21stcenturywire--2020-02-15--What’s Really Driving Countries Like Turkey and India to Buy Russian S-400s?

Russian surface-to-air missiles ( SAMs ) systems continue to dominate the defense industry and geopolitical headlines .
Why is everyone ( especially Washington ) so interested in this Russian weapons system ?
It is undoubtedly a powerful system which rivals its US Patriot Missile counterpart , but there has to be more to it than that .
More than anything else , the demand for the S400 is a signal that this type of air defense technology not only spells greater security for those countries which possess it , but also more sovereign autonomy .
War planners in Washington are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waging sanctions against some of its allies who are daring to shop in foreign markets .
Not only is it a financial issue for Washington , but also a military and geostrategic one , as Russian batteries mean there is no requirement for the typical teams of American technicians which come with such large US packages .
Besides this , it means that any country operating this system is denying the US a backdoor into their air defenses should they ever come under threat from Washington .
Currently , both India and Turkey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by defense officials in Moscow , and many are wondering how Washington will be able to cope with their arch-competitor .
RT International reports how former Indian naval intelligence officer , Shishir Upadhyaya , believes that not only is the Russian system more cost effective , but it ’ has superior defense capabilities too… The S-400 ‘ Triumf ’ air defense system is taking the globe by storm .
After NATO member Turkey , India is next in line and even Iraq is reportedly interested , despite US threats of sanctioning anyone who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lucknow DefExpo 2020 last week , Russian officials confirmed that India will receive its first shipment of S-400s by September 2021 .
The $ 5 billion deal signed in 2018 will be moving ahead despite US warnings that such a purchase could trigger sanctions under the CAATSA ( Countering America ’ s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act ) , which President Donald Trump signed in August 2017 as part of a wider program aimed against Russia .
The versatile missile system has been around since 2007 , but in recent years emerged as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aspirations – and not just traditional buyers of Russian arms .
The S-400 is winning out over several other options , including the US Patriot and THAAD systems , which has not made Washington happy .
Saudi Arabia and Iraq are the latest countries which have taken keen interest in the ‘ Triumf.
’ Riyadh was offered the S-400 following the September 2019 drone attack on the kingdom ’ s oil fields – apparently carried out by the Houthis from Yemen , although the Saudis have blamed Iran .
The strikes revealed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sophisticated air-defense systems , based around the US-made Patriot surface-to-air missiles and associated radars .
( … ) Iraq is reportedly also considering the purchase of S-400s , but is yet to formally begin consultations with Russia .
“ There have been no appeals from the Iraqi side about the purchase of Russian S-400 air defense systems , but there is interest in them , ” said Russian ambassador to Iraq , Maxim Maximov .
“ We always say that we are ready to continue to assist the Iraqi government in strengthening the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though a NATO ally , received its first S-400s last summer , and is expected to have the systems online sometime this year .
Washington reacted strongly , blocking Ankara from purchasing US F-35 fighter jets for which it has contracted .
China is in the middle of receiving its final shipment of the S-400s .
Evidently , the increasing US activity in the South China Sea – involving advanced aircraft such as the F-35 and F-22 – may have compelled Beijing to buy the S-400 , tacitly acknowledging that its own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counter the modern US air power .
Interestingly , Washington has not sanctioned Beijing over the S-400 purchase , though it had imposed sanctions earlier for buying fighter jets and missiles from Russia .
Nor have sanctions been implemented against India , despite numerous threats to do so by the US .
This might be in part because New Delhi has sought to placate Washington by considering the purchase of American NASAMS II ( National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System ) for protection of the national capital region against ballistic missiles .
Furthermore , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a $ 3.6 billion helicopter deal with the US , which could reportedly be signed during President Trump ’ s visit later this month .
( … ) The S-400 has a good pedigree , coming from the family of S-200 and S-300 air defense missile systems .
It made its debut on the world stage in 2007 , when it was first put into service of the Russian armed forces .
However , it has yet to be tested in battle , unlike the US Patriot Pac-2 , manufactured by Raytheon , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So what is making countries across the globe opt for the Russian system instead ?
Apparently , a combination of costs , political baggage , and versatility .
The ‘ Triumf ’ is much cheaper than American offerings , coming in at about $ 500 million compared to the $ 1 billion for the Patriot Pac-2 or the $ 3 billion for a THAAD battery .
Russian weapons systems are generally less expensive than most Western counterparts , in part because US contracts all come with extensive – and expensive – maintenance deals @ @ @

By
Russian surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) systems continue to dominate the defense industry and geopolitical headlines. Why is everyone (especially Washington) so interested in this Russian weapons system?
It is undoubtedly a powerful system which rivals its US Patriot Missile counterpart, but there has to be more to it than that. More than anything else, the demand for the S400 is a signal that this type of air defense technology not only spells greater security for those countries which possess it, but also more sovereign autonomy. War planners in Washington are not happy about recent developments and are waging sanctions against some of its allies who are daring to shop in foreign markets. Not only is it a financial issue for Washington, but also a military and geostrategic one, as Russian batteries mean there is no requirement for the typical teams of American technicians which come with such large US packages. Besides this, it means that any country operating this system is denying the US a backdoor into their air defenses should they ever come under threat from Washington.
Currently, both India and Turkey are in the headlines for being courted by defense officials in Moscow, and many are wondering how Washington will be able to cope with their arch-competitor.
RT International reports how former Indian naval intelligence officer, Shishir Upadhyaya, believes that not only is the Russian system more cost effective, but it’ has superior defense capabilities too…
The S-400 ‘Triumf’ air defense system is taking the globe by storm. After NATO member Turkey, India is next in line and even Iraq is reportedly interested, despite US threats of sanctioning anyone who buys weapons from Moscow.
At the Lucknow DefExpo 2020 last week, Russian officials confirmed that India will receive its first shipment of S-400s by September 2021. The $5 billion deal signed in 2018 will be moving ahead despite US warnings that such a purchase could trigger sanctions under the CAATSA (Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act), which President Donald Trump signed in August 2017 as part of a wider program aimed against Russia.
Race for the ‘Triumf’
The versatile missile system has been around since 2007, but in recent years emerged as a must-have for any nation with serious military aspirations – and not just traditional buyers of Russian arms. The S-400 is winning out over several other options, including the US Patriot and THAAD systems, which has not made Washington happy.
Saudi Arabia and Iraq are the latest countries which have taken keen interest in the ‘Triumf.’ Riyadh was offered the S-400 following the September 2019 drone attack on the kingdom’s oil fields – apparently carried out by the Houthis from Yemen, although the Saudis have blamed Iran. The strikes revealed the limits of Saudi Arabia’s seemingly sophisticated air-defense systems, based around the US-made Patriot surface-to-air missiles and associated radars.
(…) Iraq is reportedly also considering the purchase of S-400s, but is yet to formally begin consultations with Russia.
“There have been no appeals from the Iraqi side about the purchase of Russian S-400 air defense systems, but there is interest in them,” said Russian ambassador to Iraq, Maxim Maximov. “We always say that we are ready to continue to assist the Iraqi government in strengthening the country’s defense capabilities.”
Turkey, though a NATO ally, received its first S-400s last summer, and is expected to have the systems online sometime this year. Washington reacted strongly, blocking Ankara from purchasing US F-35 fighter jets for which it has contracted.
China is in the middle of receiving its final shipment of the S-400s. Evidently, the increasing US activity in the South China Sea – involving advanced aircraft such as the F-35 and F-22 – may have compelled Beijing to buy the S-400, tacitly acknowledging that its own home-grown air defense system was inadequate to counter the modern US air power.
Sanctions bluff?
Interestingly, Washington has not sanctioned Beijing over the S-400 purchase, though it had imposed sanctions earlier for buying fighter jets and missiles from Russia.
Nor have sanctions been implemented against India, despite numerous threats to do so by the US. This might be in part because New Delhi has sought to placate Washington by considering the purchase of American NASAMS II (National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System) for protection of the national capital region against ballistic missiles. Furthermore, India is in advanced stages of negotiating a $3.6 billion helicopter deal with the US, which could reportedly be signed during President Trump’s visit later this month.
(…) The S-400 has a good pedigree, coming from the family of S-200 and S-300 air defense missile systems. It made its debut on the world stage in 2007, when it was first put into service of the Russian armed forces.
However, it has yet to be tested in battle, unlike the US Patriot Pac-2, manufactured by Raytheon, and Lockheed Martin’s THAAD. So what is making countries across the globe opt for the Russian system instead? Apparently, a combination of costs, political baggage, and versatility.
The ‘Triumf’ is much cheaper than American offerings, coming in at about $500 million compared to the $1 billion for the Patriot Pac-2 or the $3 billion for a THAAD battery. Russian weapons systems are generally less expensive than most Western counterparts, in part because US contracts all come with extensive – and expensive – maintenance deals tacked on….
Continue this article at RT International
READ MORE S400 NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire S400 Files
SUPPORT OUR INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-15--Buttigieg Begins Experiencing LGBT Backlash in U.S.

