Israel’s Supreme Court — Upholding “Targeted Assassinations” and Torture

Global Research, November 08, 2019

Time and again, Israel’s high court upholds human and civil rights abuses committed by the state.

In 2006, the court upheld its targeted assassinations policy, claiming they’re OK when no other choices exist to protect against dangers to national security — that don’t exist it failed to say.

The policy contravenes Israeli law, the laws of war, and human rights law. Time and again, Israel falsely calls legitimate self-defense by Palestinians “terrorism,” unjustifiably justifying its lawless actions, most often upheld by its high court.

In Public Committee against Torture in Israel et al v. the Government of Israel et al (1999), Israel’s Supreme Court banned the practice it earlier OK’d, ruling “psychological pressure (and) a moderate degree of physical pressure” are permissible.

Israel’s 1987 Landau Commission condemned harsh interrogations amounting to torture, but approved the practice to obtain evidence for convictions in criminal proceedings, saying these tactics are necessary against “hostile (threats or acts of) terrorist activity and all expressions of Palestinian nationalism.”

Despite calling the 1984 UN Convention against Torture “absolute (with) no exceptions and no balances,” Israel’s high court OK’d coercive interrogations in three cases.

It permitted violent shaking, painful shackling, hooding, playing deafeningly loud music, sleep deprivation, and lengthly detainments.

Loopholes in the high court’s 1999 ruling OK’d abusive practices amounting to torture despite banning the practice.

It notably allowed physical force in so-called “ticking bomb” cases, giving Israeli interrogators and others wide latitude on their actions.

The court effectively ruled both ways, approving torture and other abusive practices despite banning it.

International law is clear and unequivocal on this issue, banning it at all times, under all circumstances with no allowed exceptions.

In 2015, Israel’s Supreme Court rejected a petition by human rights groups and political movements that called for overturning the Anti-Boycott Law.

At the time, the Global BDS Movement and Coalition for Women for Peace called the bill “one of the most dangerous anti-democratic laws promoted” by Knesset members, adding:

“Boycott is a nonviolent, legal and legitimate means to promote social and political aims that are protected in civil rights of freedom of expression, opinion and assembly. The bill constitutes a fatal blow to all these civil rights.”

The police state law punishes entities or individuals that call for boycotting Israel, or an economic, cultural, or academic boycott of its illegal settlements.

According to the Adalah Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, Israel’s Supreme Court “ignored the chilling effect of this law, and missed the opportunity to tell legislators that there are limits to their anti-human rights actions. This law encourages discrimination against the Arabs in Israel.”

The 2012 Nakba Law “harms both the freedom of expression and the civil rights of Arab citizens, even before its implementation.”

“Because the law’s formulation is so broad and vague, many institutions have already begun and will self-censor in order not to risk incurring penalties.”

Israel’s high court upheld the law, falsely claiming it “does not raise difficult and complex questions.”

It violates Arab history, culture, heritage, and the right to express, teach, or disseminate it freely.

Arab intellectual Constantin Zureiq earlier called the Nakba “the worst catastrophe in the deepest sense of the word, to have befallen the Arabs in their long and disaster-ridden history.”

Compromising their ability to publicly denounce what happened compounds the high crime against them.

Speech, press, and academic freedoms in Israel are gravely endangered. In 2017, legislation was enacted that banned foreign nationals who support BDS from entering the country.

Last April, Israel’s Jerusalem district court ruled against Human Rights Watch’s Israeli office director Omar Shakir, a US citizen, ordering him deported for supporting the global BDS movement, his lawful free expression right.

HRW appealed the ruling, petitioning Israel’s Supreme Court to overturn the injustice. It got an injunction to let Shakir stay in the country until the high court heard his case.

On Tuesday, the court ruled against him, Shakir tweeting:

“Breaking: Israeli Supreme Court upholds my deportation over my rights advocacy. Decision now shifts back to Israeli gov; if it proceeds, I have 20 days to leave…(W)e won’t be the last.”

Critic of Israeli human rights abuses Amnesty International said

“the court has made it explicitly clear that those who dare to speak out about human rights violations by the Israeli authorities will be treated as enemies of the state.”

Israel’s Supreme Court ruled against free expression. Without it, all other rights are jeopardized.

Compromising speech, press, and academic freedoms is the hallmark of totalitarian rule — the new normal in the US, other Western societies and Israel, affirmed by its high court.

