Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DaveHodges-TheCommonSenseShow/~3/fa-k7vSEIMc/
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DaveHodges-TheCommonSenseShow/~3/fa-k7vSEIMc/
On Tuesday, a federal judge in New York ordered Iran to pay $6 billion to victims of the 9/11 terror attacks. This ruling comes despite the fact that none of the hijackers were Iranian citizens, and despite the fact that no direct link was ever found between the 9/11 attacks and Iran.
The court found Iran, the country’s central bank, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps liable for the deaths of more than 1,000 people in the September 11 attacks. District Judge George Daniels ordered Iran to pay “$12,500,000 per spouse, $8,500,000 per parent, $8,500,000 per child, and $4,250,000 per sibling” to the families and estates of the deceased, court filings say.
How, exactly, the court came to this decision remains a mystery. A total of 15 of the 9/11 perpetrators were citizens of Saudi Arabia, while two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was from Egypt, and one was from Lebanon. Exactly zero of them were from Iran.
Even the 9/11 Commission, tasked with investigating the attacks, found no evidence of direct Iranian support. The only mention of Iran in the report says that certain 9/11 hijackers traveled through Iran on their way to Afghanistan, without having their passports stamped.
This is not the first time such a ruling has happened either. Daniels issued other default judgments against Iran in 2011 and 2016.
Iran has not responded to the any of the rulings. Last year, however, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif dismissed such accusations as ridiculous.
“A record low for the reach of petrodollars: CIA & FDD fake news w/ selective AlQaeda docs re: Iran can’t whitewash role of US allies in 9/11,” he tweeted last November.
A record low for the reach of petrodollars: CIA & FDD fake news w/ selective AlQaeda docs re: Iran can’t whitewash role of US allies in 9/11
— Javad Zarif (@JZarif) November 2, 2017
It is important to point out how highly suspicious the timing of this ruling is. It comes at a convenient moment as neocon war hawks push for war with Iran and as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu begins saber rattling with the regime, claiming that they are lying about their nuclear program.
What’s more, Iran recently announced it is dropping the US dollar in foreign trade. It should be noted that shortly before they were invaded by the US, Iraq did the same thing. Libya also announced its plans to drop the US dollar whose leader was then murdered and dragged through the streets as NATO-led allies launched a bombing campaign, turning the oil-rich nation into a terrorist wasteland of rubble and carnage.
Almost immediately after Muammar Gaddafi’s murder, the US-backed rebels in Libya formed their own central bank and were given leave by the US and the UN to legally sell oil from the lands which they confiscated.
Comedian Lee Camp breaks down this paradigm quite accurately in the video below. “It’s all about the banking.”
To recap, as the war drums beat for Iran who recently announced their decision to drop the dollar, a court implicates them in 9/11 despite having no evidence, and the media simply reports it without question. Seems legit.
It is also important to point out that the US does have evidence that Saudi Arabia aided the 9/11 attackers, and in spite of thousands of victims and their families attempting to sue them for years, a ruling similar to the Iran one is non-existent.
As TFTP has previously reported, thanks to the release of the 28 pages, Americans and the rest of the world now know that Saudi Arabia played a significant role in the September 11th attacks. Also, thanks to the release of 28 pages, we know that the US government was complicit in covering up Saudi Arabia’s role in the attacks.
Even the severely flawed and biased “9/11 Commission Report” did not did not “exclude the likelihood that charities with significant Saudi government sponsorship diverted funds to Al-Qaeda.”
For a decade and a half, Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush kept secret the alleged role Saudi Arabia played in the September 11 attacks on America. Because of the cozy relationship the US has with the terrorist nation—which Trump is complicit in maintaining—special interests within the government have chosen to protect their Saudi friends instead of telling Americans the truth about what happened that fateful day.
And, as this ruling against Iran illustrates, they show no intention of changing their ways.
DASH cryptocurrency and The Free Thought Project have formed a partnership that will continue to spread the ideas of peace and freedom while simultaneously teaching people how to operate outside of the establishment systems of control like using cryptocurrency instead of dollars. Winning this battle is as simple as choosing to abstain from the violent corrupt old system and participating in the new and peaceful system that hands the power back to the people. DASH is this system.
DASH digital cash takes the control the banking elite has over money and gives it back to the people. It is the ultimate weapon in the battle against the money changers and information controllers.
If you’d like to start your own DASH wallet and be a part of this change and battle for peace and freedom, you can start right here. DASH is already accepted by vendors all across the world so you can begin using it immediately.
Tehran has been ordered by a US court to pay more than $6 billion to victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, despite the fact that most of the plane hijackers were Saudi nationals, and no direct link was ever found to Iran.
On Tuesday, a federal judge in New York found Iran, the country’s central bank, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps liable for the deaths of more than 1,000 people in the September 11 attacks. As a consequence, District Judge George Daniels ordered Iran and its entities to pay over $6 billion in compensation to the victims’ families.
The default judgment seeks compensation of $12.5 million per spouse, $8.5 million per parent, $8.5 million per child, and $4.25 million per sibling. The US could potentially retrieve the sum from billions of dollars in Iranian assets that were frozen in the US and Europe over the years. This is unlikely, however, as the ruling is seen as symbolic and unenforceable.
It is not the first time that Daniels has issued default judgments against Iran. In 2011 and 2016, the New York judge ordered the Islamic Republic to pay billions of dollars to victims of the attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people.
Tehran has yet to react to the latest ruling, but has previously dismissed such accusations as ridiculous, given the fact that none of the perpetrators were Iranian citizens, and no investigation ever found direct links to Iran.
“A record low for the reach of petrodollars: CIA & FDD fake news w/ selective AlQaeda docs re: Iran can’t whitewash role of US allies in 9/11,” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif wrote on Twitter last year.
Some 15 of the 9/11 perpetrators were citizens of Saudi Arabia, while two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was from Egypt, and one was from Lebanon. However, the US lawsuit, originally filed in 2004, still claimed that Tehran somehow supported the hijackers and provided them with training and financial assistance.
Tuesday’s judgment is not linked to similar cases filed by the victims against Saudi Arabia, which claim that Riyadh provided direct support to the hijackers. Back in March, Judge Daniels rejected Saudi Arabia’s request to dismiss the lawsuits. Both Saudi and Iranian cases, however, are based on the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (Jasta), which was passed in 2016 and allows families of the victims to take foreign governments to court.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
U.S. President Donald Trump announced the operation in a Friday night address from the White House and said the military campaign hit targets associated with the chemical weapons capabilities of the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
“The purpose of our actions tonight is to establish a strong deterrent against the production, spread and use of chemical weapons. We are prepared to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents,” said Trump, who had previously called the chemical attack “atrocious” and vowed Syria and its allies Russia and Iran would “pay a price.”
He tweeted Saturday that the strikes were “perfectly executed” and declared “Mission Accomplished!”
“The fact of this attack should surprise no-one,” British Prime Minister Theresa May said in a statement Friday night. “The Syrian Regime has a history of using chemical weapons against its own people in the most cruel and abhorrent way.”
“The red line established by France in May 2017 was crossed,” French President Emmanuel Macron said, referring to the use of chemical weapons.
Friday’s operation drew strong condemnation from the Syrian regime and its allies. Assad said hours after the strikes that they made his regime even more determined to “fight and crush” terrorism.
Russian President Vladimir Putin denounced the strikes as an “act of aggression” that would have a “destructive influence on the entire system of international relations.”
The Kremlin called an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council on Saturday, where Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia deplored the attack as “hooliganism,” according to a translation by Russian outlet Sputnik News, and said it “makes a catastrophic humanitarian situation worse.”
Russian authorities had previously declared that the suspected chemical attack that prompted the strike was staged. At the emergency meeting, French Ambassador François Delattre said French authorities have “no doubt” the attack both occurred and was ordered by Assad’s regime.
“We can all see that a Russian disinformation campaign is in full force this morning,” U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said. “The pictures of dead children were not fake news,” she added.
The military strike became necessary after Russia stymied diplomacy by blocking U.N. Security Council action on Syria’s chemical weapons six times, Haley said. In the event of future chemical weapons attacks in Syria, she said that Trump had told her “the United States is locked and loaded” to respond.
U.K. Ambassador Karen Pierce outlined four steps to reaching a diplomatic resolution in Syria, including an immediate ceasefire and destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles.
The Security Council later voted to reject a Russian resolution condemning the “aggression” in Syria.
NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg also voiced support of the strike on behalf of all 29 of his members, according to The Associated Press.
Earlier, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called Trump, May and Macron “criminals” in a speech cited by Iranian TV, according to Reuters. “U.S., allies will not gain any achievements from crimes in Syria. Attacking Syria is a crime. U.S. president, U.K. prime minister and the president of France are criminals,” he said.
Minutes after Trump’s announcement on Friday evening, journalists from Reuters and The Associated Press reported hearing loud blasts over Damascus, the Syrian capital.
The operation started around 9 p.m. EDT and focused on three targets associated with the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons program, Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, later confirmed in an eveningnews conference:
A scientific research center in the greater Damascus area.
A chemical weapons storage facility west of Homs.
A weapons storage facility and a command post close to the facility near Homs.
The strikes “successfully hit every target,” Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said at a briefing Saturday morning. The Syrian military had claimed earlier in the day that it had intercepted “most” of the 105 missiles.
Lt. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie said that the U.S. had no indication of civilian casualties and that no aircraft or missiles involved in the operation were successfully engaged by Syrian air defenses.
Friday evening’s actions were a response to a chemical weapons attack on the town of Douma, in eastern Ghouta, last Saturday. The attack killed at least 70 people and rebel fighters were forced to relinquish control of the town to forces loyal to Assad shortly after.
Damascus, Moscow and Tehran all deny that the chemical attack was Assad’s doing. But Defense Secretary Mattis said Friday that the U.S. had conclusive evidence that chlorine gas was used in the Douma attack. He added the U.S. did not rule out that sarin gas was used as well.
McKenzie said on Saturday that the strikes had crippled the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons capabilities, but acknowledged that some of the infrastructure was still left. “I would say there’s still a residual element of the Syrian program that’s out there,” he said. “I’m not going to say that they’re going to be unable to continue to conduct a chemical attack in the future. I suspect, however, they’ll think long and hard about it.”
On Friday, Trump once again called out Assad’s backers. “To Iran and Russia I ask, what kind of nation wants to be associated with the mass murder of men, women and children? The nations of the world can be judged by the friends they keep. … Russia must decide if it will continue down this dark path or if it will join with civilized nations as a source for stability and peace.”
Although the Pentagon sought to avoid hitting Russian forces stationed in Syria to prevent a direct confrontation with Moscow, Friday’s operation is likely to further escalate tensions between the two countries.
By Saturday, there had been no indication that any Russian forces were hit. And Mattis said the U.S. had not detected any retaliatory action from Russia or Iran.
But the Russian Embassy in the U.S. warned that Friday’s strikes “will not be left without consequences.” On Saturday, Russian officials on Twitter called the “treacherous and insane” strikes a “clear and present danger to world peace” and demanded accountability.
Trump ordered cruise missile strikes on a Syrian air base almost exactly one year ago following a chemical attack on civilians in the town of Khan Sheikhoun that the U.S. blamed on Assad. Experts said the U.S. retaliation last year did little to deter Assad’s campaign against his own people.
U.S. military leaders stressed on Friday that the new operation was much broader in scope and was “a one-time shot” aimed at debilitating Assad’s chemical weapons program in the long run.
It remains unclear, however, whether the latest strikes will do much to convince Assad and his powerful supporters that they must reconsider their approach.
While the Pentagon was adamant that the attack significantly decreased Assad’s chemical weapons capabilities, Syrian government forces had taken precautions at military bases throughout the week in anticipation of possible strikes. A Syrian official told Reuters on Friday that many of those sites had been evacuated ahead of the attack.
In his efforts to sustain his rule and bring Syria fully under his control, Assad has adopted a winner-take-all strategy that can bear any cost regardless of international condemnation. Just in the past two weeks, more than 1,000 people have been killed in a brutal offensive in eastern Ghouta, according to Doctors Without Borders.
Both Russia and Iran are likely to continue their support of Assad. Their presence deters further international action by raising the prospect of a major escalation.
The chief U.S. partner in the country, the Syrian Kurdish militia known as the YPG, remains uncertain about American intentions. And U.S. work on reconstruction to prevent the return of the self-described Islamic State is ongoing but could stop at any time.
Former President Barack Obama, now remembered for promising military action if Assad crossed the “red line” of using chemical weapons, contemplated a strike in 2013. But Obama sought congressional approval and the strike never happened.
On Friday, before Trump had announced the operation, 88 House lawmakers challenged his legal authority to launch attacks against the Syrian regime without congressional approval. Republican Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.) later called the airstrikes “unconstitutional, illegal and reckless.”
Trump had set a path toward retaliation immediately after last Saturday’s reports of a chemical attack. “If President Obama had crossed his stated Red Line In The Sand, the Syrian disaster would have ended long ago!” he tweeted the following Sunday. “Animal Assad would have been history!”
Trump’s latest action further muddies his own approach to Syria. Just last week, he floated the possibility of imminently withdrawing the 2,000 U.S. troops stationed in the country. His top military advisers, meanwhile, offered a contradictory message, implying that the U.S. still has plenty to do to root out the Islamic State.
Akbar Ahmed, Jesselyn Cook and Sara Boboltz contributed to this report.
Source Article from https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-trump-orders-strikes-syria-010458263.html
B’Tselem Urges Israeli Soldiers Disobey Free-Fire Orders
by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman)
Nothing justifies attacking nonviolent civilians with live fire or other forms of brute force – a high crime committed by Israeli soldiers time and again.
Everyone everywhere is obliged to obey international laws – especially well-armed soldiers, police and other security forces able to cause enormous harm on anyone attacked.
On Tuesday, B’Tselem challenged Israeli soldiers to “refuse to fire at unarmed Palestinian protesters,” saying:
“(U)se of live ammunition against unarmed persons who pose no danger to anyone is unlawful.”
“It is even more blatantly unlawful in the case of soldiers firing from a great distance at demonstrators located on the other side of the fence that separates Israel from the Gaza Strip.”
“(I)t is impermissible to order soldiers to fire live ammunition at individuals for approaching the fence, damaging it, or attempting to cross it.”
“Obviously, the military is allowed to prevent such actions, and even to detain individuals attempting to carry them out, but firing live ammunition solely on these grounds is absolutely prohibited.”
International laws, standards and norms back the above remarks. Israeli use of live fire on defenseless Palestinians constitutes cold-blooded murder – last Friday and countless earlier times.
Palestinians can only challenge occupation harshness by putting their unarmed bodies in harm’s way. Last Friday’s demonstrations were well publicized in advance.
In Gaza they were several hundred meters from Israel’s border, posing no threat to its territory or people.
Yet premeditated Israeli live fire bore full responsibility for 18 Palestinian deaths, nearly 1,500 others injured.
Instead of efforts to avoid what happened, Netanyahu, defense minister Lieberman, and IDF commanders initiated it – disgracefully blaming Hamas for the carnage.
Similar large-scale demonstrations are planned for this Friday. Israeli vowed no change in its free-fire policy, Lieberman saying:
“We have set clear rules of the game, and we do not intend to change them. Anyone who approaches the fence endangers his life” – warning of a repeat of last Friday’s bloodbath.
B’Tselem: “Contrary to the impression given by senior military officers and government ministers, the military is not permitted to act as it sees fit, nor can Israel determine on its own what is permissible and what is not when dealing with demonstrators.”
“Like all other countries, Israel’s actions are subject to the provisions of international law and the restrictions they impose on the use of weapons, and specifically the use of live fire.”
“The provisions limit its use to instances involving tangible and immediate mortal danger, and only in the absence of any other alternative. Israel cannot simply decide that it is not bound by these rules.”
Hebrew University Professor Emeritus of Law Mordechai Kremnitzer said the following about last Friday’s carnage:
“If…using live fire to prevent unarmed civilian demonstrators from even approaching or vandalizing the border fence is seen as justified, this order is highly unlikely to be legal.”
“The fence, even when it marks a border is not more sacred than human life, and that includes the lives of Palestinians living in Gaza.”
Former Israeli Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Halevy earlier said carrying out orders contrary to rule of law principles “are of a clearly criminal nature,” adding:
“It is an illegality that pains the eye and outrages the heart, if the eye be not blind and the heart be not callous or corrupt.”
Government and military policymakers bear full responsibility for unlawful orders and actions – mainly the prime minister, defense minister and IDF chief of staff.
Given last Friday’s carnage, they’re “obligat(ed) to change” earlier orders to avoid another bloody Friday.
“(I)t is also a criminal offense to obey patently illegal orders,” said B’Tselem, adding:
“Therefore, as long as soldiers in the field continue to receive orders to use live fire against unarmed civilians, they are duty-bound to refuse to comply.”
Failure makes them complicit with their superiors.
VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at email@example.com.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
March 29th, 2018
Russia expelled 60 U.S. diplomats on Thursday and announced it would eject scores from other countries that have joined London and Washington in censuring Moscow over the poisoning of a spy.
The U.S. ambassador was also ordered to shut the consulate in St Petersburg, in Russiaâ€™s retaliation for the biggest expulsion of diplomats since the Cold War.
The White House said Moscowâ€™s decision marked a further deterioration in the U.S.-Russia relationship.
â€œRussiaâ€™s response was not unanticipated and the United States will deal with it,â€� the White House said in a statement without elaborating.
<!– AD CAN GO HERE
END: AD CAN GO HERE –>
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Source Article from http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=52561
Jon Rappoport–How many of these patents, if granted, would be game changers for planet Earth? Who knows?
Buckle up. Here we go.
From FAS (Federation of American Scientists), Secrecy News, Oct. 21, 2010, “Invention Secrecy Still Going Strong,” by Steven Aftergood:
“There were 5,135 inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2010, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office told Secrecy News last week. It’s a 1% rise over the year before, and the highest total in more than a decade.”
“Under the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders restricting their publication if government agencies believe that disclosure would be ‘detrimental to the national security’.”
“The current list of technology areas that is used to screen patent applications for possible restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act is not publicly available and has been denied under the Freedom of Information Act. (An appeal is pending.)…”
“Most of the listed technology areas are closely related to military applications. But some of them range more widely.”
“Thus, the 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction IF THE PHOTOVOLTAICS WERE MORE THAN 20% EFFICIENT. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction IF THEY OFFERED CONVERSION EFFICIENCIES ‘IN EXCESS OF 70-80%’.” (Emphasis is mine.)
“One may fairly ask if disclosure of such technologies could really have been ‘detrimental to the national security,’ or whether the opposite would be closer to the truth. One may further ask what comparable advances in technology may be subject to restriction and non-disclosure today. But no answers are forthcoming, and the invention secrecy system persists with no discernible external review.”
If you’re one of those people who maintains that advanced technology is being held away from the public, here is an overall smoking gun that validates your stance.
And you can see that breakthrough energy tech, which would radically lessen the need for oil, would be on the secrecy-do-not-release list.
What else is on the list? Old Tesla patents, for example?
The US Patent Office is an official chokepoint for the “planned society”—or should we say the “restricted society.”
But this is not to say advanced technology is always shelved or scuttled. The patent applications, in suspended animation at the US Patent Office, can be quietly disclosed, for example, to government researchers engaged in black-budget projects, where the data and the research are turned to “other uses.”
Innovative inventors, who can revolutionize society for the good, incur risks if they submit their patent applications to the State. Getting trapped in limbo, while outright theft of their research occurs, is one of those risks.
On the other hand, if a giant corporation has an invention that deploys the genetic engineering of food crops, and adds millions of tons of toxic pesticides to the environment, its patent application sails through review at the Patent Office.
© Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV-Novosti”, 2005–2018. All rights reserved.