Is identity politics failing ?
During a recent private fundraiser at San Francisco ’ s National LGBTQ Center for the Arts , two queer activists stood up to question Democratic Party candidate Pete Buttigieg .
Supporters of the Mayor of South Bend , Indiana proceeded to shout-down the female protesters , chanting “ Buttigieg , Buttigieg !
” The activists were said to have been asking questions regarding Buttigieg ’ s husband , Chasten .
Before being shouted-down by his crowd , the two petite Asian females were promptly escorted out of their seats by a tall heavy-set bouncer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ I respect your activism , but this is a gathering for supporters of our campaign and I just got a question about my husband and I ’ m really excited to answer it.
” Watch : .
The two activists belonged to group that were protesting outside the venue who are pushing a candidate who they believe is not representative of them or their experiences .
Buttigieg is the first openly gay candidate to run for President in the United States , and has since attracted the financial support of the billionaire ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As one activist named Celi Tamayo-Lee told The Guardian : Another student activist , Adiel Pollydore , remarked on the painful irony of an event which cost $ 250 to attend , as well as Buttigieg ’ s acute lack of optical awareness : “ We need better , we deserve better … .
There ’ s a level of irony that this event costs hundreds of dollars to attend in the Mission , a historically Latinx and immigrant neighborhood .
What does it say that this event is not accessible to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s being held ?
” For this and other reasons , he has reaped a backlash from the LBGTQ+ community , many of who are not convinced of Buttigieg ’ s progressive credentials .
While Buttigieg ’ s campaign does have the largest proportion of LGBT supporters , according to a recent report and polling data supplied by Morning Consult , Senator Bernie Sanders is the top choice among 34 % of LGBTQ primary voters , with Buttigieg finishing in a marginal fourth place position .
Next up in the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where both Sanders and Biden appear to leading in the polls , but Buttigieg is already cutting into Biden ’ s lead following two strong showings in Iowa and New Hampshire .
Following Super Tuesday , Buttigieg hopes to be among the top three candidates before heading into the large states of Texas , New York and California .

By
Is identity politics failing? During a recent private fundraiser at San Francisco’s National LGBTQ Center for the Arts, two queer activists stood up to question Democratic Party candidate Pete Buttigieg.
Supporters of the Mayor of South Bend, Indiana proceeded to shout-down the female protesters, chanting “Buttigieg, Buttigieg!”
The activists were said to have been asking questions regarding Buttigieg’s husband, Chasten.
Before being shouted-down by his crowd, the two petite Asian females were promptly escorted out of their seats by a tall heavy-set bouncer.
Buttigieg then told the crowd, “I respect your activism, but this is a gathering for supporters of our campaign and I just got a question about my husband and I’m really excited to answer it.” Watch:
.
The two activists belonged to group that were protesting outside the venue who are pushing a candidate who they believe is not representative of them or their experiences.
Buttigieg is the first openly gay candidate to run for President in the United States, and has since attracted the financial support of the billionaire ‘donor class’ of American oligarchy.
As one activist named Celi Tamayo-Lee told The Guardian:
“I’m definitely proud of the fact that a gay candidate has made it thus far, but it’s hard to enjoy or appreciate when his stances are so middle of the road and speak to a predominantly white, upper class audience.”
Another student activist, Adiel Pollydore, remarked on the painful irony of an event which cost $250 to attend, as well as Buttigieg’s acute lack of optical awareness:
“We need better, we deserve better …. There’s a level of irony that this event costs hundreds of dollars to attend in the Mission, a historically Latinx and immigrant neighborhood. What does it say that this event is not accessible to the folks that live in the neighborhood where it’s being held?”
For this and other reasons, he has reaped a backlash from the LBGTQ+ community, many of who are not convinced of Buttigieg’s progressive credentials.
The problems don’t end there.
While Buttigieg’s campaign does have the largest proportion of LGBT supporters, according to a recent report and polling data supplied by Morning Consult, Senator Bernie Sanders is the top choice among 34% of LGBTQ primary voters, with Buttigieg finishing in a marginal fourth place position.
Next up in the Democratic Primary schedule will be the Nevada Caucuses, where both Sanders and Biden appear to leading in the polls, but Buttigieg is already cutting into Biden’s lead following two strong showings in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Following Super Tuesday, Buttigieg hopes to be among the top three candidates before heading into the large states of Texas, New York and California.
STAY TUNED FOR MORE UPDATES
READ MORE 2020 ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2020 Files
SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-15--Boris Johnson Cancels Planned Trip to White House After Trump Hangs-up Over Harry Dunn and Huawei

Yesterday , Boris Johnson cancelled plans for a scheduled spring visit to the White House following a heated telephone exchange with Donald Trump , with issues becoming so contentious it led the US President to hang up the phone on the British Prime Minister .
According to reports , their dispute arose because of two highly contentious issues : Britain ’ s decision to allow Chinese firm Huawei to play a role in the UK ’ s 5G network , and the death of British teenager Harry Dunn at the hands of the wife of an American intelligence agent .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ warfare against China , and in particular against telecom giant Huawei , which Washington claims is a real “ national security concern , ” and insists it is using the new 5G network to secretly spy on western citizens .
However , the UK government has decided to proceed forward with its Chinese agreements and allow the firm to supply sections of the UK ’ s new 5G roll-out .
Boris Johnson most certainly has upset the White House after stating recently that the UK ’ s extradition agreement with the US is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harry Dunn case as a prime example .
The 19 year-old British teenager was killed in a hit and run incident last year after being struck by Anne Sacoolas , the wife of an US intelligence operative stationed at RAF Croughton base .
When the collision took place , Sacoolas cooperated with UK police and was breathalysed , but then ignored authorities order to be available for further questioning when she promptly fled to the US after claiming “ diplomatic immunity ” from questioning or possible prosecution .
According to Britain ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ formally charged with dangerous driving .
Not surprisingly , US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rejected the UK ’ s extradition request for Ms Sacoolas .
Downing Street has denied there is any issue between Johnson and Trump , and insists that the PM has canceled his Washington trip in order to focus on getting his domestic agenda passed in the coming months .
Regardless of the pretext , it will still be very interesting to see how both of these two important issues affect the vaunted ‘ special relationship ’ between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be seen if either of these are red lines , or what each party may be required of the other as penance .

By
Yesterday, Boris Johnson cancelled plans for a scheduled spring visit to the White House following a heated telephone exchange with Donald Trump, with issues becoming so contentious it led the US President to hang up the phone on the British Prime Minister.
According to reports, their dispute arose because of two highly contentious issues: Britain’s decision to allow Chinese firm Huawei to play a role in the UK’s 5G network, and the death of British teenager Harry Dunn at the hands of the wife of an American intelligence agent.
The Trump Administration has been waging economic warfare against China, and in particular against telecom giant Huawei, which Washington claims is a real “national security concern,” and insists it is using the new 5G network to secretly spy on western citizens. However, the UK government has decided to proceed forward with its Chinese agreements and allow the firm to supply sections of the UK’s new 5G roll-out.
Boris Johnson most certainly has upset the White House after stating recently that the UK’s extradition agreement with the US is “imbalanced,” citing the recent Harry Dunn case as a prime example. The 19 year-old British teenager was killed in a hit and run incident last year after being struck by Anne Sacoolas, the wife of an US intelligence operative stationed at RAF Croughton base.
IMAGE: Anne Sacoolas and her victim Harry Dunn.
When the collision took place, Sacoolas cooperated with UK police and was breathalysed, but then ignored authorities order to be available for further questioning when she promptly fled to the US after claiming “diplomatic immunity” from questioning or possible prosecution.
According to Britain’s Crown Prosecution Services, Sacoolas has been formally charged with dangerous driving.
Not surprisingly, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rejected the UK’s extradition request for Ms Sacoolas.
Downing Street has denied there is any issue between Johnson and Trump, and insists that the PM has canceled his Washington trip in order to focus on getting his domestic agenda passed in the coming months.
Regardless of the pretext, it will still be very interesting to see how both of these two important issues affect the vaunted ‘special relationship’ between the US and UK.
It remains to be seen if either of these are red lines, or what each party may be required of the other as penance.
READ MORE 5G NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 5G Files
SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-17--‘Media Freedom’ Campaign Pushes Magnitsky Sanctions – But Ignores Case of Julian Assange

IMAGE : Julian Assange and his former lawyer Amal Clooney .
At a meeting in Chatham House , London , last week , a ‘ High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom ’ announced their recommendations on ‘ how to better protect journalists and address abuses of media freedom in line with international human rights law.
’ The announcement shows the true nature and at least one purpose of the media freedom project set up last year by the former British Foreign Secretary , Jeremy Hunt and Canada ’ s Chrystia Freeland – to promote of an alliance in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the meeting , Amal Clooney , celebrated human rights lawyer , appointed by Hunt last year to be the UK ’ s media freedom envoy , described various cases of journalists being persecuted around the world including the recent case of Glenn Greenwald , accused by a public prosecutor in Brazil of criminal misconduct related to Greenwald ’ s anti-corruption investigation into ‘ Operation Car Wash. ’ However , absent from any mention was Wikileaks founder Julian Assange , whom Amal Clooney had represented several years ago , and who , only a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maximum security Belmarsh prison , without charge , held under an US extradition order after being indicted by President Trump ’ s Department of Justice on 17 counts under the Espionage Act of 1917 .
His extradition hearing begins one week from now .
It is especially strange given that in the days leading up to this recent Chatham House meeting , that the European Council condemned the prosecution and extradition trial of Assange , the leader of the British government opposition , Jeremy Corbyn , stood in the House of Commons and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a threat to journalism .
It is unlikely this blatant omission of Assange ’ s case was by mistake , and can therefore be assumed it was airbrushed by design .
If Assange is extradited to the US , and then found guilty , it would have monumental effects on the freedom of speech .
It would set the stage for any journalist or publisher anywhere in the world , who dared expose any US crime and corruption – to be subjected to criminalisation , extradition and imprisonment in the US .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dissenting journalists .
However , instead of addressing this hugely significant case , the Media Freedom confab was promoting a form of economic warfare known as Magnitsky sanctions , currently deployed by Washington to be a creative ‘ extra ’ used for targeting individuals in addition to broader economic sanctions used to target populations and governments .
It ’ s important to note that like the Media Freedom campaign , Magnitsky Sanctions are also neatly packaged in seemingly innocuous human rights rhetoric .
Magnitsky sanctions can be imposed unilaterally by a country like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way around obstacles like UN Security Council vetoes .
However , they may soon be imposed collectively , essentially through a US-UK-EU axis reflecting their shared foreign policy and political alliance , and NATO objectives too .
In theory , this could be a good idea , but only if these were applied fairly to all parties and without prejudice .
Theoretically , they could be used to target officials in the Israeli military the next time a Palestinian reporter is shot dead in Gaza , or to target the governor of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been held on spurious allegations , but history shows this is unlikely .
The most likely targets will be individuals in countries where the Western alliance has shared geopolitical interests .
For Britain , this will mean targeting individuals in countries such as Russia , Syria , Iran and Venezuela – and where the US and Canada have already imposed individually targeted sanctions in some cases .
There are Magnitsky provisions in the UK ’ s 2018 Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act or SAMLA , that provide a framework for waging economic warfare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of pretexts framed in human rights rhetoric , ostensibly “ Gross human rights violations ” .
These have their roots in the US 2016 Global Magnitsky Act which followed the original 2012 Act .
The narrative which underpins the whole Magnitsky story was built upon a web of allegations made by American financier Bill Browder ( image , left ) who claims that Sergei Magnitsky , a “ Russian lawyer ” ( in reality he was only an accountant ) who worked for Browder in Moscow , was persecuted for ‘ blowing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before dying as a result of state-sponsored abuse while in prison .
This version and the details of events have been challenged by numerous competent and qualified critics of Browder .
As it turns out , Browder himself is wanted for massive fraud in Russia , and has also been linked to the UK Foreign Office information warfare program known as the Integrity Initiative .
Aside from being the go-to pundit for all major corporate media outlets , he has been given access to the legislatures , including repeatedly being given a platform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frame British policy towards Russia .
There are a number of important questions regarding the legality of these Magnitsky sanctions .
These are not agreed by the UN , but rather , are used as foreign policy tools of powerful states , and can be used collectively for politically-motivated reasons .
Simply put , these are a means of bypassing any international arbitration or similar mechanisms designed to uphold international law – despite claims that they are ‘ in line with international law.
’ They are also likely to be used exclusively by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against developing countries who have no such equivalent apparatus or ability to hold these world powers to account .
What ’ s more , despite the claim during the meeting that they do not affect large numbers of people , testimony shows this is not the case .
As of May 2019 , the US had 7,967 sanctions in place against various persons and organisations , a number which continues to grow every month .
What ’ s rarely if ever discussed in the West is how targeted sanctions have wide-reaching effects on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no recourse to justice .
As for evidence of abuse used to justify sanctions , it has been shown that this is often very poor , and even at times something as spurious as a newspaper article ( essentially , any item of propaganda ) can be cited as ‘ evidence ’ of supposed human rights violations or ‘ corruption.
’ Despite the Media Freedom panel ’ s claim that an objective group will examine evidence against potential new sanctions targets , why should we think the scrutiny needed for justifying sanctions for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more objective or thorough than what ’ s currently being used to justify other targeted sanctions ?
It goes without saying that this entire process is prone to politicisation .
In addition to the case of Julian Assange , another case which defies Media Freedom virtue signalling is that of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi .
His case demonstrates yet another clear case of the double standard of the US and British governments .
Following her UN investigation into his killing , Agnes Callamard , UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial , summary or arbitrary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out an international criminal investigation , having found that Khashoggi ’ s murder constituted an international crime involving 6 violations of international law , and not only that , but Saudi Arabia ’ s own investigation violated the law .
The report states : “ The execution of Mr. Khashoggi raises an egregious underlying set of facts , as well as violations of fundamental human rights as well as of international law… , any state should be able to make claims on behalf of Mr. Khashoggi and the violation of his right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( and any other UN bodies ) .
” Yet despite any state being able to demand justice for Khashoggi ( image , left ) , only Canada showed an interest .
Despite all the speeches and rhetoric , Hunt demanded neither truth , nor justice .
Like Assange , this case was marked ‘ do not touch.
’ Instead of pursuing a coordinated criminal investigation that would have involved investigating the Crown Prince , Mohammed bin Salman , suspected by both Callamard and the CIA as being the person giving the execution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and protected his impunity .
Regarding the Magnitsky sanctions which were later imposed by the US and Canada on 17 Saudi nationals for their involvement in Khashoggi ’ s killing , Callamard made the following statement : “ Targeted sanctions against the individuals and/or entities in Saudi Arabia that were likely involved in the murder of Mr. Khashoggi must continue .
However , in view of the credible evidence into the responsibilities of the Crown Prince for his murder , such sanctions ought also to include the Crown Prince and his personal assets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provided and corroborated that he carries no responsibilities for this execution.
” The case of Khashoggi shows that powerful governments who employ Magnitsky sanctions will not impose them on real butchers if the butchers are allies , proof enough of how a political , or geopolitical agenda can often govern their use .
Of those 17 Magnitsky sanctions imposed , Callamard had this to say : “ None of the Governments responsible for issuing such sanctions has provided a well-evidenced explanation as to why these particular individuals have been targeted for sanction … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imposed around the world in response to gross human rights violations , the individuals sanctioned in the aftermath of the execution of Mr. Khashoggi are relatively middle to low-level officials and can not be said to be members of the Saudi leadership .
Yet , the execution of Mr. Khashoggi rises to the level of State responsibility .
This may reflect what Magnitsky sanctions of Western allies are meant for : mainly targeting significant individuals in countries which are non-compliant towards the allies , with little proof needed to justify them being issued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consequence in order to allow more powerful allied actors to save face .
Any effective and credible strategy to protect journalists around the world – should it involve sanctions or not – can not surely be put together and resourced by those world powers who are complicit in the persecution of a leading dissident and journalist ?
If the panel engaged in the reality of the historic case of Julian Assange , they would have to endorse sanctions against both the Johnson and Trump governments , but instead the Media Freedom project appears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the West .
Even worse , it is providing rhetoric justifying economic warfare by increasingly authoritarian governments , some of which are themselves at war with press freedom .
*** Author Nina Cross is an independent writer and researcher , and contributor to 21WIRE .
To see more of her work , visit Nina ’ s archive .

By
IMAGE: Julian Assange and his former lawyer Amal Clooney.
Nina Cross
21st Century Wire
At a meeting in Chatham House, London, last week, a ‘High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom’ announced their recommendations on ‘how to better protect journalists and address abuses of media freedom in line with international human rights law.’ The announcement shows the true nature and at least one purpose of the media freedom project set up last year by the former British Foreign Secretary, Jeremy Hunt and Canada’s Chrystia Freeland – to promote of an alliance in economic warfare using Magnitsky sanctions.
Watch the event in full here:https://t.co/GeGuJ8wWIQ — Chatham House (@ChathamHouse) February 14, 2020
At the meeting, Amal Clooney, celebrated human rights lawyer, appointed by Hunt last year to be the UK’s media freedom envoy, described various cases of journalists being persecuted around the world including the recent case of Glenn Greenwald, accused by a public prosecutor in Brazil of criminal misconduct related to Greenwald’s anti-corruption investigation into ‘Operation Car Wash.’ However, absent from any mention was Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, whom Amal Clooney had represented several years ago, and who, only a few miles away, was languishing in maximum security Belmarsh prison, without charge, held under an US extradition order after being indicted by President Trump’s Department of Justice on 17 counts under the Espionage Act of 1917. His extradition hearing begins one week from now.
It is especially strange given that in the days leading up to this recent Chatham House meeting, that the European Council condemned the prosecution and extradition trial of Assange, the leader of the British government opposition, Jeremy Corbyn, stood in the House of Commons and strongly opposed extradition, denouncing it as a threat to journalism. It is unlikely this blatant omission of Assange’s case was by mistake, and can therefore be assumed it was airbrushed by design.
The rights of journalists and whistleblowers like Julian Assange must be upheld – and his extradition must be opposed. pic.twitter.com/WDGIPQoQxA — Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) February 13, 2020
If Assange is extradited to the US, and then found guilty, it would have monumental effects on the freedom of speech. It would set the stage for any journalist or publisher anywhere in the world, who dared expose any US crime and corruption – to be subjected to criminalisation, extradition and imprisonment in the US. It would give global jurisdiction to Washington over dissenting journalists. However, instead of addressing this hugely significant case, the Media Freedom confab was promoting a form of economic warfare known as Magnitsky sanctions, currently deployed by Washington to be a creative ‘extra’ used for targeting individuals in addition to broader economic sanctions used to target populations and governments. It’s important to note that like the Media Freedom campaign, Magnitsky Sanctions are also neatly packaged in seemingly innocuous human rights rhetoric.
Magnitsky sanctions can be imposed unilaterally by a country like the US, so they provide a way around obstacles like UN Security Council vetoes. However, they may soon be imposed collectively, essentially through a US-UK-EU axis reflecting their shared foreign policy and political alliance, and NATO objectives too. In theory, this could be a good idea, but only if these were applied fairly to all parties and without prejudice. Theoretically, they could be used to target officials in the Israeli military the next time a Palestinian reporter is shot dead in Gaza, or to target the governor of a Ukrainian prison where a Russian journalist has been held on spurious allegations, but history shows this is unlikely. The most likely targets will be individuals in countries where the Western alliance has shared geopolitical interests. For Britain, this will mean targeting individuals in countries such as Russia, Syria, Iran and Venezuela – and where the US and Canada have already imposed individually targeted sanctions in some cases.
The Magnitsky narrative, Bill Browder and British foreign policy
There are Magnitsky provisions in the UK’s 2018 Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act or SAMLA, that provide a framework for waging economic warfare on individual foreign targets under a range of pretexts framed in human rights rhetoric, ostensibly “Gross human rights violations”. These have their roots in the US 2016 Global Magnitsky Act which followed the original 2012 Act.
The narrative which underpins the whole Magnitsky story was built upon a web of allegations made by American financier Bill Browder (image, left) who claims that Sergei Magnitsky, a “Russian lawyer” (in reality he was only an accountant) who worked for Browder in Moscow, was persecuted for ‘blowing the whistle’ on corrupt government officials, before dying as a result of state-sponsored abuse while in prison. This version and the details of events have been challenged by numerous competent and qualified critics of Browder.
As it turns out, Browder himself is wanted for massive fraud in Russia, and has also been linked to the UK Foreign Office information warfare program known as the Integrity Initiative. Aside from being the go-to pundit for all major corporate media outlets, he has been given access to the legislatures, including repeatedly being given a platform in the House of Commons to help frame British policy towards Russia.
There are a number of important questions regarding the legality of these Magnitsky sanctions. These are not agreed by the UN, but rather, are used as foreign policy tools of powerful states, and can be used collectively for politically-motivated reasons. Simply put, these are a means of bypassing any international arbitration or similar mechanisms designed to uphold international law – despite claims that they are ‘in line with international law.’ They are also likely to be used exclusively by an alliance of the most powerful nations against developing countries who have no such equivalent apparatus or ability to hold these world powers to account.
What’s more, despite the claim during the meeting that they do not affect large numbers of people, testimony shows this is not the case. As of May 2019, the US had 7,967 sanctions in place against various persons and organisations, a number which continues to grow every month. What’s rarely if ever discussed in the West is how targeted sanctions have wide-reaching effects on innocent people who have very little or no recourse to justice. As for evidence of abuse used to justify sanctions, it has been shown that this is often very poor, and even at times something as spurious as a newspaper article (essentially, any item of propaganda) can be cited as ‘evidence’ of supposed human rights violations or ‘corruption.’
Despite the Media Freedom panel’s claim that an objective group will examine evidence against potential new sanctions targets, why should we think the scrutiny needed for justifying sanctions for the abuse of journalists would be any more objective or thorough than what’s currently being used to justify other targeted sanctions? It goes without saying that this entire process is prone to politicisation.
Magnitsky sanctions and Kamal Khashoggi
In addition to the case of Julian Assange, another case which defies Media Freedom virtue signalling is that of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. His case demonstrates yet another clear case of the double standard of the US and British governments. Following her UN investigation into his killing, Agnes Callamard, UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killings – called on States to carry out an international criminal investigation, having found that Khashoggi’s murder constituted an international crime involving 6 violations of international law, and not only that, but Saudi Arabia’s own investigation violated the law. The report states:
“The execution of Mr. Khashoggi raises an egregious underlying set of facts, as well as violations of fundamental human rights as well as of international law…, any state should be able to make claims on behalf of Mr. Khashoggi and the violation of his right to life, to the UN Secretary General (and any other UN bodies).”
Yet despite any state being able to demand justice for Khashoggi (image, left), only Canada showed an interest. Despite all the speeches and rhetoric, Hunt demanded neither truth, nor justice. Like Assange, this case was marked ‘do not touch.’ Instead of pursuing a coordinated criminal investigation that would have involved investigating the Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman, suspected by both Callamard and the CIA as being the person giving the execution order, the Western allies backed down and protected his impunity.
Regarding the Magnitsky sanctions which were later imposed by the US and Canada on 17 Saudi nationals for their involvement in Khashoggi’s killing, Callamard made the following statement:
“Targeted sanctions against the individuals and/or entities in Saudi Arabia that were likely involved in the murder of Mr. Khashoggi must continue. However, in view of the credible evidence into the responsibilities of the Crown Prince for his murder, such sanctions ought also to include the Crown Prince and his personal assets abroad, until and unless evidence is provided and corroborated that he carries no responsibilities for this execution.”
The case of Khashoggi shows that powerful governments who employ Magnitsky sanctions will not impose them on real butchers if the butchers are allies, proof enough of how a political, or geopolitical agenda can often govern their use.
Of those 17 Magnitsky sanctions imposed, Callamard had this to say:
“None of the Governments responsible for issuing such sanctions has provided a well-evidenced explanation as to why these particular individuals have been targeted for sanction … In comparison with sanctions that have been imposed around the world in response to gross human rights violations, the individuals sanctioned in the aftermath of the execution of Mr. Khashoggi are relatively middle to low-level officials and cannot be said to be members of the Saudi leadership. Yet, the execution of Mr. Khashoggi rises to the level of State responsibility.
This may reflect what Magnitsky sanctions of Western allies are meant for: mainly targeting significant individuals in countries which are non-compliant towards the allies, with little proof needed to justify them being issued, or for scapegoating individuals of little consequence in order to allow more powerful allied actors to save face.
Any effective and credible strategy to protect journalists around the world – should it involve sanctions or not – cannot surely be put together and resourced by those world powers who are complicit in the persecution of a leading dissident and journalist? If the panel engaged in the reality of the historic case of Julian Assange, they would have to endorse sanctions against both the Johnson and Trump governments, but instead the Media Freedom project appears to be serving as controlled opposition in the West. Even worse, it is providing rhetoric justifying economic warfare by increasingly authoritarian governments, some of which are themselves at war with press freedom.
***
Author Nina Cross is an independent writer and researcher, and contributor to 21WIRE. To see more of her work, visit Nina’s archive.
READ MORE ASSANGE NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Assange/Wikileaks Files
SUPPORT OUR MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-18--To Democrats Who Back Bloomberg: ‘Did you learn nothing from Hillary?’

One of the most significant moments which radically altered the course of the 2016 US presidential election was when candidate Hillary Clinton self immolated with what was meant to be a throwaway quip : “ You know , to just be grossly generalistic , you could put half of Trump ’ s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables .
Right ?
The racist , sexist , homophobic , xenophobic , Islamaphobic—you name it .
And unfortunately there are people like that .
And he has lifted them up.
” And just like that , a quarter of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic nominee , to languish in politically correct purgatory .
Many political analysts believe that was the moment when Clinton well and truly lost the working class heartlands , shedding blue collar voters that had previously been a party stronghold for the Democrats .
But it seems that after four years of railing against President rump , the Democrats party never did any real much soul searching , at least not enough to generate enough self-awareness so as to avoid making that very mistake again in 2020 .
One is for sure : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Michael Bloomberg , never paid much attention to why Hillary lost in 2016 .
If he had , he would be doing this… .
As far as Trump supporters are concerned , one might well ask : “ When will more people have the courage to support Trump ?
” Still , such a barrage of moral lecturing might eventually lead one to question their association with Trump and the GOP — until someone like Mike Bloomberg comes along .
Bloomberg , the gazillionaire former mayor of New York who is seeking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is quickly rivaling Trump on the sheer volume of regrettable words and deeds concerning women and minorities emerging from his recent past .
But Bloomberg ’ s biggest mistake may not be in whatever sins he may have personally committed ; it could be the contempt in which he apparently holds middle America .
An example came to light over the weekend with a 2016 video wherein Bloomberg described how simple — or simpleminded ― he thinks it is to be a farmer .
“ I could teach anybody , even people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ farmer , ” Bloomberg said during remarks at the Said Business School at the University of Oxford in England .
“ You dig a hole , you put a seed in , you put dirt on top , add water , up comes the corn , ” explained Farmer Mike .
The Bloomberg campaign complained that the clip was selectively edited to obscure that Bloomberg wasn ’ t talking about modern-day practices , but even granting that rather generous interpretation , the comments were ignorant and tone-deaf .
Similarly problematic was the attitude @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ You put the piece of metal in the lathe , you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow , you can have a job , ” he said .
Bloomberg said the new “ information economy ” demands that people “ think and analyze , ” which depends on “ a lot more gray matter ” than is apparently necessary to be a farmer or a factory worker , in his view .
Bloomberg ’ s words were soon answered with reminders of just how much brainpower , technology @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modern farmer , and his condescension was noted by pundits and politicians across the ideological spectrum .
But Bloomberg ’ s haughtiness has ramifications beyond his own presidential quest .
More troubling for Democrats is that it all contributed once again to the perception that the liberal elite views millions of Americans as uneducated , backward Neanderthals , or as comprising the “ credulous boomer rube demo , ” as political consultant Rick Wilson recently described it to a fit of giggles from CNN ’ s Don Lemon .
( Lemon later said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just prior to Wilson ’ s comment , not at any group of people . )
Democrats who are backing Bloomberg might well be asked , “ Did you learn nothing from Hillary Clinton ?
” Clinton ’ s “ basket of deplorables ” description of “ half ” of Trump ’ s supporters — “ racist , sexist , homophobic , xenophobic , Islamophobic , you name it , ” she declared — undoubtedly lost her support in states that were supposedly part of the “ blue wall.
” Bloomberg didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his dismissiveness toward the skills and intelligence of farmers and other industrial workers demonstrates the same contemptuous ivory-tower attitude .
( … ) Some Democrats are fretting about the possibility of nominating a socialist as their standard-bearer .
To be sure , that would be uncharted territory .
But they should worry even more about nominating another condescending elitist , because they know from four years ago how that will turn out .
Continue this article at The Washington Post

By
One of the most significant moments which radically altered the course of the 2016 US presidential election was when candidate Hillary Clinton self immolated with what was meant to be a throwaway quip:
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”
And just like that, a quarter of the American population were banished by the Democratic nominee, to languish in politically correct purgatory.
Many political analysts believe that was the moment when Clinton well and truly lost the working class heartlands, shedding blue collar voters that had previously been a party stronghold for the Democrats. But it seems that after four years of railing against President rump, the Democratic party never did any real soul searching, at least not enough to generate enough self-awareness so as to avoid making that very mistake again in 2020.
One is for sure: oligarch, multi billionaire and Democratic candidate, Michael Bloomberg, never paid much attention to why Hillary lost in 2016. If he had, he would be doing this….
Columnist Gary Abernathy explains…
As far as Trump supporters are concerned, one might well ask: “When will more people have the courage to support Trump?” Still, such a barrage of moral lecturing might eventually lead one to question their association with Trump and the GOP — until someone like Mike Bloomberg comes along.
Bloomberg, the gazillionaire former mayor of New York who is seeking to buy the Democratic nomination for president, is quickly rivaling Trump on the sheer volume of regrettable words and deeds concerning women and minorities emerging from his recent past. But Bloomberg’s biggest mistake may not be in whatever sins he may have personally committed; it could be the contempt in which he apparently holds middle America.
An example came to light over the weekend with a 2016 video wherein Bloomberg described how simple — or simpleminded ― he thinks it is to be a farmer. “I could teach anybody, even people in this room, to be a farmer,” Bloomberg said during remarks at the Said Business School at the University of Oxford in England. “You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn,” explained Farmer Mike. The Bloomberg campaign complained that the clip was selectively edited to obscure that Bloomberg wasn’t talking about modern-day practices, but even granting that rather generous interpretation, the comments were ignorant and tone-deaf. Similarly problematic was the attitude Bloomberg seemed to hold toward factory work. “You put the piece of metal in the lathe, you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow, you can have a job,” he said. Bloomberg said the new “information economy” demands that people “think and analyze,” which depends on “a lot more gray matter” than is apparently necessary to be a farmer or a factory worker, in his view. Bloomberg’s words were soon answered with reminders of just how much brainpower, technology and skill are required to be a modern farmer, and his condescension was noted by pundits and politicians across the ideological spectrum. But Bloomberg’s haughtiness has ramifications beyond his own presidential quest. More troubling for Democrats is that it all contributed once again to the perception that the liberal elite views millions of Americans as uneducated, backward Neanderthals, or as comprising the “credulous boomer rube demo,” as political consultant Rick Wilson recently described it to a fit of giggles from CNN’s Don Lemon. (Lemon later said he was laughing at a joke made just prior to Wilson’s comment, not at any group of people.) Democrats who are backing Bloomberg might well be asked, “Did you learn nothing from Hillary Clinton?” Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” description of “half” of Trump’s supporters — “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it,” she declared — undoubtedly lost her support in states that were supposedly part of the “blue wall.” Bloomberg didn’t use such vivid descriptions, but his dismissiveness toward the skills and intelligence of farmers and other industrial workers demonstrates the same contemptuous ivory-tower attitude. (…) Some Democrats are fretting about the possibility of nominating a socialist as their standard-bearer. To be sure, that would be uncharted territory. But they should worry even more about nominating another condescending elitist, because they know from four years ago how that will turn out. Continue this article at The Washington Post READ MORE 2020 ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2020 Files SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-18--Airbrushing Assange: The Guardian’s ‘Press Freedom’ Farce

It ’ s easy to forget that behind the persecution of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is a raft of imperialist policies in works , courtesy of the United States and its allies .
This week , we learned how the UK and US are planning to weaponize the issue of ‘ Media Freedom ‘ in order to impose economic sanctions on their geopolitical enemies and rivals .
It ’ s one thing for governments to spin a cynical yarn on this issue , but it ’ s quite another thing to watch mainstream press outlets bow in full compliance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ newspaper has been mercilessly ridiculed on social media after it failed to highlight the plight of journalist Julian Assange in a piece on Amal Clooney ’ s plans to “ combat media repression globally.
” The outlet ’ s diplomatic editor Patrick Wintour published an article on Monday focused on the ‘ Report on the Use of Targeted Sanctions to Protect Journalists , ’ a document drafted by prominent human rights barrister , Amal Clooney .
Clooney , who represented the WikiLeaks co-founder during Swedish extradition proceedings against him in 2015 , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that targets sanctions against individuals , including ministers , who abuse human rights such as freedom of expression .
Wintour reports that “ The aim is to target anyone throwing journalists in jail , or shutting down the internet , ” without even a brief mention of Assange .
The journalist is currently holed up in Britain ’ s notorious Belmarsh Prison awaiting his UK court hearing on US extradition in what has been widely criticized as the American government suppressing press freedom .
SEE ALSO : ‘ Media Freedom ’ Campaign Pushes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Julian Assange The failure to highlight Assange ’ s case triggered widespread ridicule on social media .
Mark Curtis , a journalist and historian , sarcastically suggested that “ congratulations ” were in order for The Guardian for publishing “ a whole article on global media suppression without mentioning the phrase ‘ Julian Assange ’ .
” Another person hit out at the paper for not mentioning the journalist ’ s imprisonment , saying Assange was “ locked up at the behest of the US because he exposed war crimes , ” while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great career choice for so many like him [ Wintour ] .
” There were those that also slammed Clooney over the banning of Russian media from her first ‘ Media Freedom conference.
’ …

By
It’s easy to forget that behind the persecution of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is a raft of imperialist policies in works, courtesy of the United States and its allies.
This week, we learned how the UK and US are planning to weaponize the issue of ‘Media Freedom‘ in order to impose economic sanctions on their geopolitical enemies and rivals.
It’s one thing for governments to spin a cynical yarn on this issue, but it’s quite another thing to watch mainstream press outlets bow in full compliance to the security state apparatus.
RT International reports…
The Guardian newspaper has been mercilessly ridiculed on social media after it failed to highlight the plight of journalist Julian Assange in a piece on Amal Clooney’s plans to “combat media repression globally.”
The outlet’s diplomatic editor Patrick Wintour published an article on Monday focused on the ‘Report on the Use of Targeted Sanctions to Protect Journalists,’ a document drafted by prominent human rights barrister, Amal Clooney.
Clooney, who represented the WikiLeaks co-founder during Swedish extradition proceedings against him in 2015, has suggested that the UK introduce a law that targets sanctions against individuals, including ministers, who abuse human rights such as freedom of expression.
Wintour reports that “The aim is to target anyone throwing journalists in jail, or shutting down the internet,” without even a brief mention of Assange. The journalist is currently holed up in Britain’s notorious Belmarsh Prison awaiting his UK court hearing on US extradition in what has been widely criticized as the American government suppressing press freedom.
SEE ALSO: ‘Media Freedom’ Campaign Pushes Magnitsky Sanctions – But Ignores Case of Julian Assange
The failure to highlight Assange’s case triggered widespread ridicule on social media. Mark Curtis, a journalist and historian, sarcastically suggested that “congratulations” were in order for The Guardian for publishing “a whole article on global media suppression without mentioning the phrase ‘Julian Assange’.”
Another person hit out at the paper for not mentioning the journalist’s imprisonment, saying Assange was “locked up at the behest of the US because he exposed war crimes,” while another joked: “Conscience-free journalism is a great career choice for so many like him [Wintour].”
There were those that also slammed Clooney over the banning of Russian media from her first ‘Media Freedom conference.’…
Continue this story at RT International
READ MORE ASSANGE NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Assange/Wikileaks Files
SUPPORT OUR MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-20--Oligarch Bloomberg Gets Hammered in His First Democratic Debate

Billionaire oligarch Mike Bloomberg took at beating last night during the Democratic Party debate in Nevada .
While he wasn ’ t on the ballot for the Democrat Nevada Caucus primary content , the billionaire oligarch and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg still managed somehow to buy his way on to the national debate stage for the first time Wednesday evening in Las Vegas .
Certainly Bloomberg was expecting some serious attacks from his competitors , but he did not expect to be set upon by all of the candidates , who seemed to take turns tearing the financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg , worth $ 62 billion , has been haunted by claims of racist policies in New York and also of sexual harassment and bullying accusations by former employees .
Even the lower tier candidates took turning piling it on , as CNN reported : Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar accused Bloomberg of “ hiding behind his TV ads.
” Former Vice President Joe Biden hammered him for opposing Obamacare .
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders attacked Bloomberg ’ s support for stop-and-frisk policing in his first answer of the night .
Former South Bend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him “ a billionaire who thinks that money ought to be the root of all power.
” If this performance was test of whether his candidacy had real resiliency , it was an epic failure .
LAS VEGAS , NEV. — Mike Bloomberg ’ s millions in campaign spending flew right out the window Wednesday night .
The billionaire ’ s self-bankrolled presidential bid was torn to shreds in the opening minutes of Wednesday ’ s Democratic debate as his opponents skewered him for his checkered past on sexual harassment and his record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Las Vegas stage attacked Bloomberg right out the gate , and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren made the former Big Apple mayor visibly squirm and roll his eyes in frustration .
“ I ’ d like to talk about who we ’ re running against , a billionaire who calls women ‘ fat broads ’ and ‘ horse-faced lesbians , ’ ” she said from the Paris Theater .
“ And , no , I ’ m not talking about Donald Trump .
I ’ m talking about Mayor Bloomberg.
” Bloomberg , 78 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state polls after pouring hundreds of millions of dollars of his personal fortune into a slick campaign with catered campaign events and wall-to-wall TV ads .
Former Vice President Joe Biden attacked Bloomberg for “ throwing close to 5 million young black men up against a wall ” while mayor of New York City and said he only stopped after President Barack Obama intervened in his stop-and-frisk policy… Continue this story at the New York Post

By
Billionaire oligarch Mike Bloomberg took a beating last night during the Democratic Party debate in Nevada.
While he wasn’t on the ballot for the Democrat Nevada Caucus primary content, the billionaire oligarch and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg still managed somehow to buy his way on to the national debate stage for the first time Wednesday evening in Las Vegas.
Certainly Bloomberg was expecting some serious attacks from his competitors, but he did not expect to be set upon by all of the candidates, who seemed to take turns tearing the financial media mogul to pieces.
Additionally, Bloomberg, worth $62 billion, has been haunted by claims of racist policies in New York and also of sexual harassment and bullying accusations by former employees.
Even the lower tier candidates took turns piling it on, as CNN reported:
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar accused Bloomberg of “hiding behind his TV ads.” Former Vice President Joe Biden hammered him for opposing Obamacare. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders attacked Bloomberg’s support for stop-and-frisk policing in his first answer of the night. Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg called him “a billionaire who thinks that money ought to be the root of all power.”
If this performance was a test of whether his candidacy had real resiliency, it was an epic failure.
The New York Post reports…
LAS VEGAS, NEV. — Mike Bloomberg’s millions in campaign spending flew right out the window Wednesday night.
The billionaire’s self-bankrolled presidential bid was torn to shreds in the opening minutes of Wednesday’s Democratic debate as his opponents skewered him for his checkered past on sexual harassment and his record on stop-and-frisk.
Each candidate on the Las Vegas stage attacked Bloomberg right out the gate, and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren made the former Big Apple mayor visibly squirm and roll his eyes in frustration.
“I’d like to talk about who we’re running against, a billionaire who calls women ‘fat broads’ and ‘horse-faced lesbians,’” she said from the Paris Theater.
“And, no, I’m not talking about Donald Trump. I’m talking about Mayor Bloomberg.”
Bloomberg, 78, started to surge in national and state polls after pouring hundreds of millions of dollars of his personal fortune into a slick campaign with catered campaign events and wall-to-wall TV ads.
Former Vice President Joe Biden attacked Bloomberg for “throwing close to 5 million young black men up against a wall” while mayor of New York City and said he only stopped after President Barack Obama intervened in his stop-and-frisk policy… Continue this story at the New York Post
.
READ MORE 2020 ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2020 Files
SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-20--Trump, Boris, Harry Dunn Tragedy, Huawei & 5G

The recent phone row between Trump and Boris Johnson has brought up two very contentious issues – the US refusing @ @ @ @ @ Sacoolas for killing British teenager Harry Dunn whilst driving on the wrong side of the @ @ @ @ @ Trump and US hawks by allowing China firm Huawei to provide telecoms equipment for the @ @ @ @ @ .
Are these deal breakers for the US and Britain ’ s legendary ‘ special @ @ @ @ @ all this have to do with the Five Eyes intelligence sharing alliance ?
In EP @ @ @ @ @ WIRE host Patrick Henningsen discusses these and other important issues .
Listen :

By
The recent phone row between Trump and Boris Johnson has brought up two very contentious issues – the US refusing to extradite CIA wife Ann Sacoolas for killing British teenager Harry Dunn whilst driving on the wrong side of the road, and Boris defying Trump and US hawks by allowing China firm Huawei to provide telecoms equipment for the UK’s 5G roll-out. Are these deal breakers for the US and Britain’s legendary ‘special relationship’? What does all this have to do with the Five Eyes intelligence sharing alliance?
In EP 315 of this last SUNDAY WIRE host Patrick Henningsen discusses these and other important issues. Listen:
READ MORE HUAWEI NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Huawei Files
SUPPORT OUR INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-20--Andre Vltchek on Duterte and Why Philippines Defied Trump and Embraced China

In EP 315 of the SUNDAY WIRE show , host Patrick Henningsen goes on the ground to Southeast Asia to @ @ @ @ @ intrepid international political correspondent and best-selling author , Andre Vltchek , to discuss the historic @ @ @ @ @ Duterte , kicking out US military , and the country ’ s fluctuating relations with @ @ @ @ @ survive after breaking with so many long-standing institutions and policies ?
A fascinating and deep @ @ @ @ @ surround the Asia Pacific region .
Listen :

By
In EP 315 of the SUNDAY WIRE show, host Patrick Henningsen goes on the ground to Southeast Asia to speak with 21WIRE’s intrepid international political correspondent and best-selling author, Andre Vltchek, to discuss the historic announcement in Philippines by President Duterte, kicking out US military, and the country’s fluctuating relations with neighboring China. Can he survive after breaking with so many long-standing institutions and policies? A fascinating and deep analysis of the geopolitical affairs surround the Asia Pacific region. Listen:
READ MORE PHILIPPINES NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Philippines Files
SUPPORT OUR INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-20--Basil Valentine: Identity Politics & How PC Culture is Destroying Our Discourse

In EP 315 of the SUNDAY WIRE host Patrick Henningsen is joined by SUNDAY WIRE Roving Correspondent for Culture & @ @ @ @ @ to discuss how weaponized identity politics is ruining public discourse in America and Europe and @ @ @ @ @ a forum for debate – it ’ s where special interest groups issue ultimatums , @ @ @ @ @ for more oppression as undemocratic forces enter the vacuum created by censorship .
It has @ @ @ @ @ Party with the establishment ’ s ‘ antisemitism ’ witch-hunt which continues to disable normal @ @ @ @ @ rules the roost .
Over in the US , the odds are shortening up or @ @ @ @ @ ’ s 2020 nomination , while all of the DNC elite ’ s favorites are @ @ @ @ @ Americans .
Listen :

By
In EP 315 of the SUNDAY WIRE host Patrick Henningsen is joined by SUNDAY WIRE Roving Correspondent for Culture & Sport, Basil Valentine, to discuss how weaponized identity politics is ruining public discourse in America and Europe and how politics is no longer a forum for debate – it’s where special interest groups issue ultimatums, which invariably opens the door for more oppression as undemocratic forces enter the vacuum created by censorship. It has definitely destroyed the UK Labour Party with the establishment’s ‘antisemitism’ witch-hunt which continues to disable normal discourse, as political identity rules the roost. Over in the US, the odds are shortening up for Bernie Sanders for his party’s 2020 nomination, while all of the DNC elite’s favorites are struggling to connect with normal Americans. Listen:
READ MORE POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AT: 21st Century Wire Political Correctness Files
SUPPORT OUR INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-19--Sanders Surges Into Double-Digit Lead Nationally in New Poll

Panic is already beginning to set in with Democratic Party elites who are afraid that Sanders may achieve a large enough lead which will prevent party insiders and Super Delegates from stealing away his nomination by staging a coup at the party convention in July .
Billionaire Bloomberg , along with Biden , Warren and Buttigieg , have good reason to be worried , as all them are in danger of drifting into ‘ also ran ’ territory .
The DNC ’ s master strategy of ‘ pushing Bernie out ’ is clearly failing badly .
According to a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a double-digit lead this week .
The new poll published by the Washington Post-ABC News surveyed 1,066 adults between Feb. 14 and 17 and has a margin of error of 3.5 % variation .
Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) , on the strength of his performances in Iowa and New Hampshire , has surged nationally and now holds a sizable lead over all of his rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination , according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll .
Former vice president Joe Biden , who led Sanders in a Post-ABC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sharp drop in his support after finishing fourth in the Iowa caucuses and fifth in the New Hampshire primary .
Biden is now in a battle for second place with former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass. )
.
Former South Bend , Ind.
, mayor Pete Buttigieg , who won the state-delegate-count battle in the Iowa caucuses and came a close second to Sanders in New Hampshire , is in single digits nationally , roughly even with Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-Minn. ) , whose surprise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Democratic contest .
The poll underscores how quickly support for candidates can change in national polls on the strength of results from individual primaries and caucuses .
The findings come on the day of a Democratic debate in Las Vegas that will include Bloomberg on the stage for the first time and represents a high-stakes gamble for all the candidates .
The poll also comes just days ahead of the third contest on the calendar , Saturday ’ s Nevada caucuses , with the South Carolina primary to follow on Feb. 29 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goes national , with 14 states holding contests on March 3 , Super Tuesday , and crucial primaries in a variety of big states later in the month .
The Post-ABC poll shows Sanders , who got more votes in Iowa than any other candidate ahead of his narrow win in New Hampshire , with the support of 32 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning registered voters .
That is an increase of nine percentage points since January .
He holds double-digit leads among both women and men , as well as among those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in their state ’ s primary or caucuses…

By
Panic is already beginning to set in with Democratic Party elites who are afraid that Sanders may achieve a large enough lead which will prevent party insiders and Super Delegates from stealing away his nomination by staging a coup at the party convention in July.
Axios reports:
Mike Bloomberg’s campaign is sounding the alarm that Bernie Sanders will soon amass an unsurmountable delegate lead if the Democratic field stays split — and took the extraordinary step of suggesting laggards should drop out.
Billionaire Bloomberg, along with Biden, Warren and Buttigieg, have good reason to be worried, as all them are in danger of drifting into ‘also ran’ territory. The DNC’s master strategy of ‘pushing Bernie out’ is clearly failing badly.
According to a new poll, Sanders has jumped out to a double-digit lead this week. The new poll published by the Washington Post-ABC News surveyed 1,066 adults between Feb. 14 and 17 and has a margin of error of 3.5% variation.
If this happens, Sanders would have a pledged delegate lead he’ll never relinquish. https://t.co/MhhoJMlUgn — David Plouffe (@davidplouffe) February 19, 2020
Washington Post writers Dan Balz and Scott Clement report…
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), on the strength of his performances in Iowa and New Hampshire, has surged nationally and now holds a sizable lead over all of his rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Former vice president Joe Biden, who led Sanders in a Post-ABC national poll in January, has seen a sharp drop in his support after finishing fourth in the Iowa caucuses and fifth in the New Hampshire primary. Biden is now in a battle for second place with former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
Former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg, who won the state-delegate-count battle in the Iowa caucuses and came a close second to Sanders in New Hampshire, is in single digits nationally, roughly even with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), whose surprise third-place finish in New Hampshire further scrambled the Democratic contest.
The poll underscores how quickly support for candidates can change in national polls on the strength of results from individual primaries and caucuses. The findings come on the day of a Democratic debate in Las Vegas that will include Bloomberg on the stage for the first time and represents a high-stakes gamble for all the candidates.
The poll also comes just days ahead of the third contest on the calendar, Saturday’s Nevada caucuses, with the South Carolina primary to follow on Feb. 29. After South Carolina, the campaign goes national, with 14 states holding contests on March 3, Super Tuesday, and crucial primaries in a variety of big states later in the month.
The Post-ABC poll shows Sanders, who got more votes in Iowa than any other candidate ahead of his narrow win in New Hampshire, with the support of 32 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning registered voters. That is an increase of nine percentage points since January. He holds double-digit leads among both women and men, as well as among those who say they are certain to vote in their state’s primary or caucuses…
Continue this story at Washington Post
STAY TUNED FOR MORE UPDATES
READ MORE 2020 ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2020 Files
SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-02-19--US Middle East ‘Peace Deal’ is Designed to Perpetuate Conflict

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas holds up a map of historical Palestine and how it has been reduced to a small patch of land by Israel , as leaders convene at an Arab League emergency meeting in the Egyptian capital Cairo ( Photo by Khaled DESOUKI/AFP ) A deal that is entirely unacceptable to one of its principal parties isn ’ t a deal at all .
In the case of the US-proposed “ Middle East peace plan ” – unsurprisingly endorsed by the US and Israel and few others – everything about it is designed to sabotage peace and perpetuate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The London Guardian in its article , “ Palestinians cut ties with Israel and US after rejecting Trump peace plan , ” would note what are obvious conditions Palestine could not and should not accept : Demilitarizing Palestine and subjecting it to occupation blatantly illegal under international law and what would undoubtedly be continued Israeli aggression , provocations , and encroachment is akin to unconditional surrender and subjugation – conditions no government could be expected to accept with Palestine being no exception .
An op-ed published by Al Jazeera titled , Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ silver lining : Trump ’ s plan will not make the Palestinians ’ lives better , but it could help dismantle the disastrous Oslo order , ” would aptly describe the deal as : Of course , promises of money may or may not be fulfilled .
A Palestine rendered defenseless and entirely dependent on ill-willed sponsors has no way to ensure such promises are fulfilled .
Thus the “ peace plan ” is yet another demonstration of Washington ’ s continued malign presence in the Middle East and its absolute disinterest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ note that several Arab allies of the US would side with Washington ’ s proposal , prioritizing joint belligerence toward Iran rather than solidarity with Palestine .
Helping ease Arab allies of Washington out of their pretend concern for Palestine will – Washington hopes – help them focus entirely on US plans to create a united front against Iran as US power and influence in the region slips .
STATE TERROR : 16-year-old Palestinian boy Fawzi al-Junaidi , taken to a secret IDF prison and assaulted in 2017 ( Image : Twitter ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” does however help illustrate that the current , ongoing conflict in the Middle East is not driven by religion , neither Zionist nor Islamic extremism , but rather by politics and in particular – designs to maintain Western hegemony in the region that has existed since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire .
Religion and its perversion through extremism is simply used to augment and propel these designs .
Were the conflict purely a matter of religion – Sunni and Shia ’ a soldiers wouldn ’ t be fighting side-by-side in Syria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be abandoning Palestine in favor of joining the US and Israel in their collective belligerence against Iran .
And no nation in the region – save for Israel – would accept the most recent “ peace plan ” proposed by the US .
Seeing through a “ peace plan ” intentionally designed to further inflame emotions and deepen divides and understanding the true interests driving regional conflict will help establish common ground rather than erode it .
The actual people living in Israel have more in common with ordinary people living in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special interests dominating the Israeli government .
Ordinary people seek peace and stability – to live out their lives and provide for their families .
Tensions and the conflicts they lead to only disrupt ordinary people from achieving this basic desire – whether they are Israelis or Palestinians .
The US proposal illustrates to people on either side of the divide that the US is not an honest broker and that the current process posing as pursuing peace should be dismantled .
Because of this , and just as the US has faded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even from other areas within the Middle East – the US will fade from prominence regarding the Israeli-Palestinian question – hopefully opening the way for more honest brokers to move in and propose a genuine peace deal that will right injustices and provide for the best interests of ordinary people rather than merely pose as doing so while serving the interests of a malign few .
*** Author Tony Cartalucci , Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher , writer and special contributor to 21st Century Wire .
See more of his work at Tony ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his work has been published on a number of popular news and analysis websites , and also on the online magazine “ New Eastern Outlook ” .
Also , you can follow him on VK here .

By
Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas holds up a map of historical Palestine and how it has been reduced to a small patch of land by Israel, as leaders convene at an Arab League emergency meeting in the Egyptian capital Cairo (Photo by Khaled DESOUKI/AFP)
Tony Cartalucci
21st Century Wire
A deal that is entirely unacceptable to one of its principal parties isn’t a deal at all. In the case of the US-proposed “Middle East peace plan” – unsurprisingly endorsed by the US and Israel and few others – everything about it is designed to sabotage peace and perpetuate conflict – perhaps even expand it.
The London Guardian in its article, “Palestinians cut ties with Israel and US after rejecting Trump peace plan,” would note what are obvious conditions Palestine could not and should not accept:
The blueprint, endorsed by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, calls for the creation of a demilitarised Palestinian state that would exclude Jewish settlements built in occupied territory and remain under near-total Israeli security control.
Demilitarizing Palestine and subjecting it to occupation blatantly illegal under international law and what would undoubtedly be continued Israeli aggression, provocations, and encroachment is akin to unconditional surrender and subjugation – conditions no government could be expected to accept with Palestine being no exception.
An op-ed published by Al Jazeera titled, Trump’s Middle East plan may have a silver lining: Trump’s plan will not make the Palestinians’ lives better, but it could help dismantle the disastrous Oslo order,” would aptly describe the deal as:
Basically, Trump’s plan promises the Israelis an almost full realisation of the Zionist objectives to establish a Jewish state on all of historic Palestine, while offering the Palestinians “prosperous apartheid”, ie life under occupation with more money but no dignity and basic rights.
Of course, promises of money may or may not be fulfilled. A Palestine rendered defenseless and entirely dependent on ill-willed sponsors has no way to ensure such promises are fulfilled.
Thus the “peace plan” is yet another demonstration of Washington’s continued malign presence in the Middle East and its absolute disinterest in changing course. The Guardian would also note that several Arab allies of the US would side with Washington’s proposal, prioritizing joint belligerence toward Iran rather than solidarity with Palestine.
Helping ease Arab allies of Washington out of their pretend concern for Palestine will – Washington hopes – help them focus entirely on US plans to create a united front against Iran as US power and influence in the region slips.
STATE TERROR: 16-year-old Palestinian boy Fawzi al-Junaidi, taken to a secret IDF prison and assaulted in 2017 (Image: Twitter)
Politics and Power, Not Religion
This disingenuous and counterproductive “peace plan” does however help illustrate that the current, ongoing conflict in the Middle East is not driven by religion, neither Zionist nor Islamic extremism, but rather by politics and in particular – designs to maintain Western hegemony in the region that has existed since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Religion and its perversion through extremism is simply used to augment and propel these designs.
Were the conflict purely a matter of religion – Sunni and Shia’a soldiers wouldn’t be fighting side-by-side in Syria against US-sponsored terrorists. Arab nations would not be abandoning Palestine in favor of joining the US and Israel in their collective belligerence against Iran. And no nation in the region – save for Israel – would accept the most recent “peace plan” proposed by the US.
Seeing through a “peace plan” intentionally designed to further inflame emotions and deepen divides and understanding the true interests driving regional conflict will help establish common ground rather than erode it. The actual people living in Israel have more in common with ordinary people living in Palestine than with the current circle of special interests dominating the Israeli government.
Ordinary people seek peace and stability – to live out their lives and provide for their families. Tensions and the conflicts they lead to only disrupt ordinary people from achieving this basic desire – whether they are Israelis or Palestinians.
The US proposal illustrates to people on either side of the divide that the US is not an honest broker and that the current process posing as pursuing peace should be dismantled.
Because of this, and just as the US has faded from other areas of the world and even from other areas within the Middle East – the US will fade from prominence regarding the Israeli-Palestinian question – hopefully opening the way for more honest brokers to move in and propose a genuine peace deal that will right injustices and provide for the best interests of ordinary people rather than merely pose as doing so while serving the interests of a malign few.
***
Author Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher, writer and special contributor to 21st Century Wire. See more of his work at Tony’s archive. Over the last decade, his work has been published on a number of popular news and analysis websites, and also on the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. Also, you can follow him on VK here.
READ MORE PALESTINE NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Palestine Files
SUPPORT OUR INDEPENDENT MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV