871: New World Hackers

From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 11:37 PM To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Mills, Cheryl D; Nuland, Victoria J Subject: Chris Smith Cheryl told me the Libyans confirmed his death. Should we announce tonight or wait until morning?

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 15:54

BUSTED! Latest Phony Trump Accuser is a Writer for the Viciously Anti-Trump Huffington PostEach ''Trump accuser'' gets more and more ridiculous. This one turns out to be a writer for the viciously ultra-left wing Anti-Trump Huffington Post, that has been acting in the role of Hillary SuperPac from day one.

This is equivalent to if a Pro-Trump SuperPac employee accused Hillary of ''touching'' him years ago and just happened to decide to do so 3 weeks before the election'... REALLY?

GotNews Reports

Latest Trump ''fake rape'' accuser Karena Virginia is a Huffington Post writer, weird yoga ''healer'', and obvious pawn of left-wing media hack Gloria Allred.

Karena Virginia writes for the left-wing, viciously anti-Trump HuffPo:

Could she maybe be anti-Trump too?

Perhaps the famous photo of the Huffington Post's ''Editor's Meeting'' will give you a clue. (Otherwise known as the ''BAN MEN FROM EARTH'' Club)

Nice DIVERSITY!!!! NOT.

Just like every other supposed Trump ''fake rape'' accuser,Karena Virginia is not a Republican, Independent, or even everyday Democrat, but someone tied to the Democratic Party, Clinton Foundation, Democrat donors, or, in this case, Big Pro-Hillary Media.

What are the chances of that?

Oh, and she ''came out'' about her ''assault'' at a press conference organized by left-wing feminist lawyer, Democrat fundraiser, and ''hired killer'' for Republican campaigns Gloria Allred, who attempted this same campaign-killing stunt with a fake accuser just last week.

What a coincidence!

Support the Trump Movement and help us fight Liberal Media Bias. Please LIKE and SHARE this story on Facebook or Twitter.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 05:25

5286478

Cryptographic signatures demonstrate that Democratic National Committee Chairman Donna Brazile is wrong when she suggests the WikiLeaks emails were altered and that she did not send an email tipping off Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton to debate questions.

Many email systems use a verification system called DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) that shows whether an email has been changed. It uses a key stored on the email server that sent the email, so it can't be forged.

HillaryClinton.com uses Gmail to handle its mail and uses DKIM. Staffer Jennifer Palmieri, using her HillaryClinton.com email, replied to a Brazile email warning that Brazile was ''worried'' about Clinton's ability to answer a question about the death penalty, that she said would be asked at an upcoming debate. She copied Podesta '-- who also uses Gmail '-- presumably so that he could encourage Clinton to prepare for the question.

The emails were hacked from Podesta's account by WikiLeaks, but Clinton's campaign '-- and Brazile '-- have all but claimed their contents have been falsified.

But a check of the DKIM signature by the Daily Caller News Foundation against HillaryClinton.com's key shows that Palmieri did, in fact, send the exact email to Podesta that WikiLeaks says she did.

The email from Brazile had a subject line of ''From time to time I get the questions in advance'' and said ''Here's one that worries me about HRC,'' followed by the full text of a question about the death penalty.

Clinton was indeed asked the question at a debate by moderator Roland Martin.

Brazile claimed the emails were ''doctored'' by ''Russian sources'' and that she wouldn't share debate questions with candidates ahead of time. Brazile became Democratic National Committee Chairman after her predecessor, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, resigned amid accusations that she was helping Clinton over rival Sen. Bernie Sanders in the primaries.When Fox News' Megyn Kelly asked Brazile about the impropriety of sharing debate questions in advance with candidates, Brazile claimed she was being ''persecuted'' by the question.

Brazile then called Daily Caller reporter Chuck Ross ''so unprofessional'' for asking for evidence that the email wasn't real. Unfortunately for Brazile, she does not understand DKIM.

TheDCNF ran code to confirm that the email was valid as provided by WikiLeaks '-- the only way it could be false is if Palmieri herself changed the body of Brazile's email before replying to it and copying Podesta.

TheDCNF downloaded the raw source of the email here: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5205

Then ran the following code in Python:

import emailimport dkim

data = open('00021071.eml','r').read()msg = email.message_from_string(data)obj = dkim.DKIM(data)obj.verify()

The ''True'' means the email was not tampered with.

Podesta email verification / DCNF photo

Follow Luke on Twitter. Send tips to [email protected].

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 14:38

The Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner has always been the most underrated night of the campaign season.

Two presidential candidates. New York City. The Waldorf Astoria. Lots of jokes, and invariably very good ones at that. And if you're lucky enough to get a media credential, you can practically walk right up to a Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonToomey: 'No reason' Trump supporters shouldn't back meWATCH LIVE: Trump delivers 'first 100 days' speech in GettysburgDylan's 'Jokerman' a metaphor for Election 2016 and moreMORE and Donald TrumpDonald TrumpTrump son: Talk like father's leaked 2005 tapes 'a fact of life'Schilling lashes out: 'I'm apparently an anti-Semite' for asking questionsToomey: 'No reason' Trump supporters shouldn't back meMORE and snap a fitting photo like this:

ADVERTISEMENT

The tradition of the Al Smith dinner goes back to 1945, the year after Smith '-- the first Catholic presidential candidate '-- passed away.And almost every election cycle since, America is treated to an evening not of personal attacks and harsh rhetoric, but self-deprecating humor and a little benign roasting of one's opponent, all while raising millions for needy kids via Catholic charities. It's almost always the last event where the presidential candidates share a stage before the election.

The aforementioned scene of the harmony being described was largely what came to fruition on Thursday night. Trump and Clinton were funny, biting, charming (yes, Trump was actually charming at times).

Trump:

"You know the President told me to stop whining. But I really have to say the media is even more biased than ever before. You want the proof? Michelle ObamaMichelle ObamaIs Georgia turning blue?Obama promises not to twerk at WH concertEx-Arizona governor: Hispanic Dems 'don't get out and vote'MORE gives a speech. And everyone loves it, it's fantastic. They think she's absolutely great. My wife, Melania, gives the exact same speech and people get on her case. And I don't get it. I don't know why. And it wasn't her fault ... Oh, I'm in trouble when I go home tonight. She didn't know about that one."

"And even tonight, with all of the heated back and forth between my opponent and me at the debate last night, we have proven that we can actually be civil to each other. In fact, just before taking the dais, Hillary accidentally bumped into me and she very simply said, 'Pardon me.' (long pause to let the crowd get the joke, which took a few seconds). "And I very quietly replied, let me talk to you about that after I get into office."

"It's great to be here with 1,000 wonderful people. Or, as I call it, a small, intimate dinner with some friends. Or, as Hillary calls it, her largest crowd of the season."

"You know, last night, I called Hillary a nasty woman. But this stuff is all relevant after listening to Hillary rattle along and on and on. I don't think so badly of Rosie O'Donnell anymore. In fact, I'm actually starting to like Rosie a lot."

Clinton:

"It's a treat for all of you, too, because I charge a lot for speeches like this."

"I've got to say, there are a lot of friendly faces in this room, people I've been privileged to know and to work with -- I just want to put you all in a basket of adorables."

"People look at the Statue of Liberty and they see a proud symbol of our history as a nation of immigrants. A beacon of hope for people around the world. Donald sees the Statue of Liberty and sees a 4. Maybe a 5 if she loses the torch and tablet and changes her hair."

"And Donald, after listening to your speech, I will also enjoy listening to Mike PenceMike (Michael) Richard PenceTrump campaign encouraging surrogates to double down on ballot fraudWhite House compares Philippine government to Trump campaignThe Hill's 12:30 ReportMORE deny that you ever gave it."

If the night was left to jokes like those told by each of the candidates, the headlines would be something like, "Trump, Clinton show lighter side at Al Smith Dinner."

But Trump veered off onto a road Manhattan's richest 1 percent didn't like very much.

"We've learned so much from WikiLeaks. For example, Hillary believes that it is vital to deceive the people by having one public policy and a totally different policy in private."

Before Trump could get to the punchline, some in the crowd booed. Loudly. One guy about 10 feet from me yelled several times, "You're a jackass!"

Trump pressed on, knowing some were turning on him quickly.

"That's OK, I don't know who they're angry at, Hillary, you or I. For example, here she is tonight, in public, pretending not to hate Catholics."

But as The Guardian described and my notes show, Clinton got some booing of her own. Not with the vitriol and volume Trump's detractors displayed, but it was apparent.

The Guardian listed these jokes under a section called: "Some of Clinton's would-be zingers elicited a mixture of laughter and booing":

Clinton: "You notice there is no teleprompters here tonight, which is probably smart, because it may be you saw Donald ... dismantle his own. Maybe it is harder when you are translating from the original Russian."

Clinton: "I have deep respect for people like Kellyanne Conway. She is working day and night for Donald, and because she is a contractor, he is probably not even going to pay her."

And this one under a one-joke section called, "And awkward is the word for this Clinton line":

Clinton: "If Donald does win, it will be awkward at the annual presidents' day photo when all the former presidents gather at the White House, and not just with Bill. How is Barack going to get past the Muslim ban?"

USA Today summed up the evening thusly with this accurate headline:

"Trump, Clinton draw laughs, boos at Al Smith dinner"

Piers Morgan, formerly of CNN, summed matters up nicely on Twitter:

Having been there, that USA Today headline and Piers Tweet, respectively, are 100 percent correct. But we live in a world of myopic media possessed by all-things Trump.

No matter: All you're going to read and watch all of Friday was about how Trump got booed, Trump was harsh, Trump blew it again.

What won't be mentioned is the context: Republicans '-- especially those named Trump '-- aren't popular in New York and certainly with the wine and cheese crowd at the Waldorf last night. And even Clinton got some boos and awkward reactions. Oh, and the event raised $6 million for needy children, an all-time record.

Microcosm: Coverage of Thursday night's event is a classic example of why there's a serious trust issue with the press these days.

Here you have an example of Trump making remarks to an audience comprised of Manhattan's cr¨me de la cr¨me '-- many tickets were $3000 each at face value '-- and the national media that's based there, from which we'll say generously Clinton wins 80 percent of the vote.

A recent poll shows Trump down 21 points in his home state of New York. The same poll has him down 70-18 in New York City. Of course he got booed.

This New York Times headline explains why:

Donald Trump Heckled by New York Elite at Charity Dinner

"New York Elite."

If there's one group the Trump brand doesn't appeal to, it's the elite '-- with a close second being the other "e" word: "establishment."

But Clinton didn't exactly embrace at times the spirit of the evening either. The USA Today headline captures what the feeling on the ground was: Both Trump and Clinton should have dialed back a few of the jokes.

Muscle memory from a bruising campaign everyone can't wait to be over ruled instead. Captain Obvious says these two simply do not like either other and therefore can't resist going over whatever line that even a traditional charity dinner draws in the sand.

But the media decided what the narrative would be the moment the first hecklers gave Trump the first Bronx cheer:

He's the mean one. He can't even do jokes right without offending all those big fans of his in the room.

Per CNN's Charles Blow, also a New York Times columnist:

Who would think the 2016 Al Smith Dinner would encapsulate the prism our media sees this campaign in so perfectly?

A prism where only one candidate exists.

Because as we're seeing on television and in print today, it just somehow did.

Concha is a media reporter for The Hill.

The views of Contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 06:58

An international inquiry has blamed Syrian government forces for a third chemical weapons attack, according to a confidential report to the United Nations Security Council.

The report, prepared by a joined committee set up by the UN and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and seen by Reuters news agency, was presented to the security council on Friday.

The UN experts behind the report said Syrian forces were responsible for a toxic gas attack in the village of Qmenas in Idlib province on March 16, 2015. The committee was unable to determine who was behind two other gas attacks - against Binnish in Idlib province in March 2015 and Kafr Zita in Hama province in April 2014.

READ MORE: Aleppo - Syrian forces blamed for 'chlorine gas attack'

"A joint investigative mechanism was set up by the international chemical weapons watchdog and the UN to investigate reports of chemical attacks in Syria," Al Jazeera's Mike Hanna, reporting from the UN headquarters in New York, said.

"Now in its fourth and final report it says it found a third chemical attack carried out by the Syrian army."

Survivors speak of Syria chemical attack, two years on

The UN-led joint investigative mechanism (JIM) reported in late August that Syrian government forces had carried out at least two chemical attacks in 2014 and 2015 and that Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) fighters had used mustard gas on the battlefield.

Of the nine total alleged chemical attacks it is considering in its ongoing probe, the JIM has now attributed three to the Syrian government and one to ISIL.

In its fourth report, investigators concluded that there is now "sufficient information" that attack on Qmenas, near Idlib city, "was caused by a Syrian Arab Armed Forces helicopter dropping a device from a high altitude, which hit the ground and released the toxic substance that affected the population".

Investigators say the substance may have been chlorine gas, based on the symptoms the victims displayed.

READ MORE: US to destroy 2,600 tonnes of mustard gas stockpile

In Kafr Zita, however, the JIM could not confirm that the Syrian army had used barrel bombs to dump toxic substances because "the remnants of the device allegedly used had been removed", the report said.

Investigators also said that a "canister with traces of chlorine" was found in Binnish, though the container could not be "linked to any of several incident locations identified".

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a chemical weapons adviser to NGOs working in Syria and Iraq, welcomed the findings but said the report should had been made released earlier.

"The fact that it took 18 months for these results to be published is the real issue, and I think the UN need to look at that because having that amount of time before taking action is just not realistic in the current day," he told Al Jazeera.

Chlorine's use as a weapon is prohibited under the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention, which Syria joined in 2013. If inhaled, chlorine gas turns to hydrochloric acid in the lungs and can kill by burning lungs and drowning victims in the resulting body fluids.

The inquiry's mandate was extended until October 31 to finish the probe.

"Now this report will go to the security council which will discuss it in a close session in the coming week and certainly there is going to be a very heated discussion," Hanna said.

READ MORE: ISIL chemical attacks 'expected' as Mosul battle nears

"After JIM's previous report the US and Russia agreed that they would agree between themselves what action to take next.

"But other members of the council, in particular Britain and France, will likely now be pushing for far more drastic measures to be taken by the security council and certainly there will be intense debate about what the security council is going to do next," our correspondent said.

Russia says UN chemical attack report biased

Governments in Paris, London and Washington have already called for sanctions against perpetrators of chemical attacks in Syria, including against the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

But the Syrian government has been shielded by its ally Russia, which has questioned the JIM findings and said the evidence is not conclusive enough to warrant sanctions.

"To drop these weapons on civilians is absolutely deplorable and reprehensible," de Bretton-Gordon, the chemical weapons adviser, told Al Jazeera.

"I think the UN should seriously consider a no-fly zone for Syrian helicopters to prevent this from happening in the future."

Syria agreed to get rid of its chemical stockpile and refrain from making any use of toxic substances in warfare when it joined the Chemical Weapons Convention in 2013, under pressure from Russia.

The Syrian government has also been accused of using chemical weapons in rebel-held areas in Syria in 2016 and investigations one these occasions are still on going .

READ MORE: UN rights chief denounces Aleppo raids as 'war crimes'

Meanwhile, security concerns forced the UN to delay planned evacuations from Syria's Aleppo, the world body said, as Russia extended a truce that was largely holding into a third day on Saturday.

Moscow said it was extending the unilateral "humanitarian pause" in the Syrian government's Russian-backed assault on opposition-held east Aleppo until 16:00 GMT.

But there was no sign that civilians or rebels were heeding calls to leave, with Damascus and Moscow accusing opposition fighters of preventing evacuations.

The German Chancellor Angela Merkel has demanded an end to air strikes on Aleppo's residential areas.

Speaking at a meeting of EU leaders in Brussels on Thursday, she described the situation in Aleppo as "barbaric".

On the same day in Geneva, the UN rights council called for a special investigation into the violence in Aleppo in a resolution fiercely critical of Syria's government.

OPINION: We must not let chemical weapons to become the 'norm'

East Aleppo, which the rebels captured in 2012, has been under siege by the army since mid-July and has faced devastating bombardment by the government and Russia since the September 22 launch of an offensive to retake the whole city.

Nearly 500 people have been killed, more than a quarter of them children, since the assault began. More than 2,000 civilians have been wounded.

The scale of the casualties has prompted international outrage, with Washington saying the bombardment amounted to a possible war crime.

Russia announced a halt to its air strikes from Tuesday and the unilateral ceasefire from Thursday.

The Syrian army says it has opened eight corridors across the front line for the more than 250,000 civilians in rebel-held areas to leave, but so far almost none have taken up the offer.

"There has been no movement in the corridors in the eastern district. For the moment, we haven't seen any movement of residents or fighters," said Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group.

Source: Al Jazeera News And News Agencies

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 02:53

Amateur video purports to show victims of alleged Russian air strikes on the Syrian town of Ariha, which rescue workers say killed at least 30 people. Rough Cut (no reporter narration).

Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, speaks to Iran's President Hassan Rouhani as they attend a signing ceremony during the Gas Exporting Countries Forum in Iran on November 23. Picture: AP/Alexander Zemlianichenko

THE Syrian war often seems like a big confusing mess but one factor that is not often mentioned could be the key to unlocking the conflict.

Some experts have pointed out that many of the key players have one thing in common: a billion-dollar gas pipeline.

Factor in this detail and suddenly the war begins to make more sense, here's how it works:

IT'S THE GAS, STUPID

Many have questioned why Russia became involved in the Syrian war but often overlook the fight over natural gas.

As Harvard Professor Mitchell A Orenstein and George Romer wrote last month inForeign Affairs, Russia currently supplies Europe with a quarter of the gas it uses for heating, cooking, fuel and other activities.

In fact 80 per cent of the gas that Russian state-controlled company Gazprom produces is sold to Europe, so maintaining this crucial market is very important.

But Europe doesn't like being so reliant on Russia for fuel and has been trying to reduce its dependence. It's a move that is supported by the United States as it would weaken Russian influence over Europe.

This has not gone down well with Russia, which uses its power over gas as political leverage and has a history of cutting off supply to countries during conflicts. It has even gone to war in Georgia and Ukraine to disrupt plans to export gas from other parts of the Middle East.

As David Dalton, the editor of the Economist Intelligence Unit, told The New York Times: ''Russia has always used gas as an instrument of influence. The more you owe Gazprom, the more they think they can turn the screws.''

Much of Russia's power comes from established pipelines used to transport gas to Europe cheaply. But other countries are now trying to get around Russia and provide new sources of gas to Europe.

Last year US President Barack Obama spoke openly about the need for Europe to reduce its reliance on Russian gas following the conflict in Ukraine.

The US also wants to use its own natural gas supply, recently developed through fracking, to undercut Russian supply. But it will be years before the US will be in a position to ship this overseas.

The US is not the only country trying to outmanoeuvre Russia, and this is where the role of Syria becomes more important.

TWO NEW PIPELINES

Before the civil war, two competing pipelines put forward by Qatar and Iran aimed to transport gas to Europe through Syria.

Qatar's plans were first put forward in 2009 and involved building a pipeline from the Persian Gulf via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey.

The gas field located 3000 metres below the floor of the Persian Gulf is the largest natural gas field in the world. Qatar owns about two-thirds of the resource but can't capitalise on it fully because it relies on tankers to deliver it to other countries and this makes its gas more expensive than Russia's.

It was hoped the pipeline would provide cheaper access to Europe but Syrian President Bashar al Assad refused to give permission for the pipeline to go through his territory. Some believe Russia pressured him to reject the pipeline to safeguard its own business.

The proposed gas pipeline from Qatar via Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey to Europe.Source:Supplied

In the meantime Iran, which owns the other smaller, share of the Persian Gulf gas field, decided to lodge its own rival plan for a $10 billion pipeline to Europe via Iraq and Syria and then under the Mediterranean Sea.

Pipeline from Iran via Iraq and Syria to Europe.Source:Supplied

These plans apparently had Russia's blessing, possibly because it could exert more influence over Iran, which, unlike Qatar, did not host a US air base.

Assad signed off on the Iran plan in 2012 and it was due to be completed in 2016 but it was ultimately delayed because of the Arab Spring and the civil war.

Many countries supporting or opposing the war against Assad have links to these pipeline plans.

Failed pipeline bidder Qatar is believed to have funded anti-Assad rebel groups by $3 billion between 2011 and 2013. Saudi Arabia has also been accused of funding the terrorist group.

In contrast Orenstein and Romer noted the successful pipeline bidder, Iran, was believed to be helping Assad by running the Syrian army, supplying it with weapons and even troops.

Major Rob Taylor, an instructor at the US Army's Command and General Staff College wrote in the Armed Forces Journal last year that the rival pipelines could be influencing the conflict in Syria.

''Viewed through a geopolitical and economic lens, the conflict in Syria is not a civil war, but the result of larger international players positioning themselves on the geopolitical chessboard in preparation for the opening of the pipeline,'' he noted.

Just as the 2003 Iraq War has been linked to oil in the Persian Gulf, Syria may turn out to be all about gas.

WHY DOES TURKEY CARE?

One of the countries that has a lot to gain from getting rid of Assad is Turkey.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been vocal in calling for the Syrian President to step down and has also been accused of helping Islamic State, something it has rejected.

While Turkey could have other reasons for supporting the rebels in Syria, such as Assad's support for the Kurds, Harvard University Professor Orenstein told news.com.au that gas would definitely be one reason it was opposing the regime.

Turkey, which stands at the crossroads of Asia and Europe, is an aspiring member of the European Union, and some consider it to be the best option for facilitating the movement of gas supplies from the Middle East to Europe.

As a hub, Turkey would benefit from transit fees and other energy-generated revenues.

It could also insure, with US support, that all gas suppliers in the Middle East could freely export their product.

Qatar's plans put Turkey at the centre of its plan.

As one of the countries relying on Russia for gas, freeing it from this dependence would be an added bonus.

But none of this can be realised if the pipeline bypasses Turkey and if Assad becomes instrumental in approving an alternative that does not involve it.

Now that Russia is stepping in to help the Assad regime in Syria '-- possibly to protect its own dominance in the gas market '-- Turkey is facing a formidable barrier to its aspirations.

When Turkey downed a Russian plane earlier this month, some speculated it may want to weaken any potential co-operation between Russia and the US which could see Assad continue his leadership.

Russia's motives for its air strikes have also been questioned. CNN military analyst Cedric Leighton, a retired air force colonel, noting that its bombing of Islamic State extremists seemed to have hit Turkmen in northern Syria, who had strong ties to the Turkish government.