Is is just a matter of time before Western ones rule the same way?

Is digital democracy in the West and Israel endangered?

Are abuses against Chelsea Manning, other whistleblowers, Julian Assange, and other independent journalists prelude for much more severe crackdowns against fundamental freedoms ahead?

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Featured image is from IMEMC


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Haaretz Criticizes Russia, Supports US/Israeli Aggression

By Stephen Lendman

Source

Among major powers, Russia is the leading proponent of peace and stability worldwide — its geopolitical agenda polar opposite how the US, NATO, Israel, and their imperial partners operate, an unprecedented global menace Haaretz and Western media support. 

According to the Israeli broadsheet, Dems have little appetite for “Middle East entanglements and many of them have little love for Israel.”

Fact: On issues of war and peace, corporate empowerment, serving privileged interests exclusively, neoliberal harshness for ordinary Americans, and cracking down hard on resisters, there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between both right wings of the US war party.

Fact: As for virtually anything involving Israel, nearly the entire Congress and executive branch support the Jewish state one-sidedly, uncaring about Palestinian rights. Rare exceptions prove the rule.

Haaretz: “The days of unconditional US defense aid may be numbered. In the future Israel will have to give something back.”

Haaretz has things backwards for the near and longer-term. The power of the Jewish lobby in the US and West assures continued support for the worst of Israeli high crimes. The Jewish state partners with the US and NATO in waging them. 

Haaretz claiming “Putin is the new king of the Middle East” greatly exaggerates Russia’s regional influence, gaining on the West, way short of surpassing it so far.

Saying he has “economic goals” is true of all nations. Russia pursues its geopolitical aims without attacking or exploiting other nations and their people — seeking peace, stability, mutual cooperation with other countries, and multi-world polarity.

Washington’s agenda is polar opposite, the same true for NATO and Israel — at war with other nations while exploiting their own ordinary people for maximum wealth and power.

Haaretz repeated the Big Lie that won’t die about Russian US election meddling no credible evidence proved happened because none exists, adding:

“Moscow operates hacker teams specializing in political interference in ways that leave no trace of official involvement.”

Like Western media, accusations against Russia by Haaretz include no evidence proving them, showing they’re groundless.

The broadsheet quoted an unnamed Israeli official claiming with no corroborating evidence that Russia “engage(s) in political subversion all over the world. They see it as legitimate and Israel is no exception,” adding:

“Like the Chinese, the Russians want to show that the democratic system doesn’t work anywhere. They prefer to deal with leaders and hierarchical systems without institutions that balance and restrain power.” 

“So they challenge democratic structures everywhere, interfere in elections and create economic pressure via investments by oligarchs that serve the Kremlin.”

Fact: Russian democracy is real, polar opposite US-led Western and Israeli fantasy versions.

Fact: Israel spies on allies and adversaries alike, notably the US.  Washington’s Government Accountability Office (GAO) earlier accused Israel of “conduct(ing) the most aggressive espionage operation against the United States of any US ally.”

The Pentagon accused Israel of “actively engag(ing) in military and industrial espionage in the United States.”

An unnamed US official once said “(i)t is one thing for the US and Israel to spy on each other.”

“It is another thing for Israel to steal (its) secrets and play them back to (congressional) legislators to undermine US diplomacy.”

I’ve stressed that the nuclear armed and dangerous Jewish state is run by fascist extremists, Zionist ideologues, and religious fundamentalists — representing an unprecedented regional menace along with Washington’s pernicious presence.

No “challenge from Russia” to Israel exists, no “Russian sheriff in town,” no Kremlin threat to any countries.

Polar opposite is true. Moscow seeks cooperative relations with other nations, not confrontation or exploitive designs.

Haaretz a broadsheet producing credible reports at times on some issues, usually domestic ones — spoiled by the above rubbish appearing much too often.

As for all things geopolitical, the broadsheet supports US, NATO, and Israeli aggression. 

It pretends the Jewish state faces cross-border threats — despite none since the October 1973 Yom Kippur war.

It’s militantly hostile to Iran, Syria, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Hamas, and other Palestinian liberation organizations — nonbelligerent states and groups threatening no one.

Except at times by noteworthy columnists, it hasn’t come to terms with Israeli apartheid ruthlessness, its fantasy democracy, fascist rule, neoliberal harshness, and imperial aims.

