mintpressnews--2020-01-21--In the Name of “Security” Retreating US Gives Israel Billions More in Military Funding

Billions of US tax-payers ’ money will continue to be funneled into Israel in the next fiscal year , and for many years in the foreseeable future .
Republican and Democratic Senators have recently achieved just that , passing a bill aimed at providing Israel with $ 3.3 billion in annual aid .
The Bill , co-sponsored by Democratic Senator , Chris Coons and Republican Senator , Marco Rubio , passed on January 9 , only one day after Iran struck US positions in Iraq .
Enthusiasm to push the Bill forward was meant as an assurance to Tel Aviv @ @ @ @ @ @ @ committed to Israel ’ s security and military superiority in the Middle East .
Despite a palpable sense of war fatigue among all Americans , regardless of their political leaning , the US continues to sink deeper into Middle East conflicts simply because it is unable – or , perhaps , unwilling – to challenge Israel ’ s benefactors in all facets of the American government.The maxim “ What ’ s good for Israel is good for America ” continues to reign supreme among Washington ’ s political elites , despite the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the Middle East region , and is finally forcing a hasty and humiliating American retreat .
The latest aid package to Israel will officially put into law a “ Memorandum of Understanding ” that was reached between the right-wing government of Israeli Prime Minister , Benjamin Netanyahu and the Barack Obama administration in 2016 .
Obama had then offered Israel the largest military aid package in US history .
Senator Rubio explained the passing of the recent Bill in terms of the “ unprecedented threats ” that are supposedly faced by Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that “ the events of the past few days , ” referring to the US-Iran escalation , were “ a stark reminder of the importance of US assistance to Israel ’ s security.
” Particularly odd in Coons ’ statement is the fact that it was not Israel , but US positions in Iraq that were struck by Iranian missiles , themselves a response to the killing of Iranian military commander , Qassem Soleimani .
Yet , the American funding of Israel ’ s military adventures continues unabated , despite the rapidly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the shifting American role in the region as well .
This further confirms that the blind US support of Israel is not motivated by a centralized American strategy , one that aims at serving US interests .
Instead , the unconditional – and , often , self-defeating – American funding of the Israeli war machine is largely linked to domestic US politics and , indeed , the unparalleled power wielded by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States .
According to the public policy research institute of the United States Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , between 1946 and 2019 ( including the requested funds for 2020 ) US aid to Israel has exceeded $ 142 billion .
The vast majority of this funding – over $ 101 billion – went directly to the Israeli military budget , while over $ 34 billion and $ 7 billion were given to Israel in terms of economic aid and missile defense funding , respectively .
It is becoming increasingly obvious that the US no longer possesses a well-defined and centralized strategy in the Middle East , with President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next .
However , one key phrase that seems consistent in whatever political agenda that is still championed by Washington in the region is “ Israel ’ s security.
” This precarious term seems to be linked to every American action pertaining to the Middle East , as it has for decades under every American administration , without exception .
Wars were launched or funded in the name of Israel ’ s security ; human rights were violated on a massive scale ; the five-decade – and counting – military occupation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impoverished Gaza Strip and much more , have all been carried out , defended and sustained in the name of “ Israel ’ s security.
” US aid to Israel continues , despite the fact that all American aid to the Palestinians has been cut off , including the $ 300 million of annual US funding to the UN agency responsible for the welfare of Palestinian refugees , UNRWA .
The latter , which has provided education , healthcare and shelter for millions of refugees throughout the years is now , bizarrely , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as “ an obstacle to peace.
” Inexplicably , Israel receives roughly “ one-third of the American foreign-aid budget , even though ( it ) comprises just .001 percent of the world ’ s population and already has one of the world ’ s higher per capita incomes , ” wrote Professor Stephen Zunes in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs .
This massive budget includes much more than the $ 3.3 billion of annual funding , but other amounts and perks rarely make headlines .
Anywhere between $ 500 million to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every year as part of a missile defense package ; approximately , an additional $ 1 billion benefits Israel in the form of tax-deductible donations , while $ 500 billion are invested in Israeli bonds .
Then there are the loan guarantees , where the US government assumes the responsibility for billions of dollars that Israel can access as a borrower from international creditors .
If Israel defaults on its loans , it is the legal responsibility of the US government to offset the interests on the borrowed money .
Starting in 1982 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a lump sum , as opposed to scheduled payments as is the case with other countries .
To satisfy its obligations to Israel , the US government borrows the money , thus left to pay interest on the loans .
Meanwhile , “ Israel even lends some of this money back through U.S. treasury bills and collects the additional interest , ” Zunes wrote .
US relations with Israel are not governed by the kind of political wisdom that is predicated on mutual benefit .
But they are not entirely irrational either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aligned their interests , their perception of the Middle East and their country ’ s role in that region with that of Israel , thanks to years of media and official indoctrination .
Despite the fact that the US is retreating from the region , lacking strategy and future vision , US lawmakers are congratulating themselves on passing yet another generous aid package to Israel .
They feel proud of their great feat , because , in their confused thinking , a ‘ secured ’ Israel is the only guarantor of US dominance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has been proven false , time and time again .
Feature photo | US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu embrace at the Israel museum in Jerusalem , May 23 , 2017 .
Sebastian Scheiner | AP Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle .
He is the author of five books .
His latest is “ These Chains Will Be Broken : Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons ” ( Clarity Press , Atlanta ) .
Dr. Baroud is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Islam and Global Affairs ( CIGA ) , Istanbul Zaim University ( IZU ) .
His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

Billions of US tax-payers’ money will continue to be funneled into Israel in the next fiscal year, and for many years in the foreseeable future. Republican and Democratic Senators have recently achieved just that, passing a bill aimed at providing Israel with $3.3 billion in annual aid.
The Bill, co-sponsored by Democratic Senator, Chris Coons and Republican Senator, Marco Rubio, passed on January 9, only one day after Iran struck US positions in Iraq. Enthusiasm to push the Bill forward was meant as an assurance to Tel Aviv from Washington, that the US is committed to Israel’s security and military superiority in the Middle East.
Despite a palpable sense of war fatigue among all Americans, regardless of their political leaning, the US continues to sink deeper into Middle East conflicts simply because it is unable – or, perhaps, unwilling – to challenge Israel’s benefactors in all facets of the American government.The maxim “What’s good for Israel is good for America” continues to reign supreme among Washington’s political elites, despite the fact that such irrational thinking has wrought disasters on the Middle East region, and is finally forcing a hasty and humiliating American retreat.
The latest aid package to Israel will officially put into law a “Memorandum of Understanding” that was reached between the right-wing government of Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and the Barack Obama administration in 2016. Obama had then offered Israel the largest military aid package in US history.
Senator Rubio explained the passing of the recent Bill in terms of the “unprecedented threats” that are supposedly faced by Israel.
For his part, Senator Coons said that “the events of the past few days,” referring to the US-Iran escalation, were “a stark reminder of the importance of US assistance to Israel’s security.”
Particularly odd in Coons’ statement is the fact that it was not Israel, but US positions in Iraq that were struck by Iranian missiles, themselves a response to the killing of Iranian military commander, Qassem Soleimani.
Yet, the American funding of Israel’s military adventures continues unabated, despite the rapidly changing political reality in the Middle East, and the shifting American role in the region as well.
This further confirms that the blind US support of Israel is not motivated by a centralized American strategy, one that aims at serving US interests. Instead, the unconditional – and, often, self-defeating – American funding of the Israeli war machine is largely linked to domestic US politics and, indeed, the unparalleled power wielded by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States.
According to the public policy research institute of the United States Congress, Congressional Research Center (CRS), between 1946 and 2019 (including the requested funds for 2020) US aid to Israel has exceeded $142 billion.
The vast majority of this funding – over $101 billion – went directly to the Israeli military budget, while over $34 billion and $7 billion were given to Israel in terms of economic aid and missile defense funding, respectively.
It is becoming increasingly obvious that the US no longer possesses a well-defined and centralized strategy in the Middle East, with President Donald Trump changing American priorities from one speech to the next. However, one key phrase that seems consistent in whatever political agenda that is still championed by Washington in the region is “Israel’s security.”
This precarious term seems to be linked to every American action pertaining to the Middle East, as it has for decades under every American administration, without exception. Wars were launched or funded in the name of Israel’s security; human rights were violated on a massive scale; the five-decade – and counting – military occupation of Palestine; the protracted siege on the impoverished Gaza Strip and much more, have all been carried out, defended and sustained in the name of “Israel’s security.”
US aid to Israel continues, despite the fact that all American aid to the Palestinians has been cut off, including the $300 million of annual US funding to the UN agency responsible for the welfare of Palestinian refugees, UNRWA. The latter, which has provided education, healthcare and shelter for millions of refugees throughout the years is now, bizarrely, seen by both Israel and the US as “an obstacle to peace.”
Inexplicably, Israel receives roughly “one-third of the American foreign-aid budget, even though (it) comprises just .001 percent of the world’s population and already has one of the world’s higher per capita incomes,” wrote Professor Stephen Zunes in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
This massive budget includes much more than the $3.3 billion of annual funding, but other amounts and perks rarely make headlines. Anywhere between $500 million to $800 million are given to Israel every year as part of a missile defense package; approximately, an additional $1 billion benefits Israel in the form of tax-deductible donations, while $500 billion are invested in Israeli bonds.
Then there are the loan guarantees, where the US government assumes the responsibility for billions of dollars that Israel can access as a borrower from international creditors. If Israel defaults on its loans, it is the legal responsibility of the US government to offset the interests on the borrowed money.
Starting in 1982, Israel has been receiving US aid as a lump sum, as opposed to scheduled payments as is the case with other countries. To satisfy its obligations to Israel, the US government borrows the money, thus left to pay interest on the loans. Meanwhile, “Israel even lends some of this money back through U.S. treasury bills and collects the additional interest,” Zunes wrote.
US relations with Israel are not governed by the kind of political wisdom that is predicated on mutual benefit. But they are not entirely irrational either, as the American ruling classes have aligned their interests, their perception of the Middle East and their country’s role in that region with that of Israel, thanks to years of media and official indoctrination.
Despite the fact that the US is retreating from the region, lacking strategy and future vision, US lawmakers are congratulating themselves on passing yet another generous aid package to Israel. They feel proud of their great feat, because, in their confused thinking, a ‘secured’ Israel is the only guarantor of US dominance in the Middle East, a theory that has been proven false, time and time again.
Feature photo | US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu embrace at the Israel museum in Jerusalem, May 23, 2017. Sebastian Scheiner | AP
Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press, Atlanta). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA), Istanbul Zaim University (IZU). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net


