theduran--2020-01-22--The UK has a housing crisis – and we need actions, not words to solve it

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by Johanna Ross , journalist based in Edinburgh , Scotland… The UK has a housing crisis .
According to the National Housing Federation , 8.4 million people in England alone are living in sub-standard housing and 400,000 people are either homeless or at risk of being homeless .
For one of the largest economies in the world , this is a shameful statistic .
And yet the housing crisis is not given the due attention it requires , neither by politicians , nor the media .
Even during the build-up to the December election , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ although we may be familiar with the pre-election campaign soundbites promising more ‘ schools and hospitals ’ , housing never becomes a key issue .
Yet housing constitutes one of our most basic , primal needs .
So why is the UK in such a predicament ?
This is currently being debated .
Many believe at the root of the failure is a lack of house building by the government .
As Labour have pointed out , affordable housing was one of the first and biggest cuts the Conservative government made after coming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show that in 2018 the number of Government-funded affordable homes built for social rent fell by 90 % , to fewer than 1,000 , while Government figures suggest fewer than 3,000 council homes were built .
However a report published last year by the Tony Blair Institute concluded that a lack of house building was not the cause , and that construction was not the solution .
According to Ian Mulheim , the report ’ s author , shortage of supply was a ‘ red herring ’ in the housing debate , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest rates that have made it easy for home owners and investors to take on large amounts of mortgage debt and pay ever more for houses ’ .
He added that a ‘ shrinking social rented sector , cuts to housing benefit and slow wage growth among young people are making rented housing less affordable for many , even though private sector rents are stable.
’ Slow wage growth here is key .
For while UK house prices have risen 160 % since 1996 , wages have not .
Back in the 80s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bought their house , prices were much more in line with people ’ s salaries .
Your salary could be £30,000 and your house roughly the same amount .
However the sheer lack of houses can not be ignored , and still plays a role .
Problems began in 1979 with Margaret Thatcher ’ s ‘ right to buy ’ scheme .
This allowed council house tenants to purchase the properties in which they were living , and it proved extremely popular .
But it subsequently created a shortage of council houses which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1979 , for instance , around 42 % of Brits lived in council housing ; in 2008 the figure was closer to 12 % .
As The Guardian journalist John Harris has written , the ‘ right to buy ’ scheme ‘ led to fractured communities , the rise of exploitative landlordism and a lack of housing so severe that some councils are now trying to buy their old homes back ’ .
He was writing over a decade ago ; the situation has not improved since .
What is being built @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are out of reach for the majority .
For many young people buying their own house is nothing more than a distant dream .
The big obstacle is the deposit , as it can take years of saving to accumulate the amount needed for a house in many of Britain ’ s cities .
The Bank of Mum and Dad has been increasingly relied on in recent years , and yet it shouldn ’ t have to be .
Last year , the Office for National Statistics ( ONS ) revealed that over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been a 46 % increase in the number of young people aged between 20-34 still living at home with their parents .
In cities such as London , this is a common phenomenon , and it all creates additional pressure on families and society as a whole .
This is why house building is so important .
Britain is not alone in its predicament and needs to follow the lead of other countries .
Japan for instance built far more properties than England between 2013 and 2017 – 728,000 to be precise , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 80 % .
Switzerland gives local governments incentives to encourage housing development , partly why there is almost twice as much per person as there is in the United States .
Here , however , the obstacle seems to be firstly , acknowledgement of the housing crisis and secondly , a lack of will to overcome it .
It is extraordinary that major publications such as The Economist publish articles which suggest it is ‘ The West ’ s obsession with home ownership ’ what is causing the problem .
To put the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imply that it is the desire to have your own home which is the problem , is a deeply flawed approach .
It is convenient for the government , as this stance avoids it taking the blame .
But the reality is that the housing market has spiralled out of control , and people ’ s salaries can ’ t catch up .
The answer is to build more affordable housing , and more council housing now .
It has to be made a priority .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by Johanna Ross, journalist based in Edinburgh, Scotland…
The UK has a housing crisis. According to the National Housing Federation, 8.4 million people in England alone are living in sub-standard housing and 400,000 people are either homeless or at risk of being homeless. For one of the largest economies in the world, this is a shameful statistic. And yet the housing crisis is not given the due attention it requires, neither by politicians, nor the media. Even during the build-up to the December election, the issue was overshadowed by Brexit and although we may be familiar with the pre-election campaign soundbites promising more ‘schools and hospitals’, housing never becomes a key issue.
Yet housing constitutes one of our most basic, primal needs. So why is the UK in such a predicament? This is currently being debated. Many believe at the root of the failure is a lack of house building by the government. As Labour have pointed out, affordable housing was one of the first and biggest cuts the Conservative government made after coming to power in 2010. Official figures show that in 2018 the number of Government-funded affordable homes built for social rent fell by 90%, to fewer than 1,000, while Government figures suggest fewer than 3,000 council homes were built.
However a report published last year by the Tony Blair Institute concluded that a lack of house building was not the cause, and that construction was not the solution. According to Ian Mulheim, the report’s author, shortage of supply was a ‘red herring’ in the housing debate, with the real culprit being ‘low global interest rates that have made it easy for home owners and investors to take on large amounts of mortgage debt and pay ever more for houses’. He added that a ‘shrinking social rented sector, cuts to housing benefit and slow wage growth among young people are making rented housing less affordable for many, even though private sector rents are stable.’ Slow wage growth here is key. For while UK house prices have risen 160% since 1996, wages have not. Back in the 80s, for example, when my parents bought their house, prices were much more in line with people’s salaries. Your salary could be £30,000 and your house roughly the same amount.
However the sheer lack of houses cannot be ignored, and still plays a role. Problems began in 1979 with Margaret Thatcher’s ‘right to buy’ scheme. This allowed council house tenants to purchase the properties in which they were living, and it proved extremely popular. But it subsequently created a shortage of council houses which has not been addressed since. Back in 1979, for instance, around 42% of Brits lived in council housing; in 2008 the figure was closer to 12%. As The Guardian journalist John Harris has written, the ‘right to buy’ scheme ‘led to fractured communities, the rise of exploitative landlordism and a lack of housing so severe that some councils are now trying to buy their old homes back’. He was writing over a decade ago; the situation has not improved since.
What is being built now are luxury, top-end houses that are out of reach for the majority. For many young people buying their own house is nothing more than a distant dream. The big obstacle is the deposit, as it can take years of saving to accumulate the amount needed for a house in many of Britain’s cities. The Bank of Mum and Dad has been increasingly relied on in recent years, and yet it shouldn’t have to be. Last year, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealed that over the last two decades, there has been a 46% increase in the number of young people aged between 20-34 still living at home with their parents. In cities such as London, this is a common phenomenon, and it all creates additional pressure on families and society as a whole.
This is why house building is so important. Britain is not alone in its predicament and needs to follow the lead of other countries. Japan for instance built far more properties than England between 2013 and 2017 – 728,000 to be precise, reducing the number of rough sleepers by 80%. Switzerland gives local governments incentives to encourage housing development, partly why there is almost twice as much per person as there is in the United States. Here, however, the obstacle seems to be firstly, acknowledgement of the housing crisis and secondly, a lack of will to overcome it.
It is extraordinary that major publications such as The Economist publish articles which suggest it is ‘The West’s obsession with home ownership’ what is causing the problem. To put the problem back to the people, to imply that it is the desire to have your own home which is the problem, is a deeply flawed approach. It is convenient for the government, as this stance avoids it taking the blame. But the reality is that the housing market has spiralled out of control, and people’s salaries can’t catch up. The answer is to build more affordable housing, and more council housing now. It has to be made a priority.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-22--Biden Holds, Warren Falls, Bernie Rises

Biden Holds, Warren Falls, Bernie Rises

Submitted by InfoBrics , authored by William Stroock , author of military fiction… Political reformers often speak of the influence of money in politics , as if people banding together to support candidates with shared interests is somehow corrupting .
Modern American political history is filled with failed self-funding candidates like New Jersey millionaire publisher , Steve Forbes , in 1996 or Texas businessman , H. Ross Perot , in 1992 .
This year , former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg joins the list of rich men who tried to buy the presidency .
To date , the Mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on television campaign advertisements .
One has not been able to watch the NFL playoffs without seeing Blomberg ’ s face at least half a dozen times .
Bloomberg ’ s political we-produced advertisements portray him as an accomplished businessman , the successful mayor of New York City who kept crime under control , and a can-do go-getter capable of uniting America .
Along the way , Bloomberg takes a swipe at President Trump .
These are the campaign ads of a moderate , problem solving , Democrat perfect for the 1990s .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 and the Democrat Party base isn ’ t interested in moderation .
Bloomberg is averaging about 7 percent of the Democrat Party vote according to the Real Clear Politics poll of polls .
Fellow billionaire-for-whom-money-is-no-object , Tom Steyer , is near the bottom with an average of 2.4 percent .
Despite chronic gaffs and flubs , Biden ’ s support remains steady with a 28.4 percent average .
Meanwhile , Bernie Sanders poll average has surged to 20.4 percent .
Elizabeth Warren has dropped nearly a third from her late summer high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden , Sanders , and Warren , we see the main Democrat Party factions .
Biden is drawing support from older Democrats who once supported Bill Clinton and African Americans who recall his service as Barrack Obama ’ s VP .
Ironically , the 78-year-old Sanders is the candidate of the young , enthusiastic hard-left led by socialist firebrands Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-NY ) and Ilhan Omar ( D-MN ) .
Elizabeth Warren ’ s is a campaign of ideas , a liberal checklist of long sought-after policy goals from transgender rights to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of which she stole from Sanders .
She is a lawyer , college professor , and former federal bureaucrat , the candidate of , by , and for liberal bi-coastal professionals .
Journalists love Warren because they too are bi-coastal professionals .
This week the New York Times , the flagship paper of the Democrat elite and ruling class , endorsed Warren .
The Times also bizarrely endorsed Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar at the same time , saying she was a moderate and perhaps hopping to kick off a drive for the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Thanks to intersectional powerhouse Ilhan Omar ( she checks no less than four boxes : black , Muslim , immigrant , female ) the state of Minnesota will be in play this November .
Besides , should Sanders or Warren win the nomination , there ’ s no way Warren would choose Sanders , or Sanders would choose Warren .
During the last debate , Warren said Sanders told her a woman would never be president .
When Sanders denied saying any such thing , Warren accused him of calling her a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s legions of young , male supporters , the so-called Bernie-Bros , now hate Warren with the same intensity they once hated Hillary .
Biden leads the February 3rd Iowa Caucus by an average of 3.7 percent while Sanders leads the February 11th New Hampshire primary by an average of 1.3 percent .
Bloomberg hardly registers in either poll sample .
A Biden victory in Iowa would prolong his campaign and give him enough political energy to stay viable through to the southern primaries where African American voters dominate .
The two Democrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debates .
One more and we ’ ll have a definite trend .
Perhaps money can ’ t buy the presidency .
Instead , reformers should think about ways to fix both parties ’ broken candidate selection process .
Right now , the campaigns begin in Iowa and New Hampshire .
These two small states , which are in no way indicative of the rest of America , have an outsized roll in the nomination process .
Every four years candidates spend tens of millions of dollars trying to win Iowa and New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ front runner and create an aura of inevitability .
From there , the campaigns move to the South Carolina primary , the so-called firewall state where party establishments kill insurgent campaigns .
From there , it ’ s on to the odious Super Tuesday , a mismatched jumble of a primary with states from all over the country .
Very often many primaries occur long after candidates have dropped out and the race is all but over .
This writer has not cast a vote in a meaningful primary since 2000 when he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not group the smaller states into cohorts and hold separate primaries for big states , a California Primary , a Texas Primary , and so on ?
Or perhaps the parties could hold regional primaries , say for New England , the Mountain West , and the South .
Because , right now , the current system is more likely than not to yield a ‘ hung ’ party where neither Biden , Warren , or Sanders has won enough delegates to get the nomination .
That leaves the door open for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential ambitions…

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by InfoBrics, authored by William Stroock, author of military fiction…
Political reformers often speak of the influence of money in politics, as if people banding together to support candidates with shared interests is somehow corrupting. Modern American political history is filled with failed self-funding candidates like New Jersey millionaire publisher, Steve Forbes, in 1996 or Texas businessman, H. Ross Perot, in 1992. This year, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg joins the list of rich men who tried to buy the presidency. To date, the Mayor has spent an astonishing $248 million on television campaign advertisements. One has not been able to watch the NFL playoffs without seeing Blomberg’s face at least half a dozen times.
Bloomberg’s political we-produced advertisements portray him as an accomplished businessman, the successful mayor of New York City who kept crime under control, and a can-do go-getter capable of uniting America. Along the way, Bloomberg takes a swipe at President Trump. These are the campaign ads of a moderate, problem solving, Democrat perfect for the 1990s. Sadly for Bloomberg, the year is 2020 and the Democrat Party base isn’t interested in moderation.
Bloomberg is averaging about 7 percent of the Democrat Party vote according to the Real Clear Politics poll of polls. Fellow billionaire-for-whom-money-is-no-object, Tom Steyer, is near the bottom with an average of 2.4 percent. Despite chronic gaffs and flubs, Biden’s support remains steady with a 28.4 percent average. Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders poll average has surged to 20.4 percent. Elizabeth Warren has dropped nearly a third from her late summer high to an average 14.8 percent.
In Biden, Sanders, and Warren, we see the main Democrat Party factions. Biden is drawing support from older Democrats who once supported Bill Clinton and African Americans who recall his service as Barrack Obama’s VP. Ironically, the 78-year-old Sanders is the candidate of the young, enthusiastic hard-left led by socialist firebrands Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ilhan Omar (D-MN).
Elizabeth Warren’s is a campaign of ideas, a liberal checklist of long sought-after policy goals from transgender rights to gun control to Medicare-for-all, the last of which she stole from Sanders. She is a lawyer, college professor, and former federal bureaucrat, the candidate of, by, and for liberal bi-coastal professionals. Journalists love Warren because they too are bi-coastal professionals. This week the New York Times, the flagship paper of the Democrat elite and ruling class, endorsed Warren. The Times also bizarrely endorsed Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar at the same time, saying she was a moderate and perhaps hopping to kick off a drive for the first all-woman presidential ticket. And why not? Thanks to intersectional powerhouse Ilhan Omar (she checks no less than four boxes: black, Muslim, immigrant, female) the state of Minnesota will be in play this November. Besides, should Sanders or Warren win the nomination, there’s no way Warren would choose Sanders, or Sanders would choose Warren. During the last debate, Warren said Sanders told her a woman would never be president. When Sanders denied saying any such thing, Warren accused him of calling her a liar on national television. Sander’s legions of young, male supporters, the so-called Bernie-Bros, now hate Warren with the same intensity they once hated Hillary.
Biden leads the February 3rd Iowa Caucus by an average of 3.7 percent while Sanders leads the February 11th New Hampshire primary by an average of 1.3 percent. Bloomberg hardly registers in either poll sample. A Biden victory in Iowa would prolong his campaign and give him enough political energy to stay viable through to the southern primaries where African American voters dominate.
The two Democrat billionaires have failed to qualify for the debates. One more and we’ll have a definite trend. Perhaps money can’t buy the presidency. Instead, reformers should think about ways to fix both parties’ broken candidate selection process. Right now, the campaigns begin in Iowa and New Hampshire. These two small states, which are in no way indicative of the rest of America, have an outsized roll in the nomination process. Every four years candidates spend tens of millions of dollars trying to win Iowa and New Hampshire in order to make themselves the front runner and create an aura of inevitability. From there, the campaigns move to the South Carolina primary, the so-called firewall state where party establishments kill insurgent campaigns. From there, it’s on to the odious Super Tuesday, a mismatched jumble of a primary with states from all over the country. Very often many primaries occur long after candidates have dropped out and the race is all but over. This writer has not cast a vote in a meaningful primary since 2000 when he lived in Virginia.
Instead, why not group the smaller states into cohorts and hold separate primaries for big states, a California Primary, a Texas Primary, and so on? Or perhaps the parties could hold regional primaries, say for New England, the Mountain West, and the South. Because, right now, the current system is more likely than not to yield a ‘hung’ party where neither Biden, Warren, or Sanders has won enough delegates to get the nomination. That leaves the door open for a certain well-funded former candidate who still harbors presidential ambitions…
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-22--World powers meet in Berlin to broker Libya peace deal (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the push to broker a final peace in Libya during the Berlin Conference .
The conference in Berlin of 11 countries was aimed at bringing an end to the fighting between the UN-recognized government in Tripoli led by the prime minister , Fayez al-Sarraj , and the Libyan National Army in the country ’ s east led by Gen Khalifa Haftar .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
World powers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday to discuss the way forward to end the conflict in Libya .
Leaders and officials from Turkey , Russia , Egypt , France , Italy , the United Kingdom and the United States attended the gathering in the German capital , while representatives from the UAE , Algeria , China , the Republic of the Congo , the United Nations , European Union and African Union were also present .
Renegade military commander Khalifa Haftar and his rival , Fayez al-Sarraj , who leads the internationally recognised Government of National Accord ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the summit but did not participate .
Haftar , who is backed by a rival administration based in eastern Libya , launched a military offensive on Tripoli in April which has since stalled .
Some foreign powers had upped their support to the warring factions in an attempt to break the deadlock , but in Berlin , world leaders agreed on a joint course of action to de-escalate the conflict .
Here are the main points they agreed on their final communique , to be put forward as a UN Security Council resolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refraining from interference in the armed conflict or in the internal affairs of Libya ” and urge all international actors “ to do the same ” .
The participants “ commit to unequivocally and fully respect and implement the arms embargo ” established by the UN in 2011 but frequently violated , and “ call on all international actors to do the same ” .
“ We call on all actors to refrain from any activities exacerbating the conflict … including the financing of military capabilities or the recruitment of mercenaries , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asks UN experts to monitor and investigate any breaches of the arms embargo “ on a continuous basis ” and called all actors to enforce UNSC sanctions against those found to be in breach of the embargo .
The signatories to the final statement “ call on all parties concerned to redouble their efforts for a sustained suspension of hostilities , de-escalation and a permanent ceasefire ” .
They also urge “ the redeployment of heavy weapons , artillery and aerial vehicles ” and an end to all military movements by , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties – throughout Libya and in its airspace , the text reads .
The participants invite the UN to establish “ technical committees ” to monitor the implementation of the truce .
They call on the UNSC “ to impose appropriate sanctions on those who are found to be in violation of the ceasefire arrangements and on member states to enforce these ” .
According to the text , the participants want to see “ credible steps ” towards “ the dismantling of armed groups and militias ” in Libya , whose members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , security and military state institutions ” .
The UN is asked to assist in the demobilisation process .
The participants also call for the restoration of the monopoly of the state to the legitimate use of force .
They support the establishment of unified Libyan national security , police and military forces under central , civilian authority , building upon the Cairo talks , and the documents produced therein .
The Berlin document urges “ all Libyan parties to resume the inclusive Libyan-led and Libyan-owned political process under the auspices of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Libya ] ” to reach an intra-Libyan solution .
The goal is to pave “ the way to end the transitional period ” through free , fair and credible parliamentary and presidential elections .
The participants “ urge all parties in Libya to fully respect international humanitarian law and human rights law ” .
They call for an “ end to the practice of arbitrary detention ” and urge the Libyan authorities to “ gradually close the detention centres for migrants and asylum seekers ” .
The participants stressed the importance of restoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in particular the Central Bank of Libya and the National Oil Corporation ( NOC ) .
They urge all parties to guarantee the security of the country ’ s crucial oil infrastructure , and reject “ any illicit exploitation of its energy resources ” .
The document calls for transparent , accountable , fair and equitable distribution of public wealth and resources between different Libyan geographical areas , including through decentralisation and support for municipalities .
The agreement urges Libyan authorities to further strengthen “ transitional justice institutions , including prosecution initiatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which should be in line with internationally recognised standards and principles ” .
At a news conference announcing the communique , UN chief Antonio Guterres said al-Sarraj , the GNA head , and Haftar , had each appointed five military representatives to attend follow-up talks in Geneva “ in the next few days ” .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the push to broker a final peace in Libya during the Berlin Conference.
The conference in Berlin of 11 countries was aimed at bringing an end to the fighting between the UN-recognized government in Tripoli led by the prime minister, Fayez al-Sarraj, and the Libyan National Army in the country’s east led by Gen Khalifa Haftar.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via Al Jazeera…
World powers held a high-stakes summit in Berlin on Sunday to discuss the way forward to end the conflict in Libya.
Leaders and officials from Turkey, Russia, Egypt, France, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States attended the gathering in the German capital, while representatives from the UAE, Algeria, China, the Republic of the Congo, the United Nations, European Union and African Union were also present.
Renegade military commander Khalifa Haftar and his rival, Fayez al-Sarraj, who leads the internationally recognised Government of National Accord (GNA) based in Tripoli, attended the summit but did not participate.
Haftar, who is backed by a rival administration based in eastern Libya, launched a military offensive on Tripoli in April which has since stalled. Some foreign powers had upped their support to the warring factions in an attempt to break the deadlock, but in Berlin, world leaders agreed on a joint course of action to de-escalate the conflict.
Here are the main points they agreed on their final communique, to be put forward as a UN Security Council resolution.
End to foreign interference
The Berlin participants “commit to refraining from interference in the armed conflict or in the internal affairs of Libya” and urge all international actors “to do the same”.
UN arms embargo
The participants “commit to unequivocally and fully respect and implement the arms embargo” established by the UN in 2011 but frequently violated, and “call on all international actors to do the same”.
“We call on all actors to refrain from any activities exacerbating the conflict … including the financing of military capabilities or the recruitment of mercenaries,” the text adds.
The document also asks UN experts to monitor and investigate any breaches of the arms embargo “on a continuous basis” and called all actors to enforce UNSC sanctions against those found to be in breach of the embargo.
Ceasefire
The signatories to the final statement “call on all parties concerned to redouble their efforts for a sustained suspension of hostilities, de-escalation and a permanent ceasefire”.
They also urge “the redeployment of heavy weapons, artillery and aerial vehicles” and an end to all military movements by, or in direct support of, the conflict parties – throughout Libya and in its airspace, the text reads.
The participants invite the UN to establish “technical committees” to monitor the implementation of the truce.
They call on the UNSC “to impose appropriate sanctions on those who are found to be in violation of the ceasefire arrangements and on member states to enforce these”.
Dissolving militias
According to the text, the participants want to see “credible steps” towards “the dismantling of armed groups and militias” in Libya, whose members should then be integrated “into civilian, security and military state institutions”. The UN is asked to assist in the demobilisation process.
The participants also call for the restoration of the monopoly of the state to the legitimate use of force. They support the establishment of unified Libyan national security, police and military forces under central, civilian authority, building upon the Cairo talks, and the documents produced therein.
Return to political process
The Berlin document urges “all Libyan parties to resume the inclusive Libyan-led and Libyan-owned political process under the auspices of the UNSMIL [the UN Support Mission in Libya]” to reach an intra-Libyan solution.
The goal is to pave “the way to end the transitional period” through free, fair and credible parliamentary and presidential elections.
Human rights
The participants “urge all parties in Libya to fully respect international humanitarian law and human rights law”.
They call for an “end to the practice of arbitrary detention” and urge the Libyan authorities to “gradually close the detention centres for migrants and asylum seekers”.
Economy and oil
The participants stressed the importance of restoring and safeguarding the integrity of Libyan institutions, in particular the Central Bank of Libya and the National Oil Corporation (NOC).
They urge all parties to guarantee the security of the country’s crucial oil infrastructure, and reject “any illicit exploitation of its energy resources”.
Distribution of wealth
The document calls for transparent, accountable, fair and equitable distribution of public wealth and resources between different Libyan geographical areas, including through decentralisation and support for municipalities.
The agreement urges Libyan authorities to further strengthen “transitional justice institutions, including prosecution initiatives, reparations, truth-seeking and institutional reform, which should be in line with internationally recognised standards and principles”.
Follow-up talks
At a news conference announcing the communique, UN chief Antonio Guterres said al-Sarraj, the GNA head, and Haftar, had each appointed five military representatives to attend follow-up talks in Geneva “in the next few days”.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-23--Putin Calls for a New System Guided by the UN Charter… But Is It Possible?

Anyone looking with sober eyes upon today ’ s world and the feeble economic and geopolitical underpinnings holding the system together must accept the fact that a new system WILL be created .
This is not an opinion , but a fact .
We are moving towards eight billion lives on this globe and the means of productive powers to sustain that growing population ( at least in the west ) has been permitted to decay terribly over the recent half century while monetary values have grown like a hyperinflationary cancer to unimaginable proportions .
Derivatives speculation alone under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ banking system has resulted in over $ 1.5 quadrillion in nominal values which have ZERO connection to the real world ( GDP globally barely accounts for $ 80 trillion ) .
Over the past 5 months $ 415 billion of QE bailouts have been released into the bankrupt banks to prevent a collapse .
So , economically it ’ s foundation of sand .
Militarily , the west has followed the earlier Roman empire of yesteryear by overextending itself beyond capacity creating situations of global turmoil , death and unbounded resentment at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Military industrial complex .
The recent near-war with Iran at the start of 2020 put the world on a fast track towards a nuclear war with Iran ’ s allies Russia and China .
Culturally , the disconnection from the traditional values that gave western civilization it ’ s moral fitness to survive and grow has resulted in a post-truth age now spanning over three generations ( from the baby boomers to today ’ s young adults ) who have become the most confused class of people in modern history losing all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wants ” , “ right ” vs “ wrong ” , “ beauty ” vs “ ugliness ” or even “ male ” and “ female ” .
Without ranting on anymore , it suffices to say that this thing is not sustainable .
So the question is not “ will we get a new system ?
” but rather “ whom will this new system serve ?
” Will this new system serve an oligarchical agenda at the expense of the nations and people of the earth or will it serve the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the earth at the expense of the oligarchy ?
President Putin ’ s January 15 State of the Union was a breath of fresh air for this reason , as the world leader who has closely allied his nation ’ s destiny to China ’ s Belt and Road Initiative , laid out a call for a new system to be created by the five largest nuclear powers as common allies under a multi-polar paradigm .
After speaking about Russia ’ s vision for internal improvements , Putin shifted towards the international arena @ @ @ @ @ @ @ USA , UK , China and France to organize a new architecture that goes far beyond merely military affairs , Putin stated : Putin ’ s emphasis that “ the United Nations should set an example ” is not naïve fantasy , nor “ crypto globalist rhetoric ” as some of his critics have stated .
Putin knows that the UN has been misused by anti-nation state ideologues for a very long time .
He also knows his history better than his critics and is aware that the original mandate of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sovereign nation state .
Article 2.1 of the charter clearly says : “ The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
” For readers who are perhaps rightfully cynical that such organizations as the UN could ever play a truly positive role in world affairs , it is important to recall that the UN was never intended to have any unilateral authority over nation states , or military power unto itself when was created in 1945 .
Its purpose was intended to provide a platform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harmonize their policies and overcome misunderstanding with the aim of protecting the general welfare of the people of the earth .
Articles 1.3-4 state clearly that the UN ’ s is designed “ to achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic , social , cultural , or humanitarian character , and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race , sex , language , or religion and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United Nations principles as enunciated in its pre-amble and core articles were to ever be followed ( just like America ’ s own admirable constitution ) : then wars of aggression and regime change would not be possible .
Article 2.4 directly addresses this saying : “ All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state ” .
These principles stand in stark contrast to the earlier 1919 Round Table/RIIA-orchestrated attempt at a post-national world order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was rightfully put out of its misery by nationalists of the 1920s .
FDR ’ s 1944 vision , as Putin is well aware , was based not on “ world government ” , but rather upon the concept of a community of sovereign nations collaborating on vast development and infrastructure projects which were intended to be the effect of an “ internationalization ” of the New Deal that transformed America in the years following the Great Depression .
The closest approximation to this spirit in practice in our modern age is found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Initiative .
Thousands of Asian , African and South American engineers and statesmen were invited to visit the USA during the 1930s and early 1940s to study the Tennessee Valley Authority and other great New Deal water , agriculture and energy projects in order to bring those ideas back to their countries as a driver to break out of the shackles of colonialism both politically , culturally and economically .
In opposition to FDR , Churchill the unrepentant racist was okay with offering political independence , but never the cultural or economic means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ devolved into an Anglo-American alliance with FDR ’ s death in 1945 , the other Bretton Woods Institutions which were meant to provide international productive credit to those large scale infrastructure projects to end colonialism were taken over by FDR ’ s enemies who purged the IMF and World Bank of all loyalists to FDR ’ s international New Deal vision throughout the years of the red scare .
Whether these corrupt financing institutions can be brought back to their original intention or whether they must simply be replaced with new lending mechanisms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , BRICS New Development Bank or Silk Road Investment Fund remains to be seen .
What is vital to keep in mind is that Putin ( just like FDR before him ) knows that neither Britain nor Britain ’ s Deep State loyalists in America can trusted .
Yet , in spite of their mistrust , they both knew that a durable world order could only be accomplished if these forces were reined in under a higher law imposed by the authority of truly sovereign nations , and this is why FDR ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to provide the impetus to global development initiatives and achieve the goals of the Atlantic Charter .
This partnership was sabotaged over FDR ’ s dead body as the Cold War and Truman Doctrine broke that alliance .
The goal of ending colonialism had to wait another 80 years .
At the 2007 Munich Security Conference , Putin had already laid his insight into history clearly on the table when he said : “ This universal , indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that “ security for one is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ D. Roosevelt said during the first few days that the Second World War was breaking out : “ When peace has been broken anywhere , the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger… I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today ’ s world .
And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today ’ s – and precisely in today ’ s – world , then the military , political and economic resources would not suffice .
What is even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.
” Putin is not naïve to call for the United Nations charter to serve as the guiding light of a new military , political , economic architecture .
Nor is he naïve to think that such untrustworthy nations as the USA , UK and France should serve in partnership with Russia and China since Putin knows that it will be Russia and China shaping the terms of the new system and not the collapsing basket-cases of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ betrays a losing hand , which is why certain forces have been so desperate to overthrow the poker table over the past few years .
The fact that Putin , Xi and their growing allies have not permitted this chaos agenda to unfold has not only driven “ end of history ” imperialists into rage fits but also gives FDR ’ s vision for a community of sovereign nation states a second chance at life .
Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , BRI expert correspondent on Tactical Talk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Untold History of Canada ’ book series .
His works appear regularly on The Duran , Strategic Culture , Sott , Fort Russ , Zero Hedge , L.A. Review of Books , LeSaker.fr , Vigile Quebec , and South Front .
In 2019 Matthew co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation .
He can be reached at [ email protected ]

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Anyone looking with sober eyes upon today’s world and the feeble economic and geopolitical underpinnings holding the system together must accept the fact that a new system WILL be created.
This is not an opinion, but a fact. We are moving towards eight billion lives on this globe and the means of productive powers to sustain that growing population (at least in the west) has been permitted to decay terribly over the recent half century while monetary values have grown like a hyperinflationary cancer to unimaginable proportions. Derivatives speculation alone under the deregulated “too big to fail” banking system has resulted in over $1.5 quadrillion in nominal values which have ZERO connection to the real world (GDP globally barely accounts for $80 trillion). Over the past 5 months $415 billion of QE bailouts have been released into the bankrupt banks to prevent a collapse. So, economically it’s foundation of sand.
Militarily, the west has followed the earlier Roman empire of yesteryear by overextending itself beyond capacity creating situations of global turmoil, death and unbounded resentment at the dominant Anglo American powers controlling NATO and the Military industrial complex. The recent near-war with Iran at the start of 2020 put the world on a fast track towards a nuclear war with Iran’s allies Russia and China.
Culturally, the disconnection from the traditional values that gave western civilization it’s moral fitness to survive and grow has resulted in a post-truth age now spanning over three generations (from the baby boomers to today’s young adults) who have become the most confused class of people in modern history losing all discrimination of “needs” vs “wants”, “right” vs “wrong”, “beauty” vs “ugliness” or even “male” and “female”.
Without ranting on anymore, it suffices to say that this thing is not sustainable.
So the question is not “will we get a new system?” but rather “whom will this new system serve?”
Will this new system serve an oligarchical agenda at the expense of the nations and people of the earth or will it serve the interests of the nations and people of the earth at the expense of the oligarchy?
Putin Revives a Forgotten Vision
President Putin’s January 15 State of the Union was a breath of fresh air for this reason, as the world leader who has closely allied his nation’s destiny to China’s Belt and Road Initiative, laid out a call for a new system to be created by the five largest nuclear powers as common allies under a multi-polar paradigm.
After speaking about Russia’s vision for internal improvements, Putin shifted towards the international arena saying:
“I am convinced that it is high time for a serious and direct discussion about the basic principles of a stable world order and the most acute problems that humanity is facing. It is necessary to show political will, wisdom and courage. The time demands an awareness of our shared responsibility and real actions.”
Calling for Russia, the USA, UK, China and France to organize a new architecture that goes far beyond merely military affairs, Putin stated:
“The founding countries of the United Nations should set an example. It is the five nuclear powers that bear a special responsibility for the conservation and sustainable development of humankind. These five nations should first of all start with measures to remove the prerequisites for a global war and develop updated approaches to ensuring stability on the planet that would fully take into account the political, economic and military aspects of modern international relations.”
Putin’s emphasis that “the United Nations should set an example” is not naïve fantasy, nor “crypto globalist rhetoric” as some of his critics have stated.
Putin knows that the UN has been misused by anti-nation state ideologues for a very long time. He also knows his history better than his critics and is aware that the original mandate of the United Nations was premised upon the defense of the sovereign nation state. Article 2.1 of the charter clearly says: “The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.”
For readers who are perhaps rightfully cynical that such organizations as the UN could ever play a truly positive role in world affairs, it is important to recall that the UN was never intended to have any unilateral authority over nation states, or military power unto itself when was created in 1945. Its purpose was intended to provide a platform for dialogue where sovereign nation states could harmonize their policies and overcome misunderstanding with the aim of protecting the general welfare of the people of the earth. Articles 1.3-4 state clearly that the UN’s is designed “to achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.”
If the United Nations principles as enunciated in its pre-amble and core articles were to ever be followed (just like America’s own admirable constitution): then wars of aggression and regime change would not be possible. Article 2.4 directly addresses this saying: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state”.
These principles stand in stark contrast to the earlier 1919 Round Table/RIIA-orchestrated attempt at a post-national world order under the failed League of Nations which was rightfully put out of its misery by nationalists of the 1920s. FDR’s 1944 vision, as Putin is well aware, was based not on “world government”, but rather upon the concept of a community of sovereign nations collaborating on vast development and infrastructure projects which were intended to be the effect of an “internationalization” of the New Deal that transformed America in the years following the Great Depression. The closest approximation to this spirit in practice in our modern age is found in China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Thousands of Asian, African and South American engineers and statesmen were invited to visit the USA during the 1930s and early 1940s to study the Tennessee Valley Authority and other great New Deal water, agriculture and energy projects in order to bring those ideas back to their countries as a driver to break out of the shackles of colonialism both politically, culturally and economically. In opposition to FDR, Churchill the unrepentant racist was okay with offering political independence, but never the cultural or economic means to achieve it.
Although the world devolved into an Anglo-American alliance with FDR’s death in 1945, the other Bretton Woods Institutions which were meant to provide international productive credit to those large scale infrastructure projects to end colonialism were taken over by FDR’s enemies who purged the IMF and World Bank of all loyalists to FDR’s international New Deal vision throughout the years of the red scare. Whether these corrupt financing institutions can be brought back to their original intention or whether they must simply be replaced with new lending mechanisms such as the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, BRICS New Development Bank or Silk Road Investment Fund remains to be seen.
What is vital to keep in mind is that Putin (just like FDR before him) knows that neither Britain nor Britain’s Deep State loyalists in America can trusted. Yet, in spite of their mistrust, they both knew that a durable world order could only be accomplished if these forces were reined in under a higher law imposed by the authority of truly sovereign nations, and this is why FDR’s post-war plans involved a USA-Russia-China-UK partnership to provide the impetus to global development initiatives and achieve the goals of the Atlantic Charter. This partnership was sabotaged over FDR’s dead body as the Cold War and Truman Doctrine broke that alliance. The goal of ending colonialism had to wait another 80 years.
At the 2007 Munich Security Conference, Putin had already laid his insight into history clearly on the table when he said:
“This universal, indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that “security for one is security for all”. As Franklin D. Roosevelt said during the first few days that the Second World War was breaking out: “When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger… I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today’s – and precisely in today’s – world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.”
Putin is not naïve to call for the United Nations charter to serve as the guiding light of a new military, political, economic architecture. Nor is he naïve to think that such untrustworthy nations as the USA, UK and France should serve in partnership with Russia and China since Putin knows that it will be Russia and China shaping the terms of the new system and not the collapsing basket-cases of the west whose excess bluff and bluster betrays a losing hand, which is why certain forces have been so desperate to overthrow the poker table over the past few years. The fact that Putin, Xi and their growing allies have not permitted this chaos agenda to unfold has not only driven “end of history” imperialists into rage fits but also gives FDR’s vision for a community of sovereign nation states a second chance at life.
Originally Published on the Strategic Culture Foundation
Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review, BRI expert correspondent on Tactical Talk and has authored 3 volumes of ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series. His works appear regularly on The Duran, Strategic Culture, Sott, Fort Russ, Zero Hedge, L.A. Review of Books, LeSaker.fr, Vigile Quebec, and South Front. In 2019 Matthew co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation. He can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-23--Comey under investigation for leaking Soros-Wasserman Schultz emails obtained by Dutch intelligence

Comey under investigation for leaking Soros-Wasserman Schultz emails obtained by Dutch intelligence (Video)

The Duran ’ s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss a New York Times report that claims the Justice Department is investigating whether disgraced FBI Director James Comey illegally leaked secret information concerning a Russian document , obtained via a Dutch intelligence hack , to The New York Times and The Washington Post .
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute .
The Duran Audio Podcast : Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes .
New York Times report says prosecutors are scrutinizing at least two news articles about the FBI and Comey that mentioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice Department is investigating whether then-FBI Director James Comey illegally leaked secret information concerning a Russian document to The New York Times and The Washington Post , the Times reported late Thursday .
The new review , which the Times downplayed as a possibly politically motivated probe , reportedly concerned a Russian intelligence document “ claiming a tacit understanding between the Clinton campaign and the [ Obama ] Justice Department over the inquiry into whether she intentionally revealed classified information through her use of a private email server , ” as the Post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligence accessed the document on Russian computers and provided it to the FBI .
Included in the document was a discussion between Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz , D-Fla. , then the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee , and Leonard Benardo , who worked with the George Soros-founded group Open Society Foundations .
Schultz told Benardo in the document that then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch would ensure Clinton was not prosecuted in the email probe .
The two have denied the conversation , and citing “ people familiar with its contents , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ has long been viewed within the FBI as unreliable and possibly a fake ” by Russians .
Now , suspicion has fallen on Comey being one of those “ persons familiar with ” the document ’ s contents , according to the Times ’ reporting .
The document played a role in Comey ’ s decision to unilaterally announce in the summer of 2016 , without seeking Lynch ’ s approval , that no “ reasonable prosecutor ” would charge Clinton .
Comey was worried that Russia could leak the email and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impartiality otherwise , the Times reported .
Daniel Richman , a Columbia Law School professor and longtime Comey friend who helped him leak memos of private conversations with President Trump that ultimately led to Special Counsel Robert Mueller ’ s appointment , was quoted in the Times ’ 2017 article describing the Russian document .
The DOJ decided last year against prosecuting Comey for leaking classified information following a referral from the department ’ s inspector general .
The IG did find , however , that Comey had violated FBI policy in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ code name and true identity ” of a sensitive source .
“ Everyone at the DOJ involved in the decision said it wasn ’ t a close call , ” one official told Fox News at the time .
“ They all thought this could not be prosecuted.
” Sources familiar with Daniel Richman ’ s status at the FBI told Fox News that he was assigned to “ special projects ” by Comey , and had a security clearance as well as badge access to the building .
Comey penned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the days leading up to his firing .
He then passed those documents to Richman , who gave them to The New York Times .
Comey admitted to that arrangement during congressional testimony .
After the fact , the FBI classified two of those memos as “ confidential.
” DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz had referred Comey for potential prosecution as part of an internal review .
But , one of the key factors leading to the DOJ declining to prosecute apparently was the fact that the two memos were labeled “ confidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chain of events that led to them ending up with the press .
Trump , for his part , has called Comey corrupt repeatedly , saying his termination was justified .
Comey ’ s former deputy at the FBI , Andrew McCabe , has admitted he lied to investigators about his own leaks to the media .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss a New York Times report that claims the Justice Department is investigating whether disgraced FBI Director James Comey illegally leaked secret information concerning a Russian document, obtained via a Dutch intelligence hack, to The New York Times and The Washington Post.
Support Free Speech:
Subscribe to The Duran on YouTube – Find us on BitChute.
The Duran Audio Podcast:
Follow on Soundcloud – Subscribe on iTunes.
Via Fox News…
New York Times report says prosecutors are scrutinizing at least two news articles about the FBI and Comey that mentioned a secret Russian intelligence document.
The Justice Department is investigating whether then-FBI Director James Comey illegally leaked secret information concerning a Russian document to The New York Times and The Washington Post, the Times reported late Thursday.
The new review, which the Times downplayed as a possibly politically motivated probe, reportedly concerned a Russian intelligence document “claiming a tacit understanding between the Clinton campaign and the [Obama] Justice Department over the inquiry into whether she intentionally revealed classified information through her use of a private email server,” as the Post described it in May 2017.
Dutch intelligence accessed the document on Russian computers and provided it to the FBI. Included in the document was a discussion between Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., then the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, and Leonard Benardo, who worked with the George Soros-founded group Open Society Foundations.
Schultz told Benardo in the document that then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch would ensure Clinton was not prosecuted in the email probe.
The two have denied the conversation, and citing “people familiar with its contents,” the Post reported in 2017 that the document “has long been viewed within the FBI as unreliable and possibly a fake” by Russians.
Now, suspicion has fallen on Comey being one of those “persons familiar with” the document’s contents, according to the Times’ reporting.
The document played a role in Comey’s decision to unilaterally announce in the summer of 2016, without seeking Lynch’s approval, that no “reasonable prosecutor” would charge Clinton. Comey was worried that Russia could leak the email and undermine the investigation’s appearance of impartiality otherwise, the Times reported.
Daniel Richman, a Columbia Law School professor and longtime Comey friend who helped him leak memos of private conversations with President Trump that ultimately led to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment, was quoted in the Times’ 2017 article describing the Russian document.
The DOJ decided last year against prosecuting Comey for leaking classified information following a referral from the department’s inspector general. The IG did find, however, that Comey had violated FBI policy in his handling of the memos, which contained the “code name and true identity” of a sensitive source.
“Everyone at the DOJ involved in the decision said it wasn’t a close call,” one official told Fox News at the time. “They all thought this could not be prosecuted.”
Sources familiar with Daniel Richman’s status at the FBI told Fox News that he was assigned to “special projects” by Comey, and had a security clearance as well as badge access to the building.
Comey penned memos memorializing his interactions with Trump in the days leading up to his firing. He then passed those documents to Richman, who gave them to The New York Times. Comey admitted to that arrangement during congressional testimony.
After the fact, the FBI classified two of those memos as “confidential.”
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz had referred Comey for potential prosecution as part of an internal review.
But, one of the key factors leading to the DOJ declining to prosecute apparently was the fact that the two memos were labeled “confidential” after he set in motion the chain of events that led to them ending up with the press.
Trump, for his part, has called Comey corrupt repeatedly, saying his termination was justified.
Comey’s former deputy at the FBI, Andrew McCabe, has admitted he lied to investigators about his own leaks to the media.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-24--An Epic Act of Resistance & Trial of Our Times

On February11th , four American peace activists , known as the Embassy Protectors Collective , will be tried before the U.S. empire for “ interfering with certain protective functions ” of its Federal government for their occupation of the Venezuelan embassy in Washington , D.C. to prevent it from being handed over to coup leaders sponsored by the Trump administration .
Their occupation ended on May 16 , 2019 , when federal agents broke into the sealed embassy , against international law , and arrested them in a swat style raid .
The government ’ s accusation against them is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and prosecution , since they haven ’ t broken any laws .
Matter of fact , their true crime in the minds of the Trump administration is just the opposite – it ’ s their brilliant defense of international law , and Venezuela ’ s sovereign right to self-determination against Yankee imperialism .
Although the Trump administration didn ’ t want President Maduro to win a second term , 67 percent of Venezuelans did .
This stands in stark contrast with President Donald Trump ’ s own experience , since he lost the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , a candidate despised by her own democratic party ’ s base – who only managed to secure her place as a presidential nominee due to the fraud perpetrated by the party ’ s elite .
Even the Republican party ’ s use of targeted racist and classist voter suppression and purge techniques could not secure Trump winning numbers at the polls .
In the United States of America , as demonstrated by Trump , a loser can win the presidency .
Compare this with Former President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ the election process in Venezuela is the best in the world.
” Nonetheless , the Trump administration set its heart on Juan Guaido , a man that was not even a candidate in the 2018 election .
Yet , with the superpower ’ s backing , what would be a farce in any other context still remains a threat – as Guaido , left to his own devise , is merely a self-appointed president as well as being a self-appointed leader of a self-appointed assembly .
What elevates this trial in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brave activists struck a successful blow against imperialist aggression from inside the belly of the beast – literally from within Washington , D.C. For 37 days , the Trump administration was powerless against the guile & guts of pediatrician , Margaret Flowers ; medical anthropologist , Adrienne Pine ; attorney , Kevin Zeese ; and activist , David Paul as they bravely upheld Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention .
The four were aided by a strong coalition of activist groups .
In solidarity , 70 members of the various groups , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the embassy with them .
As conditions worsened , or for personal reasons , they disbursed prior to the raid .
However , many remained outside the embassy protesting the siege conditions faced by their comrades inside and delivered food despite facing assault and arrest .
Even the aged civil rights defender , the Reverend Jesse Jackson , personally took part in a food delivery to the Embassy Protectors .
Fortunately , unlike the 72-year-old president of Veterans for Peace , Gerry Cordon , he was not assaulted by police and arrested in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collective that protected the Venezuelan embassy from seizure by Trump ’ s federal agents , local police , and an Astroturf fascist , racist & sexist mob – making their united act of resistance epic and their prosecution a trial of our times .
Despite the best efforts of the biased judge who ruled on December 13th against their right to critical information needed for their defense , their acts of bravery can not be silenced – as activists will ensure their story is told .
On January 29th , Judge Beryl Howell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ motion filed by government lawyers that even more severely restricts what can be discussed during their February 11th trial .
If Judge Howell grants the government ’ s motion , it will leave the Embassy Protectors virtually defenseless .
The government wants the prosecution to be limited exclusively to three things ( 1 ) the four were in the embassy , ( 2 ) they were given a notice of eviction by the police , and ( 3 ) they refused to leave .
Essentially , they want the jury that decides their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ensure the Trump administration ’ s desired outcome – which is to convict the Embassy Protectors and make them a model for how it intends to deal with challenges to its illegal foreign and domestic policies .
The fact that Howell is assigned the case is no accident as she is the chief judge of the U.S. District Court and co-author of the unconstitutional Patriot Act .
Under the Patriot Act , protections against unreasonable search & seizure are waived , and incarceration can be indeterminate and without charge .
So , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Intelligence Community background , that Judge Howell referred to the embassy protectors as a “ gang ” , stated facts in a way that supported their guilt , and made it clear that a trial will result in their conviction .
Among the issues the Trump administration is asking to not be discussed in the Embassy Protectors ’ trial are the following : • That Nicolas Maduro is the democratically elected president of Venezuela .
More than 300 election observers for the 2018 election agreed that the election met international standards .
Additionally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world recognize him as the President of Venezuela as does the United Nations .
• That Juan Guaido has no legitimacy to represent the Venezuelan government .
Also , he is under investigation for his role in the “ humanitarian aid ” corruption scandal .
• That Carlos Vecchio , whose demand that the Embassy Protectors leave the embassy and was the basis of their eviction , is not an ambassador from Venezuela but part of Guaido ’ s failed coup .
Additionally , Vecchio , a former Exxon oil executive , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laundering to the tune of US $ 70 million through CITGO , Venezuela ’ s US-based subsidiary of the state oil company PDVSA .
• That they were in the embassy with the permission of the elected government of Venezuela .
• That they received advice that they were in the embassy legally .
• That negotiations were ongoing between the US and Venezuela for a mutual protecting power agreement which would have resulted in Switzerland protecting the US embassy in Caracas and Turkey protecting the Venezuelan embassy in DC .
And that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would leave voluntarily when that agreement was reached .
Additionally , The day before the four were arrested , Samuel Moncada , the Venezuelan ambassador to the UN , held a press conference where he discussed the negotiation for a protecting power agreement and reconfirmed that the Embassy Protectors were in the embassy with Venezuela ’ s permission .
• That they were surrounded by a coup mob that was blocking food from coming into the embassy .
• That the electricity and water were turned off on them .
• That the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who had no legitimate right to enter the embassy to arrest them .
• That the Embassy Protectors were acting within their First Amendment rights .
The Embassy Protectors face federal charges punishable by up to one year in prison , a $ 100,000 fine each , and restitution to the government for police time & damages , which is considerable given the duration of their occupation and the absurd amount of armed forces used in the embassy raid – as they remain 4 unarmed senior and middle-aged peace activists .
Since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen in prison , especially to dissidents , people of conscious must ensure all charges are dropped .
So , let us stand on the right side of history with the Embassy Protectors and show solidarity by attending their trial in Washington , D.C. , which begins on February 11th , donating to their legal fund , and spreading the truth of what ’ s really happening widely .
Lauren Smith is an independent journalist .
Her work has been published by Counterpunch , Common Dreams , Telesur , Monthly Review , Alliance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CA amongst others .
She holds a BA in Politics , Economics and Society from SUNY at Old Westbury and an MPA in International Development Administration from New York University .
Her historical fiction novel based on Nicaragua ’ s 1979 revolution is due out this year .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by Lauren Smith…
On February11th, four American peace activists, known as the Embassy Protectors Collective, will be tried before the U.S. empire for “interfering with certain protective functions” of its Federal government for their occupation of the Venezuelan embassy in Washington, D.C. to prevent it from being handed over to coup leaders sponsored by the Trump administration. Their occupation ended on May 16, 2019, when federal agents broke into the sealed embassy, against international law, and arrested them in a swat style raid. The government’s accusation against them is merely a pretext used for their arrest and prosecution, since they haven’t broken any laws. Matter of fact, their true crime in the minds of the Trump administration is just the opposite – it’s their brilliant defense of international law, and Venezuela’s sovereign right to self-determination against Yankee imperialism.
Although the Trump administration didn’t want President Maduro to win a second term, 67 percent of Venezuelans did. This stands in stark contrast with President Donald Trump’s own experience, since he lost the popular vote in 2017 to Former Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a candidate despised by her own democratic party’s base – who only managed to secure her place as a presidential nominee due to the fraud perpetrated by the party’s elite. Even the Republican party’s use of targeted racist and classist voter suppression and purge techniques could not secure Trump winning numbers at the polls. In the United States of America, as demonstrated by Trump, a loser can win the presidency. Compare this with Former President Jimmy Carter’s 2012 declaration that “the election process in Venezuela is the best in the world.”
Nonetheless, the Trump administration set its heart on Juan Guaido, a man that was not even a candidate in the 2018 election. Yet, with the superpower’s backing, what would be a farce in any other context still remains a threat – as Guaido, left to his own devise, is merely a self-appointed president as well as being a self-appointed leader of a self-appointed assembly.
What elevates this trial in our collective consciousness is the fact that these brave activists struck a successful blow against imperialist aggression from inside the belly of the beast – literally from within Washington, D.C. For 37 days, the Trump administration was powerless against the guile & guts of pediatrician, Margaret Flowers; medical anthropologist, Adrienne Pine; attorney, Kevin Zeese; and activist, David Paul as they bravely upheld Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention. The four were aided by a strong coalition of activist groups. In solidarity, 70 members of the various groups, including journalists, took turns staying inside the embassy with them. As conditions worsened, or for personal reasons, they disbursed prior to the raid. However, many remained outside the embassy protesting the siege conditions faced by their comrades inside and delivered food despite facing assault and arrest. Even the aged civil rights defender, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, personally took part in a food delivery to the Embassy Protectors. Fortunately, unlike the 72-year-old president of Veterans for Peace, Gerry Cordon, he was not assaulted by police and arrested in this process.
It is this grassroots collective that protected the Venezuelan embassy from seizure by Trump’s federal agents, local police, and an Astroturf fascist, racist & sexist mob – making their united act of resistance epic and their prosecution a trial of our times.
Despite the best efforts of the biased judge who ruled on December 13th against their right to critical information needed for their defense, their acts of bravery cannot be silenced – as activists will ensure their story is told. On January 29th, Judge Beryl Howell will hear pre-trial arguments concerning a recent motion filed by government lawyers that even more severely restricts what can be discussed during their February 11th trial. If Judge Howell grants the government’s motion, it will leave the Embassy Protectors virtually defenseless. The government wants the prosecution to be limited exclusively to three things (1) the four were in the embassy, (2) they were given a notice of eviction by the police, and (3) they refused to leave. Essentially, they want the jury that decides their fate to be blindfolded. This will ensure the Trump administration’s desired outcome – which is to convict the Embassy Protectors and make them a model for how it intends to deal with challenges to its illegal foreign and domestic policies.
The fact that Howell is assigned the case is no accident as she is the chief judge of the U.S. District Court and co-author of the unconstitutional Patriot Act. Under the Patriot Act, protections against unreasonable search & seizure are waived, and incarceration can be indeterminate and without charge. So, it’s no surprise, with her Intelligence Community background, that Judge Howell referred to the embassy protectors as a “gang”, stated facts in a way that supported their guilt, and made it clear that a trial will result in their conviction.
Among the issues the Trump administration is asking to not be discussed in the Embassy Protectors’ trial are the following:
That Nicolas Maduro is the democratically elected president of Venezuela. More than 300 election observers for the 2018 election agreed that the election met international standards. Additionally, more than 150 governments around the world recognize him as the President of Venezuela as does the United Nations.
That Juan Guaido has no legitimacy to represent the Venezuelan government. Also, he is under investigation for his role in the “humanitarian aid” corruption scandal.
That Carlos Vecchio, whose demand that the Embassy Protectors leave the embassy and was the basis of their eviction, is not an ambassador from Venezuela but part of Guaido’s failed coup. Additionally, Vecchio, a former Exxon oil executive, is charged with fraud, embezzlement and money laundering to the tune of US $70 million through CITGO, Venezuela’s US-based subsidiary of the state oil company PDVSA.
That they were in the embassy with the permission of the elected government of Venezuela.
That they received advice that they were in the embassy legally.
That negotiations were ongoing between the US and Venezuela for a mutual protecting power agreement which would have resulted in Switzerland protecting the US embassy in Caracas and Turkey protecting the Venezuelan embassy in DC. And that the Embassy Protectors had stated that they would leave voluntarily when that agreement was reached. Additionally, The day before the four were arrested, Samuel Moncada, the Venezuelan ambassador to the UN, held a press conference where he discussed the negotiation for a protecting power agreement and reconfirmed that the Embassy Protectors were in the embassy with Venezuela’s permission.
That they were surrounded by a coup mob that was blocking food from coming into the embassy.
That the electricity and water were turned off on them.
That the Vienna Convention was violated by federal agents, who had no legitimate right to enter the embassy to arrest them.
That the Embassy Protectors were acting within their First Amendment rights.
The Embassy Protectors face federal charges punishable by up to one year in prison, a $100,000 fine each, and restitution to the government for police time & damages, which is considerable given the duration of their occupation and the absurd amount of armed forces used in the embassy raid – as they remain 4 unarmed senior and middle-aged peace activists. Since their charges are unjust and anything can happen in prison, especially to dissidents, people of conscious must ensure all charges are dropped. So, let us stand on the right side of history with the Embassy Protectors and show solidarity by attending their trial in Washington, D.C., which begins on February 11th, donating to their legal fund, and spreading the truth of what’s really happening widely.
Lauren Smith is an independent journalist. Her work has been published by Counterpunch, Common Dreams, Telesur, Monthly Review, Alliance for Global Justice and Global Research, CA amongst others. She holds a BA in Politics, Economics and Society from SUNY at Old Westbury and an MPA in International Development Administration from New York University. Her historical fiction novel based on Nicaragua’s 1979 revolution is due out this year.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-24--Greek NGO: Church of Greece Recognized Ukrainian Autocephaly in Violation of Law

The Greek NGO Pan-Hellenic Orthodox Union is to appeal to the country ’ s Council of State claiming that the decision of the Church of Greece to recognize the Ukrainian autocephaly was taken in violation of Greek law , the Orthodoxos Typos reports .
On October 12 , 2019 , the Council of Bishops of the Church of Greece held an extraordinary meeting on recognizing the autocephaly granted to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine ( OCU ) by the Ecumenical Patriarchate .
At the meeting , it was decided to give Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens and All Greece a mandate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Orthodox Church of Ukraine .
The Union demands that the decision of the Bishops ’ Council taken on October 12 , 2019 , is annulled .
The reason is that the Council acted in disregard for Greek laws , in particular Article 19 of Regulation No .
1/1977 ( Regarding the procedures of the Council of Bishops of the Church of Greece ) since no secret or open voting took place and its result wasn ’ t supported by the majority of votes ( 2/3 of votes ) .
Despite the minutes of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the written text of the decision hasn ’ t been published yet .
The Church of Greece ’ s intention to recognize the OCU drew heavy criticism among theologians and clergymen .
Thus , Metropolitan Symeon of Neo Smyrni addressed Archbishop Ieronymos and the Synod to stress that the Ukrainian autocephaly raises lots of questions and doubts .
In particular , he pays attention to the facts that it wasn ’ t requested by a canonical local Church and the schismatics or the so-called “ self-consecrated ” ( the uncanonical Ukrainian Orthodox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) were recognized bypassing the canonical local Church .
The Metropolitan also reminded that instead of unifying the faithful in Ukraine the Ecumenical Patriarchate ’ s decision only divided them since the “ honorary patriarch ” Filaret and a number of bishops split from the newly established OCU .
Earlier , Greek Metropolitan Seraphim of Kythira called upon the Bishops ’ Council not to make hasty decisions on the Ukrainian issue .
According to His Eminence , the Patriarch of Constantinople had no right to grant autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church because it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Orthodox Church , which previously was recognized by Constantinople and the whole Orthodox world .
The same point of view is expressed by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware , a hierarch of the Patriarchate of Constantinople who has stated on numerous occasions that Ukraine is the canonical territory of the Russian Church .
Besides that , Patriarch Theophilos of Jerusalem and Metropolitan Seraphim of Piraeus claimed the Ukrainian issue is a part of geopolitical game which is played between the East and the West and leads to a split in the Orthodox world .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Bishops ’ Council of the Church of Greece .
Now , if the Council of State declares the bishops ’ decision unlawful , the Church of Greece ’ s support for the OCU ’ s autocephaly might be revised .
According to the Orthodoxos Typos , the hearing of the Pan-Hellenic Orthodox Union ’ s appeal is to be held on March 6 , 2020 .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Submitted by Nadia Bazuk…
The Greek NGO Pan-Hellenic Orthodox Union is to appeal to the country’s Council of State claiming that the decision of the Church of Greece to recognize the Ukrainian autocephaly was taken in violation of Greek law, the Orthodoxos Typos reports.
On October 12, 2019, the Council of Bishops of the Church of Greece held an extraordinary meeting on recognizing the autocephaly granted to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU) by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. At the meeting, it was decided to give Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens and All Greece a mandate to proceed with the recognition of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine.
The Union demands that the decision of the Bishops’ Council taken on October 12, 2019, is annulled. The reason is that the Council acted in disregard for Greek laws, in particular Article 19 of Regulation No. 1/1977 (Regarding the procedures of the Council of Bishops of the Church of Greece) since no secret or open voting took place and its result wasn’t supported by the majority of votes (2/3 of votes). Despite the minutes of the meeting were authenticated by the Council, the written text of the decision hasn’t been published yet.
The Church of Greece’s intention to recognize the OCU drew heavy criticism among theologians and clergymen. Thus, Metropolitan Symeon of Neo Smyrni addressed Archbishop Ieronymos and the Synod to stress that the Ukrainian autocephaly raises lots of questions and doubts.
In particular, he pays attention to the facts that it wasn’t requested by a canonical local Church and the schismatics or the so-called “self-consecrated” (the uncanonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kyivan Patriarchate and Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church) were recognized bypassing the canonical local Church. The Metropolitan also reminded that instead of unifying the faithful in Ukraine the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s decision only divided them since the “honorary patriarch” Filaret and a number of bishops split from the newly established OCU.
Earlier, Greek Metropolitan Seraphim of Kythira called upon the Bishops’ Council not to make hasty decisions on the Ukrainian issue. According to His Eminence, the Patriarch of Constantinople had no right to grant autocephaly to the Ukrainian Church because it is under the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church, which previously was recognized by Constantinople and the whole Orthodox world. The same point of view is expressed by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, a hierarch of the Patriarchate of Constantinople who has stated on numerous occasions that Ukraine is the canonical territory of the Russian Church.
Besides that, Patriarch Theophilos of Jerusalem and Metropolitan Seraphim of Piraeus claimed the Ukrainian issue is a part of geopolitical game which is played between the East and the West and leads to a split in the Orthodox world.
However, all these arguments were not considered by the Bishops’ Council of the Church of Greece.
Now, if the Council of State declares the bishops’ decision unlawful, the Church of Greece’s support for the OCU’s autocephaly might be revised. According to the Orthodoxos Typos, the hearing of the Pan-Hellenic Orthodox Union’s appeal is to be held on March 6, 2020.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report


theduran--2020-01-24--Twelve Questions For Donald Trump (Part 2)

1 ) There are too many such cases to enumerate here , but on August 11 , 2014 , a young white man named Dillon Taylor was shot in the back by a police officer after ignoring a warning to stop .
He was wearing headphones at the time .
The district attorney ruled the murder justified .
Last year , a Salt Lake City judge dismissed a lawsuit by the victim ’ s family .
2 ) On September 26 , 2016 , the unarmed black motorist Terence Crutcher was shot dead by Betty Shelby .
Then candidate Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and indicated that under his Presidency incidents like this would not happen .
Shelby was charged only with manslaughter , and after her acquittal was rewarded with a new job teaching police officers how to handle the aftermath of police shootings , if you can believe that ?
3 ) Again , there have been many such incidents , including of visibly pregnant women being assaulted by uniformed thugs .
4 ) Police officers in many states routinely seize at times quite large sums of money from motorists and others for no legitimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get his money back , he then has to sue in civil court .
Perhaps the worst such case was that of Rebecca Brown from whom the DEA seized a staggering eighty-two thousand dollars , money she was taking to the bank for her elderly father .
5 ) The InstituteForJustice has uploaded a whole series of videos to YouTube on this subject .
Some of the imaginary crimes concerned include stacking wood in the backyard and “ having cracks and crumbles ” in a house driveway .
6 ) Any business that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faced with this problem .
7 ) Hillary Clinton found a way to transfer top secret information from SCIFs and Government intranets onto the regular Internet .
8 ) This happens not simply to us little people but even to the President , as the world now knows .
9 ) The homelessness situation in especially San Francisco has now become so grave that it is now a serious public health risk , and has seen the return of Mediaeval diseases .
10 ) Even without the ludicrous # MeToo Movement , women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make false allegations of anything up to aggravated rape against not only celebrities but any man in the public eye , including Donald Trump .
Because the vast majority of such allegations are historical in nature they are mostly impossible to disprove , but even when they are , such liars are never held to account .
11 ) Andy Ngo for one , or anyone wearing a MAGA hat .
12 ) The Federal Reserve is part of a private banking cartel that creates money out of thin air then lends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where not just the American national debt but the debt of all nations comes from .

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
1) There are too many such cases to enumerate here, but on August 11, 2014, a young white man named Dillon Taylor was shot in the back by a police officer after ignoring a warning to stop. He was wearing headphones at the time. The district attorney ruled the murder justified. Last year, a Salt Lake City judge dismissed a lawsuit by the victim’s family.
2) On September 26, 2016, the unarmed black motorist Terence Crutcher was shot dead by Betty Shelby. Then candidate Trump said video of the murder was disturbing and indicated that under his Presidency incidents like this would not happen. Shelby was charged only with manslaughter, and after her acquittal was rewarded with a new job teaching police officers how to handle the aftermath of police shootings, if you can believe that.
3) Again, there have been many such incidents, including of visibly pregnant women being assaulted by uniformed thugs.
4) Police officers in many states routinely seize at times quite large sums of money from motorists and others for no legitimate reason. If the victim wants to get his money back, he then has to sue in civil court. Perhaps the worst such case was that of Rebecca Brown from whom the DEA seized a staggering eighty-two thousand dollars, money she was taking to the bank for her elderly father.
5) The InstituteForJustice has uploaded a whole series of videos to YouTube on this subject. Some of the imaginary crimes concerned include stacking wood in the backyard and “having cracks and crumbles” in a house driveway.
6) Any business that handles large amounts of cash can be faced with this problem.
7) Hillary Clinton found a way to transfer top secret information from SCIFs and Government intranets onto the regular Internet.
8) This happens not simply to us little people but even to the President, as the world now knows.
9) The homelessness situation in especially San Francisco has become so grave that it is now a serious public health risk, and has seen the return of Mediaeval diseases.
10) Even without the ludicrous #MeToo Movement, women of a certain type have become incentivised to make false allegations of anything up to aggravated rape against not only celebrities but any man in the public eye, including Donald Trump. Because the vast majority of such allegations are historical in nature they are mostly impossible to disprove, but even when they are, such liars are never held to account.
11) Andy Ngo for one, or anyone wearing a MAGA hat.
12) The Federal Reserve is part of a private banking cartel that creates money out of thin air then lends it at interest. This is largely where not just the American national debt but the debt of all nations comes from.
Back to Part 1.
Read Later Add to Favourites Add to Collection Report