All of the above pose a regional and global menace — second only to US-dominated NATO.

Trump Regime Targets Whistleblower Edward Snowden’s New Book

By Stephen Lendman

Source

The Trump Regime sued Edward Snowden and publishers of his new memoir titled “Permanent Record.” More on this below.

Exposing government wrongdoing is a noble act. Like dissent, it’s a high form of patriotism, warranting praise, not persecution and condemnation.

The 1989 US Whistleblower Protection Act protects federal employees who report misconduct.

Federal agencies are prohibited from retaliating against individuals who do the right thing. Yet it happens time and again. 

Whistleblowers may report law or regulatory violations, gross mismanagement, waste, fraud and/or abuse, or acts endangering public health or safety.

The FBI is exempt from WPA provisions. Instead of protecting the rights of whistleblowers, the agency targets them.

Since WPA’s 1994 revisions, it ruled on over 200 cases — only three times in favor of whistleblowers, the deck stacked against them. US law fails to protect them, circumvented by its police state apparatus.

The 2012 Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA) failed to protect government employees from reprisal for disclosing official misconduct, revealing it to co-workers or supervisors, or disclosing policy decision consequences — any or all of the above in relation to their jobs or duties.

The Obama regime prosecuted more whistleblowers and leakers involved in exposing US wrongdoing than all his predecessors combined, nine targeted individuals, Trump following the same repressive practice, wanting US dirty linen concealed.

The US is a surveillance state. Big Brother watches everyone, privacy virtually nonexistent, including our health and financial records, cellphone and email communications, everything posted on social media, along with workplace and other public areas surveilled.

Exposing government wrongdoing is hazardous to personal safety and welfare. Julian Assange is imprisoned in London at the behest of the Trump regime — for the “high crime” of truth-telling journalism the way it should be universally.

Courageous whistleblower Chelsea Manning spent years in prison for revealing US high crimes of war and against humanity in Afghanistan and Iraq — imprisoned again indefinitely for refusing to aid the Trump regime’s lynching of Assange.

Granted asylum in Russia, a noble gesture, Edward Snowden was luckier. He followed in the footsteps of Daniel Ellsberg and likeminded others, connecting the dots for countless millions to know how they’re illegally and repressively spied on.

Earlier he said “I really want the focus to be on (documents revealed) which I hope will trigger among citizens around the globe what kind of world we want to live in.”

Enactment of the USA Freedom Act (the renamed Patriot Act) did little to change things. US spy agencies continue trampling on Bill of Rights protections.

They compromise due process, habeas rights, free expression, assembly and association, as well as protection from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Skype, YouTube, Apple, and major telecommunications companies are complicit in spying on their customers for US dark forces.

US intelligence community spying targets friends and foes alike. It’s for total control, political and economic advantage, to be one up on foreign competitors —information used advantageously in trade, geopolitical, and military relations.

Domestic spying is longstanding. It has nothing to do with protecting national security. America’s only foreign, domestic, or terrorists threats are invented.

The Trump regimes Justice Department sued Snowden and three publishers of his memoir — MacMillan Publishers, Henry Holt and Co., and Holtzbrinck Publishers.

The repressive suit aims to freeze assets from book sales. US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia G. Zachary Terwilliger said the following:

“Intelligence information should protect our nation, not provide personal profit (sic). This lawsuit will ensure that Edward Snowden receives no monetary benefits from breaching the trust placed in him (sic).”

The lawsuit is the latest example of Washington’s assault on speech, media and academic freedoms, targeting what diverges from the official narrative on major issues.

It accused Snowden and his publishers of going to press “without submitting (the book for) pre-publication review.”

The notion that US approval is required of current or former federal employees to write or speak publicly on issues related to their work flies in the face of their constitutional rights.

In response to the suit, Snowden tweeted: “The government of the United States has just announced a lawsuit over my memoir, which was just released today worldwide. This is the book the government does not want you to read…”

Already a bestseller, Snowden said in his preface “I used to work for the government, but now I work for the public,” adding:

“It took me nearly three decades to (understand the) distinction…I now spend my time trying to protect the public from the” US intelligence community — working against ordinary people .

Separately, he tweeted: “It is hard to think of a greater stamp of authenticity than the US government filing a lawsuit claiming your book is so truthful that it was literally against the law to write.” 

It reveals no state secrets, nothing not already in the public domain, including from establishment media reports.

The ACLU and Knight First Amendment Institute are challenging the so-called pre-publication review process, attorney Max Kaufman, saying:

“(I)ts current form is broken and unconstitutional, and it needs to go.”

“It’s one thing to censor the nuclear codes, but it’s another to censor the same information high schoolers are pulling from Wikipedia.” 

“Prepublication review gives the government far too much power to suppress speech that the public has a right to hear.”

Snowden hopes the DOJ lawsuit will promote his memoir, enabling it to attract greater readership worldwide.

Russia Helping Iran Circumvent Illegal US Sanctions

Source

by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman)

Unilaterally imposed US sanctions against other nations have no legal validity. They’re used against governments unwilling to subordinate their sovereign rights to its interests.

Washington uses them as weapons of war by other means against nations on its target list for regime change.

In 1996, the Vienna-based International Progress Organization called sanctions “an illegitimate form of collective punishment of the weakest and poorest members of society, the infants, the children, the chronically ill, and the elderly.”

When unilaterally imposed, they violate Chapter VII of the UN Charter, authorizing the Security Council alone to intervene against member states to restore peace, stability and security.

Its members alone may impose sanctions on member states, their entities or individuals — not heads of state, legislatures or courts of any nation.

Along with wars of aggression, color revolutions, and old-fashioned coups, use of sanctions is a favorite US tactic against targeted nations — notably used against Cuba (since 1962), Iran (since 1979), Syria (since 1979), the Russian Federation (since 2014), North Korea, and China, among other countries.

They’re imposed by the US based on Big Lies and deception, the Trump regime using them more aggressively against Venezuela, North Korea, and Iran than its predecessors — aiming to crush their economies and immiserate their people into submission.

What hasn’t worked before is highly unlikely to be achieved ahead. Failure hasn’t deterred the Trump regime from continuing to use weaponized sanctions as a hammer against the rule of law, peace, equity and justice.

Throughout its history, the Islamic Republic has found ways to circumvent illegal US sanctions, including by working cooperatively with private entities and friendly nations like Russia, China, and Turkey.

Last year it was reported that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani struck an agreement with Vladimir Putin and Turkey’s Erdogan aimed at circumventing US sanctions, perhaps with China as well at the time.

Last fall, Rouhani said “(w)e will continue by all means to both produce and export” oil. It’s “in the frontline of confrontation and resistance,” adding:

“It is not strange that countries that are sanctioned find ways to dodge the sanctions.”

“The Americans should know that a country which is sanctioned would still be able to find solutions to move forward.” 

“They cannot do this because various mechanisms have been discovered to maintain Iran’s oil exports.”

Iran has been circumventing US sanctions for decades. Responding to Trump’s sanctions war, a statement in May said its oil sales will continue regardless of US tactics to block them.

On Friday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said “Iran should have the opportunity to carry out oil exports at least approximately on a scale comparable to the period until May of last year” — when Trump pulled out of the JCPOA nuclear deal, breaching a Security Council adopted international agreement, making it binding international law.

If Brussels fails to launch its so-called Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges (INSTEX) to maintain normal economic, financial, and trade relations with Iran, Russia will help Tehran maintain its exports and circumvent US-imposed restrictions on its financial transactions — bypassing the dollar.

European officials pledged to maintain normal economic, financial, and trade relations with Iran but failed to back promises with positive actions. Russia and China consider the Islamic Republic to be a strategic partner. 

According to TankerTrackers.com, when Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif was in Beijing last month for talks on “regional and international issues,” the Chinese oil tanker Pacific Bravo headed “eastward, having loaded approximately 2 million barrels of Iranian oil from the Soroosh and Kharg terminals in the Persian Gulf over the past few days,” adding:

The tanker “report(ed) its destination as Indonesia, but (it) was recently acquired by Bank of Kunlun, a financial institution that is owned by the Chinese state oil company CNPC.” 

“TankerTrackers.com believes China is the ultimate destination for the oil on board.” 

The Chinese-owned tanker was the first to load Iranian crude after the Trump regime ended waivers on the purchase of Iranian oil to designated countries.

Weeks earlier, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said his government “resolutely opposes” unilateral sanctions on Iran.