mintpressnews--2020-01-22--World’s Super Rich Meet in Davos to Discuss the Climate Change Problem they Created

The world ’ s wealthiest elites are congregating in the Swiss mountain resort of Davos for the 2020 World Economic Forum , a place where thousands of the planet ’ s most influential business people meet to discuss the state of the world .
Climate change is a big topic at this year ’ s event , themed “ stakeholders for a cohesive and sustainable world.
” Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg was invited to speak , using the opportunity to condemn those assembled for their actions and inactions regarding the most pressing problem facing humanity .
“ I wonder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reason to fail and leave them facing… climate chaos that you knowingly brought upon them ?
That it seemed so bad for the economy that we decided to resign the idea of securing future living conditions without even trying , ” asked the Swede , excoriating business and political leaders .
“ Our house is still on fire .
Your inaction is fuelling the flames by the hour , and we are telling you to act as if you loved your children above all else.
” While some in attendance have echoed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Prince Charles , for example , has called for a “ paradigm shift ” with regards to global warming – Thunberg herself attacked the political elite for their “ empty words and promises.
” “ You say , ‘ we won ’ t let you down .
Don ’ t be so pessimistic.
’ And then ?
Silence , ” she told those assembled to listen to her .
One attendee that Thunberg has certainly failed to convince is President Donald Trump .
The president appeared more concerned that the teenager had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Person of the Year 2019 .
“ Fear and doubt is not a good thought process because this is a time for tremendous hope and joy and optimism and action , ” he said yesterday , presenting Thunberg as an alarmist charlatan .
“ To embrace the possibilities of tomorrow , we must reject the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse.
” The president pointed the finger at developing countries for problems of global pollution .
“ The fumes are rising at levels that you wouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Our numbers are very good , our environmental numbers .
Our water numbers , our numbers on the air are tremendous .
We have to do something about other continents and other countries.
” Yet , as research has shown , the people most responsible for a warming planet were disproportionately attending the summit .
A report from Oxfam on the climate crisis concluded that “ climate change is inextricably linked to economic inequality : it is a crisis that is driven by the greenhouse gas emissions of the ‘ haves ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hardest.
” It found that the poorest half of the world ’ s population are responsible for only around 10 percent of total global emissions , despite living in countries most affected by the problem .
In contrast , the richest 10 percent produce half the world ’ s pollution , with the top one percent ’ s carbon footprint around 175 times that of a poor African or Asian .
This number rises exponentially higher when discussing the world ’ s super wealthy .
U.S. emissions per capita are almost three times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Perhaps even more importantly , the Climate Accountability Institute found that just 100 massive corporations are responsible for 71 percent of the world ’ s emissions , with over half of all CO2 produced by just 25 entities .
Huge fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil , Shell , BP and Chevron dominate the list .
That is the reason why an increasing number of observers see the problems of climate change , inequality and capitalism bound together , it being impossible to solve the first two without a radical overhaul of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cooper wrote that the World Economic Forum demonstrates only one thing : “ If the billionaire stranglehold over global politics is not broken , we are all going to fry in a future climate hell ” as billionaires are happy to watch the world burn if it means increased profits .
It is also the reason why Trump ’ s assertions that unnamed African or Asian countries are primarily at fault rings hollow .
If the president wants to play the blame game , he could have stayed at home .
Feature photo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remarks at the World Economic Forum , Jan. 21 , 2020 , in Davos .
Evan Vucci | AP Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The @ @

The world’s wealthiest elites are congregating in the Swiss mountain resort of Davos for the 2020 World Economic Forum, a place where thousands of the planet’s most influential business people meet to discuss the state of the world. Climate change is a big topic at this year’s event, themed “stakeholders for a cohesive and sustainable world.” Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg was invited to speak, using the opportunity to condemn those assembled for their actions and inactions regarding the most pressing problem facing humanity.
Greta spoke at Davos today. Her words, and her actions will go down in history. pic.twitter.com/fZrbTZJ0GB — Joshua Potash (@JoshuaPotash) January 21, 2020
“I wonder what will you tell your children was the reason to fail and leave them facing… climate chaos that you knowingly brought upon them? That it seemed so bad for the economy that we decided to resign the idea of securing future living conditions without even trying,” asked the Swede, excoriating business and political leaders. “Our house is still on fire. Your inaction is fuelling the flames by the hour, and we are telling you to act as if you loved your children above all else.” While some in attendance have echoed her words – the United Kingdom’s Prince Charles, for example, has called for a “paradigm shift” with regards to global warming – Thunberg herself attacked the political elite for their “empty words and promises.” “You say, ‘we won’t let you down. Don’t be so pessimistic.’ And then? Silence,” she told those assembled to listen to her.
One attendee that Thunberg has certainly failed to convince is President Donald Trump. The president appeared more concerned that the teenager had beaten him out to be Time Magazine’s Person of the Year 2019. “Fear and doubt is not a good thought process because this is a time for tremendous hope and joy and optimism and action,” he said yesterday, presenting Thunberg as an alarmist charlatan. “To embrace the possibilities of tomorrow, we must reject the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse.”
The president pointed the finger at developing countries for problems of global pollution. “The fumes are rising at levels that you wouldn’t believe,” he said, “Our numbers are very good, our environmental numbers. Our water numbers, our numbers on the air are tremendous. We have to do something about other continents and other countries.”
As the world's elite gather in Davos to discuss climate breakdown, it's worth remembering who's responsible for this crisis: "The richest 1% may emit 30 times more than the poorest 50%, and 175 times more than the poorest 10%" (Oxfam, 2015). pic.twitter.com/3RCBcCOQn2 — Jason Hickel (@jasonhickel) January 21, 2020
Yet, as research has shown, the people most responsible for a warming planet were disproportionately attending the summit. A report from Oxfam on the climate crisis concluded that “climate change is inextricably linked to economic inequality: it is a crisis that is driven by the greenhouse gas emissions of the ‘haves’ that hits the ‘have-nots’ the hardest.” It found that the poorest half of the world’s population are responsible for only around 10 percent of total global emissions, despite living in countries most affected by the problem. In contrast, the richest 10 percent produce half the world’s pollution, with the top one percent’s carbon footprint around 175 times that of a poor African or Asian. This number rises exponentially higher when discussing the world’s super wealthy. U.S. emissions per capita are almost three times French emissions and double the Japanese figures.
Perhaps even more importantly, the Climate Accountability Institute found that just 100 massive corporations are responsible for 71 percent of the world’s emissions, with over half of all CO2 produced by just 25 entities. Huge fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and Chevron dominate the list.
That is the reason why an increasing number of observers see the problems of climate change, inequality and capitalism bound together, it being impossible to solve the first two without a radical overhaul of the third. The Week’s Ryan Cooper wrote that the World Economic Forum demonstrates only one thing: “If the billionaire stranglehold over global politics is not broken, we are all going to fry in a future climate hell” as billionaires are happy to watch the world burn if it means increased profits. It is also the reason why Trump’s assertions that unnamed African or Asian countries are primarily at fault rings hollow. If the president wants to play the blame game, he could have stayed at home.
Feature photo | President Donald Trump delivers the opening remarks at the World Economic Forum, Jan. 21, 2020, in Davos. Evan Vucci | AP
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-01-22--Brazil’s Right-Wing Gov’t Charges Journalist Glenn Greenwald with Cybercrimes

The Brazilian government of Jair Bolsonaro has charged investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald with cybercrimes– offenses he allegedly committed while reporting on the government ’ s own high-level corruption .
Prosecutors claim that the American journalist “ helped , encouraged and guided ” a group of hackers to gain access to cell phone messages between top government figures , using the information to undermine the image of Brazil ’ s anti-corruption task force .
Greenwald rejected the charges , claiming they were “ retaliation ” against himself and his outlet The Intercept , for a “ series of journalistic exposes we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , showing high level corruption in the Bolsonaro government , in particular by his Minister of Justice and Public Security Sergio Moro , ” adding that the Brazilian government “ simply don ’ t believe ” in a free press or in democracy .
Brazilian prosecutors have been carrying out a supposed anti-corruption drive since 2014 that has led to the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff in 2016 and the imprisonment of former president and 2018 election frontrunner Lula da Silva .
However , Greenwald ’ s reporting exposed that the judge in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was actually in constant contact with the prosecution team , instructing them on lines of attack and how best to destroy the center-left Workers ’ Party , who both Rousseff and Lula belong to .
After he imprisoned Lula , clearing the way for Jair Bolsonaro to win the 2018 elections , Moro accepted a privileged position in Bolsonaro ’ s cabinet and was given extensive powers , effectively making him one of the most influential men in Brazil .
His reporting was crucial to Lula ’ s release from prison in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drew parallels with how Western governments have treated whistleblowers and publishers who have exposed their secrets .
Greenwald himself worked closely with NSA leaker Edward Snowden , who exposed the extent of the spying operation the organization was conducting .
While Greenwald was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his work – considered by many as the highest award in journalism – Snowden has been persecuted and demonized , forced into exile in Russia .
Meanwhile , Wikileaks co-founder , Julian Assange – a figure Greenwald has constantly defended – languishes in a London @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States .
While Greenwald has built an enormous cult following as possibly the world ’ s most high profile journalist specializing in leaked material , national security and civil liberties , he is not a popular figure in the world of professional journalists , who see him as an overly-combative outsider .
Although denouncing the charges against him , the nation ’ s top reporters were at pains to stress how much they personally disliked him , lest they be confused for journalists challenging the power of the national security state .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greenwald over the years – sometimes , he even infuriates me ” wrote Vox Senior Correspondent Zack Beauchamp , but , “ his indictment should be condemned by anyone with an iota of concern for free speech.
” Conservative writer Max Boot agreed ; “ I ’ m no fan of Glenn Greenwald , nor he of me , but this sounds like an attempt to target him for running investigative articles that embarrassed the right-wing Brazilian regime , ” he tweeted .
Greenwald was originally a lawyer and blogger , before transitioning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ writing for Salon then The Guardian , before founding investigative news website The Intercept in 2014 .
He is a prominent doubter of RussiaGate and is not afraid of debate or argument .
For his open skepticism of the idea that Vladimir Putin decided the 2016 elections , he claims he has been effectively blacklisted from MSNBC and other liberal networks , although he has appeared on Fox ’ s Tucker Carlson Tonight .
This and many of his contrarian positions have led to allegations that he is a far-right asset .
Greenwald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that he has devoted his life defending the rights and civil liberties of Muslims and other minorities from increasingly authoritarian administrations , and that he is an openly gay man , married to David Miranda , a Brazilian Congressman from the Socialism and Liberty Party , both under fire from a genuinely fascist government in Brazil .
On the Useful Idiots podcast , he revealed that his resistance to Bolsonaro ’ s administration has taken a serious toll on his own family ’ s liberty , noting that they must travel everywhere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Jair Bolsonaro was elected in a highly contentious election in 2018 that saw the Workers ’ Party candidate , Lula da Silva , imprisoned and barred from running , despite being by far the most popular candidate .
The election was also marred by waves of fake news .
Bolsonaro has stoked the flames of anti-gay hatred in Brazil , an already LGBT hostile nation , claiming that he would rather his sons died than come out as gay .
Greenwald and his partner are perhaps the two most visible LGBT opponents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be silent as the government attempts to curb liberties and human rights .
The government has privatized great swaths of the economy , promised to cut down the Amazon rainforest , leaving “ not a centimeter ” for indigenous groups to live on , and has moved extremely close to the Trump administration .
In December it participated in an attack on a paramilitary attack on Venezuela , controlled by the leftist government of Nicolas Maduro .
Bolsonaro has also praised the far-right dictatorship that ruled the country between the 1960s and 1980s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” This is “ all about ushering in that level of repression ” again , Greenwald says , claiming this is merely one step down an increasingly authoritarian path the government is taking .
Feature photo | Glenn Greenwald checks his news website at his home in Rio de Janeiro , Brazil .
Leo Correa | AP Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

The Brazilian government of Jair Bolsonaro has charged investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald with cybercrimes– offenses he allegedly committed while reporting on the government’s own high-level corruption. Prosecutors claim that the American journalist “helped, encouraged and guided” a group of hackers to gain access to cell phone messages between top government figures, using the information to undermine the image of Brazil’s anti-corruption task force.
Greenwald rejected the charges, claiming they were “retaliation” against himself and his outlet The Intercept, for a “series of journalistic exposes we have been publishing and reporting since June, showing high level corruption in the Bolsonaro government, in particular by his Minister of Justice and Public Security Sergio Moro,” adding that the Brazilian government “simply don’t believe” in a free press or in democracy.
Regarding the criminal charges brought by the Bolsonaro government: it’s a grave and obvious attack on a free press, brought by a far-right judge. We’re going to defend a free press, not be intimidated by authorities abusing their power. The reporting will continue. pic.twitter.com/kd9b8Kggx3 — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 21, 2020
Brazilian prosecutors have been carrying out a supposed anti-corruption drive since 2014 that has led to the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff in 2016 and the imprisonment of former president and 2018 election frontrunner Lula da Silva. However, Greenwald’s reporting exposed that the judge in charge of the proceedings, Sergio Moro, was actually in constant contact with the prosecution team, instructing them on lines of attack and how best to destroy the center-left Workers’ Party, who both Rousseff and Lula belong to. After he imprisoned Lula, clearing the way for Jair Bolsonaro to win the 2018 elections, Moro accepted a privileged position in Bolsonaro’s cabinet and was given extensive powers, effectively making him one of the most influential men in Brazil. His reporting was crucial to Lula’s release from prison in November.
Bolsonaro’s actions immediately drew parallels with how Western governments have treated whistleblowers and publishers who have exposed their secrets. Greenwald himself worked closely with NSA leaker Edward Snowden, who exposed the extent of the spying operation the organization was conducting. While Greenwald was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his work – considered by many as the highest award in journalism – Snowden has been persecuted and demonized, forced into exile in Russia. Meanwhile, Wikileaks co-founder, Julian Assange – a figure Greenwald has constantly defended – languishes in a London prison, awaiting possible extradition to the United States.
First it was #Assange now its @ggreenwald ..WAKE UP! pic.twitter.com/SHnA9eDMzJ — Randy Credico Live On The Fly (@CredicoRandy) January 21, 2020
While Greenwald has built an enormous cult following as possibly the world’s most high profile journalist specializing in leaked material, national security and civil liberties, he is not a popular figure in the world of professional journalists, who see him as an overly-combative outsider. Although denouncing the charges against him, the nation’s top reporters were at pains to stress how much they personally disliked him, lest they be confused for journalists challenging the power of the national security state. “I’ve disagreed with Glenn Greenwald over the years – sometimes, he even infuriates me” wrote Vox Senior Correspondent Zack Beauchamp, but, “his indictment should be condemned by anyone with an iota of concern for free speech.” Conservative writer Max Boot agreed; “I’m no fan of Glenn Greenwald, nor he of me, but this sounds like an attempt to target him for running investigative articles that embarrassed the right-wing Brazilian regime,” he tweeted.
"I hate Glenn Greenwald and would never support his work but fascist persecution of journalists is bad" is my favorite genre of tweet today pic.twitter.com/ti9kceNYva — Jacob Silverman (@SilvermanJacob) January 21, 2020
Greenwald was originally a lawyer and blogger, before transitioning into journalism during the Bush administration, writing for Salon then The Guardian, before founding investigative news website The Intercept in 2014. He is a prominent doubter of RussiaGate and is not afraid of debate or argument. For his open skepticism of the idea that Vladimir Putin decided the 2016 elections, he claims he has been effectively blacklisted from MSNBC and other liberal networks, although he has appeared on Fox’s Tucker Carlson Tonight. This and many of his contrarian positions have led to allegations that he is a far-right asset. Greenwald strongly contests this, pointing to the fact that he has devoted his life defending the rights and civil liberties of Muslims and other minorities from increasingly authoritarian administrations, and that he is an openly gay man, married to David Miranda, a Brazilian Congressman from the Socialism and Liberty Party, both under fire from a genuinely fascist government in Brazil. On the Useful Idiots podcast, he revealed that his resistance to Bolsonaro’s administration has taken a serious toll on his own family’s liberty, noting that they must travel everywhere in armored cars escorted by armed guards.
Jair Bolsonaro was elected in a highly contentious election in 2018 that saw the Workers’ Party candidate, Lula da Silva, imprisoned and barred from running, despite being by far the most popular candidate. The election was also marred by waves of fake news. Bolsonaro has stoked the flames of anti-gay hatred in Brazil, an already LGBT hostile nation, claiming that he would rather his sons died than come out as gay. Greenwald and his partner are perhaps the two most visible LGBT opponents of the Bolsonaro government, refusing to be silent as the government attempts to curb liberties and human rights.
The government has privatized great swaths of the economy, promised to cut down the Amazon rainforest, leaving “not a centimeter” for indigenous groups to live on, and has moved extremely close to the Trump administration. In December it participated in an attack on a paramilitary attack on Venezuela, controlled by the leftist government of Nicolas Maduro. Bolsonaro has also praised the far-right dictatorship that ruled the country between the 1960s and 1980s as a “superior form of government.” This is “all about ushering in that level of repression” again, Greenwald says, claiming this is merely one step down an increasingly authoritarian path the government is taking.
Feature photo | Glenn Greenwald checks his news website at his home in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Leo Correa | AP
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-01-24--Former Brazilian President Lula da Silva: Obama, Hillary Ordered Me Not to Negotiate with Iran

He was the world ’ s most popular leader .
Now he is “ the world ’ s most prominent political prisoner ” according to American political philosopher Noam Chomsky .
From extremely humble beginnings as a peanut seller and a shoeshine boy on Brazil ’ s streets , Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva rose to become president of his nation in 2002 .
Yet he is now being kept hostage by the country ’ s fascist Bolsonaro administration .
In a wide-ranging interview with Brasil Wire editors Daniel Hunt , Brian Mier and Michael Brooks , host of The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ known as Lula described how the U.S. government ordered him not to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran , new revelations about U.S. involvement in the coup of 1964 , and the current state of his country .
U.S. tensions with Iran are nearing an all-time high .
But ten years ago , the Brazilian government brokered a deal between Iran and the West – something , Lula reveals , was met with near incandescent anger by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton .
The former president was at the G20 summit in Princeton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a peace deal with Iran was in the air .
But , as he soon found out , none of the leaders in the room were interested in speaking with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad .
“ How do these people want to make a deal without a conversation ?
” Lula asked , proposing to travel alone in good faith to Iran as a neutral arbiter from the global South .
The U.S. tried to scupper his plan at every step .
As Lula recounted , The reason Obama did not want him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had already written and signed a formal letter to Lula promising that if Iran agreed to certain terms , the U.S. would sign a treaty .
Lula went to Tehran regardless of the objections and had little trouble signing Ahmadinejad up to terms dictated by Obama .
He naively thought the U.S. and the E.U .
would celebrate his diplomacy .
In fact , Lula said , he was treated as a “ personna non grata on the international political stage.
” “ Everyone was acting like Brazil had gotten into something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he added .
In response to Brazil ’ s efforts at diplomacy , Obama increased sanctions on Iran , shattering the pretense that the U.S. was acting as an honest partner and just wanted to secure peace in the region .
Nevertheless , his actions , calling the West ’ s bluff , eventually led to an Iran deal that made the region a safer place .
“ The rich countries… did not accept a new protagonist in the area .
In their minds , Brazil was not big enough to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scale .
It was easy for me to speak with Ahmadinejad because I told him that the only thing I wanted from them is what we have in Brazil , ” Lula told his interviewers .
Brazil had been a loyal client state of the U.S. since the 1964 coup that overthrew João Goulart and replaced him with a fascist military dictatorship .
In 2018 , Lula notes , evidence was released revealing the extent of U.S. involvement in the coup .
Audiotapes showed that President Kennedy personally gave the orders to overthrow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waters to assist the military takeover .
“ It took us 54 years to learn that , ” opined the former president .
As leader of South America ’ s largest country , Lula reasserted Brazil ’ s independence internationally .
“ I am convinced that the Americans never accepted the fact that we made a deal with France to build nuclear powered ships , ” he said .
“ Comrade Obama was not happy when we decided to make a deal to buy [ French ] Rafale jets , and that [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Swedish fighter jets .
He wasn ’ t happy with that .
He also wasn ’ t happy with a certain level of independence that Brazil had.
” According to Lula , the U.S. was aghast at the wave of countries electing left-wing heads of state across the region .
By 2011 , a large majority of Latin Americans lived under governments formally committed to ending the reign of American imperialism , from the more radical leftist governments of Venezuela , Bolivia and Ecuador to the “ soft left ” of Argentina , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differed in outlook but all saw the necessity in working together to achieve genuine independence .
They also began inviting other powers like Russia and China in .
“ I think the Americans woke up one morning and said , “ hold on a second , Latin America is ours and we will not allow the Chinese to continue acquiring Latin America , ” Lula said .
However , the situation is very different in 2020 .
Lula ’ s successor Dilma Rousseff was impeached and Lula imprisoned and barred from standing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Evo Morales have been overthrown in U.S. sponsored coups .
The U.S. has also recognized right-wing opposition politician Juan Guaidó as president of Venezuela .
Lula took aim at the “ rude ” and “ mediocre ” “ foolishness ” of the Trump administration : “ The idea that you would officially recognize a con-artist , a congressman who declared himself President of the Republic – imagine if this fad catches on around the World !
” Today , Brazil is again controlled by a fascist military officer in Jair Bolsonaro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a highly dubious court decision , sent to prison , and barred from standing in the 2018 elections , where polls show he was the overwhelming favorite for victory .
After jailing him , the judge , Sergio Moro , accepted a place as the Minister of Justice in Bolsonaro ’ s cabinet .
Even more shockingly , Brazil-based American journalist Glenn Greenwald exposed that Moro was far from a neutral arbiter and was in fact collaborating with the prosecution team to ensure Lula ’ s conviction .
As MintPress News reported this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with “ cybercrimes ” in retaliation .
“ I think that Brazil is living its worst moment in history , ” Lula told his interviewers .
“ We have a subservient government.
” Subservient , that is , to the United States and to capitalism .
He was kept in solitary confinement , and without access to reading materials , but has been temporarily freed while his appeal is heard , hence his increased ability to speak out .
Lula grew up dirt poor in Brazil ’ s extremely impoverished northeast , dropping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shine shoes for a living .
He was a child laborer and lost a finger at age 14 in a lathing accident in an auto parts factory .
But he had already begun to organize his much older colleagues , rising to become one of the country ’ s top union bosses , a dangerous position to hold in a fascist dictatorship .
After many years of trying , he was elected president of Brazil in 2002 .
As the U.S. was declaring war on Iraq , Lula was declaring a war on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ signature Bolsa Familia program , which featured both unconditional and conditional direct cash transfers to the poorest Brazilians , lifted tens of millions out of poverty .
Under Lula and Dilma , the education budget rose fivefold while health spending quadrupled as the country constructed an enormous socialized health system with the help of around 12,000 Cuban doctors .
It was independent , constructive thinking like this that generated such respect for Lula worldwide and the reason he is still seen as a dangerous subversive by elites both in Brazil and in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good example , after all , is a powerful one .
Feature photo | U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , center , speaks with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva , right , during Brazil ’ s President Dilma Rousseff ’ s inauguration ceremony at the Planalto presidential palace in Brasilia , Brazil , Jan. 1 , 2011 .
Eraldo Peres | AP Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

He was the world’s most popular leader. Now he is “the world’s most prominent political prisoner” according to American political philosopher Noam Chomsky. From extremely humble beginnings as a peanut seller and a shoeshine boy on Brazil’s streets, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva rose to become president of his nation in 2002. Yet he is now being kept hostage by the country’s fascist Bolsonaro administration. In a wide-ranging interview with Brasil Wire editors Daniel Hunt, Brian Mier and Michael Brooks, host of The Michael Brooks Show, the man universally known as Lula described how the U.S. government ordered him not to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran, new revelations about U.S. involvement in the coup of 1964, and the current state of his country.

U.S. tensions with Iran are nearing an all-time high. But ten years ago, the Brazilian government brokered a deal between Iran and the West – something, Lula reveals, was met with near incandescent anger by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The former president was at the G20 summit in Princeton, N.J., and talk of negotiating a peace deal with Iran was in the air. But, as he soon found out, none of the leaders in the room were interested in speaking with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. “How do these people want to make a deal without a conversation?” Lula asked, proposing to travel alone in good faith to Iran as a neutral arbiter from the global South. The U.S. tried to scupper his plan at every step. As Lula recounted,
I remember that Hilary Clinton worked hard against my idea to go to Iran. She even called the Emir of Qatar and asked him to convince me not to go. When I arrived in Moscow and met with [Dmitry] Medvedev, I found out Obama had called and asked him to help convince me not to go.”
The reason Obama did not want him negotiating, it transpired, was that he had already written and signed a formal letter to Lula promising that if Iran agreed to certain terms, the U.S. would sign a treaty. Lula went to Tehran regardless of the objections and had little trouble signing Ahmadinejad up to terms dictated by Obama. He naively thought the U.S. and the E.U. would celebrate his diplomacy. In fact, Lula said, he was treated as a “personna non grata on the international political stage.” “Everyone was acting like Brazil had gotten into something that nobody had invited it to do,” he added.
In response to Brazil’s efforts at diplomacy, Obama increased sanctions on Iran, shattering the pretense that the U.S. was acting as an honest partner and just wanted to secure peace in the region. Nevertheless, his actions, calling the West’s bluff, eventually led to an Iran deal that made the region a safer place. “The rich countries… did not accept a new protagonist in the area. In their minds, Brazil was not big enough to get involved in an issue of that scale. It was easy for me to speak with Ahmadinejad because I told him that the only thing I wanted from them is what we have in Brazil,” Lula told his interviewers.
Lula’s legacy of independence
Brazil had been a loyal client state of the U.S. since the 1964 coup that overthrew João Goulart and replaced him with a fascist military dictatorship. In 2018, Lula notes, evidence was released revealing the extent of U.S. involvement in the coup. Audiotapes showed that President Kennedy personally gave the orders to overthrow Goulart and that U.S. warships entered Brazilian waters to assist the military takeover. “It took us 54 years to learn that,” opined the former president.
As leader of South America’s largest country, Lula reasserted Brazil’s independence internationally. “I am convinced that the Americans never accepted the fact that we made a deal with France to build nuclear powered ships,” he said. “Comrade Obama was not happy when we decided to make a deal to buy [French] Rafale jets, and that [my successor] Dilma decided to buy Swedish fighter jets. He wasn’t happy with that. He also wasn’t happy with a certain level of independence that Brazil had.”
According to Lula, the U.S. was aghast at the wave of countries electing left-wing heads of state across the region. By 2011, a large majority of Latin Americans lived under governments formally committed to ending the reign of American imperialism, from the more radical leftist governments of Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador to the “soft left” of Argentina, Uruguay or Brazil. All the governments differed in outlook but all saw the necessity in working together to achieve genuine independence.
They also began inviting other powers like Russia and China in. “I think the Americans woke up one morning and said, “hold on a second, Latin America is ours and we will not allow the Chinese to continue acquiring Latin America,” Lula said. However, the situation is very different in 2020.
Lula’s successor Dilma Rousseff was impeached and Lula imprisoned and barred from standing for office. Others, such as Bolivia’s Evo Morales have been overthrown in U.S. sponsored coups. The U.S. has also recognized right-wing opposition politician Juan Guaidó as president of Venezuela. Lula took aim at the “rude” and “mediocre” “foolishness” of the Trump administration: “The idea that you would officially recognize a con-artist, a congressman who declared himself President of the Republic – imagine if this fad catches on around the World!”
Today, Brazil is again controlled by a fascist military officer in Jair Bolsonaro. Lula was convicted of corruption in a highly dubious court decision, sent to prison, and barred from standing in the 2018 elections, where polls show he was the overwhelming favorite for victory. After jailing him, the judge, Sergio Moro, accepted a place as the Minister of Justice in Bolsonaro’s cabinet. Even more shockingly, Brazil-based American journalist Glenn Greenwald exposed that Moro was far from a neutral arbiter and was in fact collaborating with the prosecution team to ensure Lula’s conviction. As MintPress News reported this week, Greenwald has now been charged with “cybercrimes” in retaliation.
“I think that Brazil is living its worst moment in history,” Lula told his interviewers. “We have a subservient government.” Subservient, that is, to the United States and to capitalism. He was kept in solitary confinement, and without access to reading materials, but has been temporarily freed while his appeal is heard, hence his increased ability to speak out.
Lula grew up dirt poor in Brazil’s extremely impoverished northeast, dropping out of school by grade five to shine shoes for a living. He was a child laborer and lost a finger at age 14 in a lathing accident in an auto parts factory. But he had already begun to organize his much older colleagues, rising to become one of the country’s top union bosses, a dangerous position to hold in a fascist dictatorship. After many years of trying, he was elected president of Brazil in 2002. As the U.S. was declaring war on Iraq, Lula was declaring a war on hunger in his own country. His signature Bolsa Familia program, which featured both unconditional and conditional direct cash transfers to the poorest Brazilians, lifted tens of millions out of poverty. Under Lula and Dilma, the education budget rose fivefold while health spending quadrupled as the country constructed an enormous socialized health system with the help of around 12,000 Cuban doctors.
It was independent, constructive thinking like this that generated such respect for Lula worldwide and the reason he is still seen as a dangerous subversive by elites both in Brazil and in the United States. The threat of a good example, after all, is a powerful one.
Feature photo | U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, center, speaks with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, right, during Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff’s inauguration ceremony at the Planalto presidential palace in Brasilia, Brazil, Jan. 1, 2011. Eraldo Peres | AP
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-01-24--Houthis Anticipate US Assassination Attempts, Warn US Troops Will Be Targeted in Retaliation

As tensions in the Middle East continue to rise , there are indications that Donald Trump ’ s administration is planning to carry out assassination operations against high-ranking Houthi officials inside of Yemen similar to the U.S. assassination of Iranian Revolutionary Guard General , Qassem Soleimani , a move likely to open the door for further escalation in the region .
On Thursday , a high ranking Houthi official in Sana ’ a told MintPress News on condition of anonymity that the Houthis would not hesitate to target U.S. troops in the region if the Trump administration targets its personnel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wake of an announcement by United States officials that the U.S. military tried , but failed , to kill another senior Iranian commander on the same day a U.S. drone strike killed Soleimani .
According to reports , a U.S. military air attack targeted Abdul Reza Shahlai , a high-ranking commander in Iran ’ s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps ( IRGC ) while he was in Yemen , but the mission was not successful .
The U.S. Department of the Treasury claimed that Shahlai was based in Yemen and accused him of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans and US allies globally.
” Meanwhile , Yemeni activists and media pundits are expressing concerns over what they consider serious threats from Trump administration , pointing out that news of the unsuccessful assassination in Yemen should not be underestimated .
Others have called on U.S. Congress to prevent any attacks on Yemeni soil and to keep U.S. soldiers in the region out of harm ’ s way .
The pretexts for U.S. attacks in Yemen are not without precedent .
On October 13 , 2016 , the U.S. military announced that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hodeida , an area of Yemen controlled by Houthi forces , in retaliation for an alleged failed missile attack on the USS Mason , a U.S. Navy destroyer .
The Houthis maintain that they were not involved in any missile attacks against the Mason .
For their part , the Houthis ( Ansar Allah ) were clear in their warning to U.S. leaders in the wake of U.S. assassinations in Iraq , promising that U.S. troops in the Arabian Gulf or the Red Sea would be targeted without hesitation if the Trump administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Yemeni army , which is loyal to Ansar Allah , is already preparing for anticipated U.S. attacks .
Ansar Allah ’ s leadership has reaffirmed that their anti-U.S. position is based on a principled and ideological commitment , but historically , Ansar Allah has not directly targeted the United States or its interests in the region .
During a televised speech broadcast live on January 8 during Yemen ’ s martyr ’ s week commemoration , Abdulmalik Badr al-Din al Houthi , the leader of Ansar Allah , said that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s equation in killing us and interfering in our affairs and to do nothing is no longer acceptable.
” He went on to say that the Houthis ’ dealings with the “ carelessness of the United States which targets the nation ’ s leaders will be different.
” The Ansar Allah leader pointed out that if there was no U.S. support for Saudi Arabia , the war against Yemen would not have occurred , adding that the role of the United States in the war against his country includes supervision , management @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the supply of weapons .
He also warned Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates from continuing their military campaign in Yemen , saying that “ developments in the region are not in their interests.
” Implying that the escalation of tensions between the U.S. and Iran could be used against both the United States and Saudi Arabia in some way .
The threats of Ansar Allah , a group known to strike sensitive targets without hesitation , should not be underestimated .
On September 14 , Yemen hit two of Saudi Arabia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Khurais in a retaliatory attack that the United States blamed on Iran .
Now , they have developed their arsenal of ballistic missiles and drones even further and experts say are likely capable of hitting U.S. troops in the region .
According to Houthi officials in Sana ’ a , the Trump administration appears to be using allegations of an Iranian troop presence in Yemen , an allegation that Houthis deny , as a pretext for further military action in the country , despite no evidence to back the claim .
Furthermore , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that of Iran ’ s allies in the region after the U.S. assassinated Soleimani further suggests that Iran has no significant measure of influence over the Houthi ’ s decision-making process .
In fact , the Houthis fiercely rejected any and all foreign attempts to influence their decisions after the assassination of Soleimani .
The group , thus far , has not promised to retaliate against U.S. troops as revenge for the murder of Soleimani as Iran ’ s allies in the region did in near unanimity .
Moreover , they treated the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be drawn into an escalation despite angry demonstrations that took place in many of Yemen ’ s cities over the assassination .
However , the Houthis have signed a military cooperation deal with Iran as a result of the continued war and blockade against their country and may work with Iran to take action against U.S. troops in the region should the U.S. target Houthi leaders in Yemen .
According to some strategic decision-makers in Sana ’ a , retaliatory attacks could take place if even a single case of a U.S. attack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the wake of the U.S. killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and Iraqi military leader Abu Majd al- Muhandis , many Yemeni politicians fear the Trump administration could carry out similar operations against high-ranking leaders in Yemen .
The Saudi-backed assassinations of former presidents Saleh al- Sammad and Ibrahim al-Hamdi , both popular figures among Yemenis , are cemented in the country ’ s collective memory .
On November 6 , 2017 , Saudi Arabia released a list of 40 names of Houthis leaders and senior figures that the Kingdom wanted dead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Saudi Ministry of Interior , which offered rewards of between $ 5 to $ 30 million .
On April 19 , 2018 , former president of the SPC , Saleh al-Samad , was assassinated by Saudi airstrikes in Hodeida while preparing for a protest to statements made by the American ambassador that the Houthi-controlled city of Hodeida will fall .
Almost two years after al-Sammad ’ s assassination , a criminal court in Hodeida has begun the trial of U.S. President Trump along with 61 Yemenis and foreigners , all believed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the former head of the SPC .
After finding ten suspects guilty , the court held its first hearing , trying Trump and the remaining 51 foreign and Yemeni defendants in absentia in late October .
The trial , which has drawn national media attention , may only be symbolic , but it sends a clear message to the U.S. that its operations in Yemen and its ongoing complicity in the worst man-made humanitarian crisis in the world is unacceptable and will undermine U.S. foreign policy in the region .
Before his assassination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a plan to rebuild Yemen into a modern , stable and democratic state by 2030 .
He penned the National Vision , a manifesto of 175 goals focused on independence , freedom and non-submission to foreign influence .
Yemenis ’ concerns about .U.S and Saudi intentions towards their national leaders were reinforced when the Yemeni Defense Ministry revealed that both U.S intelligence and Saudi princes ’ were involved in the 1977 assassination of popular Yemeni president Ibrahim al-Hamdi after he refused Washington and Riyadh ’ s interference in Yemen ’ s internal affairs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Abdullah bin Amer , a senior official at the Yemeni Defense Ministry , released important documents related to the assassination of President al-Hamdi , including the names of those involved in his murder .
Before his death , al-Hamdi was attempting to pivot Yemen away from the Saudi kingdom and the United States and build Yemen ’ s independence by developing it ’ s oil reserves and its strategic location on the Bab al-Mandeb Strait .
Now , according to senior Houthi officials , Sana ’ a is in possession of evidence that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s administration and the Saudi regime in the assassination , including planning , supervising and covering up the crime , according to Brigadier bin Amer .
MintPress was shown documents allegedly exchanged between U.S. and Saudi intelligence that indicated the involvement of the United States and former Saudi Kings Khalid bin Abdulaziz Al Saud , Fahd bin Abdulaziz and their brother Sultan in the assassination , but was unable to independently verify their authenticity .
According to the documents as well as witness testimony , al-Hamdi was invited to lunch at the residence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Army chief of staff under his command .
During his stay there , Ali Abdullah Saleh , then a brigade commander , and one of his bodyguards entered the house .
Moments after they entered , al-Hamdi was killed in a hail of bullets .
Sultan Bin Abdulaziz , according to the documents , was in direct contact with Saleh al-Hadyan , the Saudi military attaché in Northern Yemen ’ s capital Sana ’ a at the time of the targeted killing .
Riyadh allegedly dispatched three Saudi intelligence operatives to Sana ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left Yemen three hours after the operation concluded .
“ Saudi Arabia killed al-Hamdi under the supervision of Saudi military attaché , Saleh al-Hadyan because he was an opponent of Saudi Arabia and did not comply with its instructions and interventions in Yemen , ” The late Abdullah Saleh said in a 2016 interview with RT Arabic in which he claimed that he had “ evidence of the involvement of Saudi Arabia.
” When al-Hamdi came to power in 1974 , North Yemen lacked even the most basic services and infrastructure .
Moreover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of collapse and tribesmen held significant power and influence .
Al-Hamdi , much like Al-Sammad , created a development plan supervised by a number of committees which encouraged local communities to contribute to road construction , school buildings , and water networks .
Under al-Hamdi ’ s direction , North Yemen underwent a period of rapid economic growth .
The country ’ s GDP rose from 21.5 percent in 1974 to 56.1 percent in 1977 and per capita income rose by 300 percent .
Al-Hamdi , according to WikiLeaks documents , was also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eventual elections ” in North Yemen .
Given the fate shared by those willing to risk charting a path free of foreign intervention in Yemen , it is unlikely that the Houthis , nor their fellow countrymen , will take attempts by foreign countries to assassinate Yemeni leaders lightly .
Feature photo | Yemenis hold posters of Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani during a protest against a U.S. airstrike in Iraq that killed them both , in Sanaa , Yemen , Jan. 6 , 2020 .
Hani Mohammed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalist .
He covers the war in Yemen for MintPress News as well as local Yemeni media .

As tensions in the Middle East continue to rise, there are indications that Donald Trump’s administration is planning to carry out assassination operations against high-ranking Houthi officials inside of Yemen similar to the U.S. assassination of Iranian Revolutionary Guard General, Qassem Soleimani, a move likely to open the door for further escalation in the region.
On Thursday, a high ranking Houthi official in Sana’a told MintPress News on condition of anonymity that the Houthis would not hesitate to target U.S. troops in the region if the Trump administration targets its personnel inside Yemen.
The statement comes in the wake of an announcement by United States officials that the U.S. military tried, but failed, to kill another senior Iranian commander on the same day a U.S. drone strike killed Soleimani.
According to reports, a U.S. military air attack targeted Abdul Reza Shahlai, a high-ranking commander in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) while he was in Yemen, but the mission was not successful. The U.S. Department of the Treasury claimed that Shahlai was based in Yemen and accused him of having “a long history of targeting Americans and US allies globally.”
Meanwhile, Yemeni activists and media pundits are expressing concerns over what they consider serious threats from Trump administration, pointing out that news of the unsuccessful assassination in Yemen should not be underestimated. Others have called on U.S. Congress to prevent any attacks on Yemeni soil and to keep U.S. soldiers in the region out of harm’s way.
The pretexts for U.S. attacks in Yemen are not without precedent. On October 13, 2016, the U.S. military announced that it had struck three coastal radar sites in Hodeida, an area of Yemen controlled by Houthi forces, in retaliation for an alleged failed missile attack on the USS Mason, a U.S. Navy destroyer. The Houthis maintain that they were not involved in any missile attacks against the Mason.
For their part, the Houthis (Ansar Allah) were clear in their warning to U.S. leaders in the wake of U.S. assassinations in Iraq, promising that U.S. troops in the Arabian Gulf or the Red Sea would be targeted without hesitation if the Trump administration attempts to target Houthi leaders in Yemen.
The Yemeni army, which is loyal to Ansar Allah, is already preparing for anticipated U.S. attacks. Ansar Allah’s leadership has reaffirmed that their anti-U.S. position is based on a principled and ideological commitment, but historically, Ansar Allah has not directly targeted the United States or its interests in the region.
During a televised speech broadcast live on January 8 during Yemen’s martyr’s week commemoration, Abdulmalik Badr al-Din al Houthi, the leader of Ansar Allah, said that “We will no longer acquiesce to Trump’s equation in killing us and interfering in our affairs and to do nothing is no longer acceptable.” He went on to say that the Houthis’ dealings with the “carelessness of the United States which targets the nation’s leaders will be different.”
The Ansar Allah leader pointed out that if there was no U.S. support for Saudi Arabia, the war against Yemen would not have occurred, adding that the role of the United States in the war against his country includes supervision, management, political protection, destruction, and the supply of weapons.
He also warned Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates from continuing their military campaign in Yemen, saying that “developments in the region are not in their interests.” Implying that the escalation of tensions between the U.S. and Iran could be used against both the United States and Saudi Arabia in some way.
The threats of Ansar Allah, a group known to strike sensitive targets without hesitation, should not be underestimated. On September 14, Yemen hit two of Saudi Arabia’s oil facilities in Abqaiq and Khurais in a retaliatory attack that the United States blamed on Iran. Now, they have developed their arsenal of ballistic missiles and drones even further and experts say are likely capable of hitting U.S. troops in the region.
According to Houthi officials in Sana’a, the Trump administration appears to be using allegations of an Iranian troop presence in Yemen, an allegation that Houthis deny, as a pretext for further military action in the country, despite no evidence to back the claim.
Furthermore, the contrast between the Houthi reaction to that of Iran’s allies in the region after the U.S. assassinated Soleimani further suggests that Iran has no significant measure of influence over the Houthi’s decision-making process.
In fact, the Houthis fiercely rejected any and all foreign attempts to influence their decisions after the assassination of Soleimani. The group, thus far, has not promised to retaliate against U.S. troops as revenge for the murder of Soleimani as Iran’s allies in the region did in near unanimity. Moreover, they treated the incident with caution and decided not to be drawn into an escalation despite angry demonstrations that took place in many of Yemen’s cities over the assassination.
However, the Houthis have signed a military cooperation deal with Iran as a result of the continued war and blockade against their country and may work with Iran to take action against U.S. troops in the region should the U.S. target Houthi leaders in Yemen. According to some strategic decision-makers in Sana’a, retaliatory attacks could take place if even a single case of a U.S. attack in Yemen were to take place.
A legacy of targeted killings
In the wake of the U.S. killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and Iraqi military leader Abu Majd al- Muhandis, many Yemeni politicians fear the Trump administration could carry out similar operations against high-ranking leaders in Yemen. The Saudi-backed assassinations of former presidents Saleh al- Sammad and Ibrahim al-Hamdi, both popular figures among Yemenis, are cemented in the country’s collective memory.
On November 6, 2017, Saudi Arabia released a list of 40 names of Houthis leaders and senior figures that the Kingdom wanted dead or alive. The list was issued by the Saudi Ministry of Interior, which offered rewards of between $5 to $30 million. On April 19, 2018, former president of the SPC, Saleh al-Samad, was assassinated by Saudi airstrikes in Hodeida while preparing for a protest to statements made by the American ambassador that the Houthi-controlled city of Hodeida will fall.
Almost two years after al-Sammad’s assassination, a criminal court in Hodeida has begun the trial of U.S. President Trump along with 61 Yemenis and foreigners, all believed to be involved in the assassination of the former head of the SPC. After finding ten suspects guilty, the court held its first hearing, trying Trump and the remaining 51 foreign and Yemeni defendants in absentia in late October.
The trial, which has drawn national media attention, may only be symbolic, but it sends a clear message to the U.S. that its operations in Yemen and its ongoing complicity in the worst man-made humanitarian crisis in the world is unacceptable and will undermine U.S. foreign policy in the region.
Before his assassination, Al-Sammad was attempting to carry out a plan to rebuild Yemen into a modern, stable and democratic state by 2030. He penned the National Vision, a manifesto of 175 goals focused on independence, freedom and non-submission to foreign influence.
Yemenis’ concerns about .U.S and Saudi intentions towards their national leaders were reinforced when the Yemeni Defense Ministry revealed that both U.S intelligence and Saudi princes’ were involved in the 1977 assassination of popular Yemeni president Ibrahim al-Hamdi after he refused Washington and Riyadh’s interference in Yemen’s internal affairs.
At a press conference, Brigadier Abdullah bin Amer, a senior official at the Yemeni Defense Ministry, released important documents related to the assassination of President al-Hamdi, including the names of those involved in his murder.
Before his death, al-Hamdi was attempting to pivot Yemen away from the Saudi kingdom and the United States and build Yemen’s independence by developing it’s oil reserves and its strategic location on the Bab al-Mandeb Strait. Now, according to senior Houthi officials, Sana’a is in possession of evidence that confirms the role of President Carter’s administration and the Saudi regime in the assassination, including planning, supervising and covering up the crime, according to Brigadier bin Amer.
MintPress was shown documents allegedly exchanged between U.S. and Saudi intelligence that indicated the involvement of the United States and former Saudi Kings Khalid bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, Fahd bin Abdulaziz and their brother Sultan in the assassination, but was unable to independently verify their authenticity.
According to the documents as well as witness testimony, al-Hamdi was invited to lunch at the residence of Ahmad al-Qashmi, who was the Army chief of staff under his command. During his stay there, Ali Abdullah Saleh, then a brigade commander, and one of his bodyguards entered the house. Moments after they entered, al-Hamdi was killed in a hail of bullets.
Sultan Bin Abdulaziz, according to the documents, was in direct contact with Saleh al-Hadyan, the Saudi military attaché in Northern Yemen’s capital Sana’a at the time of the targeted killing. Riyadh allegedly dispatched three Saudi intelligence operatives to Sana’a hours before the assassination who then left Yemen three hours after the operation concluded.
“Saudi Arabia killed al-Hamdi under the supervision of Saudi military attaché, Saleh al-Hadyan because he was an opponent of Saudi Arabia and did not comply with its instructions and interventions in Yemen,” The late Abdullah Saleh said in a 2016 interview with RT Arabic in which he claimed that he had “evidence of the involvement of Saudi Arabia.”
When al-Hamdi came to power in 1974, North Yemen lacked even the most basic services and infrastructure. Moreover, the country was on the brink of collapse and tribesmen held significant power and influence. Al-Hamdi, much like Al-Sammad, created a development plan supervised by a number of committees which encouraged local communities to contribute to road construction, school buildings, and water networks.
Under al-Hamdi’s direction, North Yemen underwent a period of rapid economic growth. The country’s GDP rose from 21.5 percent in 1974 to 56.1 percent in 1977 and per capita income rose by 300 percent. Al-Hamdi, according to WikiLeaks documents, was also working to “prepare the groundwork for eventual elections” in North Yemen.
Given the fate shared by those willing to risk charting a path free of foreign intervention in Yemen, it is unlikely that the Houthis, nor their fellow countrymen, will take attempts by foreign countries to assassinate Yemeni leaders lightly.
Feature photo | Yemenis hold posters of Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani during a protest against a U.S. airstrike in Iraq that killed them both, in Sanaa, Yemen, Jan. 6, 2020. Hani Mohammed | AP
Ahmed AbdulKareem is a Yemeni journalist. He covers the war in Yemen for MintPress News as well as local Yemeni media.


mintpressnews--2020-01-24--Enormous Crowds at Iraq’s Million Man March Tell America to Leave for Good

People from all over Iraq have descended upon its capital Baghdad , heeding the call from influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr for a “ million man march ” calling for an end to the nearly 17 year-long U.S. occupation of the country .
Images from the event show seas of peaceful crowds walking together through the city center .
Sayed Sadiq al-Hashemi , the director of the Iraqi Center for Studies , estimated that more than 2.5 million took part in the demonstrations .
While there are many divisions in Iraqi society , marchers hope to send a united message @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going on about respecting Iraqi sovereignty .
Well Iraqis want you out of their country , ” said Lebanese-American journalist Rania Khalek , adding that the recent U.S. assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps ( IRGC ) has seriously backfired , leading to a huge show of anti-American sentiment .
She also took aim at the media coverage ; “ Whenever a couple hundred people protest against Iran , it trends on twitter .
Yet when hundreds of thousands in Iraq protest against the US ?
No @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s words were prophetic .
The march has already concluded , yet coverage in Western media has been sparse , to say the least .
A search for “ Iraq ” into the Google News search engine at 16:00 GMT Friday elicited just two articles in the Western press .
Meanwhile , Bloomberg ’ s Quick Take released a since-corrected video , incorrectly describing the mass protests as merely “ anti-government demonstrations.
” The message of the million man march was impossible to miss : the main stage of the event featured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GET OUT AMERICA ” printed in giant upper case English letters , while protesters carried signs that featured slogans like “ Americans elect moron criminals & the rest of the world suffers destruction , ” “ Trump is destroying America and the world , ” and , perhaps most ominously , “ You arrived vertically but will leave horizontally.
” The most comprehensive English language coverage by far was , ironically , from Iranian-government owned channel Press TV , who had live video feeds of the events with round-the-clock coverage and commentary in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deleted Press TV from its platforms , including YouTube , making it far harder for Western audiences to access it .
The media attack on the public ’ s ability to hear alternative opinions continued as Facebook announced that , because of U.S. sanctions , it was legally compelled to remove all content that contradicted the Trump administration ’ s position on Soleimani ’ s assassination or shared an Iranian government perspective .
“ We operate under U.S. sanctions laws , including those related to the U.S. government ’ s designation of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook spokesperson said .
This is particularly problematic as Soleimani was , according to American surveys , “ the most popular Iranian public figure ” with over 80 percent of the country having a positive or very positive opinion of him .
This effectively means that the Trump administration has control over the opinions that the world – and Iranians themselves – see on social media .
Although Soleimani ’ s assassination on January 3 sparked outrage in Iran , it was also deeply unpopular with Iraqis , who saw it as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has for their country ’ s sovereignty .
Little known outside the region is that the Soleimani had traveled to Baghdad for peace talks with Saudi Arabia at the behest of Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi .
Abdul-Mahdi specifically asked Trump for permission to invite him to his country .
Trump acquiesced , then used the opportunity to kill him .
In response , the Iraqi parliament passed a unanimous resolution on January 5 ( with many abstentions ) , calling for the expulsion of all U.S. troops .
There are currently an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plus large numbers of mercenary contractors .
The Trump administration , however , has flatly refused to leave .
In fact , it is greatly increasing the number of military personnel in the country as it prepares for a possible attack on Iran .
“ At this time , any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership — not to discuss troop withdrawal , but our right , appropriate force posture in the Middle East , ” said State Department spokesperson Morgan Ortagus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , threatening the entire country with “ very big sanctions ” as a punishment for telling America to leave .
Iraqis know the consequences of sanctions .
American engineered sanctions killed over one million Iraqis during the 1990s , including half a million children , as the country literally starved to death under the economic blockade .
The sanctions were labeled “ genocidal ” by successive U.N. diplomats who were charged with overseeing them .
At the time , Secretary of State Madeline Albright brushed off the deaths , stating that they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result of the millions of deaths caused by the sanctions and the 2003 invasion and occupation , the country has an unusually young population : the median age of an Iraqi is just 20 ( in the U.S. it is 38 ) .
Therefore , most Iraqis have never seen their country free of American troops .
Feature photo | Demonstrators carry placards depicting U.S. President Donald Trump at a protest against the presence of US troops in Iraq on Jan. 24 , 2020 .
Ala ’ a Al-Marjani | Reuters Alan MacLeod @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

People from all over Iraq have descended upon its capital Baghdad, heeding the call from influential Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr for a “million man march” calling for an end to the nearly 17 year-long U.S. occupation of the country. Images from the event show seas of peaceful crowds walking together through the city center. Sayed Sadiq al-Hashemi, the director of the Iraqi Center for Studies, estimated that more than 2.5 million took part in the demonstrations. While there are many divisions in Iraqi society, marchers hope to send a united message against American imperialism.
“Pompeo keeps going on about respecting Iraqi sovereignty. Well Iraqis want you out of their country,” said Lebanese-American journalist Rania Khalek, adding that the recent U.S. assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has seriously backfired, leading to a huge show of anti-American sentiment. She also took aim at the media coverage; “Whenever a couple hundred people protest against Iran, it trends on twitter. Yet when hundreds of thousands in Iraq protest against the US? No trending,” she said.
Khalek’s words were prophetic. The march has already concluded, yet coverage in Western media has been sparse, to say the least. A search for “Iraq” into the Google News search engine at 16:00 GMT Friday elicited just two articles in the Western press. Meanwhile, Bloomberg’s Quick Take released a since-corrected video, incorrectly describing the mass protests as merely “anti-government demonstrations.”
The message of the million man march was impossible to miss: the main stage of the event featured a huge banner with the words “GET OUT AMERICA” printed in giant upper case English letters, while protesters carried signs that featured slogans like “Americans elect moron criminals & the rest of the world suffers destruction,” “Trump is destroying America and the world,” and, perhaps most ominously, “You arrived vertically but will leave horizontally.”
https://twitter.com/IraqLiveUpdate/status/1220635030533427201
The most comprehensive English language coverage by far was, ironically, from Iranian-government owned channel Press TV, who had live video feeds of the events with round-the-clock coverage and commentary in English. Ironic because last week Google deleted Press TV from its platforms, including YouTube, making it far harder for Western audiences to access it. The media attack on the public’s ability to hear alternative opinions continued as Facebook announced that, because of U.S. sanctions, it was legally compelled to remove all content that contradicted the Trump administration’s position on Soleimani’s assassination or shared an Iranian government perspective. “We operate under U.S. sanctions laws, including those related to the U.S. government’s designation of the IRGC and its leadership,” a Facebook spokesperson said. This is particularly problematic as Soleimani was, according to American surveys, “the most popular Iranian public figure” with over 80 percent of the country having a positive or very positive opinion of him. This effectively means that the Trump administration has control over the opinions that the world – and Iranians themselves – see on social media.
Although Soleimani’s assassination on January 3 sparked outrage in Iran, it was also deeply unpopular with Iraqis, who saw it as the latest example of the contempt the U.S. has for their country’s sovereignty. Little known outside the region is that the Soleimani had traveled to Baghdad for peace talks with Saudi Arabia at the behest of Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi. Abdul-Mahdi specifically asked Trump for permission to invite him to his country. Trump acquiesced, then used the opportunity to kill him.
Truly is remarkable, more than million Iraqi across the nation gathered together to rise against the US and Zionist regime. This is the real voice of the nation who support #resistance against the enemy’s aggression. #ابو_مهدي_المهندس #العراق #iraq #IraqMillionManMarch pic.twitter.com/hCaf3sbUDo — zehra (@zehrafahd) January 24, 2020
In response, the Iraqi parliament passed a unanimous resolution on January 5 (with many abstentions), calling for the expulsion of all U.S. troops. There are currently an estimated 5,000 American soldiers in Iraq, plus large numbers of mercenary contractors.
The Trump administration, however, has flatly refused to leave. In fact, it is greatly increasing the number of military personnel in the country as it prepares for a possible attack on Iran. “At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership — not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East,” said State Department spokesperson Morgan Ortagus. Donald Trump was even more imperious, threatening the entire country with “very big sanctions” as a punishment for telling America to leave.
Iraqis know the consequences of sanctions. American engineered sanctions killed over one million Iraqis during the 1990s, including half a million children, as the country literally starved to death under the economic blockade. The sanctions were labeled “genocidal” by successive U.N. diplomats who were charged with overseeing them. At the time, Secretary of State Madeline Albright brushed off the deaths, stating that they were a price worth paying. As a result of the millions of deaths caused by the sanctions and the 2003 invasion and occupation, the country has an unusually young population: the median age of an Iraqi is just 20 (in the U.S. it is 38). Therefore, most Iraqis have never seen their country free of American troops.
Feature photo | Demonstrators carry placards depicting U.S. President Donald Trump at a protest against the presence of US troops in Iraq on Jan. 24, 2020. Ala’a Al-Marjani | Reuters
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.