Prof Orenstein said the competition over natural gas could ultimately prevent co-operation between the two world powers on fighting Islamic State.

''I doubt there is much basis for US-Russia co-operation due to opposite interests in gas issues and Iran,'' he told news.com.au

But despite fears that the world is facing a new Cold War, Prof Orenstein believes it's more of a ''free for all'', with the fight over natural gas acting as just another fuel.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 05:12

Posing as a non-political solidarity organization, the Syria Campaign leverages local partners and media contacts to push the U.S. into toppling another Middle Eastern government.

On September 30, demonstrators gathered in city squares across the West for a "weekend of action'' to ''stop the bombs'' raining down from Syrian government and Russian warplanes on rebel-held eastern Aleppo. Thousands joined the protests, holding signs that read "Topple Assad" and declaring, "Enough With Assad." Few participants likely knew that the actions were organized under the auspices of an opposition-funded public relations company called the Syria Campaign.

By partnering with local groups like the Syrian civil defense workers popularly known as the White Helmets, and through a vast network of connections in media and centers of political influence, The Syria Campaign has played a crucial role in disseminating images and stories of the horrors visited this month on eastern Aleppo. The group is able to operate within the halls of power in Washington and has the power to mobilize thousands of demonstrators into the streets. Despite its outsized role in shaping how the West sees Syria's civil war, which is now in its sixth year and entering one of its grisliest phases, this outfit remains virtually unknown to the general public.

The Syria Campaign presents itself as an impartial, non-political voice for ordinary Syrian citizens that is dedicated to civilian protection. ''We see ourselves as a solidarity organization,'' The Syria Campaign strategy director James Sadri told me. ''We're not being paid by anybody to pursue a particular line. We feel like we've done a really good job about finding out who the frontline activists, doctors, humanitarians are and trying to get their word out to the international community.''

Yet behind the lofty rhetoric about solidarity and the images of heroic rescuers rushing in to save lives is an agenda that aligns closely with the forces from Riyadh to Washington clamoring for regime change. Indeed, The Syria Campaign has been pushing for a no-fly zone in Syria that would require at least ''70,000 American servicemen'' to enforce, according to a Pentagon assessment, along with the destruction of government infrastructure and military installations. There is no record of a no-fly zone being imposed without regime change following '--which seems to be exactly what The Syria Campaign and its partners want.

''For us to control all the airspace in Syria would require us to go to war against Syria and Russia. That's a pretty fundamental decision that certainly I'm not going to make,'' said Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee this month.

While the military brass in Washington seems reluctant to apply the full force of its airpower to enforce a NFZ, The Syria Campaign is capitalizing on the outrage inspired by the bombardment of rebel-held eastern Aleppo this year to intensify the drumbeat for greater U.S. military involvement.

The Syria Campaign has been careful to cloak interventionism in the liberal-friendly language of human rights, casting Western military action as ''the best way to support Syrian refugees,'' and packaging a no-fly zone '-- along with so-called safe zones and no bombing zones, which would also require Western military enforcement '-- as a ''way to protect civilians and defeat ISIS.''

Among The Syria Campaign's most prominent vehicles for promoting military intervention is a self-proclaimed "unarmed and impartial" civil defense group known as the White Helmets. Footage of the White Helmets saving civilians trapped in the rubble of buildings bombed by the Syrian government and its Russian ally has become ubiquitous in coverage of the crisis. Having claimed to have saved tens of thousands of lives, the group has become a leading resource for journalists and human rights groups seeking information inside the war theater, from casualty figures to details on the kind of bombs that are falling.

But like The Syria Campaign, the White Helmets are anything but impartial. Indeed, the group was founded in collaboration with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)'s Office of Transitional Initiatives, an explicitly political wing of the agency that has funded efforts at political subversion in Cuba and Venezuela. USAID is the White Helmets' principal funder, committing at least $23 million to the group since 2013. This money was part of $339.6 million budgeted by USAID for ''supporting activities that pursue a peaceful transition to a democratic and stable Syria" -- or establishing a parallel governing structure that could fill the power vacuum once Bashar Al-Assad was removed.

Thanks to an aggressive public relations push by The Syria Campaign, the White Helmets have been nominated for the Nobel Prize, and have already been awarded the ''alternative Nobel'' known as the Right Livelihood Award. (Previous winners include Amy Goodman, Edward Snowden and Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu.) At the same time, the White Helmets are pushing for a NFZ in public appearances and on a website created by The Syria Campaign.

The Syria Campaign has garnered endorsements for the White Helmets from a host of Hollywood celebrities including Ben Affleck, Alicia Keyes and Justin Timberlake. And with fundraising and ''outreach'' performed by The Syria Campaign, the White Helmets have become the stars of a slickly produced Netflix documentary vehicle that has received hype from media outlets across the West.

But making the White Helmets into an international sensation is just one of a series of successes The Syria Campaign has achieved in its drive to oust Syria's government.

Targeting the UN in Damascus

When an aid convoy organized by the Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC) and United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs came under attack on its way to the rebel-held countryside of West Aleppo in Syria this September 18, the White Helmets pinned blame squarely on the Syrian and Russian governments. In fact, a White Helmets member was among the first civilians to appear on camera at the scene of the attack, declaring in English that ''the regime helicopters targeted this place with four barrel [bombs].'' The White Helmets also produced one of the major pieces of evidence Western journalists have relied on to implicate Russia and the Syrian government in the attack: a photograph supposedly depicting the tail fragment of a Russian-made OFAB 250-270 fragmentation bomb. (This account remains unconfirmed by both the UN and SARC, and no evidence of barrel bombs has been produced).

Ironically, the White Helmets figured prominently in The Syria Campaign's push to undermine the UN's humanitarian work inside Syria. For months, The Syria Campaign has painted the UN as a stooge of Bashar Al-Assad for coordinating its aid deliveries with the Syrian government, as it has done with governments in conflict zones around the world. The Guardian's Kareem Shaheen praised a 50-page report by The Syria Campaign attacking the UN's work in Syria as "damning." A subsequent Guardian' article cited the report as part of the inspiration for its own ''exclusive'' investigation slamming the UN's coordination with the Syrian government.

At a website created by The Syria Campaign to host the report, visitors are greeted by a UN logo drenched in blood.

The Syria Campaign has even taken credit for forcing former UN Resident Coordinator Yacoub El-Hillo out of his job in Damascus, a false claim it was later forced to retract. Among the opposition groups that promoted The Syria Campaign's anti-UN report was Ahrar Al-Sham, a jihadist rebel faction that has allied with Al Qaeda in a mission to establish an exclusively Islamic state across Syria.

A Westerner who operates a politically neutral humanitarian NGO in Damascus offered me a withering assessment of The Syria Campaign's attacks on the UN. Speaking on condition of anonymity because NGO workers like them are generally forbidden from speaking to the media, and often face repercussions if they do, the source accused The Syria Campaign of ''dividing and polarizing the humanitarian community'' along political lines while forcing humanitarian entities to ''make decisions based on potential media repercussions instead of focusing on actual needs on the ground.''

The NGO executive went on to accuse The Syria Campaign and its partners in the opposition of ''progressively identifying the humanitarian workers operating from Damascus with one party to the conflict,'' limiting their ability to negotiate access to rebel-held territory. ''As a humanitarian worker myself,'' they explained, ''I know that this puts me and my teams in great danger since it legitimizes warring factions treating you as an extension of one party in the conflict.

''The thousands of Syrians that signed up with the UN or humanitarian organizations are civilians,'' they continued. ''They not only joined to get a salary but in hopes of doing something good for other Syrians. This campaign [by The Syria Campaign] is humiliating all of them, labelling them as supporters of one side and making them lose hope in becoming agents of positive change in their own society.''

This September, days before the aid convoy attack prompted the UN to suspend much of its work inside Syria, The Syria Campaign spurred 73 aid organizations operating in rebel-held territory, including the White Helmets, to suspend their cooperation with the UN aid program. As the Guardian noted in its coverage, ''The decision to withdraw from the Whole of Syria programme, in which organisations share information to help the delivery of aid, means in practice the UN will lose sight of what is happening throughout the north of Syria and in opposition-held areas of the country, where the NGOs do most of their work.''

Despite The Syria Campaign's influence on the international media stage, details on the outfit's inner workings are difficult to come by. The Syria Campaign is registered in England as a private company called the Voices Project at an address shared by 91 other companies. Aside from Asfari, most of The Syria Campaign's donors are anonymous.

Looming over this opaque operation are questions about its connections to Avaaz, a global public relations outfit that played an instrumental role in generating support for a no-fly zone in Libya, and The Syria Campaign's founding by Purpose, another PR firm spun out of Avaaz. James Sadri bristled when I asked about the issue, dismissing it as a ''crank conspiracy'' ginned up by Russian state media and hardcore Assadist elements.

However, a careful look at the origins and operation of The Syria Campaign raises doubts about the outfit's image as an authentic voice for Syrian civilians, and should invite serious questions about the agenda of its partner organizations as well.

A creation of international PR firms

Best known for its work on liberal social issues with well-funded progressive clients like the ACLU and the police reform group, Campaign Zero, the New York- and London-based public relations firm Purpose promises to deliver creatively executed campaigns that produce either a ''behavior change,'' ''perception change,'' ''policy change'' or ''infrastructure change.'' As the Syrian conflict entered its third year, this company was ready to effect a regime change.

On Feb. 3, 2014, Anna Nolan, the senior strategist at Purpose, posted a job listing. According to Nolan's listing, her firm was seeking ''two interns to join the team at Purpose to help launch a new movement for Syria.''

At around the same time, another Purpose staffer named Ali Weiner posted a job listing seeking a paid intern for the PR firm's new Syrian Voices project. ''Together with Syrians in the diaspora and NGO partners,'' Weiner wrote, ''Purpose is building a movement that will amplify the voices of moderate, non-violent Syrians and mobilize people in the Middle East and around the world to call for specific changes in the political and humanitarian situation in the region.'' She explained that the staffer would report ''to a Strategist based primarily in London, but will work closely with the Purpose teams in both London and New York.''

On June 16, 2014, Purpose founder Jeremy Heimans drafted articles of association for The Syria Campaign's parent company. Called the Voices Project, Heimans registered the company at 3 Bull Lane, St. Ives Cambridgeshire, England. It was one of 91 private limited companies listed at the address. Sadri would not explain why The Syria Campaign had chosen this location or why it was registered as a private company.

Along with Heimans, Purpose Europe director Tim Dixon was appointed to The Syria Campaign's board of directors. So was John Jackson, a Purpose strategist who previously co-directed the Burma Campaign U.K. that lobbied the EU for sanctions against that country's ruling regime. (Jackson claimed credit for The Syria Campaign's successful push to remove Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad's re-election campaign ads from Facebook.) Anna Nolan became The Syria Campaign's project director, even as she remained listed as the strategy director at Purpose.

''Purpose is not involved in what we do,'' The Syria Campaign's Sadri told me. When pressed about the presence of several Purpose strategists on The Syria Campaign's board of directors and staff, Sadri insisted, ''We're not part of Purpose. There's no financial relationship and we're independent.''

Sadri dismissed allegations about The Syria Campaign's origins in Avaaz. ''We have no connection to Avaaz,'' he stated, blaming conspiratorial ''Russia Today stuff'' for linking the two public relations groups.

However, Purpose's original job listing for its Syrian Voices project boasted that ''Purpose grew out of some of the most impactful new models for social change'' including ''the now 30 million strong action network avaaz.org.'' In fact, The Syria Campaign's founder, Purpose co-founder Jeremy Heimans, was also one of the original founders of Avaaz. As he told Forbes, ''I co-founded Avaaz and [the Australian activist group] Get Up, which inspired the creation of Purpose.''

New and improved no-fly zone

The Syria Campaign's defensiveness about ties to Avaaz is understandable.

Back in 2011, Avaaz introduced a public campaign for a no-fly zone in Libya and delivered a petition with 1,202,940 signatures to the UN supporting Western intervention. John Hilary, the executive director of War On Want, the U.K.'s leading anti-poverty and anti-war charity, warned at the time, "Little do most of these generally well-meaning activists know, they are strengthening the hands of those western governments desperate to reassert their interests in north Africa'... Clearly a no-fly zone makes foreign intervention sound rather humanitarian'--putting the emphasis on stopping bombing, even though it could well lead to an escalation of violence.''

John Hilary's dire warning was fulfilled after the NATO-enforced no-fly zone prompted the ouster of former President Moamar Qaddafi. Months later, Qaddafi was sexually assaulted and beaten to death in the road by a mob of fanatics. The Islamic State and an assortment of militias filled the void left in the Jamahiriya government's wake. The political catastrophe should have been serious enough to call future interventions of this nature into question. Yet Libya's legacy failed to deter Avaaz from introducing a new campaign for another no-fly zone; this time in Syria.

''To some a no-fly zone could conjure up images of George W. Bush's foreign policy and illegal Western interventions. This is a different thing,'' Avaaz insisted in a communique defending its support for a new no-fly zone in Syria. Sadri portrayed The Syria Campaign's support for a no-fly zone as the product of a ''deep listening process'' involving the polling of Syrian civilians in rebel-held territories and refugees outside the country. He claimed his outfit was a ''solidarity organization,'' not a public relations firm, and was adamant that if and when a no-fly zone is imposed over Syrian skies, it would be different than those seen in past conflicts.

''There also seems to be a critique of a no-fly zone which is slapping on templates from other conflicts and saying this is what will happen in Syria,'' Sadri commented. He added, ''I'm just trying to encourage us away from a simplistic debate. There's a kneejerk reaction to Syria to say, 'It's Iraq or it's Libya,' but it's not. It's an entirely different conflict.''

Funding a "credible transition"

For the petroleum mogul who provided the funding that launched the Syria Project, the means of military intervention justified an end in which he could return to the country of his birth and participate in its economic life on his own terms.

Though The Syria Campaign claims to ''refuse funding from any party to the conflict in Syria,'' it was founded and is sustained with generous financial assistance from one of the most influential exile figures of the opposition, Ayman Asfari, the U.K.-based CEO of the British oil and gas supply company Petrofac Limited. Asfari is worth $1.2 billion and owns about one-fifth of the shares of his company, which boasts 18,000 employees and close to $7 billion in annual revenues.

Through his Asfari Foundation, he has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to The Syria Campaign and has secured a seat for his wife, Sawsan, on its board of directors. He has also been a top financial and political supporter of the Syrian National Coalition, the largest government-in-exile group set up after the Syrian revolt began. The group is dead-set on removing Assad and replacing him with one of its own. Asfari's support for opposition forces was so pronounced the Syrian government filed a warrant for his arrest, accusing him of supporting ''terrorism.''

In London, Asfari has been a major donor to former British Prime Minister David Cameron and his Conservative Party. This May, Cameron keynoted a fundraiser for the Hands Up for Syria Appeal, a charity heavily supported by Asfari that sponsors education for Syrian children living in refugee camps. The Prime Minister might have seemed like an unusual choice for the event given his staunch resistance to accepting unaccompanied Syrian children who have fled to Europe. However, Asfari has generally supported Cameron's exclusionary policy.

Grilled about his position during an episode of BBC's Hardtalk, Asfari explained, ''I do not want the country to be emptied. I still have a dream that those guys [refugees] will be able to go back to their homes and they will be able to play a constructive role in putting Syria back together.''

In Washington, Asfari is regarded as an important liaison to the Syrian opposition. He has visited the White House eight times since 2014, meeting with officials like Philip Gordon, the former Middle East coordinator who was an early advocate for arming the insurgency in Syria. Since leaving the administration, however, Gordon has expressed regret over having embraced a policy of regime change. In a lengthy September 2015 editorial for Politico, Gordon slammed the Obama administration's pursuit of regime change, writing, ''There is now virtually no chance that an opposition military 'victory' will lead to stable or peaceful governance in Syria in the foreseeable future and near certainty that pursuing one will only lead to many more years of vicious civil war.''

Asfari publicly chastised Gordon days later on Hardtalk. ''I have written to [Gordon] an email after I saw that article in Politico and I told him I respectfully disagree,'' Asfari remarked. ''I think the idea that we are going to have a transition in Syria with Assad in it for an indefinite period is fanciful. Because at the end of the day, what the people want is a credible transition.''

For Asfari, a ''credible'' post-war transition would require much more than refugee repatriation and the integration of opposition forces into the army: ''Will you get the Syrian diaspora, including people like myself, to go back and invest in the country?'' he asked on Hardtalk. '''...If we do not achieve any of these objectives, what's the point of having a free Syria?''

The Independent has described Asfari as one among of a pantheon of "super rich" exiles poised to rebuild a post-Assad Syria '-- and to reap handsome contracts in the process. To reach his goal of returning to Syria in triumph after the downfall of Assad's government, Asfari not only provided the seed money for The Syria Campaign, he has helped sustain the group with hefty donations.

Just this year, the Asfari Foundation donated $180,000 to the outfit, according to The Syria Campaign's media lead Laila Kiki. Asfari is not The Syria Campaign's only donor, however. According to Kiki, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund also contributed $120,000 to the outfit's $800,000 budget this year. ''The rest of the funds come from donors who wish to remain anonymous,'' she explained.

Shaping the message

Among The Syria Campaign's main priorities, for which it has apparently budgeted a substantial amount of resources, is moving Western media in a more interventionist direction.

When The Syria Campaign placed an ad on its website seeking a senior press officer upon its launch in 2014, it emphasized its need for ''someone who can land pieces in the U.S., U.K. and European [media] markets in the same week.'' The company's ideal candidate would be able to ''maintain strong relationships with print, broadcast, online journalists, editors in order to encourage them to see TSC as a leading voice on Syria.'' Prioritizing PR experience over political familiarity, The Syria Campaign reassured applicants, ''You don't need to be an expert on Syria or speak Arabic.'' After all, the person would be working in close coordination with an unnamed ''Syrian communications officer who will support on story gathering and relationships inside Syria.''

Sadri acknowledged that The Syria Campaign has been involved in shopping editorials to major publications. ''There have been op-eds in the past that we've helped get published, written by people on the ground. There's a lot of op-eds going out from people inside Syria,'' he told me. But he would not say which ones, who the authors were, or if his company played any role in their authorship.

One recent incident highlighted The Syria Campaign's skillful handling of press relationships from Aleppo to media markets across the West. It was August 17, and a Syrian or Russian warplane had just hit an apartment building in rebel-held eastern Aleppo. Sophie McNeill, a Middle East correspondent for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, received a photo from the Syrian American Medical Society, which maintains a WhatsApp group networking doctors inside rebel territory with international media.

The photo showed a five-year-old boy, Omran Daqneesh, who had been extracted from the building by members of the White Helmets and hoisted into an ambulance, where he was filmed by members of the Aleppo Media Center. The chilling image depicts a dazed little boy, seated upright and staring at nothing, his pudgy cheeks caked in ash and blood. ''Video then emerged of Omran as he sat blinking in the back of that ambulance,'' McNeill wrote without explaining who provided her with the video. She immediately posted the footage on Twitter.

''Watch this video from Aleppo tonight. And watch it again. And remind yourself that with #Syria #wecantsaywedidntknow,'' McNeill declared. Her post was retweeted over 17,000 times and the hashtag she originated, which implied international inaction against the Syrian government made such horrors possible, became a viral sensation as well. (McNeill did not respond to questions sent to her publicly listed email.)

Hours later, the image of Omran appeared on the front page of dozens of international newspapers, from the New York Times to the Wall Street Journal to the Times of London. CNN's Kate Bolduan, who had suggested during Israel's bombardment of the Gaza Strip in 2014 that civilian casualties were, in fact, human shields, broke down in tears during an extended segment detailing the rescue of Omran.

Abu Sulaiman Al-Muhajir, the Australian citizen serving as a top leader and spokesman for Al Qaeda's Syrian offshoot, Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham, took a special interest in the boy. "I cannot get conditioned to seeing injured/murdered children," Al-Muhajir wrote on Facebook. "Their innocent faces should serve as a reminder of our responsibility."

Seizing on the opportunity, The Syria Campaign gathered quotes from the photographer who captured the iconic image, Mahmoud Raslan, and furnished them to an array of media organizations. While many outlets published Raslan's statements, Public Radio International was among the few that noted The Syria Campaign's role in serving them up, referring to the outfit as ''a pro-opposition advocacy group with a network of contacts in Syria.''

On August 20, McNeill took to Facebook with a call to action: ''Were you horrified by the footage of little Omran?'' she asked her readers. ''Can't stop thinking about him? Well don't just retweet, be outraged for 24 hours and move on. Hear what two great humanitarians for Syria, Zaher Sahloul & James Sadri, want you to do now.''

Sadri happened to be the director of The Syria Campaign and Sahloul was the Syrian American Medical Society director who partnered with The Syria Campaign. In the article McNeill wrote about Omran's photo, which was linked in her Facebook post, both Sahloul and Sadri urged Westerners to join their call for a no-fly zone'-- a policy McNeill tacitly endorsed. (Sahloul was recently promoted by the neoconservative columnist Eli Lake for accusing Obama of having "allowed a genocide in Syria." This September, Sahloul joined up with the Jewish United Federation of Chicago, a leading opponent of Palestine solidarity organizing, to promote his efforts.)

As the outrage inspired by the image of Omran spread, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof (a friend and publisher of Syria Campaign board member Lina Sergie Attar) called for ''fir[ing] missiles from outside Syria to crater [Syrian] military runways to make them unusable.'' Meanwhile, on MSNBC's Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough waved around the photo of Omran and indignantly declared, "The world will look back. Save your hand-wringing'...you can still do something right now. But nothing's been done.''

As breathless editorials and cable news tirades denounced the Obama administration's supposed ''inaction,'' public pressure for a larger-scale Western military campaign was approaching an unprecedented level.

Damage control for opposition extremists

The day after Omran made headlines, the left-wing British news site the Canary publicized another photograph that exposed a grim reality behind the iconic image.

Culled from the Facebook page of Mahmoud Raslan, the activist from the American-operated Aleppo Media Center who took the initial video of Omran, it showed Raslan posing for a triumphant selfie with a group of rebel fighters. The armed men hailed from the Nour Al-Din Al-Zenki faction. At least two of the commanders who appeared in the photo with Raslan had recently beheaded a boy they captured, referring to him in video footage as ''child'' while they taunted and abused him. The boy has been reported to be a 12-year-old named Abdullah Issa and may have been a member of the Liwa Al-Quds pro-government Palestinian militia.

This was not the only time Raslan had appeared with Al-Zenki fighters or expressed his sympathy. On August 2, he posted a selfie to Facebook depicting himself surrounded by mostly adolescent Al-Zenki fighters dressed in battle fatigues. ''With the suicide fighters, from the land of battles and butchery, from Aleppo of the martyrs, we bring you tidings of impending joy, with God's permission,'' Raslan wrote. He sported a headband matching those worn by the ''suicide fighters.''

Despite its unsavory tendencies and extremist ideological leanings, Al-Zenki was until 2015 a recipient of extensive American funding, with at least 1000 of its fighters on the CIA payroll. Charles Lister, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute who has said his research on the Syrian opposition was ''100% funded by Western govts,'' has branded Al-Zenki as ''moderate opposition fighters.''

This August, after the video of Al-Zenki members beheading the adolescent boy appeared online, Sam Heller, a fellow for the Washington-based Century Foundation, argued for restoring the rebel group's CIA funding. Describing Al-Zenki as ''a natural, if unpalatable, partner,'' Heller contended that ''if Washington insists on keeping its hands perfectly clean, there's probably no Syrian faction'--in the opposition, or on any side of the war'--that merits support.''

This September 24, Al-Zenki formally joined forces with the jihadist Army of Conquest led by Al Qaeda-established jihadist group, Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham. For its part, The Syria Campaign coordinated the release of a statement with Raslan explaining away his obvious affinity with Al-Zenki. Sophie McNeill, the Australian Broadcasting Corp. reporter who was among the first to publish the famous Omran photo, dutifully published Raslan's statement on Twitter, acknowledging The Syria Campaign as its source.

Curiously describing the beheading victim as a 19-year-old and not the ''child'' his beheaders claimed he was, Raslan pleaded ignorance about the Al-Zenki fighters' backgrounds: ''It was a busy day with lots of different people and groups on the streets. As a war photographer I take lots of photos with civilians and fighters.''

Mahmoud Raslan may not have been the most effective local partner, but The Syria Campaign could still count on the White Helmets.

In Part II: How the U.S.-funded White Helmets rescue civilians from Syrian and Russian bombs while lobbying for the U.S. military to step up its own bombing campaign.

Max Blumenthal is a senior editor of the Grayzone Project at AlterNet, and the award-winning author of Goliath and Republican Gomorrah. His most recent book is The 51 Day War: Ruin and Resistance in Gaza. Follow him on Twitter at @MaxBlumenthal.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 01:37

Short of troops to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan a decade ago, the California National Guard enticed thousands of soldiers with bonuses of $15,000 or more to reenlist and go to war.

Now the Pentagon is demanding the money back.

Nearly 10,000 soldiers, many of whom served multiple combat tours, have been ordered to repay large enlistment bonuses '-- and slapped with interest charges, wage garnishments and tax liens if they refuse '-- after audits revealed widespread overpayments by the California Guard at the height of the wars last decade.

Investigations have determined that lack of oversight allowed for widespread fraud and mismanagement by California Guard officials under pressure to meet enlistment targets.

But soldiers say the military is reneging on 10-year-old agreements and imposing severe financial hardship on veterans whose only mistake was to accept bonuses offered when the Pentagon needed to fill the ranks.

''These bonuses were used to keep people in,'' said Christopher Van Meter, a 42-year-old former Army captain and Iraq veteran from Manteca, Calif., who says he refinanced his home mortgage to repay $25,000 in reenlistment bonuses and $21,000 in student loan repayments that the Army says he should not have received. ''People like me just got screwed.''

In Iraq, Van Meter was thrown from an armored vehicle turret '-- and later awarded a Purple Heart for his combat injuries '-- after the vehicle detonated a buried roadside bomb.

Susan Haley, a Los Angeles native and former Army master sergeant who deployed to Afghanistan in 2008, said she sends the Pentagon $650 a month '-- a quarter of her family's income '-- to pay down $20,500 in bonuses that the Guard says were given to her improperly.

''I feel totally betrayed,'' said Haley, 47, who served 26 years in the Army along with her husband and oldest son, a medic who lost a leg in combat in Afghanistan.

Haley, who now lives in Kempner, Texas, worries they may have to sell their house to repay the bonuses. ''They'll get their money, but I want those years back,'' she said, referring to her six-year reenlistment.

The problem offers a dark perspective on the Pentagon's use of hefty cash incentives to fill its all-volunteer force during the longest era of warfare in the nation's history.

Even Guard officials concede that taking back the money from military veterans is distasteful.

''At the end of the day, the soldiers ended up paying the largest price,'' said Maj. Gen. Matthew Beevers, deputy commander of the California Guard. ''We'd be more than happy to absolve these people of their debts. We just can't do it. We'd be breaking the law.''

Facing enlistment shortfalls and two major wars with no end in sight, the Pentagon began offering the most generous incentives in its history to retain soldiers in the mid-2000s.

It also began paying the money up front, like the signing bonuses that some businesses pay in the civilian sector.

''It was a real sea change in how business was done,'' said Col. Michael S. Piazzoni, a California Guard official in Sacramento who oversaw the audits. ''The system paid everybody up front, and then we spent the next five years figuring out if they were eligible.''

The bonuses were supposed to be limited to soldiers in high-demand assignments like intelligence and civil affairs or to noncommissioned officers badly needed in units due to deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan.

The National Guard Bureau, the Pentagon agency that oversees state Guard organizations, has acknowledged that bonus overpayments occurred in every state at the height of the two wars.

But the money was handed out far more liberally in the California Guard, which has about 17,000 soldiers and is one of the largest state Guard organizations.

In 2010, after reports surfaced of improper payments, a federal investigation found that thousands of bonuses and student loan payments were given to California Guard soldiers who did not qualify for them, or were approved despite paperwork errors.

Army Master Sgt. Toni Jaffe, the California Guard's incentive manager, pleaded guilty in 2011 to filing false claims of $15.2 million and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison. Three officers also pleaded guilty to fraud and were put on probation after paying restitution.

Instead of forgiving the improper bonuses, the California Guard assigned 42 auditors to comb through paperwork for bonuses and other incentive payments given to 14,000 soldiers, a process that was finally completed last month.

Roughly 9,700 current and retired soldiers have been told by the California Guard to repay some or all of their bonuses and the recoupment effort has recovered more than $22 million so far.

Because of protests, appeals and refusal by some to comply, the recovery effort is likely to continue for years.

In interviews, current and former California Guard members described being ordered to attend mass meetings in 2006 and 2007 in California where officials signed up soldiers in assembly-line fashion after outlining the generous terms available for six-year reenlistments.

Robert Richmond, an Army sergeant first class then living in Huntington Beach, said he reenlisted after being told he qualified for a $15,000 bonus as a special forces soldier.

The money gave him ''breathing room,'' said Richmond, who had gone through a divorce after a deployment to Afghanistan in 2002 and 2003.

In 2007, his special forces company was sent to the Iraqi town of Hillah, 60 miles south of Baghdad in an area known as the ''Triangle of Death'' because of the intense fighting.

Richmond conducted hundreds of missions against insurgents over the next year. In one, a roadside bomb exploded by his vehicle, knocking him out and leaving him with permanent back and brain injuries.

He was stunned to receive a letter from California Guard headquarters in 2014 telling him to repay the $15,000 and warning he faced ''debt collection action'' if he failed to comply.

Richmond should not have received the money, they argued, because he already had served 20 years in the Army in 2006, making him ineligible.

Richmond, 48, has refused to repay the bonus. He says he only had served 15 years when he reenlisted, due to several breaks in his Army service.

He has filed appeal after appeal, even after receiving a collection letter from the Treasury Department in March warning that his ''unpaid delinquent debt'' had risen to $19,694.62 including interest and penalties.

After quitting the California Guard so the money wouldn't be taken from his paycheck, he moved to Nebraska to work as a railroad conductor, but was laid off.

He then moved to Texas to work for a construction company, leaving his wife and children in Nebraska. With $15,000 debt on his credit report, he has been unable to qualify for a home loan.

''I signed a contract that I literally risked my life to fulfill,'' Richmond said bitterly. ''We want somebody in the government, anybody, to say this is wrong and we'll stop going after this money.''

Though they cannot waive the debts, California Guard officials say they are helping soldiers and veterans file appeals with the National Guard Bureau and the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, which can wipe out the debts.

But soldiers say it is a long, frustrating process, with no guarantee of success.

Robert D'Andrea, a retired Army major and Iraq veteran, was told to return a $20,000 bonus he received in 2008 because auditors could not find a copy of the contract he says he signed.

Now D'Andrea, a financial crimes investigator with the Santa Monica Police Department, says he is close to exhausting all his appeals.

''Everything takes months of work, and there is no way to get your day in court,'' he said. ''Some benefit of the doubt has to be given to the soldier.''

Bryan Strother, a sergeant first class from Oroville north of Sacramento, spent four years fighting Guard claims that he owed $25,010.32 for mistaken bonuses and student loans.

Guard officials told Strother he had voided his enlistment contract by failing to remain a radio operator, his assigned job, during and after a 2007-08 deployment to Iraq.

Strother filed a class-action lawsuit in February in federal district court in Sacramento on behalf of all soldiers who got bonuses, claiming the California Guard ''conned'' them into reenlisting.

The suit asked the court to order the recovered money to be returned to the soldiers and to issue an injunction against the government barring further collection.

In August, Strother received a letter from the Pentagon waiving repayment of his bonus.

''We believe he acted in good faith in accepting the $15,000,'' a claims adjudicator from the Pentagon's Defense Legal Services Agency wrote in the letter. He still owed $5,000 in student loan repayments, it said.

Within weeks, lawyers for U.S. Atty. Phillip A. Talbert in Sacramento petitioned the court to dismiss Strother's lawsuit, arguing that it was moot since most of his debt had been waived. A federal judge is supposed to rule on the government's motion by January.

''It's a legal foot-dragging process to wear people out and make people go away,'' said Strother. ''It's overwhelming for most soldiers.''

Indeed, some have just given up, repaying the money even before exhausting their appeals.

''It was tearing me up, the stress, the headaches,'' said Van Meter, the former Army captain from Manteca who paid off his $46,000 debt by refinancing his mortgage. ''I couldn't take it anymore. The amount of stress it put us through financially and emotionally was something we wanted to move past.''

david.cloud@latimes.com

Twitter: @davidcloudLAT

ALSO

Inside the underground hide-out of an Islamic State leader

An outsider takes charge of the Border Patrol '-- and yes, he'll wear the green uniform

Facing Iraq government-led Mosul offensive, Islamic State extremists strike back

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:26

With tensions between Russia and the United States at their highest since the Cold War, there have been alarming signs coming out of Moscow that suggest the country is ready for war.

Almost no one believes the Kremlin is actually preparing for a military conflict with the United States. Most analysts instead see it as a show, intended to boost support at home and to deter Western countries from intervening militarily in Syria.

There are some unsettling things Russia has done, however, to give the impression that war is looming:

Beware the 'Nuclear Dimensions'As the confrontation between the United and Russia has worsened over Syria, and amid speculation Washington might launch airstrikes against Syrian government forces, Russian state-controlled media has gone into high gear, asking Russians whether they are prepared for nuclear war.

''If that should one day happen, each of you must know where the nearest bomb shelter is,'' a report on the state-controlled network, NTV, noted, before taking viewers on a tour of a nuclear bunker in Moscow.

Novosibirsk Region Governor Vladimir Gorodetsky ,center, attends shooting exercises at Shilovsky range, Oct. 14, 2016.State outlets, already solidly anti-American in their coverage, have unleashed themselves further, indulging in bitter denunciations of America duplicity, bombastic promises of merciless defenses and freely bandying the nuclear card. Russia's main current affairs show, hosted by a man known by critics as the country's ''propagandist-in-chief,'' warned American "impudence" could take on ''nuclear dimensions,'' then spending 40 minutes taking viewers through a panoply of potential nuclear options Russia possesses if the United States were to intervene too strongly in Syria. The host, Evgeny Kiselyov, described how three Russian missile frigates this week had sailed toward Syria to head off potential U.S. airstrikes against Syrian military targets.

"Incidentally," Kiselyov told his audience, the ships missiles "also [come] in a nuclear version. Which version is aboard our missile frigates right now isn't known.''

Check Your Gas MasksThis month Russia held a large-scale civil defense drill across the country, meant to prepare people for disasters, among them nuclear catastrophe. The drill, which Russian authorities claimed affected 40 million people, and particularly the way it was presented on state television, resembled Soviet-era exercises, with scenes of schoolchildren flooding out in evacuations and being taught to hurriedly pull on gas masks.

Who's in Charge Here?Russia's defense ministry has announced how the country would function in time of war, clarifying which government bodies would take command. The answer was largely it would, taking control of governor's offices, local administrations and the police. The military simulated that scenario during a huge exercise in southern Russia.

The Sound of Saber-RattlingThe maneuvers took on harder forms as well. This week, Russia deployed nuclear-capable missiles to Kaliningrad, its northern European enclave between Poland and Lithuania that put the weapons within striking distance of Western capitals. Moscow has threatened before to deploy the Iskander-M missiles to Kaliningrad, in response, it says, to the establishment of the U.S. anti-missile shield being erected in Eastern Europe. But this week's deployment came sooner than expected, with analysts suggesting that indicated the Kremlin wanted to play it as part of the broader saber-rattling display in the confrontation around Syria.

From Land or SeaA man looks at a Russian Topol intercontinental ballistic missile launcher at the permanent exhibition of military equipment and vehicles at Patriot Park in Kubinka, outside Moscow, Sept. 8, 2016.Russia also conducted a series of intercontinental ballistic missile tests this week, launching three missiles in a single day. Two of the nuclear-capable missiles were launched from submarines off Russia's Pacific coast, the third was fired from an inland launch pad, RIA Novosti reported.

What a Catastrophe Might Look LikeStill, despite the threats, the display has sometimes shown its seams. In the NTV report warning people to identify their nearest fallout shelter, the presenter interviewed a retired colonel "showing several possible scenarios of the catastrophe" on a map.

The ''map'' turned out to be a U.S. video game based on nuclear conflict.

Every Neighborhood Needs a Good Bomb ShelterMost Russians don't take the war talk seriously, laughing off the idea on the street. Most take a more realistic view of whether there's actually need to find a bomb-shelter. A photo being shared on social media showed an apartment block in suburban Moscow where pranksters or enterprising fraudsters had posted a flier asking residents to donate cash to build a neighborhood bomb shelter.

''Hurry,'' the flier said. ''Places are limited.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 20:50

Source: Pravda.Ru archive

The situation in the world is heating up not only in the Middle East. The "fuse" of Ukraine, the US and Europe has started to smolder. How should Russia behave in this situation? Pravda.Ru editor-in-chief Inna Novikova talked about it in an interview with Russian political scientist, Director General of the Center for Political Information, Alexei Mukhin.

"Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko does not surprise anyone now with his statements. On the anniversary of the Babyn Yar tragedy, he said that anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union was an element of the state-run policy, and Russia subsequently inherited the practice. Allegedly, instead of the physical destruction of people, Russia aims to eliminate the Jewish identity. How can one understand this?"

"One does not have to understand Ukrainian President Poroshenko. He sees the world in different colours. He has created a little world of comfort for himself, from which he cannot escape, not even under medical supervision.

"When a person is paranoid, he rebuilds obvious facts into something monstrous and then tries to share his vision with the rest of the world. I would not pay much attention to what Mr. Poroshenko says. The "holiday of disobedience" in Ukraine is gradually coming to an end and, apparently, one will have to arrange some tribunal there to evaluate the things that the sitting Ukrainian authorities have done. Poroshenko's statements mean that Ukraine is stranded and does not make any independent decisions.

"This is the Ukraine that the USA needs, because the Americans use the lost country to create tensions in the relations between Russia and Europe. Ukraine plays the role of the new Berlin Wall, and this wall will stand as long as Washington supports the Kiev regime.

"The Ukrainian Prime Minister and his team, the leadership of the Verkhovna Rada and the rest - they all build the economic, political and social system of Ukraine to make the country as much subordinated as possible to international financial institutions and specific foreign countries. The USA is the first on the list, but America is currently preoccupied with its election problems.

"Meanwhile, large Western companies buy chunks of Ukraine one after another. In Ukraine, the West follows the worse-the-better principle. The worse the situation in Ukraine gets, the cheaper the country's assets will become.

"It is obvious that it was not beneficial at all for either Russia or the Donetsk militia to shoot down the Malaysian Boeing. If they had done so, they would have put themselves in a terrible situation, which their ill-wishers would have taken advantage of. This is what eventually happened in the end.

"Interestingly, everyone became very much concerned about the consequences of the disaster with the airplane. No one tries to answer the question why the passenger airplane was flying above the combat zone. The whole story looks very much like a special operation from 1983, when a Korean Boeing was downed to discredit the USSR. Russia insists the investigation should be continued, with Russia's participation.

"The Americans will continue putting pressure on Europe. NATO, as a matter of fact, is a commercial project that gives the US an opportunity to sell weapons, introduce its instructors and so on. NATO is a global marketing project. When Obama asks NATO partners to increase funding, it means that the USA wants to increase its share of profit.

"NATO, in tandem with EU institutions, exercise control over Europe in military and political fields. Brussels takes efforts to contain the development of national economies. This could be done for the sake of the Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership, the text of which is kept secret, and no one knows what kind of a cat there is in the bag."

"Why know? What is good for America is good for the rest of the world - isn't that the point?"

"Absolutely. One should listen to what the Americans say very attentively. The point is to hear, but the effect is frightening. The USA imposed sanctions on Russia and forced Europe to join them. However, Russia was not the first victim. At first, the USA punished French banks that were working with Iran at the time when the country was staying under the burden of US sanctions. The Americans have recently ordered Deutsche Bank to pay the fine of $12 billion. Other countries, such as Ukraine, look at the legal nihilism of the USA and say "we will not pay anything either." As a result, Ukraine does not pay $3 billion of its debt to Russia.

"Changes in the institutional system lead to general chaos, and chaos is impossible to control. In the United States, there was a popular theory of "controlled chaos" that supposedly could be used to control different processes. In practice, the "controlled chaos" in Iraq, Libya and Syria has led to the global collapse of the political systems of these countries and threw them into the pot of bloody civil wars. The crisis in Ukraine was created artificially. The illegal team that came to power in Ukraine abolished the powers of ousted President Viktor Yanukovych only a year later. In other words, Viktor Yanukovych had all of his presidential powers for a whole year after the coup, even though he was not staying in Ukraine. Who was ruling the country then?

"Unfortunately, many countries of the world took the US model of world order for granted: the USA is the strongest, so let it rule the world. However, Russia stood up against it. Putin said in his Munich speech in 2007 that rules can work only when others follow them."

Interviewed by Inna Novikova

Pravda.Ru

Read article on the Russian version of Pravda.Ru

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:02

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, You have been nominated for the FX analyst of the year in 2016 again. True, your calls on the Euro and the Swiss peg were amazing. But what has fascinated me even more is you also forecast that the Schengen Agreement would come to an end before the refugee crisis. Can you elaborate on how these forecasts are even possible for you obviously do what no one else has ever been able to accomplish?

Thank you for a eye-opening blog.

FJ

ANSWER: Everything is connected. Nothing takes place in some isolated vacuum. Hopefully, people will open their eyes and see what I see; when they do, it will change how the world is managed. Just the other day, a die-hard Democrat tried to argue that Trump would start World War III and that Hillary has more experience. I said her experience was limited to working at the State Department, hiding her own emails, and setting up a Canadian entity that sold foreign influence to the highest bidder who then deposited the money in her ''charity''. Come on. What experience? Then I mentioned how people made the very same argument about Ronald Reagan, saying that he too was a tough ''hawk'' who would also start World War III. He continued to bring down the Berlin Wall.

When we wake up and realize that the system cannot be altered by one person, then perhaps we will start to investigate the truth. As far as the EU is concerned, it is a total disaster. Brussels is fighting Poland, Hungary has fallen further into an abyss, and passports are being checked again, even between Denmark and Sweden, because now everyone is afraid after Germany allowed rapists and terrorists in and tried to cover it up. In short, the EU is functionally moving into a supernova. Brussels remains in a state of denial and tries to force the EU upon everyone while denying any democratic process in order to save the jobs of the Eurocrats.

Everything is connected. The Schengen Agreement is just one domino. The Schengen Agreement was wearing down because of economic differences. Let's be honest here. The ONLY country to have benefited from the creation of the euro was Germany. Why? It eliminated the FX risk for German manufacturers. Thus, Germany was able to expand its trade within Europe. The rest of Europe had to convert their debts to the euro and they doubled. The failed structure of the euro placed tremendous pressure upon the entire world economy. The collapse of the Schengen Agreement was inevitable and not exclusively caused by the refugee crisis.

So as Mark Twain said, ''The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.'' Keep in mind the euro still has a few years left. However, its days are clearly numbered, as we know it today.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:59

The UK government's plans to check whether people are old enough to watch pornography might include creating a database of everyone's viewing habits.

The Government has recently been looking to introduce new checks to ensure that adult content can only be viewed by those over 18. To do that, it will introduce age verification schemes, and sites that don't implement them will be rendered inaccessible from within the UK.

But the mechanism involved in doing so could create an entire database of the UK's porn viewing habits, according to the Open Rights Group. Doing so will create a vulnerable set of information that could expose anyone, according to the group.

Those that are likely to be in charge of the process say that privacy should be at its heart. But the way that the systems are set up might not allow people to keep their data secure.

That is largely because data protection law usually requires that people give up their data willingly and with their express consent, usually by signing up to terms and conditions. But in this case, people's data '' their porn viewing habits and their age '' would be being taken without asking, meaning that it would be difficult to keep that sensitive information secure.

One particular way of checking appears to rely on a business standard that was written for making sure people can't buy knives when they're under age. But that also requires that each person within the system is given a unique identifier '' which would essentially become a personal ID number for people's viewing habits.

The online age checking piece has now been removed from the website.

''This draft is no longer available to be viewed,'' a message written on the page reads. ''The comments that have been made on it have been collected, and will be considered by the committee responsible for the draft.''

The Open Rights Group has called on the government to ensure that the information being used in the age verification process is kept safe and secure. It should also make sure that people's privacy is ''properly spelled out'' and that the system should ''be designed to minimise the impacts on people''.

But even if the system is secure, there's no evidence that an age verification system would actually prevent ''an even slightly determined teenager from accessing pornography, nor reduce demand for it among young people'', the Open Rights Group wrote.

''The Government appears to be looking for an easy fix to a complex social problem. The Internet has given young people unprecedented access to adult content but it's education rather than tech solutions that are most likely to address problems arising from this. Serious questions about the efficacy and therefore proportionality of this measure remain.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 02:05

From:hrod17@clintonemail.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2014-08-17 17:50 Subject: Here's what I mentionedNote: Sources include Western intelligence, US intelligence and sources in the region. 1. With all of its tragic aspects, the advance of ISIL through Iraq gives the U.S. Government an opportunity to change the way it deals with the chaotic security situation in North Africa and the Middle East. The most important factor in this matter is to make use of intelligence resources and Special Operations troops in an aggressive manner, while avoiding the old school solution, which calls for more traditional military operations. In Iraq it is important that we engage ISIL using the resources of the Peshmerga fighters of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG), and what, if any, reliable units exist in the Iraqi Army. The Peshmerga commanders are aggressive hard fighting troops, who have long standing relationships with CIA officers and Special Forces operators. However, they will need the continued commitment of U.S. personnel to work with them as advisors and strategic planners, the new generation of Peshmerga commanders being largely untested in traditional combat. That said, with this U.S. aid the Kurdish troops can inflict a real defeat on ISIL. 2. It is important that once we engage ISIL, as we have now done in a limited manner, we and our allies should carry on until they are driven back suffering a tangible defeat. Anything short of this will be seen by other fighters in the region, Libya, Lebanon, and even Jordan, as an American defeat. However, if we provide advisors and planners, as well as increased close air support for the Peshmerga, these soldiers can defeat ISIL. They will give the new Iraqi Government a chance to organize itself, and restructure the Sunni resistance in Syria, moving the center of power toward moderate forces like the Free Syrian Army (FSA). In addition to air support, the Peshmerga also need artillery and armored vehicles to deal with the tanks and other heavy equipment captured from the Iraqi army by ISIL. 3. In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone. 4. Armed with proper equipment, and working with U.S. advisors, the Peshmerga can attack the ISIL with a coordinated assault supported from the air. This effort will come as a surprise to the ISIL, whose leaders believe we will always stop with targeted bombing, and weaken them both in Iraq and inside of Syria. At the same time we should return to plans to provide the FSA, or some group of moderate forces, with equipment that will allow them to deal with a weakened ISIL, and stepped up operations against the Syrian regime. This entire effort should be done with a low profile, avoiding the massive traditional military operations that are at best temporary solutions. While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region. This effort will be enhanced by the stepped up commitment in the KRG. The Qataris and Saudis will be put in a position of balancing policy between their ongoing competition to dominate the Sunni world and the consequences of serious U.S. pressure. By the same token, the threat of similar, realistic U.S. operations will serve to assist moderate forces in Libya, Lebanon, and even Jordan, where insurgents are increasingly fascinated by the ISIL success in Iraq. 6. In the end the situation in Iraq is merely the latest and most dangerous example of the regional restructuring that is taking place across North Africa, all the way to the Turkish border. These developments are important to the U.S. for reasons that often differ from country to country: energy and moral commitment to Iraq, energy issues in Libya, and strategic commitments in Jordan. At the same time, as Turkey moves toward a new, more serious Islamic reality, it will be important for them to realize that we are willing to take serious actions, which can be sustained to protect our national interests. This course of action offers the potential for success, as opposed to large scale, traditional military campaigns, that are too expensive and awkward to maintain over time. 7. (Note: A source in Tripoli stated in confidence that when the U.S. Embassy was evacuated, the presence of two U.S. Navy jet fighters over the city brought all fighting to a halt for several hours, as Islamist forces were not certain that these aircraft would not also provide close ground support for moderate government forces.) 8. If we do not take the changes needed to make our security policy in the region more realistic, there is a real danger of ISIL veterans moving on to other countries to facilitate operations by Islamist forces. This is already happening in Libya and Egypt, where fighters are returning from Syria to work with local forces. ISIL is only the latest and most violent example of this process. If we don't act to defeat them in Iraq something even more violent and dangerous will develop. Successful military operations against these very irregular but determined forces can only be accomplished by making proper use of clandestine/special operations resources, in coordination with airpower, and established local allies. There is, unfortunately, a narrow window of opportunity on this issue, as we need to act before an ISIL state becomes better organized and reaches into Lebanon and Jordan. 9. (Note: It is important to keep in mind that as a result of this policy there probably will be concern in the Sunni regions of Iraq and the Central Government regarding the possible expansion of KRG controlled territory. With advisors in the Peshmerga command we can reassure the concerned parties that, in return for increase autonomy, the KRG will not exclude the Iraqi Government from participation in the management of the oil fields around Kirkuk, and the Mosel Dam hydroelectric facility. At the same time we will be able to work with the Peshmerga as they pursue ISIL into disputed areas of Eastern Syria, coordinating with FSA troops who can move against ISIL from the North. This will make certain Basher al Assad does not gain an advantage from these operations. Finally, as it now appears the U.S. is considering a plan to offer contractors as advisors to the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, we will be in a position to coordinate more effectively between the Peshmerga and the Iraqi Army.)

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 15:52

From:john.podesta@gmail.com To: gthrush@politico.com Date: 2015-04-30 21:50 Subject: Re: sorry to bother...OTR: No problems here On Apr 30, 2015 3:00 PM, "Glenn Thrush" wrote: > No worries > Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains > to u > Please don't share or tell anyone I did this > Tell me if I fucked up anything > > > Insiders expressed confidence in Dennis Cheng, the campaign's relatively > unknown campaign finance director, whose selection was seen as a signal the > campaign was avoiding another mistake of '08: The empowering of celebrity > donors who crowded out the younger, more aggressive bundlers who helped > power Barack Obama's money machine. > > > > Yet in recent days, as Clinton has assessed her daunting challenge, it's > become clear that the force behind the fundraising operation is campaign > chairman John Podesta, who has been quietly cultivating big donors and > coordinating fundraising strategy. > > > > Podesta, people close to the campaign, supports the Cheng-led strategy of > creating an army of small- to medium-scale campaign bundlers '' a ''flat'' > fundraising structure that would give donors the sense of ownership in the > campaign. Podesta jokingly refers to himself as the ''Sultan of Flat,'' but > the older generation of Clinton fundraisers and donors interviewed over the > past two weeks said they believed the new structure would eventually give > way to a more conventional fundraising apparatus that would empower > mega-donors on the coasts. > > > > Managing the friction between the old lions of Clinton fundraising '' who > have no use for the flat org chart -- and younger players Cheng hopes to > recruit won't be easy. Cheng recently angered several former Obama > fundraisers by offering them their old regional finance jobs '' even though > they had gone onto to bigger, more lucrative careers in Washington over the > years; They turned him down, according to a former Obama campaign official. > > > > Cheng has also been trying to reassure Obama bundlers and even former > lower level Clinton Administration aides, who have now grown to have > successful careers, that they won't be left. "Their sense is that unless > they raise zillions of dollars, they're never going to be noticed and > certainly never going to infiltrate their already tight-knit inner circle, > so why bother," one New York-based fundraiser said. "Everyone knows who > Clinton's inner circle is, that they are going to raise a boat load of > money with relatively little effort, and that there is little that can be > done by a new person to make their mark > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 30, 2015, at 3:06 PM, John Podesta wrote: > > Sure. Sorry for the delay I was on a plane. > On Apr 30, 2015 9:44 AM, "Glenn Thrush" wrote: > >> Can I send u a couple of grafs, OTR, to make sure I'm not fucking >> anything up? >> -- >> *Glenn Thrush* >> Chief Political Correspondent, POLITICO >> Senior Staff Writer, POLITICO Magazine >> Cell (call first): 202-731-4974 >> Desk: 703-647-8543 >> http://www.politico.com/reporters/GlennThrush.html >> >> From: John Podesta >> Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 at 6:34 PM >> To: Glenn Thrush >> Subject: Re: sorry to bother... >> >> OTR: not sure what you mean by the first issue. I'm the sultan of >> flat. My whole pitch is all are welcome and grow the network. >> On Apr 29, 2015 11:38 AM, "Glenn Thrush" wrote: >> >>> Hey sir'-- sorry to bother '-- OTR question >>> >>> Was working on a fundraising story (when Maggie and Matea's stories >>> popped) >>> Been talking to bundlers who told me that one of the reasons you need to >>> get HRC out on the road was simply that the Hillfunders mid-level strategy >>> was getting enough traction and you had to mine the old 08 crowd a little >>> quicker than u thought'... >>> Also- to be a pain in the ass '-- I've heard that u were never entirely on >>> board with the whole 'flat' idea in the first place. >>> Cheers/Thrush >>> -- >>> *Glenn Thrush* >>> Chief Political Correspondent, POLITICO >>> Senior Staff Writer, POLITICO Magazine >>> Cell (call first): 202-731-4974 >>> Desk: 703-647-8543 >>> http://www.politico.com/reporters/GlennThrush.html >>> >>> >>>

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 14:31

From:stephenjhadley@me.com To: Jacob_J_Sullivan@ovp.eop.gov, john.podesta@gmail.com, John_D_Podesta@who.eop.gov Date: 2014-06-15 21:52 Subject: Re: POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITYFor an emissary, you might think about Ray Odierno paired with either Zal Khalilzad or Ryan Crocker. Steve Stephen J. Hadley (202) 220-5061 > On Jun 15, 2014, at 5:47 PM, Stephen Hadley wrote: > > Per my conversation with each of you. > > Steve > > > Stephen J. Hadley > (202) 220-5061 > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: james jeffrey >> Date: June 15, 2014 at 12:06:09 AM EDT >> To: Stephen Hadley , Stephen Hadley >> Subject: POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY >> Steve, with the occupation of Ninewah by ISIS, and of greater Kirkuk by the KRG, we have an interesting possibility. It is my understanding that the pipelines that brought Kurdish crude to Kirkuk to be shipped via the Kirkuk Ceyhan pipeline can be reversed. If this is so this provides an opportunity for the Northern Oil Company--part of the central government, to ship out up to 200,000 b/d (I think the pipeline would take that much, but would have to check. But clearly close to that as the Kurds on good days were sending up to 175,000 b/d to Kirkuk. See attachment for layout (slightly obsolete) of pipelines. Pipeline running between Kirkuk (hidden by white legend ballon) and the Kurdish net is in black running northwest-southeast.) >> >> Idea would be: >> >> --Kirkuk to keep producing (shutting down operating wells is a laborious, costly, and very detrimental process. With Beiji refinery, fed by up to 100,000 b/d from Kirkuk and the Ceyhan line in enemy hands, that's a lot of capacity shut in. ) with production either sent to Kurdistan for refining or shipped out via the 300,000 b/d line that, very fortunately, KRG now has to Ceyhan. >> >> --KRG would 'temporarily' market all oil exported via that line--its own quantities, say 100,000 b/d, plus Kirkuk. (This would be a compromise to the KRG). >> >> --But proceeds would be put in the Fed Reserve "DFI" account with some special arrangement for the Kurdish 17% of total revenues country-wide (the idea Brett was working on--this would be a compromise to the Central Government). >> >> --This would all be a 'temporary,' 'emergency' action given the situation. >> >> --On top of everything else, while quantities are limited this could calm world markets. >> >> If this makes sense, I'd suggest someone like Jim Jones shop it to the KRG. For various reasons while Brett is an alternative I don't know where he stands with the Kurds. (I do know that Sistani supposedly is very angry at the Kurds, probably for seizing Kirkuk and other territories (which otherwise would have been seized by ISIS)). >> >> I will be an an Northern Iraq energy conference in London next week, and can shop the idea in principle to Ashti and perhaps Turkey's Yildiz. But this will take someone like Jones or you to pitch to the Kurds. >> >> Let me know how this sounds. Regards, Jim >

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:52

I think people are more in despair about how things are'--yes new jobs but they are low wage jobs. HOUSING is a huge issue. Most people pay half of what they make to rent'...

Sent from Donna's I Pad. Follow me on twitter @donnabrazile

WikiLeaks '' The Podesta Emails

OK. Let's see what you are saying on Twitter.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 14:06

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 06:53

Investigators have said Syrian government forces were behind a third chemical weapons attack last year.

In a report to the United Nations Security Council, military helicopters are said to have dropped barrel bombs containing chlorine gas in Syria's north-west province of Idlib in March 2015.

The toxic chemical can kill by burning the victims lungs, drowning them in the resulting body fluids.

The finding sets the stage for a showdown between Russia and western UN council members over how to respond.

In addition to the bombing in Idlib, an earlier report also accused Bashar al Assad's forces of two other chemical weapons attacks in 2015 and 2014.

The report follows the UN human rights chief's condemnation over the humanitarian crisis in Aleppo.

Describing the city as a ''slaughter house'', Zeid Raad Al Hussein said the siege and bombing of eastern districts of the city constituted ''crimes of historic proportions.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 06:46

This is the State of the Union, euronews' weekly roundup of the top stories from Brussels.

In this episode: EU fails to agree a tough stance on Russia; the EU-Canada free trade deal rumbles on, but the head of the Walloon government remains admant that he won't back down.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 06:28

3,300 rescued in one dayMore than 800 of an estimated 3,300 migrants rescued by the Italian coastguard on Friday have been brought to safety.

They were picked up off one large boat, three smaller ones and 20 rubber vessels.

And they are the lucky ones.

The bodies of seven dead migrants were also recovered.

''They are vulnerable people, especially psychologically,'' said Dr Michele Telaro from Doctors Without Borders. ''They have lived through very difficult situations and tough experiences. Many have witnessed violence in Libya, or been victims themselves. They are very vulnerable.''

Claims migrant boat was attackedLibyan naval forces have denied accusations by a rescue organisation that one of their vessels attacked a migrant boat packed with around 150 people.

The incident is alleged to have happened before the planned start of training next week of up to 100 Libyan coast guard members as part of the EU anti-smuggling mission, Operation Sophia.

Swooped inGermany-based Sea-Watch, one of several non-governmental organisations operating vessels off the coast of Libya, said on Friday a speedboat marked ''Libyan Coast Guard'' swooped in as they went to the aid of an overcrowded rubber boat in the early hours.

At least one man from the Libyan vessel jumped into the rubber boat.

A Sea-Watch spokesman said he beat the migrants with a stick, causing mass panic.

Part of the rubber boat deflated, it is claimed, toppling most of the occupants into the sea.

No firearms were used.

The Sea-Watch crew says it recovered four bodies but saw others in the water.

Of an estimated 150 people on board, an estimated 120 have been rescued.

Sea-Watch spokesman Ruben Neugebauer says the position of their ship, the Sea-Watch 2, was not in Libyan waters.

''This was an attack on our rescue operation. We were engaged already with the boat to hand out life jackets, which is very important because the situation is very dangerous.''

LibyanCoastGuardattackon Sea-Watch rescueoperationcauses multiple dead.Archive pictureby f_melber pic.twitter.com/B112LMPBKM

— Seawatch(seawatchcrew)October21, 2016

What the Libyan navy saysA spokesman in Tripoli, Ayoub Qassem, says the Sea-Watch account is not correct.

Three vessels were spotted off the coast of Western Libya in the early hours of Friday.

A patrol had only boarded one vessel to check why it was in Libyan waters.

''The crew alleged that we attacked them and a number of casualties have been reported. This is not true at all. We call on them to prove this incident if they are right,'' Qassem said.

''The commander asked them why they were in Libyan waters but the crew of the organisation did not answer logically. The crew was asked to leave. It is a breach and disrespect to Libyan sovereignty and according to international rules and norms.''

#Libya naval forces denycharges of attackon migrant boat https://t.co/FZ1DP3z2i6#africa#ayoubqassem

'-- TobiBaba (@Voiceof9jathugs) October22, 2016

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:55

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:48

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:41

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 05:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 04:32

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 04:19

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 04:15

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 04:10

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 03:50

See more in the cross-post on the NewsBusters blog.

Not surprisingly, CNN's post-Al Smith Dinner analysis did not take kindly to Donald Trump on Thursday night as the assembled crew didn't object to the crowd booing Trump and applauded Hillary Clinton's remarks as ''self-deprecating,'' ''singeing,'' and ''traditional'' since she's so familiar with dinners like this along with the elitist Gridiron Club.

CNN senior political analyst and former Clinton administration official David Gergen received the first crack at it and he couldn't recall there ever being boos at the dinner before warning that ''there's such a risk here of sounding partisan, but I must tell you, there was a real difference between the two'' candidates.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 03:46

More in the cross-post on the MRC's NewsBusters blog.

While filling in for co-host Matt Lauer on Friday's NBC Today, Nightly News anchor Lester Holt laughably claimed that the liberal New York elite at Thursday night's Al Smith dinner should have been a friendly audience for Donald Trump. Noting how they jeered the Republican nominee's address at the charity event, a baffled Holt declared: ''He got booed. And not only did he get booed, but in a room where a lot of what you consider his crowd was.''

MSNBC anchor Steve Kornacki agreed: ''Absolutely, I mean, you've got a lot of sort of wealthy, you know, people who might be Republicans traditionally.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 03:40

[See NewsBusters for more.] The journalists at CBS This Morning on Friday promoted a petition by ''concerned'' United Nations staffers against the honoring of Wonder Woman, a ''large-breasted, white woman'' who wears an ''American flag motif.'' The fictional DC comics character is being hailed as an ''Ambassador for the Empowerment of Women and Girls.'' Talking to Lynda Carter, the '70s era Wonder Woman, guest co-host Margaret Brennan insisted the character was ''drawing some scrutiny because of the way you're dressed.'' Gayle King catalogued the list of complaints from outraged, dissident UN staffers: ''Listen on to what they are saying though, Lynda. 'A large breasted, white woman of impossible proportioned, scantily clad in a shimmery, thigh-baring body suit with an American flag motif and knee-high boots is not an appropriate spokeswoman for the gender equality at the United Nations.'''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 03:38

[More in the cross-post on the MRC's NewsBusters blog.]

Carl Bernstein unleashed on Donald Trump on the 21 October 2016 edition of CNN's New Day, attacking the billionaire presidential candidate as a "neo-fascist...sociopath." Bernstein used his "neo-fascist" label two more times during the segment, and predicted that Trump is "setting himself up as the head...of a real neo-fascist movement and media empire with the people from Breitbart....It's a dangerous thing. We're in a dangerous place."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 03:33

In a mind blowing segment Friday morning on ABC's Good Morning America, George Stephanopoulos, Jon Karl and Michael Strahan actually tried to rewrite the historic 2000 election and hoped no one would remember how events actually occurred. Using the opportunity to bash Trump's comments on conceding the election, the panel laughably contrasted Trump's behavior with the ''incredibly gracious'' and ''patriotic'' Al Gore in 2000.

Read the rest of the blog here.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 02:14

Exposed: George Soros opens up and tells the truth for 3 straight minutes.

He stated that Western Civilization is doomed and that Donald Trump will win the popular vote in the next general election, but Hillary Clinton already is a ''done deal''.

How is this possible?! If someone wins the people and lose the elections that means that elections are rigged?!

So the biggest Hillary's financier and supporter admits on live TV that elections are going to be rigged?!

This is insane! Watch the video and see what this old monster is saying:

This do not means that the battle is over. This should be motivation more for us to fight harder and do everything we can to stop Democrats from stealing the elections!

We can do that, Trump and Pence are going to be in the White House!

If you agree, please share and comment below.

Like us on Facebook ''USA Politics Today

** PLEASE SHARE THIS ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER IF YOU SUPPORT TRUMP **

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 23 Oct 2016 01:53

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 15:58

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 05:54

October 20, 2016Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump appeared together at the 71st Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner to'... read more

Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump appeared together at the 71st Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner to ''roast'' each other just the day after the two candidates participated in their final presidential debate. The Al Smith Dinner is an annual white-tie fundraiser for Catholic charities supporting underprivileged children at which presidential candidates traditionally appear. close

Javascript must be enabled in order to access C-SPAN videos.

*This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

People in this videoMore PeopleHosting OrganizationSeriesRelated VideoOctober 19, 2016Presidential Candidates DebateDemocratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump met for the third and final presidential debate'...

October 9, 2016Presidential Candidates DebateIn their second presidential debate Donald Trump (R) and Hillary Clinton (D) took questions from the audience members in a town'...

September 26, 2016Presidential Candidates DebatePresidential candidates Donald Trump (R) and Hillary Clinton (D) debated a variety of economic and foreign policy topics in the'...

October 18, 2012Alfred E. Smith Memorial DinnerPresident Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney gave keynote speeches at the 67th Annual Alfred E.'...

User Created Clips from This VideoView all clips from this video

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 22 Oct 2016 05:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:56

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:53

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:51

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:51

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:31

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 21:28

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 19:16

Internet traffic company Dyn on Friday warned of another cyberattack after websites and services across the East Coast were shut down earlier in the day.

"We have begun monitoring and mitigating a DDoS attack against our Dyn Managed (Domain Name System) infrastructure. Our Engineers are continuing to work on mitigating this issue," Dyn said on its website at 11:52 a.m. ET.

A Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack is when a web service is intentionally overwhelmed by traffic from many sources. It is a common method for digital assaults.

Dyn said the attack may also impact "Dyn Managed DNS advanced services with possible delays in monitoring."

It was not known who was behind the distributed denial of service attack.

The Department of Homeland Security told CNBC that it is "looking into all potential causes" of the attack. NBC News reported that one U.S. intelligence official said North Korea had been ruled out as a suspect.

The White House said U.S. authorities are monitoring reports of attack on the internet services company and whether it is a "criminal act," according to Reuters.

Many prominent websites including Amazon, Twitter and Spotify were shut down for nearly two hours Friday morning by an earlier denial of service attack. CNBC.com was also affected. Amazon reported later that it was once again having service issues but resolved the problem.

Later in the day, Netflix reported that they are experiencing issues, while Spotify said some of its members were having trouble accessing their website.

Dyn said the earlier attack started at 7:10 a.m. ET. It affected Dyn's Managed DNS infrastructure, which is the system that directs users to the correct webpage.

Dyn said the services had been restored to normal after the initial attack by 9:20 a.m. ET.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Fri, 21 Oct 2016 11:53