-Ferrada-de-Noli-4-Jan-2016-no-glasses-redc-Hanna-to-The_Indicter-644x634" width="196" height="193"></a>Professor Dr med <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Ferrada_de_Noli" target="_blank">Marcello Ferrada de Noli</a> is the founder and chairman of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Doctors_for_Human_Rights" target="_blank">Swedish Professors and Doctors for Human Rights</a> and editor-in-chief of <em><a href="http://theindicter.com" target="_blank">The Indicter</a>. </em>Also publisher of <a href="http://professorsblogg.com" target="_blank">The Professors’ Blog</a>, and CEO of <a href="http://libertarianbooks.se" target="_blank">Libertarian Books – Sweden</a>. Author of “<a href="http://media2.libertarianbooks.se/2013/12/SWEDEN-VS.ASSANGE-HUMAN-RIGHTS-ISSUES-By-Prof-Marcello-Ferrada-de-Noli.pdf" target="_blank">Sweden VS. Assange – Human Rights Issues</a>.” His op-ed articles have been published in Dagens Nyheter (DN), Svenska Dagbladet (Svd), Aftonbladet, Västerbotten Kuriren, Dagens Medicin,  Läkartidningen and other Swedish media. He also has had exclusive interviews in DN, Expressen, SvD and Aftonbladet, and in Swedish TV channels (Svt 2, TV4, TV5) as well as international TV and media.</p>&#10;<p class="entry-title" style="text-align: justify;">Reachable via email at <a href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank">[email protected]</a>, <a href="mailto:[email protected]" target="_blank">[email protected]</a></p>&#10;<p class="entry-title" style="text-align: justify;">Follow the professor on Twitter at <strong><a href="https://twitter.com/ProfessorsBlogg">@Professorsblogg</a></p>&#10;</body></html>" />

Late in the day, on Nov. 15, one week after the U.S. elections, the lame-duck Congress convened in special session with normal rules suspended so the House could pass House Resolution 5732, the “Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act” calling for intensifying the already harsh sanctions on Syria, assessing the imposition of a “no fly zone” inside Syria (to prevent the Syrian government from flying) and escalating efforts to press criminal charges against Syrian officials.

HR5732 claims to promote a negotiated settlement in Syria but, as analyzed by Friends Committee for National Legislation, it imposes preconditions which would actually make a peace agreement more difficult.

There was 40 minutes of “debate” with six representatives (Ed Royce, R-California; Eliot Engel, D-New York; Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Florida; Dan Kildee, D-Michigan; Chris Smith, R-New Jersey; and Carlos Curbelo, R-Florida) all speaking in favor of the resolution. There were few other representatives present, but the House Foreign Affairs Committee stated that the resolution was passed “unanimously” without mentioning these special conditions.

According to Wikipedia, “Suspension of the rules is a procedure generally used to quickly pass non-controversial bills in the United States House of Representatives … such as naming Post Offices…” In this case, however, the resolution could lead to a wider war in the Middle East and potentially World War III with nuclear-armed Russia.

Most strikingly, the resolution calls for evaluating and developing plans for the United States to impose a “no fly zone” inside Syria, a sovereign nation, an act of war that also would violate international law as an act of aggression. It also could put the U.S. military in the position of shooting down Russian aircraft.

To call this proposal “non-controversial” is absurd, although it may say a great deal about the “group think” of the U.S. Congress that an act of war would be so casually considered. Clearly, this resolution should have been debated under normal rules with a reasonable amount of Congressional presence and debate.

The motivation for bypassing normal rules and rushing the bill through without meaningful debate was articulated by the bill’s sponsor, Democrat Eliot Engel: “We cannot delay action on Syria any further. … If we don’t get this legislation across the finish line in the next few weeks, we are back to square one.”

The current urgency may be related to the election results since President-elect Donald Trump has spoken out against “regime change” foreign policy. As much as neoconservatives and their liberal-interventionist allies are critical of President Obama for not doing more in Syria, these Congressional hawks are even more concerned about the prospect of a President who might move toward peace and away from war.

Read more here.

The very moving video inside shows a soldier hug his family after 5 years of separation, as a major suburb of Aleppo is retaken by Syria from the terrorists. The fighting in Aleppo, Syria, has been particularly protracted as it has been one of the last bastions of the terrorist forces that are trying to take over Syria. These forces are backed by the United States and NATO and their allies, which, shamefully, include Australia. The Syrian Arab Army has lost about 80,000 soldiers trying to defend Syria, which has a secular government, from takeover by militant religious fundamentalists. Most remaining Syrians are sheltered behind lines held by the Syrian Arab Army, although Australia, NATO and the US view this army as the 'enemy'. The so-called 'Rebels' which Australia, NATO and the United States support, have used people in captive cities as human shields to stop the Syrian Arab Army and Russia from bombing these terrorists. US-NATO have turned this round as propaganda, pretending that the necessity of bombing the fundamentalist forces, is a gratuitous form of bombing civilians. US-NATO have maliciously failed to acknowledge that those civilians are being held against their will. President Elect Trump seems to want to change this and to help Syria to retain its sovereignty by cooperating with the Russian Army. To anyone who is not a crazed fundamentalist guerilla, this seems the only way to go. We congratulate the Syrian Arab Army on its hard-won gains in Aleppo and its surrounds and we wish that our government would cease its support for the terrorists by lifting sanctions imposed by Bob Carr under the pretext that the Syrian Government had massacred its own supporters at Hula.

Latest on the situation in Aleppo

"The Syrian army’s Tiger Forces and allied pro-government groups have fully liberated the key area of Hanano Housing in the northeastern part of Aleppo city (more about the miliary sutioation in general can be found here). The area had been controlled by Jaish al-Fatah militants. With liberation of the Hanano Housing, government forces can threat to split the eastern Aleppo pocket with capturing Sakhur and linking the frontline up in Suleiman Halabi. Another option that now becomes possible with the success in Hanano Housing is to encircle Jaish al-Fatah units between Hanano and Jabal Badro in southeastern Aleppo. Government forces advadnce in southeastern Aleppo is ongoing." Source: https://southfront.org/government-forces-take-control-of-hanano-housing/.

ALSO, dated yesterday: https://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2016/11/26/saa-25-villages/ :"SAA establishes control over 25 villages/farms in Aleppo countryside, Terrorist gangs kill civilians in Damascus Countryside and Idleb"

This article gives acknowledgement to the Russians as allies and shows the successful delivery of food aid. We republish the article from the Syrian Free Press.

SAA establishes control over 25 villages/farms in Aleppo countryside, Terrorist gangs kill civilians in Damascus Countryside and Idleb

Syrian Arab Army units, in cooperation with the allied forces, established control over an area of above 120 km2 in the northeastern countryside of Aleppo after eliminating the last terrorist gatherings there.

A field commander told reporters that army units, in cooperation with the allied forces, continued their progress in the area surrounding the Infantry School and engaged in fierce battles with terrorist groups, inflicting heavy losses on them in personnel and equipment.

He added that the army established control over 25 village and farms, including Tal Shaer, the farms surrounding it, al-Ta’ana, Harysa, al-Wardieh, Jobah and the farms surrounding it.

He pointed out that army units confronted attacks launched by ISIS and armed groups linked to the Turkish regime on the military points in the northeastern countryside of Aleppo.

The Commander noted that the terrorist groups which are supported by the Turkish regime falsely claim to be fighting ISIS in the direction of northeast of al-Bab, but it is the Syrian army and the allied forces who drove the terrorists of ISIS away from the entire area in 15 days.

Hama

The Syrian army repels terrorist attack on military posts in northern Hama.

Sweida

Syrian army unit targeted with artillery the movements of Daesh terrorists in al-Qasser village to the northeast of Sweida city, according to a military source.

The source added the ten Daesh members were killed due to the shelling and two of their vehicles were destroyed.

Terrorist attacks kill 7 civilians in Damascus and its countryside

Six civilians were killed due to a terrorist rocket attack on Harasta suburb in Damascus Countryside.

A source at Damascus Countryside Police Command told SANA reporter that the attack, which included several rocket shells, was launched by terrorists of the so-called “Jaish al-Islam” who are positioned in Eatsern Ghoutaby, adding that another person was injured due to the selling.

Colonel Sama’an killed in a terrorist attack on al-Faihaa Sports city in Damascus

Meanwhile, Director of al-Jaish football team, Colonel Nazih Sama’an was killed in a terrorist attack on al-Faihaa Sports city in Damascus.

A police source told SANA that terrorists of Jaish al-Islam targeted al-Faihaa sports city and al-Adawi Street with two rocket shells, killing the colonel and injuring player Ali Maryameh.

Eight persons injured in Aleppo 

ِA police source told SANA that terrorist organizations targeted with a rocket shell residential neighborhood of al-Masharka in Aleppo, injuring a woman and a child.

Later, the source added that 6 other persons were injured in a rocket shell launched by terrorists on a building in Baghdad station neighborhood in Aleppo.

Terrorist sniper shootings on locals in Idleb’s al-Fouaa injure one person

In the same context, another person was also injured when terrorist groups affiliated to Jabhat al-Nusra opened sniper rifle fire on the locals’ houses in the terrorist-besieged al-Fouaa town in the northern countryside of Idleb province.

Local sources told SANA that the sniper shootings came from Binnesh town, confirming that one person was injured in the attack.

Russian aid distributed to displaced families in al-Muallaqa village, Damascus Countryside

A new batch of Russian humanitarian aid was distributed on Thursday to displaced people in al-Muallaqa village in cooperation with Damascus Countryside Governorate.

Representative of the Russian Coordination Center in Hmeimim Alexei Ivanov said 200 food portions, containing rice, sugar and canned food, were distributed to the displaced families in the village as part of the aid provided by Russia to help alleviate the Syrian people’ suffering due to the terrorist crimes.

For his part, Abdul Rahman al-Khatib, the mayor of Harjalleh town in which al-Muallaqa village is located, hailed the Russian stance in support of Syria, pointing out that Damascus Countryside Governorate provides all services and the basic needs to the 800 displaced families currently residing in al-Muallaqa village.

SOURCES:
SANA Reports
Submitted by SyrianPatriot 
War Press Info Network at :
https://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2016/11/26/saa-25-villages/
~
Re-publications are welcome, but we kindly ask you,
to facilitate the correct information's diffusion,
to cite all these original links and sources.

The Baird government's controversial biodiversity laws have passed their final hurdle in parliament, with NSW farmers set to get greater power to clear their land from next year. The legislation will replace the Native Vegetation Act, which was designed to prevent mass land clearing. Thousands of possums, quolls, koalas and gliders will be killed each year if Premier Mike Baird scraps our tree-clearing laws. Nationals MPs, big agri-business and developers want to allow landholders trash our precious woodlands and urban bushland by replacing the Native Vegetation Act with weaker tree-clearing controls.

Letter

The Hon. Josh Frydenberg MP

Minister for the Environment and Energy

Dear Minister

End the senseless destruction of our wildlife - stop the carnage and destruction in NSW

The Baird government's controversial biodiversity laws have passed their final hurdle in parliament, with NSW farmers set to get greater power to clear their land from next year.
The legislation will replace the Native Vegetation Act, which was designed to prevent mass land clearing.

Thousands of possums, quolls, koalas and gliders will be killed each year if Premier Mike Baird scraps our tree-clearing laws. Nationals MPs, big agri-business and developers want to allow landholders trash our precious woodlands and urban bushland by replacing the Native Vegetation Act with weaker tree-clearing controls. These changes will:

-add extinction pressures to our state's 1000 threatened species;
-threaten our clean, reliable water supplies;
-turn our fertile land into wasteland through erosion and salinity;
-put landmark trees and bushland at risk; and
-add further to Australia's carbon pollution.

In 2015, a study by NSW Parks and Wildlife found that 60,000 hectares was being cleared per year in the state — a four-fold increase on previous State Government figures.

Professor Hugh Possingham warned that rather than protecting biodiversity, the laws would allow a doubling of broad-scale clearing that would put some native animals at risk of extinction.

The primary objections of Professor Possingham are that the government is proposing self-assessable codes that will result in broad-scale land clearing, thus degrading soil, water and biodiversity, and that the ‘no net loss’ standard against which clearing should be measured has not made the draft legislation. Despite the weight of scientific expertise opposed to the legislation the Baird Government has pressed on regardless. How are those with short-term, vested interests in monetary gain, allowed to determine their own rate of land clearing? Environmental protection is in everybody's interests, and that of future generations. Eradicating habitat is a silver-bullet for more threatened species, and native flora and fauns extinctions - already we have one of the highest rates in the modern world! Tourist come to see, and rightly expect to see, our wonderful mega-diverse range of iconic native species - vegetation, marsupials, birds, and other native wildlife. They don't want to see barren, cleared landscapes, urban sprawl and industries!

The current laws are supposed to prevent that kind of clearing without permits. The changes, which the government says were developed through a "rigorous, transparent, scientific and evidence-based process," allow farmers more freedom to clear their land without having to find equivalent areas of offsets. This is vandalism, and not only will we lose precious biodiversity functions, and native animals/birds, but we will see more desertification in the future - hardly the route to more production and more food!

The Sydney Basin, for instance, has some 1900 koalas under limited protection, with about 300 of the marsupials resident near Campbelltown one of the areas with rapid housing growth. This is because our rate of immigration is set on full-throttle levels - and not inevitable.

Last year 47,000 native animals and birds were killed in NSW by property owners using a "s121 licence". Each licence strictly controls the number of animals permitted to killed, and requires data to be lodged with the Office of Environment and Heritage. The office issued permits for 34 species, or a total of 145,550 animals and birds to be killed in 2015-16. This included more than 100,000 eastern grey kangaroos, almost 9000 corellas, 6500 sulphur crested cockatoos, 5500 galahs, 655 emus, 175 swamp wallabies, 113 wombats and 83 magpies. What sort of department of "Environment and Heritage" actually gives out so many permits to kill off native species? Some Orwellian oxymoron? They are killing off the ENVIRONMENT, habitat, biodiversity and vandalizing NSW's natural HERITAGE. How can this horrendous carnage be permitted, or justified?

Almost 1000 species of plants and animals are currently endangered in NSW, mainly due to land clearing. Over 40% of the state has already been cleared for agriculture, mining and development purposes and of what’s left, just 9% is in good condition. This leaves very little room for our native animals to maintain their homes. Since the "bad old days" of colonisation, and ignorance, biodiversity has been in steady decline in NSW. For the last 10 years, previous Governments have been working hard to halt and improve this decimation of our local plants and animals, armed with two environment protection acts – the 1995 Threatened Species Conservation Act and the 2003 Native Vegetation Act. They aren’t perfect but the World Wildlife Fund reckons these laws have saved the lives of around 250 000 of our furry amigos to date, including koalas and other native animals.

So why the new Colonial land-clearing permits, a return to the dark ages of ignorance, and law-less-ness? What about the national laws and policies that protect our native species?

The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) is the Australian Government's central piece of environmental legislation. It provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places defined in the Act as matters of national environmental significance.

Specifically, the EPBC Act aims to:

-conserve Australia? biodiversity
-protect biodiversity internationally by controlling the international movement of wildlife
-provide a streamlined environmental assessment and
-approvals process where matters of national environmental significance are involved
-protect our world and national heritage
-promote ecologically sustainable development.

So, why isn't this Act being implemented against the rogue Baird government? What are our Environment ministers doing to stop the Baird governments vandalism, and destruction?

Vivienne Ortega

Secretary, Australian Wildlife Protection Council

http://www.awpc.org.au

[email protected]

The two videos inside this article are Parts 1 and 2 of a seminar on "The Right of Blasphemy - No to Medieval Trials" which took place in Rome, Italy, on Sunday, October 30, 2016. The seminar aimed at raising awareness of the fierce campaign against the enlightening intellectuals in the Arab world. From assassinating the writer and intellectual; Nahed Hattar in Jordan, imprisoning the Islamic researcher; Islam Behery In Egypt, and the liberal blogger; Raif Badawi in Saudi Arabia, to sentencing the journalist; Mohamed Sheikh Walad Amkheter to death, to other, endless examples. “Blasphemy”is always a prefabricated accusation of anyone who tries to discuss or think differently. Of additional interest is the fact that the president of the secularist ADHOC organisation that held this very open-minded seminar was Syrian-born Randa Kassis, who recently met with Donald Trump Jr at the French 'think tank' the Center of Political and Foreign Affairs, headed by her husband, Fabien Baussart, to discuss US-Russian cooperation. (See "Hope for Syria! Trump's son at Randa Kassis pro-Syrian French think tank in October."

DR NADIA OWEIDAT: "I have felt personally in my entire ten years of being an analyst in Washington [...] that I am constantly accused of being not authentic enough because I'm not an Islamist.

So there's somebody has decided that if you from the region and it doesn't matter like I come from the biggest tribe in Jordan - my tribe goes back to the time of the Pharaohs - [...] but that doesn't make me authentic because I'm not religious. I'm not Islamist. Not just not really, just I'm not Islamist.

So I've had this accusation and its really irritating who has decided that unless an Islamist I'm not an authentic voice from the Middle East. [...]

We have to fight this because this sympathy is really costing the entire world, because it's a huge imbalance in siding with Islamist as authentic. [...]

Political Islamist parties have proven over and over that they are very authoritarian and there's enough of us in the Middle East that are really sick and tired of authoritarianism. We would like to see real human rights, would like to see real engagement. We want to play a role in building our countries and were excluded from from that engagement. [...] Islam is like returning regimes exclude everybody [...] who doesn't carry their vision. It's not even vision their narrow-minded ideology. So this really needs to be tackled [...]" (Dr. Nadia Oweidat: Modern Islamic thought professor.)

It has been very difficult to discover the list of participants and all their names. Below is a list advertised on the International Humanist and Ethical Union, IHEU site in England.

Speaker list:
1. Dr. Hamed Abdel-Samad: German-Egyptian writer and critic of Islamism.
2. Dr. Nadia Oweidat: Modern Islamic thought professor.
3. Dr. Saaed Nashed: Moroccan writer and intellectual, concerned with the issues of modernism and enlightenment.
4. Dr. Olfa Youssef: Tunisian writer, author, professor.
5. Dr. Elizabeth O’Casey: Advocacy Director of IHEU and representative at the United Nations Human Rights Council.
6. Mr. Majed Hatar brother of the assassinated Jordanian writer Nahed Hatar

Whilst one can obtain an automated transcript of the speeches via you tube's transcript function, the accuracy is poor. I have tried to transcribe parts of the first and the second speeches and may put these up later.

During the recent United States' presidential election campaign almost the entire mainstream was heavily biased against Donald Trump, and in favour of Hillary Clinton. Surprisingly, given Hillary Clinton's repeated claim that Donald Trump was a puppet of Vladimir Putin, the Russian news service RT America was also strongly biased against Donald Trump. Whilst it would be wrong to conclude from this that Clinton was actually Putin's puppet, rather than Trump, how was it possible for a Russian taxpayer-funded news service to act against Russia's own interests by promoting the russophobic Clinton?

Presenters Tyrel Ventura and Tabetha Wallace and their guest, Ed Schultz, presenter of RT America's news service, were savagely critical of Donald Trump in their show Now on to election night: 3rd and final debate with Ed Schultz (21/10/16). Guest, Ed Schultz, predicted that Donald Trump would lose. Whilst I thought, as did many American voters, that Donald Trump clearly won the third Presidential election debate, as well as the second, all three in that discussion on Watching the hawks agreed that he had lost that debate. (There was a small facade of criticism of Clinton from Schultz and Ventura, possibly because they may well have understood that failure to see some fault in Clinton could have caused their credibility to suffer too much.)

Also mirroring the mainstream media's 'reporting' and commentary, the rest of RT America spent nearly all of its coverage of the election attacking the alleged bigotry, racism, xenophobia, and temperamentalism of Donald Trump, whilst omitting discussion of the substantial policies, both domestic and international, that were at stake, and ignoring the mountain of evidence that should have damned Hillary Clinton years ago.

That evidence includes Hillary Clinton's complicity, since 1990, in the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Central Asia, the Middle East and the former republics of Yugoslavia, plus the cover-up of sexual misconduct and rape allegations against her husband, the former United States' President, Bill Clinton.

RT America programs, which, in this way, also sided with Clinton, include News with Ed Schultz, Lee Camp's 'comedy' show Redacted Tonight and Watching the Hawks.

In an example of Redacted Tonight,"Trump cabinet is horrifying, get rid of Electoral College, and TPP is dead," (19/11/16), the promotional summary states:

In this week's episode of Redacted Tonight, Lee Camp covers the latest news on Trump’s cabinet, which already has people panicking. What should we fear most about Trump's cabinet picks? Is he really draining the swamp?

In what seems like an attempt to cover their tracks following Donald Trump's victory, Ed Schultz and the producers of Watching the Hawks now appear to be backing away from the pro-Clinton bias they displayed during the election campaign. However, Redacted Tonight and The Big Picture continue their savage attacks on Donald Trump. Post-election examples of this in The Big Picture include: Why Trump's cabinet is a basket of deplorables (21/10/16) and Will Tulsi Gabbard go from Bernie to Trump?.

Comments after the second show listed above include:

"Is Thom channeling George Soros now? Honestly, he used to have quite an amusing program due to allowing some intelligent and witty right wingers on his panel. Now it is all straight propaganda for the faux left."

"Yep. The show is embarrassing."

"comic-relief?"

"RT should bin 'The Big Picture'. The episode with Lawson and Badawi was truly awful. If we wanted to listen to all this rabid globalist propaganda we could tune in to any of the mainstream media news channels. RT should be presenting the benefits of a MULTI-POLAR globe, not pushing the narratives of the American globalisers. What next? Is RT planning on promoting the Democrats view that the US should punish Russia for existing?"

Quite possibly Thom Hartmann and Lee Camp are banking that the various moves now underway in America to overturn Donald Trump's victory and declare Hillary Clinton President will succeed and restore some of their credibility.

The Russian government set up RT back in 2005. It recognised that it had failed to challenge the Western mainstream media's narrative about the former Yugoslav republic of Serbia. The lack of any strong media to challenge those western media lies then had permitted the United States and its European allies to bomb that country and overthrow its government in 1999.

Since then, RT and other national news services such as Iran's PressTV have helped to counter the Western mainstream media's lying narrative on Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and Yemen. Perhaps in part, consequently, the United States' and its allies' regime-change plans for Syria and Yemen have yet to succeed. These plans have also to contend with the support of the Russian air force, the Lebanese Hezbollah movement and Iran for Syria, along with the resilience of the Syrian people themselves.

RT should not rest on its laurels, however. Its success invites subversion. The apparent (failed) attempt by RT America to make Hillary Clinton President of the United States illustrates that RT America should be thoroughly overhauled with new journalists and a charter that requires RT America to give both sides of the story wherever that story is seriously disputed.

The same comment applies, of course, to the mainstream western media.

NOTES

The above article was adapted from a comment posted by 'Don't Get Fooled Again' beneath an article worth reading, Trump's Media Summit Was a 'F−−−ing Firing Squad' (22/11/16) by Emily Smith and Daniel Happer | Information Clearing House.