China and other countries continue normal relations with Tehran. Russian efforts to further help its ruling authorities sell crude and related products, along with conducting financial transactions by circumventing the dollar, are important ways to counter illegal US sanctions.

Imposing them failed to achieve US objectives for decades. What hasn’t worked before is unlikely to be successful ahead.

The Trump regime failed to halt construction of Russia’s Nord Stream II gas pipeline to deliver 55 billion cubic meters of low-cost natural gas to European markets when completed in late 2019 or early 2020 — at the expense of much more costly and less accessible US liquified natural gas (LNG).

Its aim to bring Iranian oil exports to zero and halt its international financial transactions failed so far and is unlikely to work ahead.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

 

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Related posts

Pre-election Stunt. Possible US-Israeli Defense Pact? Netanyahu Fighting for his Political Life

Global Research, September 15, 2019

Days ahead of Israeli Knesset elections on Tuesday, Netanyahu fighting for his political life, Trump tweeted the following:

“I had a call today with Prime Minister Netanyahu to discuss the possibility of moving forward with a Mutual Defense Treaty, between the United States and Israel…further anchor(ing)” bilateral relations, he added.

He tacitly endorsed Netanyahu’s reelection bid, saying

“I look forward…after the Israeli elections when we meet at the United Nations later this month!”

Trump suggesting a mutual US/Israeli defense treaty was a pre-election stunt, supporting Netanyahu’s bid to remain prime minister — a Ziofascist extremist, a recklessly dangerous Iranophobe, an enemy of peace, equity and justice.

Trump’s remark came when the last pre-election polls showed a dead heat between Netanyahu’s Likud party and Gantz/Lapid’s Blue and White party.

It’s also at a time when Netanyahu faces post-election indictment for bribery, fraud and breach of trust following an October hearing, his personal freedom at stake.

Saturday on Israeli television, he appealed to his base, saying

“I’m going to get us a defense pact that will provide us with security for centuries, but for that I need your votes.”

The US and Israel have no enemies, no threats to their security, so they’re invented.

What would a defense treaty mean between both countries? In 1989, the US designated Israel a major non-NATO ally (MNNA).

It’s the closest thing to alliance membership, affording the Jewish state significant military and other advantages not given to non-NATO countries.

In December 2014, the US-Israel Major Strategic Partner Act made the Jewish state more equal than other MNNA nations — the Orwellian notion.

In his novel “Animal Farm,” some animals were more equal than others — Israel at the top of the pecking order among US allies because of the power and influence of its lobby.

James Petras powerfully discussed it in his book, titled “The Power of Israel in the United States” — creating a “tyranny of Israel over the US,” he explained.

The Jewish state today is US-dominated NATO’s leading partner country. Since 1995, it’s been a Mediterranean Dialogue nation, reinforcing its partnership with alliance nations.

The US and Israel are imperial partners, allying in each other’s wars of aggression, the Jewish state provided aid and other benefits beyond what Washington affords other nations.

If consummated, a US/Israeli defense pact would elevate relations to a higher level. It would likely have provisions similar to what’s in the NATO Charter.

Its Article 4 calls for members to “consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence, or security of any” is threatened.

Article 5 considers an armed attack (real or otherwise) against one or more member states, an attack against all, collective self-defense called for, alliance members mandated to intervene.

While the US already goes all-out to aid Israel militarily, a bilateral defense pact would mandate it.

For example, when Gazan rockets respond to Israeli aggression, followed by Israeli-terror-bombing, the US would be obligated to get involved if the Jewish state requested it.

The same goes if Israel manufactures a pretext for war on  Iran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, or greater war on Syria than already.

A mutual defense pact elevates the risk of greater regional wars instead stepping back from the brink to avoid them — why it’s a dangerous idea if Trump actually pursues it.

For now, it’s just a DJT pre-election stunt to help save Netanyahu’s political future.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Featured image: President Trump meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in New York on Sept. 18, 2017. (Screenshot from Whitehouse.gov)

Another Official 9/11 Big Lie Exposed — Again

By Stephen Lendman

Source

“The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report About 9/11 Is Unscientific and False” by David Ray Griffin debunked the official account of what happened.

He explained that the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s official findings were fabricated.

He accused NIST of falsifying and ignoring hard evidence, sticking to the official Big Lie about WTC 7’s collapse.

AE911Truth’s Richard Gage said the following about Griffin’s book:

He “provided a comprehensive dismantling of NIST’s theory about WTC 7, according to which it suffered global collapse because of ordinary building fires,” adding: 

“Besides showing that NIST committed massive scientific fraud, Griffin also points out that NIST was able to complete its theory only by affirming a miracle: a steel-framed high-rise building coming down in free fall even though explosives had not been used to remove its columns.”

Physics Professor John Wyndham said “Griffin show(ed) that NIST’s WTC 7 report has no scientific credibility.”

Big Lies take on a life of their own because establishment media report them as facts — serving as press agents for powerful interests inimical to peace, equity and justice.

The official 9/11 story is the Biggest Big Lie of our time — about the mother of all state-sponsored false flags, dark forces in Washington responsible.

Osama bin Laden and so-called “crazed Arabs” had nothing to do with what happened on a day that will live in infamy forever. 

It opened the gates of hell for endless US wars of aggression against nonbelligerent states threatening no one — responsible for countless millions of deaths and human misery on an appalling scale.

Seriously ill with kidney disease and other ailments, bin Ladin in mid-2001 was being treated at the American Hospital in Dubai.

On September 10, 2001 (one day before 9/11), CBS News anchor Dan Rather reported his admittance to a Rawalpindi, Pakistan hospital. He was dying.

On July 11, 2002, The NYT said “Osama bin Laden is dead. (He) died in December (2001) and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan.”

The BBC, Fox News, and other media sources reported the same information. 

On December 26, 2001, a leading Pakistani newspaper reported bin Laden’s death. It cited a prominent Taliban official who attended his funeral – witnessing his dead body before it was laid to rest.

Obama didn’t kill Osama, another Big Lie of our time. So-called “Enemy Number One” was an unwitting CIA asset — recruited in the 1980s by Pakistani intelligence against Soviet Russia in Afghanistan.

The official 9/11 account was fabricated to conceal state-sponsored terrorism, dark forces in Washington responsible for what happened.

David Ray Griffin 10 books on the 9/11 Big Lie provide the most detailed account of what happened and its aftermath — including about the 9/11 (whitewash) Commission.

Jet fuel had nothing to do with bringing down the twin towers. The BBC reported WTC 7’s collapse nearly 30 minutes before it happened.

UK activist Tony Rooke refused to pay his BBC license fee — required of all Brits to watch television.

He cited Section 15 of Britain’s 2000 Terrorism Act, stating it’s an “offense for someone to invite another to provide money, intending that it should be used, or having reasonable cause to suspect that it may be used, for terrorism purposes.”

He accused the BBC of reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it came down. A UK judge agreed with him, his victory unreported by US establishment media — part of their conspiracy of silence about hard truths dark forces want suppressed.

Fires and heavy debris from the twin towers had nothing to do with WTC 7’s collapse — the official Big Lie reported by Western media.

four-year study by University of Alaska’s J. Leroy Hulsey, South Carolina Department of Transportation bridge engineer Zhili Quan, and Nanjing University of Science and Technology Department of Civil Engineering academic Feng Xiao titled “A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center” was in part funded by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth).

It provided detailed scientific evidence of what caused WTC 7’s collapse, debunking the official Big Lie.

The study’s “principle conclusion…is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on

9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse.”

The official 9/11 account was fabricated, suppressing hard truths about what happened on that fateful day, changing the course of history.

According to the study, scientific evidence shows that “fires could not have caused weakening or displacement of structural members capable of initiating any of the hypothetical local failures alleged to have triggered the total collapse of the building, nor could any local failures, even if they had occurred, have triggered a sequence of failures that would have resulted in the observed total collapse.”

WTC 7’s collapse “was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

No “progressive collapse involving the sequential failure of columns throughout the building” occurred.”

Nothing external to WTC 7 caused its free fall collapse in 2.5 seconds. Debris from the twin towers and building 7 was removed and destroyed to prevent a proper forensic analysis, AE911Truth explained.

On 9/11, remaining remnants of rule of law in the US died. Endless war on humanity at home and abroad replaced it.

Things are worsening, not improving — both right wings of the US war party responsible for an increasingly nightmarish scenario.

US rage for unchallenged dominance risks unthinkable/potentially catastrophic global war by accident or design, including possible use of nuclear weapons for the first time in earnest — a nightmarish scenario if things turn out this way.

US Dirty Hands All Over Hong Kong Violence and Chaos?

Image result for US Dirty Hands All Over Hong Kong Violence and Chaos?
September 3, 2019

Stephen LENDMAN

The UN Charter and other international laws are clear and unequivocal. 

No nation may legally interfere in the internal affairs of others for any reasons at any time — except in self-defense if attacked.

The US hasn’t been attacked by another nation since December 7, 1941 — or threatened by any since WW II ended. 

Facing no enemies today, they’re invented as pretexts for its policymakers to pursue their imperial aims — seeking unchallenged global dominance, wanting all nations transformed into US vassal states, their resources plundered, their people exploited.

Endless wars, color revolutions, and old-fashioned coups are their favored tactics, targeting nonbelligerent nations the US doesn’t control, threatening no one.

What’s ongoing in Hong Kong replicates US color revolution attempts against targeted countries since first aimed at Belgrade, Serbia in 2000.

There’s nothing spontaneous about these disruptive eruptions when occur.

They’re planned and orchestrated in the US, directing local proxies, the CIA, anti-democratic National Endowment for Democracy, and likely other US agencies involved.

Make no mistake. Trump regime hardliners are waging escalated war on China by other means. 

Tactics include weaponized trade, tariffs and sanctions war, provocative Pentagon incursions near Chinese waters, weapons sales to Taiwan, and targeting China’s soft Hong Kong underbelly, wanting the country destabilized.

Over the weekend, Hong Kong protesters escalated violence further, throwing bricks and firebombs, setting a police barrier protecting a government building ablaze.

Overnight Saturday, the city’s financial district was gripped by running street battles, police countering orchestrated violence with tear gas and water cannons.

A police statement denounced “radical protesters (for throwing) corrosives and petrol bombs, (posing a) serious threat” to everyone nearby. 

So far, Beijing has been reluctant to overreact, letting city authorities handle things, perhaps not for much longer.

Its authorities are well aware of US dirty hands behind what’s been ongoing for months, Hong Kong wracked by endless violence and chaos, restoring calm to the city essential.

On Saturday, China’s official People’s Daily broadsheet published several pieces, denouncing “outrageous violence and disruptions…radical demonstrators” involved, adding:

“(R)adical forces…attacked journalists…travelers, (and) police officers,” US politicians and media supporting them — the broadsheet calling “US interference in Hong Kong affairs intolerable.”

Earlier, US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was way out of line, saying Hong Kong protests are “a beautiful sight to behold.”

After reunification with China, Hong Kong (1997) and Macau (1999) were granted a high degree of autonomy for 50 years as special administrative regions (SARs).

They’re responsible for their domestic affairs alone, including executive, legislative, and judicial independence from the mainland while being Chinese territory.

Hong Kong Basic Law stipulates that Beijing is responsible for foreign affairs and defense. The city’s future belongs to China, transitioning until 2047 when its autonomy ends.

The People’s Daily said Beijing supports Hong Kong’s SAR government, along with actions by police to restore order.

Failure to curb violence encourages more of it. What began in March turned violent in June, especially in recent weeks.

The People’s Daily said “kidnapping HK’s future (violently) should not be tolerated.” It called “radical protesters no different than terrorists…engag(ing) in all kinds of illegal and violent activities.”

Restoring normality to the city is vital. Should Beijing intervene directly, a dilemma confronting its authorities!

Since early June, protests became violent, showing no signs of abating, things escalating.

So far, Beijing let city police handle things, hoping energy behind what’s going on would wane, intervening only rhetorically.

If violence in city streets continues much longer, its authorities may request mainland intervention by the People’s Armed Police or People’s Liberation Army to restore order.

No nations anywhere tolerate unrest, disorder, rioting, or violence without intervening to quell it.

Key for Beijing and Hong Kong authorities is doing enough to end what’s going on without going too far.

They don’t want to discourage foreign investment or harm local business interests more than already.

But if violent protests continue unchecked, there’s risk they could spread to the mainland — what bipartisan hardliners in Washington may have in mind.

A Final Comment

How would Washington respond if foreign hands stoked violence in a US city, maybe its New York financial hub?

They’d be blood in the streets and mass arrests for sure, no holds barred. 

Perhaps Pentagon forces would join local police to restore normality if things escalated to how Hong Kong is affected.

stephenlendman.org

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.
%d bloggers like this: