wearechange--2020-09-27--Deutsche Bank Accused of Funding ISIS After Leaked Banking Documents Reveal Suspicious Money Transfe

Deutsche Bank Accused of Funding ISIS After Leaked Banking Documents Reveal Suspicious Money Transfers

The Islamic State ’ s infamous rule over vast areas of Iraq during 2014 and 2016 not only led to a humanitarian crisis , but also left the country ’ s economy depleted .
Its expansion in Iraq , marked by its control over vast areas of the country , most notably capturing the city of Mosul in June 2014 , also allowed the organisation to seize over 121 bank branches according to the Central Bank , in what was described as one of the largest bank robberies the world has ever seen .
Across its operations , the Islamic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of approximately $ 830 million .
Despite this , some banks , including Deutsche Bank and specifically its US branches , continued to allow money transfers to be sent to Iraq despite the group ’ s control over large parts of the country .
Leaked banking documents obtained by BuzzFeed News and shared with ICIJ , ARIJ and other media partners as part of the FinCEN Files investigation , reveal suspicious money transfers of at least $ 4 billion flagged by Deutsche Bank ’ s US branches and Bank of America , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ June 2014 and 30 June 2015 .
From 2 to 13 February 2015 , The Bank of America flagged 524 bank transfers moving from US bank accounts to various Iraqi bank branches for over $ 16.8 million , and from 18 to 20 May of the same year , The Bank of America flagged 244 bank transfers that ranged from $ 46.54 to as much as $ 28 million at a time , for a total of approximately $ 41.4 million .
The bank filed the two suspicious activity reports ( SARs ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by The Bank of America to identify wire transfers that are originating from , and being sent to , these financial institutions located in Iraq.
” The SAR filed in June indicates that 109 of the bank transfers were sent from seven Iraq-based banks to The Bank of America clients and totalled over $ 900,000 , while 54 outbound wire transfers were sent for more than $ 7 million .
“ 81 wires totalling $ 33,409,836.12 were conducted via correspondent bank relationships that involved numerous financial institutions on a global level , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas filed their SARs to FinCEN “ in conjunction with ongoing law enforcement collaboration , ” the exact nature of which is unclear .
Their first report of the 15 SARs filed in January 2015 , monitored 3,844 transactions made between 15 June 2014 to 15 December 2014 worth over $ 2.3 billion involving 13 Iraqi banks .
No client information or details on the beneficiaries were included in any of the bank ’ s reports .
Although the SARs did not specify which bank branches were involved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the height of the Islamic State ’ s rule and its control over several Iraqi bank branches .
Many of the banks in northern Iraq were in areas of IS influence , and such transfers could be the proceeds of the illicit oil and gas trade that the organisation largely relied on in its areas of control .
According to a report by the Central Bank prepared by its financial consultant , Dr Waleed Eidy Abdul Nabi , in October 2017 , the bank took various precautionary measures , including the following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sector during the Islamic State ’ s rule : • Stopping the activity of bank branches and non-banking financial institutions located in the governorates ( Mosul , Salahuddin , Diyala , Anbar ) and prohibiting their transfer or supply of foreign currency based on Banking Control decree No .
9/2/185 of 3/7/2014 .
• Halting the subscription of banks and non-banking financial institutions in the electronic clearing system and the payment system in general , located in the governorates ( Nineveh , Kirkuk , Salahuddin , Diyala , and Anbar ) .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activity of the branches under the Islamic State ’ s control , to be submitted to the governor in order to prevent money acquired by IS from entering the Iraqi banking and financial system .
Despite the Central Bank ’ s precautionary measures taken to stop the activity of bank branches in Mosul on 7 July 2014 , the chief executive of Iraq ’ s United Bank for Investment , Alaa Karam Allah , stated in an interview with The Financial Times on 17 July 2014 , that the bank in Mosul was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] did not close and work has not stopped for a day .
None of our workers have been assaulted , and the building is untouched.
” The Financial Action Task Force , a Paris-based intergovernmental organization to combat money laundering and terrorist financing , published a report on IS funding sources from February 2015 that identifies sources in relation to their importance as follows : • Illegal returns through land occupation , such as bank robbery , extortion , control of oil fields and refineries , theft of economic assets , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cross lands under the organisation ’ s control .
• Material support , such as that associated with Foreign Terrorist Fighters • Fundraising through “ modern communication networks ” , that is , social networking sites The Islamic State ’ s assets were estimated to be $ 2.2 billion by the end of 2015 , which included oil and gas reserves , cash , minerals , and land , according to the Center for Analysis of Terrorism .
Additionally , the data stated that the organisation ’ s illegal oil trade was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the face of the Islamic State ’ s enhanced financial conditions , Iraq ’ s financial state deteriorated due to the decline in oil prices .
Its budget deficit increased from 6 % of GDP in 2014 to 15 % of GDP in 2015 .
Additionally , the Central Bank of Iraq ’ s foreign currency reserves decreased from $ 67 billion in 2014 to $ 51 billion in 2015 , according to an IMF report .
Given that Deutsche Bank and the privately-owned Iraqi Elaf Islamic Bank have been previously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Iran in contravention of US sanctions , another plausible scenario on the recipients of the transfers mentioned in the SARs is that these remittances may have reached Iranian-affiliated groups in Iraq .
In fact , this corresponds with the sanctions imposed on Deutsche Bank by the New York State Department of Financial Services for transacting with sanctioned Iranian entities .
The major question remains : why were these huge money transfers permitted despite the suspicions and measures to counter violent extremism and the related sanctions in the US and Iraq ?
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ software defect that prevented it from reporting some suspicious transactions to the concerned authorities for nearly a decade .
As a result , thousands of suspicious banking transactions took place without proper accountability or oversight , including the aforementioned transfers from 2014-2015 .
On suspicious transfers , Washington DC-based attorney and Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist ( CAMS ) , Ross Delston told ARIJ that “ these transfers go on all the time , and no one knows what percentage of transfers are in fact caught.
” “ The bank is required to monitor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to them to stop it , to block it and or to report it .
They could block it without reporting it , they could turn it away without reporting it .
It ’ s not automatic .
It ’ s up to each bank to decide what to do , and not every bank is diligent , ” he added .
According to the leaked SARs , the Trade Bank of Iraq was involved in the largest share of the transfers ; $ 3.6 billion flagged from June 2014 to June 2015 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any client information , nor exactly who sent or received the money .
It should be noted that the Iraqi Trade Bank , a publicly-owned bank , is the main institution used by Baghdad for trade and finance .
Yet a judicial warrant was issued to arrest the bank ’ s latest two directors , Hamdiya Al-Jaf and Faisal Wissam Al-Haimus ( current president and CEO ) , on various charges including corruption and mismanagement .
The second largest bank involved in these transfers was the Ashur International Bank for Investment , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the Mosul Development and Investment Bank .
In May 2015 , the bank received one round dollar transaction in the amount of exactly $ 15,250,000.00 .
Yet , again , Deutsche Bank does not offer any information on the senders or recipients of the money transfers .
The state ’ s Rafidain Bank has 13.28 % of Ashur ’ s shares .
From July 31 , 2012 to May 17 , 2013 , the US Treasury Department imposed sanctions on the Elaf Bank , on the basis of its knowledge and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of large financial services , to the Iranian Bank for Export Development ( EDBI ) .
Elaf Bank , and 10 of its subsidiaries , were monitored by Deutsche Bank as per their reports .
As for the Iraqi Islamic Bank for Investment and Development , the private bank was involved in approximately $ 43.3 million worth of remittances , while the Bank of Baghdad , also a private bank , was involved in over $ 5.5 million during the same period .
These are in addition to a number of other Iraqi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the mentioned banks have branches in Iraq ’ s main cities including Baghdad , Mosul , Kirkuk and Erbil .
But as mentioned , the SARs do not specify which branches were involved in these transfers .
“ It is thus possible that the suspicious transactions did not involve transacting for the IS .
Domestic Iraqi banks could , however , easily lift the cloud hanging over these transactions by disclosing to authorities who the parties to the transactions were .
In this way it can be determined whether these parties had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a forensic investigator specialising in state capture .
Rafidain Bank , the Iraqi Islamic Bank , Ashur International Bank for Investment , the Trade Bank of Iraq and Elaf Bank did not respond to requests for comment .
However , It was widely reported that after IS ’ takeover of Mosul in June 2014 , the group looted more than $ 400 million ( 500 billion Iraqi Dinars ) in cash from the city ’ s financial institutions .
“ For IS to survive , a portion of that money had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay external parties for weapons , goods and services .
The same channels would likely be used to receive money from sympathisers , clients and debtors , ” Böhmke adds .
A Central Bank of Iraq report for 2014 , published in July 2017 , showed the 121 bank branches controlled by IS , including 84 public bank branches and 37 that were private .
According to the report , the organisation stole around $ 830 million from bank branches that fell under its control in the form of $ 101 million , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 727.6 million ) , over half of which ( over $ 415 million ) , were taken from the Trade Bank of Iraq , according to the American magazine Newsweek .
Deutsche Bank ’ s relationships in Iraq are diverse , as the bank has strong ties with and interests in both the Iraqi government and within Kurdistan .
• The bank ’ s relationship with the Iraqi government : • In mid-2015 , the Iraqi government , headed by Haider al-Abadi , appointed three banks , Deutsche Bank , Citibank , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worth $ 6 billion , with the aim of trying to finance the budget deficit of $ 25 billion for 2015 .
The negotiations with the banks and the entire process were stalled but the Iraqi government issued bonds worth $ 2 billion in 2017 and appointed Deutsche Bank , Citibank and JPMorgan Chase again as the main co-directors of the new five-year bonds .
Recently , in September 2019 , the Iraqi Council of Ministers headed by Adel Abdul Mahdi approved a loan agreement between the Federal Ministry of Finance , Deutsche @ @ @ @ @ @ @ construction of 13 substations and supply 35 high-voltage transformers to the Ministry of Electricity from the German company Siemens .
• The bank ’ s dealings in Kurdistan : • In February 2015 , Gulf Keystone Petroleum ( GKP ) in Kurdistan chose the bank and a second party as financial advisors for potential deals related to assets or company sale .
Subsequently , in June 2015 , the Kurdistan Regional Government selected two banks , one of them being Deutsche Bank , to oversee potential bond sales by the government .
Later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Group in the Kurdistan region turned to the bank again , in addition to Dubai ’ s branch of the Lebanese Bank Med , to arrange a credit purchase of $ 75 million for an eight-year period .
It is clear that Deutsche Bank is one of the first and preferred options for Iraq in its financial and oil transactions or consultations .
But why does the Iraqi government insist on turning to a bank whose reputation has become tarnished and its credibility at stake , especially after it was suspected of financing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ banking for sanctioned Iranian entities ?
In fact , the bank ’ s relationship with Iraq is not new .
Deutsche Bank ’ s involvement in Iraq dates back to 1888 , when the bank was given priority rights for mining operations including oil and petroleum in the Ottoman empire .
This is by no means the first time that Deutsche bank has been placed under suspicion .
To date , it has incurred billions of dollars in fines due to money-laundering and suspicious transactions , in addition to financing countries that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremism .
In November 2017 , the families of a number of US soldiers who were killed or injured in Iraq filed a complaint against Deutsche Bank and several other banks on charges of providing banking services to Iran that enabled militants to launch 55 attacks against US armed forces in Iraq .
However , the US judge dismissed the lawsuit in March 2019 on the grounds that the evidence did not sufficiently prove that the bank was aware that through its banking operations , it was enabling the militants to launch attacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Hezbollah , Al Qaeda , and other groups that the US government considers terrorist organisations , according to Reuters .
Another prominent name in the cases against Deutsche Bank is Rhonda Kemper ’ s , whose son was killed by a bomb in Basra , that , according to her claim , was Iranian-made and transferred from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to Hezbollah and the Iraqi militias , who then planted it in Basra .
Kemper used the Anti-Terrorism Act ( “ ATA ” ) in her case , according to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was dismissed in December 2018 for “ failure to state a claim.
” Additionally , the New York Department of Financial Services has penalized the bank several times using its authoritative role over Deutsche Bank since Deutsche Bank ’ s US headquarters is in New York .
Delston notes that unlike Canada for instance , the US does not have “ a reporting requirement for wire transfers over 10,000 dollars.
” Thus , only a limited percentage of these transfers are caught .
“ That ’ s why when its caught , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be very high , simply as a warning to other banks that they should follow these rules more closely , ” he added .
Among the penalties listed against Deutsche Bank are the following : – In November 2015 , the bank was fined $ 258 million by the Financial Services Department , and was obligated to appoint an independent monitor and terminate employees for transactions and financial transfers on behalf of Iran , Syria , Sudan and other sanctioned entities , after having documented that from 1999 to 2006 at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ methods of more than 27,200 money transfers in dollars ’ worth more than $ 10.86 billion on behalf of Iranian , Libyan , Syrian , Burmese and Sudanese financial institutions , among others subject to US economic sanctions .
– With regard to the financial fines resulting from money laundering , covering corruption and dealing with suspicious persons , the German bank was fined $ 2.5 billion on 23 April 2015 , with some contracts to be terminated and some employees to be banned due to manipulation of interest rates .
Following this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was fined $ 425 million for allowing its traders to engage in a money-laundering scheme using “ mirror ” trades in Russia .
On 20 June 2018 , the bank was then fined $ 205 million due to illegal and “ unsafe conduct ” in foreign exchange trading .
– In November 2018 , German authorities raided Deutsche Bank ’ s headquarters in Frankfurt in search of information related to a money-laundering scandal .
It is clear that the bank ’ s record is replete with credible allegations of legal transgression .
Despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sufficient to ensure the bank refrains from conducting illicit transactions or suspicious financial transfers , and which requires it to adopt transparency in its dealings .
If Deutsche Bank ’ s suspicious transaction reporting system was properly operating , as required by law , at the time of the flows of money to and from Iraqi Banks in 2015 , it is possible that some illicit flows would have been interdicted , including possible flows to and from the Islamic State .
Deutsche Bank did not respond to our specific questions regarding our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a general statement from its spokesperson : “ The bank is exposed to diverse financial crime risks , including money laundering , terrorism financing , and sanctions… In line with its legal and regulatory obligations , Deutsche Bank believes it is vital to combat financial crime in order to ensure the stability of banks and the integrity of the international financial system .
Failure to manage financial crime risks exposes Deutsche Bank and its employees to potential criminal and/or regulatory liability , civil lawsuits , and a loss of reputation .
Although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial crime risks entirely , commensurate controls must be in place to minimize these risks.
” Accordingly , “ Deutsche Bank is currently subject to increased levels of regulatory scrutiny and activities over its financial crime risk management .
These regulatory activities have led to the appointment of a number of external monitors .
”

The Islamic State’s infamous rule over vast areas of Iraq during 2014 and 2016 not only led to a humanitarian crisis, but also left the country’s economy depleted. Its expansion in Iraq, marked by its control over vast areas of the country, most notably capturing the city of Mosul in June 2014, also allowed the organisation to seize over 121 bank branches according to the Central Bank, in what was described as one of the largest bank robberies the world has ever seen. Across its operations, the Islamic State (Daesh) stole a total of approximately $830 million.
Despite this, some banks, including Deutsche Bank and specifically its US branches, continued to allow money transfers to be sent to Iraq despite the group’s control over large parts of the country.
Leaked banking documents obtained by BuzzFeed News and shared with ICIJ, ARIJ and other media partners as part of the FinCEN Files investigation, reveal suspicious money transfers of at least $4 billion flagged by Deutsche Bank’s US branches and Bank of America, to a number of Iraqi banks between 15 June 2014 and 30 June 2015.
From 2 to 13 February 2015, The Bank of America flagged 524 bank transfers moving from US bank accounts to various Iraqi bank branches for over $16.8 million, and from 18 to 20 May of the same year, The Bank of America flagged 244 bank transfers that ranged from $46.54 to as much as $28 million at a time, for a total of approximately $41.4 million.
The bank filed the two suspicious activity reports (SARs) “as part of a special project by The Bank of America to identify wire transfers that are originating from, and being sent to, these financial institutions located in Iraq.”
The SAR filed in June indicates that 109 of the bank transfers were sent from seven Iraq-based banks to The Bank of America clients and totalled over $900,000, while 54 outbound wire transfers were sent for more than $7 million.
“81 wires totalling $33,409,836.12 were conducted via correspondent bank relationships that involved numerous financial institutions on a global level,” The Bank of America reported.
Similarly, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas filed their SARs to FinCEN “in conjunction with ongoing law enforcement collaboration,” the exact nature of which is unclear.
Their first report of the 15 SARs filed in January 2015, monitored 3,844 transactions made between 15 June 2014 to 15 December 2014 worth over $2.3 billion involving 13 Iraqi banks.
No client information or details on the beneficiaries were included in any of the bank’s reports.
Deutsche Bank: Funding armed groups in Iraq?
Although the SARs did not specify which bank branches were involved, the transactions were sent and received during the height of the Islamic State’s rule and its control over several Iraqi bank branches. Many of the banks in northern Iraq were in areas of IS influence, and such transfers could be the proceeds of the illicit oil and gas trade that the organisation largely relied on in its areas of control.
According to a report by the Central Bank prepared by its financial consultant, Dr Waleed Eidy Abdul Nabi, in October 2017, the bank took various precautionary measures, including the following, to protect the banking and financial sector during the Islamic State’s rule:
Stopping the activity of bank branches and non-banking financial institutions located in the governorates (Mosul, Salahuddin, Diyala, Anbar) and prohibiting their transfer or supply of foreign currency based on Banking Control decree No. 9/2/185 of 3/7/2014.
Halting the subscription of banks and non-banking financial institutions in the electronic clearing system and the payment system in general, located in the governorates (Nineveh, Kirkuk, Salahuddin, Diyala, and Anbar).
Preparing a unified monthly report on the activity of the branches under the Islamic State’s control, to be submitted to the governor in order to prevent money acquired by IS from entering the Iraqi banking and financial system.
Despite the Central Bank’s precautionary measures taken to stop the activity of bank branches in Mosul on 7 July 2014, the chief executive of Iraq’s United Bank for Investment, Alaa Karam Allah, stated in an interview with The Financial Times on 17 July 2014, that the bank in Mosul was functioning normally: “[The bank] did not close and work has not stopped for a day. None of our workers have been assaulted, and the building is untouched.”
The Financial Action Task Force, a Paris-based intergovernmental organization to combat money laundering and terrorist financing, published a report on IS funding sources from February 2015 that identifies sources in relation to their importance as follows:
Illegal returns through land occupation, such as bank robbery, extortion, control of oil fields and refineries, theft of economic assets, and illegal taxes on goods and cash that cross lands under the organisation’s control. Kidnapping in exchange for a ransom Donations Material support, such as that associated with Foreign Terrorist Fighters Fundraising through “modern communication networks”, that is, social networking sites
The Islamic State’s assets were estimated to be $2.2 billion by the end of 2015, which included oil and gas reserves, cash, minerals, and land, according to the Center for Analysis of Terrorism. Additionally, the data stated that the organisation’s illegal oil trade was a primary source of funding for the organisation.
In the face of the Islamic State’s enhanced financial conditions, Iraq’s financial state deteriorated due to the decline in oil prices. Its budget deficit increased from 6% of GDP in 2014 to 15% of GDP in 2015. Additionally, the Central Bank of Iraq’s foreign currency reserves decreased from $67 billion in 2014 to $51 billion in 2015, according to an IMF report.
Given that Deutsche Bank and the privately-owned Iraqi Elaf Islamic Bank have been previously found to be involved in banking transactions with Iran in contravention of US sanctions, another plausible scenario on the recipients of the transfers mentioned in the SARs is that these remittances may have reached Iranian-affiliated groups in Iraq. In fact, this corresponds with the sanctions imposed on Deutsche Bank by the New York State Department of Financial Services for transacting with sanctioned Iranian entities.
The major question remains: why were these huge money transfers permitted despite the suspicions and measures to counter violent extremism and the related sanctions in the US and Iraq?
Distribution of the suspicious transfers
In May 2019, Deutsche Bank revealed a software defect that prevented it from reporting some suspicious transactions to the concerned authorities for nearly a decade. As a result, thousands of suspicious banking transactions took place without proper accountability or oversight, including the aforementioned transfers from 2014-2015.
On suspicious transfers, Washington DC-based attorney and Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialist (CAMS), Ross Delston told ARIJ that “these transfers go on all the time, and no one knows what percentage of transfers are in fact caught.”
“The bank is required to monitor transactions, and it’s up to them to stop it, to block it and or to report it. They could block it without reporting it, they could turn it away without reporting it. It’s not automatic. It’s up to each bank to decide what to do, and not every bank is diligent,” he added.
According to the leaked SARs, the Trade Bank of Iraq was involved in the largest share of the transfers; $3.6 billion flagged from June 2014 to June 2015. Deutsche Bank did not report on any client information, nor exactly who sent or received the money.
It should be noted that the Iraqi Trade Bank, a publicly-owned bank, is the main institution used by Baghdad for trade and finance. Yet a judicial warrant was issued to arrest the bank’s latest two directors, Hamdiya Al-Jaf and Faisal Wissam Al-Haimus (current president and CEO), on various charges including corruption and mismanagement.
The second largest bank involved in these transfers was the Ashur International Bank for Investment, a private subsidiary of the Elaf Islamic Bank, and the Mosul Development and Investment Bank. In May 2015, the bank received one round dollar transaction in the amount of exactly $15,250,000.00. Yet, again, Deutsche Bank does not offer any information on the senders or recipients of the money transfers.
The state’s Rafidain Bank has 13.28% of Ashur’s shares.
From July 31, 2012 to May 17, 2013, the US Treasury Department imposed sanctions on the Elaf Bank, on the basis of its knowledge and facilitation of transactions, and the provision of large financial services, to the Iranian Bank for Export Development (EDBI). Elaf Bank, and 10 of its subsidiaries, were monitored by Deutsche Bank as per their reports.
As for the Iraqi Islamic Bank for Investment and Development, the private bank was involved in approximately $43.3 million worth of remittances, while the Bank of Baghdad, also a private bank, was involved in over $5.5 million during the same period. These are in addition to a number of other Iraqi banks mentioned in the reports.
Most of the mentioned banks have branches in Iraq’s main cities including Baghdad, Mosul, Kirkuk and Erbil. But as mentioned, the SARs do not specify which branches were involved in these transfers.
“It is thus possible that the suspicious transactions did not involve transacting for the IS. Domestic Iraqi banks could, however, easily lift the cloud hanging over these transactions by disclosing to authorities who the parties to the transactions were. In this way it can be determined whether these parties had links to extremism” says Henrich Böhmke, a forensic investigator specialising in state capture.
Rafidain Bank, the Iraqi Islamic Bank, Ashur International Bank for Investment, the Trade Bank of Iraq and Elaf Bank did not respond to requests for comment.
However, It was widely reported that after IS’ takeover of Mosul in June 2014, the group looted more than $400 million (500 billion Iraqi Dinars) in cash from the city’s financial institutions.
“For IS to survive, a portion of that money had to enter the legitimate banking system again to pay external parties for weapons, goods and services. The same channels would likely be used to receive money from sympathisers, clients and debtors,” Böhmke adds.
A Central Bank of Iraq report for 2014, published in July 2017, showed the 121 bank branches controlled by IS, including 84 public bank branches and 37 that were private.
According to the report, the organisation stole around $830 million from bank branches that fell under its control in the form of $101 million, and 856.5 billion Iraqi Dinars ($727.6 million), over half of which (over $415 million), were taken from the Trade Bank of Iraq, according to the American magazine Newsweek.
Deutsche Bank’s Interests in Iraq
Deutsche Bank’s relationships in Iraq are diverse, as the bank has strong ties with and interests in both the Iraqi government and within Kurdistan.
The bank’s relationship with the Iraqi government: In mid-2015, the Iraqi government, headed by Haider al-Abadi, appointed three banks, Deutsche Bank, Citibank, and JPMorgan Chase, to issue government bonds worth $6 billion, with the aim of trying to finance the budget deficit of $25 billion for 2015. The negotiations with the banks and the entire process were stalled but the Iraqi government issued bonds worth $2 billion in 2017 and appointed Deutsche Bank, Citibank and JPMorgan Chase again as the main co-directors of the new five-year bonds. Recently, in September 2019, the Iraqi Council of Ministers headed by Adel Abdul Mahdi approved a loan agreement between the Federal Ministry of Finance, Deutsche Bank and Standard Chartered to finance the construction of 13 substations and supply 35 high-voltage transformers to the Ministry of Electricity from the German company Siemens. The bank’s dealings in Kurdistan: In February 2015, Gulf Keystone Petroleum (GKP) in Kurdistan chose the bank and a second party as financial advisors for potential deals related to assets or company sale. Subsequently, in June 2015, the Kurdistan Regional Government selected two banks, one of them being Deutsche Bank, to oversee potential bond sales by the government. Later, in March 2016, the Qaiwan Group in the Kurdistan region turned to the bank again, in addition to Dubai’s branch of the Lebanese Bank Med, to arrange a credit purchase of $75 million for an eight-year period.
It is clear that Deutsche Bank is one of the first and preferred options for Iraq in its financial and oil transactions or consultations. But why does the Iraqi government insist on turning to a bank whose reputation has become tarnished and its credibility at stake, especially after it was suspected of financing armed groups in Iraq and of facilitating banking for sanctioned Iranian entities?
In fact, the bank’s relationship with Iraq is not new. Deutsche Bank’s involvement in Iraq dates back to 1888, when the bank was given priority rights for mining operations including oil and petroleum in the Ottoman empire.
Deutsche Bank Under Scrutiny for Corruption
This is by no means the first time that Deutsche bank has been placed under suspicion. To date, it has incurred billions of dollars in fines due to money-laundering and suspicious transactions, in addition to financing countries that are subject to US sanctions for sponsoring violent extremism.
In November 2017, the families of a number of US soldiers who were killed or injured in Iraq filed a complaint against Deutsche Bank and several other banks on charges of providing banking services to Iran that enabled militants to launch 55 attacks against US armed forces in Iraq.
However, the US judge dismissed the lawsuit in March 2019 on the grounds that the evidence did not sufficiently prove that the bank was aware that through its banking operations, it was enabling the militants to launch attacks in Iraq through contributing to transfer funds to Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, and other groups that the US government considers terrorist organisations, according to Reuters.
Another prominent name in the cases against Deutsche Bank is Rhonda Kemper’s, whose son was killed by a bomb in Basra, that, according to her claim, was Iranian-made and transferred from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to Hezbollah and the Iraqi militias, who then planted it in Basra. Kemper used the Anti-Terrorism Act (“ATA”) in her case, according to the court report. Yet, her case was dismissed in December 2018 for “failure to state a claim.”
Additionally, the New York Department of Financial Services has penalized the bank several times using its authoritative role over Deutsche Bank since Deutsche Bank’s US headquarters is in New York.
Delston notes that unlike Canada for instance, the US does not have “a reporting requirement for wire transfers over 10,000 dollars.” Thus, only a limited percentage of these transfers are caught.
“That’s why when its caught, the penalties that are exacted on the bank can be very high, simply as a warning to other banks that they should follow these rules more closely,” he added.
Among the penalties listed against Deutsche Bank are the following:
– In November 2015, the bank was fined $258 million by the Financial Services Department, and was obligated to appoint an independent monitor and terminate employees for transactions and financial transfers on behalf of Iran, Syria, Sudan and other sanctioned entities, after having documented that from 1999 to 2006 at least, Deutsche Bank used crooked and non-transparent methods of more than 27,200 money transfers in dollars’ worth more than $10.86 billion on behalf of Iranian, Libyan, Syrian, Burmese and Sudanese financial institutions, among others subject to US economic sanctions.
– With regard to the financial fines resulting from money laundering, covering corruption and dealing with suspicious persons, the German bank was fined $2.5 billion on 23 April 2015, with some contracts to be terminated and some employees to be banned due to manipulation of interest rates. Following this, in early 2017, the bank was fined $425 million for allowing its traders to engage in a money-laundering scheme using “mirror” trades in Russia. On 20 June 2018, the bank was then fined $205 million due to illegal and “unsafe conduct” in foreign exchange trading.
– In November 2018, German authorities raided Deutsche Bank’s headquarters in Frankfurt in search of information related to a money-laundering scandal.
It is clear that the bank’s record is replete with credible allegations of legal transgression. Despite this, rigorous action has not been sufficient to ensure the bank refrains from conducting illicit transactions or suspicious financial transfers, and which requires it to adopt transparency in its dealings.
If Deutsche Bank’s suspicious transaction reporting system was properly operating, as required by law, at the time of the flows of money to and from Iraqi Banks in 2015, it is possible that some illicit flows would have been interdicted, including possible flows to and from the Islamic State.
Deutsche Bank did not respond to our specific questions regarding our findings, but rather confined its response to a general statement from its spokesperson: “The bank is exposed to diverse financial crime risks, including money laundering, terrorism financing, and sanctions… In line with its legal and regulatory obligations, Deutsche Bank believes it is vital to combat financial crime in order to ensure the stability of banks and the integrity of the international financial system. Failure to manage financial crime risks exposes Deutsche Bank and its employees to potential criminal and/or regulatory liability, civil lawsuits, and a loss of reputation. Although it is not possible to eliminate these financial crime risks entirely, commensurate controls must be in place to minimize these risks.” Accordingly, “Deutsche Bank is currently subject to increased levels of regulatory scrutiny and activities over its financial crime risk management. These regulatory activities have led to the appointment of a number of external monitors.”
Republished from MiddleEastMonitor.com under Creative Commons


wearechange--2020-09-26--“We Do Not Consent”: Thousands Rally in London to Oppose Another COVID-19 Lockdown

Six months after parliament passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 , which gives the government powers to impose lockdowns and other restrictive social distancing measures ( measures that have been accompanied by stiff fines ) , thousands of Britons packed London ’ s Trafalgar Square bearing signs reading “ We Do Not Consent ” and “ Think Before It ’ s Illegal ” during a rally that was billed as a “ We Do Not Consent ” anti-lockdown demonstration .
The event was organized by a coalition of political groups , and supporters have been galvanized by the talk of another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well as PM Boris Johnson ’ s assurances that a lockdown would be imposed if the government felt all other measures had failed .
Protests are exempt from the rule of six , a rule that threatens fines for groups of more than six people , which has created much aggravation in the UK .
Organizers of the rally had to submit a “ risk assessment ” and agree to comply with social distancing rules .
While police told the press that the organizers had completed these requirements , the metropolitan police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wearing masks and violating other rules .
They added that enforcement “ remains a last resort but will be undertaken if required.
” Demonstrators waved signs and British flags and cheered as speakers – including several notable “ conspiracy theories ” , according to the Guardian – addressed the crowd .
Crowds chanted “ freedom ” as people whistled and clapped .
At points , police fulfilled their promise to break up crowds .
Before they began , the protests received a warning from the Metropolitan Police , which said it would intervene @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by social distancing guidelines .
Toby Young , General Secretary of the Free Speech Union , expressed hope that law enforcement would allow the group to protest “ as they did with [ Extinction Rebellion ] and BLM.
” Attending the protest , Kerry Dunn , 41 , from Bath , claimed her son , Beau , suffered adverse affects after being vaccinated .
“ I ’ ve been shouting that mandatory vaccines are coming , no one believed me , ” she said .
“ Now we can see it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve never been closer.
” Another event , billed as a “ People ’ s network and family picnic ” , is also being organised by the same activists for Sunday in Hyde Park .

Six months after parliament passed the Coronavirus Act 2020, which gives the government powers to impose lockdowns and other restrictive social distancing measures (measures that have been accompanied by stiff fines), thousands of Britons packed London’s Trafalgar Square bearing signs reading “We Do Not Consent” and “Think Before It’s Illegal” during a rally that was billed as a “We Do Not Consent” anti-lockdown demonstration.
The event was organized by a coalition of political groups, and supporters have been galvanized by the talk of another London lockdown by mayor Sadiq Khan, as well as PM Boris Johnson’s assurances that a lockdown would be imposed if the government felt all other measures had failed.
Protests are exempt from the rule of six, a rule that threatens fines for groups of more than six people, which has created much aggravation in the UK. Organizers of the rally had to submit a “risk assessment” and agree to comply with social distancing rules. While police told the press that the organizers had completed these requirements, the metropolitan police promised to crack down on those not wearing masks and violating other rules.
They added that enforcement “remains a last resort but will be undertaken if required.”
Demonstrators waved signs and British flags and cheered as speakers – including several notable “conspiracy theories”, according to the Guardian – addressed the crowd. Crowds chanted “freedom” as people whistled and clapped.
#WeDoNotConsent
The crowds get bigger at every protest.
More people are waking up.
Stand up and fight for your rights.
Trafalgar Square pic.twitter.com/gugLqUfLs6 — Charlotte Gracias (@Charlotte3003G) September 26, 2020
Thousand of people have joined a #NoNewNormal demonstration against #lockdown, mass vaccination and other Covid-19 measures in Trafalgar Square. pic.twitter.com/n30bIoVJVe — Damien Gayle (@damiengayle) September 26, 2020
“I’ve been shouting that mandatory vaccines are coming, no one believed me. No we can see it’s just around the corner, we’ve never been closer.” Kerry Dunn, 41, from Bath, whose son, Beau, suffered severe brain damage after he was vaccinated. pic.twitter.com/lhZrLp022E — Damien Gayle (@damiengayle) September 26, 2020
“What is see is fear and negativity being propagated. In Ayurveda, which is the root of western medicine, we say the thing that weakens the immune system the most is negativity.” Vinothini Apok, 40, a former doctor from north London. pic.twitter.com/ZvBzzGquDB — Damien Gayle (@damiengayle) September 26, 2020
At points, police fulfilled their promise to break up crowds. Before they began, the protests received a warning from the Metropolitan Police, which said it would intervene if the protesters don’t abide by social distancing guidelines.
Police have moved in to break up the crowd at the #NoNewNormal demo pic.twitter.com/1gwbo200sB — Damien Gayle (@damiengayle) September 26, 2020
Toby Young, General Secretary of the Free Speech Union, expressed hope that law enforcement would allow the group to protest “as they did with [Extinction Rebellion] and BLM.”
Thousands have gathered in Trafalgar Square to protest against the lockdown. I hope the police allow them to peacefully protest, as they did the BLM and XR protestors. pic.twitter.com/Ef4H7uoC0x — Toby Young (@toadmeister) September 26, 2020
Attending the protest, Kerry Dunn, 41, from Bath, claimed her son, Beau, suffered adverse affects after being vaccinated.
“I’ve been shouting that mandatory vaccines are coming, no one believed me,” she said. “Now we can see it’s just around the corner, we’ve never been closer.”
Another event, billed as a “People’s network and family picnic”, is also being organised by the same activists for Sunday in Hyde Park.
Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permission


wearechange--2020-09-28--Reminder: WikiLeaks Has Always Been Open to Publishing Leaks on Trump

Trump ’ s October surprise has come a few days early , with The New York Times publishing a lengthy report on the president ’ s tax information spanning two decades .
The Times reports Trump often paid little or no federal income taxes during the period the information covers , that his companies are hemorrhaging money , and that he is responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in debt .
The report also contradicted years of mainstream speculation that Trump ’ s tax returns would reveal evidence of Russian collusion if made public .
“ They report that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dollars in valuable assets , but they do not reveal his true wealth .
Nor do they reveal any previously unreported connections to Russia , ” the Times reports .
So it looks like the president is every bit the corrupt kleptocratic oligarch that everyone has always suspected , except the roots of his deception lie not in Moscow but in home-grown , American-as-apple-pie end-stage capitalism .
These revelations by the Times are certainly newsworthy and most certainly should have been published , and this would be the case even if the information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Powerful people like the president of the United States have no business keeping secrets from the public ; the more power you have over people , the fewer secrets you should be allowed to keep from them .
This report served the public interest and it would be criminal for the Trump administration to prosecute the Times for publishing it , regardless of how it was obtained .
You can probably guess where I ’ m going with this .
As the liberal commentariat applauds The New York Times for its journalistic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that across the pond another journalist is being prosecuted in a pervasively corrupt and deceitful show trial for exposing not mere tax information , but evidence of actual war crimes .
I am of course speaking of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange , who is being prosecuted by the Trump administration for the 2010 Manning leaks which revealed US malfeasance in its operations in Iraq and Afghanistan .
Trump ’ s Justice Department is seeking extradition on charges under the Espionage Act which will carry a sentence of up to 175 years in prison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a chilling effect on journalism around the world as reporters shy away from natsec investigative reporting on the US for fear of suffering the same fate .
It ’ s also worth reminding the world that WikiLeaks itself has for years been soliciting the same tax information that The New York Times is being praised for exposing .
Following the NYT publication the WikiLeaks Twitter account re-shared a request it had made in January 2017 for anyone with access to Trump ’ s tax returns to submit them to WikiLeaks , with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar leaks .
“ Trump Counselor Kellyanne Conway stated today that Trump will not release his tax returns .
Send them to : wikileaks.org/ # submit so we can , ” the 2017 tweet reads .
This was not the only time WikiLeaks made this request .
They made a similar request before the 2016 election as well , almost exactly four years ago , tweeting “ # Debates Clinton biting strongly on Trump ’ s secret tax returns .
If you have them they can be submitted here : wikileaks.org/ # submit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that WikiLeaks has never published information on Trump .
WikiLeaks is a leak publishing outlet ; it only publishes what people give it .
If people know they can safely leak information through mass media outlets like The New York Times , as is evidently the case in an administration that has been rife with leaks for years , they tend to do so .
It ’ s only when people can ’ t receive the protection of powerful institutions that they leak through WikiLeaks .
We learned in 2013 that Chelsea Manning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mainstream media outlets and turned only to WikiLeaks because those outlets didn ’ t take her seriously .
As The Guardian reported during the Manning trial [ male pronouns due to Manning , who is a trans woman , not having yet transitioned at the time ] : While he was on leave from Iraq and staying in the Washington area in January 2010 he contacted the Washington Post and asked would it be interested in receiving information that he said would be “ enormously important to the American people ” .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a reporter but “ she didn ’ t seem to take me seriously ” .
The woman said , according to Manning ’ s account , that the paper would only be interested subject to vetting by senior editors .
Despairing of that route , Manning turned to the New York Times .
He called the public editor of the paper but only got voicemail .
He then tried other numbers on the paper but also got put through to voicemail , and though he left a message with his Skype contact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Those outlets failed Manning while WikiLeaks came through .
This is because Manning was not merely seeking to publicize the tax information on an unpopular president to a powerful outlet which openly opposes him , but the largest stash of US military secrets that anyone had ever leaked .
The criticism that WikiLeaks has never published incriminating information on Trump has always been baseless , and not just due to a scarcity of leakers coming to them .
As journalist and WikiLeaks activist Suzie Dawson pointed out last year , there are thousands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WikiLeaks database consisting of opposition research and other unflattering information on the controversial figure .
Typing the words “ Donald Trump ” into WikiLeaks ’ search engine comes up with 14,531 results as of this writing from the DNC Leaks , the Podesta emails , the Global Intelligence Files and other publications throughout WikiLeaks ’ history .
People who claim WikiLeaks “ never publishes ” information about a given subject are usually only saying so because they ’ ve never typed the name of that subject into the search bar on the WikiLeaks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , too ) .
It ’ s also worth noting that the 2017 Vault 7 CIA leaks were a Trump administration publication .
It enraged the Trump administration so much that the next month Mike Pompeo gave a speech declaring WikiLeaks a “ hostile non-state intelligence service ” and vowing to take the outlet down , and a few months later Trump ’ s DOJ issued a warrant for Assange ’ s arrest on a made-up , bogus charge .
Assange smearers don ’ t like to count the CIA leaks because they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump with well-hydrated Russian prostitutes , but they were indisputably a blow to this administration and it ’ s stupid to pretend otherwise .
Finally it needs to be said that expecting WikiLeaks to publish information on Trump while actively being attacked by the Trump administration is an unreasonable expectation , to put it mildly .
When the most powerful government on earth wages war on a publisher , that does tend to put a damper on their output .
Expecting WikiLeaks to magically produce damning information on Trump while its founder is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaks with mainstream plutocratic media who have massive resources available to them is ridiculous .
If you care about journalism , support Assange .
The powerful need to be held to account , and we shouldn ’ t have to rely on the permission of other factions of power to allow us to do that .

Trump’s October surprise has come a few days early, with The New York Times publishing a lengthy report on the president’s tax information spanning two decades. The Times reports Trump often paid little or no federal income taxes during the period the information covers, that his companies are hemorrhaging money, and that he is responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in debt.
The report also contradicted years of mainstream speculation that Trump’s tax returns would reveal evidence of Russian collusion if made public.
“They report that Mr. Trump owns hundreds of millions of dollars in valuable assets, but they do not reveal his true wealth. Nor do they reveal any previously unreported connections to Russia,” the Times reports.
So it looks like the president is every bit the corrupt kleptocratic oligarch that everyone has always suspected, except the roots of his deception lie not in Moscow but in home-grown, American-as-apple-pie end-stage capitalism.
Surprise, surprise.
Any update on this? https://t.co/8P57bvi2QN — Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) September 28, 2020
These revelations by the Times are certainly newsworthy and most certainly should have been published, and this would be the case even if the information they are based on was obtained illegally. Powerful people like the president of the United States have no business keeping secrets from the public; the more power you have over people, the fewer secrets you should be allowed to keep from them. This report served the public interest and it would be criminal for the Trump administration to prosecute the Times for publishing it, regardless of how it was obtained.
You can probably guess where I’m going with this.
As the liberal commentariat applauds The New York Times for its journalistic accomplishment, it’s worth remembering that across the pond another journalist is being prosecuted in a pervasively corrupt and deceitful show trial for exposing not mere tax information, but evidence of actual war crimes.
I am of course speaking of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who is being prosecuted by the Trump administration for the 2010 Manning leaks which revealed US malfeasance in its operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Trump’s Justice Department is seeking extradition on charges under the Espionage Act which will carry a sentence of up to 175 years in prison, a precedent that will inevitably have a chilling effect on journalism around the world as reporters shy away from natsec investigative reporting on the US for fear of suffering the same fate.
It’s also worth reminding the world that WikiLeaks itself has for years been soliciting the same tax information that The New York Times is being praised for exposing.
WikiLeaks is open to any receive information from any source that is of political and/or historical significance https://t.co/6n8T0460A3 — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) September 27, 2020
Following the NYT publication the WikiLeaks Twitter account re-shared a request it had made in January 2017 for anyone with access to Trump’s tax returns to submit them to WikiLeaks, with a reminder that it remains open to any similar leaks.
“Trump Counselor Kellyanne Conway stated today that Trump will not release his tax returns. Send them to: wikileaks.org/#submit so we can,” the 2017 tweet reads.
This was not the only time WikiLeaks made this request. They made a similar request before the 2016 election as well, almost exactly four years ago, tweeting “#Debates Clinton biting strongly on Trump’s secret tax returns. If you have them they can be submitted here: wikileaks.org/#submit”.
#Debates Clinton biting strongly on Trump's secret tax returns. If you have them they can be submitted here: https://t.co/cLRcuIiQXz — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) September 27, 2016
This invalidates the common criticism that WikiLeaks has never published information on Trump. WikiLeaks is a leak publishing outlet; it only publishes what people give it. If people know they can safely leak information through mass media outlets like The New York Times, as is evidently the case in an administration that has been rife with leaks for years, they tend to do so. It’s only when people can’t receive the protection of powerful institutions that they leak through WikiLeaks.
We learned in 2013 that Chelsea Manning tried to publish her historic leaks through mainstream media outlets and turned only to WikiLeaks because those outlets didn’t take her seriously. As The Guardian reported during the Manning trial [male pronouns due to Manning, who is a trans woman, not having yet transitioned at the time]:
While he was on leave from Iraq and staying in the Washington area in January 2010 he contacted the Washington Post and asked would it be interested in receiving information that he said would be “enormously important to the American people”. He spoke to a woman who said she was a reporter but “she didn’t seem to take me seriously”. The woman said, according to Manning’s account, that the paper would only be interested subject to vetting by senior editors. Despairing of that route, Manning turned to the New York Times. He called the public editor of the paper but only got voicemail. He then tried other numbers on the paper but also got put through to voicemail, and though he left a message with his Skype contact details, nobody called him back.
Those outlets failed Manning while WikiLeaks came through. This is because Manning was not merely seeking to publicize the tax information on an unpopular president to a powerful outlet which openly opposes him, but the largest stash of US military secrets that anyone had ever leaked.
The criticism that WikiLeaks has never published incriminating information on Trump has always been baseless, and not just due to a scarcity of leakers coming to them. As journalist and WikiLeaks activist Suzie Dawson pointed out last year, there are thousands of documents relating to Trump in the WikiLeaks database consisting of opposition research and other unflattering information on the controversial figure.
Typing the words “Donald Trump” into WikiLeaks’ search engine comes up with 14,531 results as of this writing from the DNC Leaks, the Podesta emails, the Global Intelligence Files and other publications throughout WikiLeaks’ history. People who claim WikiLeaks “never publishes” information about a given subject are usually only saying so because they’ve never typed the name of that subject into the search bar on the WikiLeaks website (and that goes for Russia, too).
It’s also worth noting that the 2017 Vault 7 CIA leaks were a Trump administration publication. It enraged the Trump administration so much that the next month Mike Pompeo gave a speech declaring WikiLeaks a “hostile non-state intelligence service” and vowing to take the outlet down, and a few months later Trump’s DOJ issued a warrant for Assange’s arrest on a made-up, bogus charge. Assange smearers don’t like to count the CIA leaks because they don’t contain any videos of Trump with well-hydrated Russian prostitutes, but they were indisputably a blow to this administration and it’s stupid to pretend otherwise.
Finally it needs to be said that expecting WikiLeaks to publish information on Trump while actively being attacked by the Trump administration is an unreasonable expectation, to put it mildly. When the most powerful government on earth wages war on a publisher, that does tend to put a damper on their output. Expecting WikiLeaks to magically produce damning information on Trump while its founder is being actively prosecuted and while competing for leaks with mainstream plutocratic media who have massive resources available to them is ridiculous.
If you care about journalism, support Assange. The powerful need to be held to account, and we shouldn’t have to rely on the permission of other factions of power to allow us to do that.
Republished from CaitlinJohnstone.com with permission


wearechange--2020-09-28--Texas Residents Warned Their Drinking Water May Contain a “Brain-Eating Microbe”

Today in “ news you definitely don ’ t need to get in the middle of an already tumultuous 2020 ” , some Texas residents are being told not to drink their water due to it potentially being tainted with a “ brain-eating microbe.
” An advisory was issued for Lake Jackson , Freeport , Angleton , Brazoria , Richwood , Oyster Creek , Clute and Rosenberg to not use water for anything other than flushing toilets , according to The Guardian .
This comes after the The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality warned of potential contamination of the water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a microscopic amoeba that infects people when it enters the body through the nose .
From there , it travels to the brain and can cause a “ rare and debilitating disease ” called primary amebic meningoencephalitis .
The infection is usually fatal and has been seen before in the past , notably in tap water in Southern Louisiana from 2011 to 2013 .
It was also found in an untreated geothermal well in Arizona in 2003 .
The advisory affects 120,000 people in addition to Dow Chemical workers in Freeport and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It will remain in effect until the Brazosport Water Authority , where the contamination is thought to be , is thoroughly flushed and tested .
The BWA pulls its water from the Brazos river .
In other news , who ’ s ready to get 2021 started as soon as humanly possible ?

Today in “news you definitely don’t need to get in the middle of an already tumultuous 2020”, some Texas residents are being told not to drink their water due to it potentially being tainted with a “brain-eating microbe.”
An advisory was issued for Lake Jackson, Freeport, Angleton, Brazoria, Richwood, Oyster Creek, Clute and Rosenberg to not use water for anything other than flushing toilets, according to The Guardian.
This comes after the The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality warned of potential contamination of the water supply with Naegleria fowleri.
Naegleria fowleri is a microscopic amoeba that infects people when it enters the body through the nose. From there, it travels to the brain and can cause a “rare and debilitating disease” called primary amebic meningoencephalitis.
The infection is usually fatal and has been seen before in the past, notably in tap water in Southern Louisiana from 2011 to 2013. It was also found in an untreated geothermal well in Arizona in 2003.
The advisory affects 120,000 people in addition to Dow Chemical workers in Freeport and Clemens and Wayne Scott state prisons. It will remain in effect until the Brazosport Water Authority, where the contamination is thought to be, is thoroughly flushed and tested. The BWA pulls its water from the Brazos river.
In other news, who’s ready to get 2021 started as soon as humanly possible?
Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permission


wearechange--2020-09-28--IMPORTANT Things You’re Not Being Told About Trump’s Tax Returns

OH YEAH , since we are not corporate or government owned help us out here .
YOU CAN ALSO SUPPORT @ @

In this video, we cover what the media is overlooking about Donald Trump’s tax returns and discuss alleged ballot harvesting in Minnesota.
Sign up on lukeunfiltered.com or to check out our store on thebestpoliticalshirts.com.


wearechange--2020-09-28--Man Sentenced to 1 Year in Prison for Throwing Parties During Lockdown in Maryland

A Maryland man who held multiple large gatherings during lockdowns in violation of Gov .
Larry Hogan ’ s public health order , banning groups over ten or more people , was sentenced to one year in jail , reported WJZ Baltimore .
Judge W. Louis Hennessy sentenced Shawn Marshall Myers , 42 , of Hughesville , to one year in jail on Friday ( Sept. 25 ) for failure to comply with an emergency order .
Myers threw multiple parties on his property ; in some cases , more than 50 attendees were counted by the local law enforcement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the time the virus pandemic erupted .
According to the Charles County Sheriff , the first party was held on Mar .
22 , had between 50 to 60 people .
About one week later , on Mar .
27 , officers responded to Myers ’ home for a second time , finding more than 50 people partying .
At that point , he was arrested .
“ Officers told Myers to disband the party , but again he was argumentative claiming he and his guests had the right to congregate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Beyond being argumentative , Myers directed his guests to stay in defiance of Governor Hogan ’ s Orders and the officers ’ lawful orders to disband the party.
” In addition to a jail sentence , Myers was slapped with a $ 5,000 fine and ordered to serve up to three years of unsupervised probation upon his release .
Readers may recall Myers wasn ’ t the only one hosting parties during lockdowns .
“ Covidiot ” millennials threw wild parties as a game to infect each other so they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get the antibodies .

A Maryland man who held multiple large gatherings during lockdowns in violation of Gov. Larry Hogan’s public health order, banning groups over ten or more people, was sentenced to one year in jail, reported WJZ Baltimore.
Judge W. Louis Hennessy sentenced Shawn Marshall Myers, 42, of Hughesville, to one year in jail on Friday (Sept. 25) for failure to comply with an emergency order.
Myers threw multiple parties on his property; in some cases, more than 50 attendees were counted by the local law enforcement agency in late March, which was around the time the virus pandemic erupted.
According to the Charles County Sheriff, the first party was held on Mar. 22, had between 50 to 60 people.
“Myers was argumentative with officers but eventually agreed to disband his party,” according to the State’s Attorney.
About one week later, on Mar. 27, officers responded to Myers’ home for a second time, finding more than 50 people partying. At that point, he was arrested.
“Officers told Myers to disband the party, but again he was argumentative claiming he and his guests had the right to congregate,” the State’s Attorney said. “Beyond being argumentative, Myers directed his guests to stay in defiance of Governor Hogan’s Orders and the officers’ lawful orders to disband the party.”
In addition to a jail sentence, Myers was slapped with a $5,000 fine and ordered to serve up to three years of unsupervised probation upon his release.
Readers may recall Myers wasn’t the only one hosting parties during lockdowns. “Covidiot” millennials threw wild parties as a game to infect each other so they can “get it over with” and get the antibodies.
Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permission


wearechange--2020-09-29--Biden Refuses Drug Test, Requests A Break Every 30 Minutes???

In this video , we cover what you should look out for ahead of what ’ s going to be @ @ @ @ @ .
OH YEAH , since we are not corporate or government owned help us out @ @ @ @ @ SUPPORT US ON

In this video, we cover what you should look out for ahead of what’s going to be a very contentious presidential debate.
Sign up on lukeunfiltered.com or to check out our store on thebestpoliticalshirts.com.


wearechange--2020-09-29--US Intelligence Investigated Hillary Clinton Over Alleged Plan to Smear Trump With Russia Accusation

US Intelligence Investigated Hillary Clinton Over Alleged Plan to Smear Trump With Russia Accusations

On September 7 , 2016 , US intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to former FBI officials James Comey and @ @ @ @ @ Hillary Clinton approved a plan to smear then-candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Russian @ @ @ @ @ hackers , according to information given to Sen. Lindsey Graham by the Director of National @ @ @ @ @ News ’ Chad Pergram , “ In late July 2016 , U.S. intelligence agencies obtained @ @ @ @ @ alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up @ @ @ @ @ candidate Donald Trump , ” after one of Clinton ’ s foreign policy advisers proposed @ @ @ @ @ up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.
” In 2017 , it was @ @ @ @ @ Russia ” plan was hatched “ within twenty-four hours ” of Clinton losing the election @ @ @ @ @ investigation predates that by several months .

On September 7, 2016, US intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to former FBI officials James Comey and Peter Strzok concerning allegations that Hillary Clinton approved a plan to smear then-candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian hackers, according to information given to Sen. Lindsey Graham by the Director of National Intelligence.
According to Fox News’ Chad Pergram, “In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump,” after one of Clinton’s foreign policy advisers proposed vilifying Trump “by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.”
2) DNI info to Grahm:…by tying him to Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee. The IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.” — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) September 29, 2020
4)…DNI info to Graham:…on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.’” — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) September 29, 2020
6) DNI info to Graham:…concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.’” — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) September 29, 2020
In 2017, it was claimed that the “blame Russia” plan was hatched “within twenty-four hours” of Clinton losing the election – while the US intelligence investigation predates that by several months.
New book by 'Shattered' by Clinton insiders reveals that "blame Russia" plan was hatched "within twenty-four hours" of election loss. pic.twitter.com/NDUk90Jp5q — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) May 11, 2017
Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permission


wearechange--2020-09-30--Rand Paul and Tulsi Gabbard Team Up to Unplug the President’s ‘Internet Kill Switch’

The COVID-19 crisis has taken an enormous human toll , with more than 200,000 Americans having succumbed to the virus , according to government data .
So , too , the sweeping government response has wrought both unprecedented economic and public health consequences .
Thus , in addition to the obvious health consequences , one major concern posed by the COVID-19 crisis is that unprecedented government power grabs may be here to stay .
Consider that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used the coronavirus as pretext to unconstitutionally outlaw evictions nationwide in a de facto nationalization of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gretchen Whitmer baselessly made lawn care services illegal , and it quickly becomes clear why a bipartisan group of legislators is now seeking to limit the government ’ s power to take drastic action in future emergencies .
Right now , the executive branch technically has the authority under a World War II-era amendment of the Communications Act of 1934 to seize control of , monitor , or shut down “ any wire communication ” if the president deems it necessary for “ national security ” and declares an emergency .
This power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ include the ability of a president to , amid a crisis , seize control of the internet or even shut it off in swaths of the country in the name of national security .
It even appears the president could do this all unilaterally .
Thankfully , on September 23 , Sens .
Rand Paul , Gary Peters , and Ron Wyden joined forces with Reps. Thomas Massie and Tulsi Gabbard to introduce a bill rolling back these drastic powers .
“ If you give government an inch , it takes ten miles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the surveillance state ’ s overreaches in a time of seemingly endless war , ” Paul said .
“ No president from either party should have the sole power to shut down or take control of the internet or any other of our communication channels during an emergency.
” “ The oath that I took as a Soldier and as a Member of Congress was to support and defend our Constitution , ” Gabbard remarked .
“ No President should have the power to ignore our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declaring a national emergency.
” “ When governments around the world turn off internet access , they do significant harm to their national economies and their citizen ’ s civil rights , ” Massie said .
“ This bipartisan bill will ensure that no future American president can unilaterally trip an ‘ internet kill switch.
’ Americans do not have to accept the premise that one person can deprive them of their 1st Amendment rights by flipping a switch.
” Why Restraining the Government ’ s ‘ Emergency Powers ’ Is Necessary Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roll back emergency powers over the internet .
After all , they would only ever be used in a true extreme emergency , right ?
Why wouldn ’ t we want the government to have all the available tools to address a genuine crisis ?
The problem with this stance becomes clear when you take even a cursory glance at how often the word “ crisis ” is bantered about in modern political discourse .
Politicians call student loan debt a “ crisis , ” the affordability of housing a “ crisis , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Others dub everything from the national debt to overregulation a “ crisis.
” None of this is to say these issues are not pressing , important , or even urgent .
But it ’ s apparent that just about every issue under the sun can be considered a “ crisis ” or “ emergency ” to its most ardent advocates .
So , the notion that emergency powers will only be used in extreme circumstances is deeply naïve.And both perceived “ crises ” and actual crises alike are often used as justification for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hayek once observed , “ ‘ Emergencies ’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.
” Robert Higgs concurred in his seminal work Crisis and Leviathan , in which he explains how the government obtains new powers each time a crisis emerges , but rarely if ever fully relinquishes them when the crisis passes .
“ In one form of another , great crises will surely come again , ” Higgs wrote .
“ When they do , governments almost certainly will gain new powers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who cherish individual liberty and a free society , the prospect is deeply disheartening.
” We ’ ve seen this play out time and time again in American history .
During World War II , President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the emergency posed by the war to round up Asian Americans and Asian immigrants and throw them in internment camps without due process or even any suspicion of wrongdoing .
In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks , the emergency was used as justification for unconstitutional warrantless spying on Americans and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ combatants ” without any due process .
Many of these spying powers are still in effect today , nearly two decades after the attack .
And the internet “ kill switch ” is itself a remnant of emergency powers granted during World War II but never rescinded .
Imagine the havoc a power-hungry federal government , controlled by either party , could wreak during an emergency , real or perceived , by seizing control of wireless communications .
Yet this isn ’ t a far-fetched fantasy .
If we leave the federal government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the internet on the books , it ’ s likely that it will eventually be exercised to the detriment of Americans ’ civil liberties .
And once the power is exercised , it ’ s unlikely we ’ ll ever be able to scale it back .
This is not a hypothetical .
China shut down the internet in Xinjiang for an entire year in 2009 in response to protests and riots in the region .
Iran temporarily killed the internet in 2019 to shut down the spread of information during anti-regime protests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have exercised an internet “ kill switch ” in some regions to control the populace and stifle communication .
But this dystopian fate isn ’ t inevitable for the United States .
We should be thankful for the bipartisan group of legislators working to ensure that this nightmare scenario never comes to life here .
It doesn ’ t matter whether you ’ re a Democrat or Republican , liberal or conservative .
It doesn ’ t matter whether you despise Donald Trump or are horrified by the thought of President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opponents wielding unilateral control over the internet disturbs you , that ’ s a good sign it ’ s a power the government should not have .

The COVID-19 crisis has taken an enormous human toll, with more than 200,000 Americans having succumbed to the virus, according to government data. So, too, the sweeping government response has wrought both unprecedented economic and public health consequences.
Thus, in addition to the obvious health consequences, one major concern posed by the COVID-19 crisis is that unprecedented government power grabs may be here to stay. Consider that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used the coronavirus as pretext to unconstitutionally outlaw evictions nationwide in a de facto nationalization of the rental market or that Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer baselessly made lawn care services illegal, and it quickly becomes clear why a bipartisan group of legislators is now seeking to limit the government’s power to take drastic action in future emergencies.
Right now, the executive branch technically has the authority under a World War II-era amendment of the Communications Act of 1934 to seize control of, monitor, or shut down “any wire communication” if the president deems it necessary for “national security” and declares an emergency. This power applied to the modern age would certainly include the ability of a president to, amid a crisis, seize control of the internet or even shut it off in swaths of the country in the name of national security. It even appears the president could do this all unilaterally.
Thankfully, on September 23, Sens. Rand Paul, Gary Peters, and Ron Wyden joined forces with Reps. Thomas Massie and Tulsi Gabbard to introduce a bill rolling back these drastic powers.
“If you give government an inch, it takes ten miles, and this has been vividly illustrated by the surveillance state’s overreaches in a time of seemingly endless war,” Paul said. “No president from either party should have the sole power to shut down or take control of the internet or any other of our communication channels during an emergency.”
“The oath that I took as a Soldier and as a Member of Congress was to support and defend our Constitution,” Gabbard remarked. “No President should have the power to ignore our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and violate our civil liberties and privacy by declaring a national emergency.”
“When governments around the world turn off internet access, they do significant harm to their national economies and their citizen’s civil rights,” Massie said. “This bipartisan bill will ensure that no future American president can unilaterally trip an ‘internet kill switch.’ Americans do not have to accept the premise that one person can deprive them of their 1st Amendment rights by flipping a switch.”
Why Restraining the Government’s ‘Emergency Powers’ Is Necessary
Some might fail to see the need to roll back emergency powers over the internet. After all, they would only ever be used in a true extreme emergency, right? Why wouldn’t we want the government to have all the available tools to address a genuine crisis?
The problem with this stance becomes clear when you take even a cursory glance at how often the word “crisis” is bantered about in modern political discourse.
Politicians call student loan debt a “crisis,” the affordability of housing a “crisis,” and healthcare a “crisis.” Others dub everything from the national debt to overregulation a “crisis.” None of this is to say these issues are not pressing, important, or even urgent. But it’s apparent that just about every issue under the sun can be considered a “crisis” or “emergency” to its most ardent advocates. So, the notion that emergency powers will only be used in extreme circumstances is deeply naïve.And both perceived “crises” and actual crises alike are often used as justification for sweeping government power grabs. As Friedrich Hayek once observed, “‘Emergencies’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.” Robert Higgs concurred in his seminal work Crisis and Leviathan, in which he explains how the government obtains new powers each time a crisis emerges, but rarely if ever fully relinquishes them when the crisis passes.
“In one form of another, great crises will surely come again,” Higgs wrote. “When they do, governments almost certainly will gain new powers over economic and social affairs… For those who cherish individual liberty and a free society, the prospect is deeply disheartening.”
History Shows How ‘Emergency Powers’ Lead to Disastrous Abuses
We’ve seen this play out time and time again in American history.
During World War II, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the emergency posed by the war to round up Asian Americans and Asian immigrants and throw them in internment camps without due process or even any suspicion of wrongdoing. In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the emergency was used as justification for unconstitutional warrantless spying on Americans and the detention and torture of alleged “enemy combatants” without any due process.
Many of these spying powers are still in effect today, nearly two decades after the attack. And the internet “kill switch” is itself a remnant of emergency powers granted during World War II but never rescinded.
Imagine the havoc a power-hungry federal government, controlled by either party, could wreak during an emergency, real or perceived, by seizing control of wireless communications. Yet this isn’t a far-fetched fantasy. If we leave the federal government’s sweeping power to shut down the internet on the books, it’s likely that it will eventually be exercised to the detriment of Americans’ civil liberties. And once the power is exercised, it’s unlikely we’ll ever be able to scale it back.
This is not a hypothetical. China shut down the internet in Xinjiang for an entire year in 2009 in response to protests and riots in the region. Iran temporarily killed the internet in 2019 to shut down the spread of information during anti-regime protests. Even democratic nations such as India have exercised an internet “kill switch” in some regions to control the populace and stifle communication.
But this dystopian fate isn’t inevitable for the United States. We should be thankful for the bipartisan group of legislators working to ensure that this nightmare scenario never comes to life here.
It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative. It doesn’t matter whether you despise Donald Trump or are horrified by the thought of President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. If the thought of your political opponents wielding unilateral control over the internet disturbs you, that’s a good sign it’s a power the government should not have.
Republished from FEE.org under Creative Commons


wearechange--2020-09-30--London Court Hears Shocking Details of CIA Plot to Assassinate Julian Assange, Steal DNA

Now in its second week , Julian Assange ’ s extradition hearing at the Old Baily in London just heard explosive testimony based on previously reported revelations that the CIA had actively plotted to assassinate him , by either poisoning or via a kidnapping plot .
The testimony is part of the defense team ’ s attempt to frame the US extradition case as entirely political in nature , and not based on breaking US law , but also toward convincing the judge that the WikiLeaks founder would certainly face extreme and excessive punishment , which would be cause for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mainstream media has by and large ignored much of the bombshell testimony from the hearing since last week , this latest cloak-and-dagger type information detailing just how far US intelligence was willing to go is impossible to ignore .
Even The Guardian is now belatedly reporting on it : Plans to poison or kidnap Julian Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy were discussed between sources in US intelligence and a private security firm that spied extensively on the WikiLeaks co-founder , a court has been told .
Details of the alleged spying operation against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the embassy were laid out on Wednesday at his extradition case , in evidence by a former employee of a Spanish security company , UC Global .
Outrageously , the US used the Spanish front company to plant “ intrusive and sophisticated ” secret surveillance devices in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where Assange had been living under asylum for seven years .
While officially the firm was in charge of protecting the Ecuadorian embassy , it was simultaneously acting on behalf of the US authorities , which was engaged in eavesdropping on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diplomatic building to meet privately with him .
Plotting by US intelligence even involved scenarios wherein a “ kidnapping ” or killing could be made to look like an “ accident.
” And even more shocking and outrageous , biometric information was taken or sought even centered on family members and close acquaintances of Assange as they visited the embassy .
This even involved plans to lift a DNA sample from his baby ’ s dirty diaper , as The Guardian details further of Wednesday ’ s testimony : The testimony was so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worked for UC Global were allowed to issue their statements under anonymity .
This legal protection was granted because they believe the private security firm ’ s director , David Morales , or even US intelligence officials he works with could seek to harm or kill them .
The Guardian continues with the following : The founder and director of UC Global , David Morales , had said that “ the Americans ” had wanted to establish paternity but the plan was foiled when the then employee alerted the child ’ s mother @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the former employee and another person who had been involved with UC Global , after the hearing was told they feared that Morales , or others connected to him in the US , could seek to harm them .
Details of their written evidence were read out at the Old Bailey in London on Wednesday by Mark Summers QC , one of the lawyers for Assange , who is fighting extradition to the US on charges relating to leaks of classified documents allegedly exposing US war crimes and abuse .
The below leaked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ Julian Assange ’ s friend Stephen Hoo walking into the Ecuadorian embassy in London with one of the cyberactivist ’ s babies in 2017.
” Again , the defense is hoping the testimony is a damning enough indictment of the CIA and its partners ’ massive intrusion on Assange ’ s basic legal rights and protections as to prevent the US requested extradition .
Indeed considering two star eyewitnesses for the defense ( who themselves essentially were involved in the prior invasive surveillance of Assange ) are fearful enough about what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seek a form of temporary ‘ witness protection ’ by the London court , this should make it glaringly obvious that the whole thing is a political witch hunt of a whistleblower who exposed American war crimes abroad .
Should the UK deem that Assange is at risk of cruel punishment or even death if extradited to US custody , it must strike down the request based on existing laws .

Now in its second week, Julian Assange’s extradition hearing at the Old Baily in London just heard explosive testimony based on previously reported revelations that the CIA had actively plotted to assassinate him, by either poisoning or via a kidnapping plot.
The testimony is part of the defense team’s attempt to frame the US extradition case as entirely political in nature, and not based on breaking US law, but also toward convincing the judge that the WikiLeaks founder would certainly face extreme and excessive punishment, which would be cause for Britain to block the extradition.
Though mainstream media has by and large ignored much of the bombshell testimony from the hearing since last week, this latest cloak-and-dagger type information detailing just how far US intelligence was willing to go is impossible to ignore.
Even The Guardian is now belatedly reporting on it:
Plans to poison or kidnap Julian Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy were discussed between sources in US intelligence and a private security firm that spied extensively on the WikiLeaks co-founder, a court has been told. Details of the alleged spying operation against Assange and anyone who visited him at the embassy were laid out on Wednesday at his extradition case, in evidence by a former employee of a Spanish security company, UC Global.
Outrageously, the US used the Spanish front company to plant “intrusive and sophisticated” secret surveillance devices in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where Assange had been living under asylum for seven years.
While officially the firm was in charge of protecting the Ecuadorian embassy, it was simultaneously acting on behalf of the US authorities, which was engaged in eavesdropping on Assange and his visitors who entered the diplomatic building to meet privately with him. Plotting by US intelligence even involved scenarios wherein a “kidnapping” or killing could be made to look like an “accident.”
And even more shocking and outrageous, biometric information was taken or sought even centered on family members and close acquaintances of Assange as they visited the embassy.
This even involved plans to lift a DNA sample from his baby’s dirty diaper, as The Guardian details further of Wednesday’s testimony:
Microphones were concealed to monitor Assange’s meetings with lawyers, his fingerprint was obtained from a glass and there was even a plot to obtain a nappy from a baby who had been brought on regular visits to the embassy, according to the witness, whose evidence took the form of a written statement.
The testimony was so explosive that two key eyewitnesses who previously worked for UC Global were allowed to issue their statements under anonymity.
This legal protection was granted because they believe the private security firm’s director, David Morales, or even US intelligence officials he works with could seek to harm or kill them. The Guardian continues with the following:
The founder and director of UC Global, David Morales, had said that “the Americans” had wanted to establish paternity but the plan was foiled when the then employee alerted the child’s mother. Anonymity was granted on Tuesday to the former employee and another person who had been involved with UC Global, after the hearing was told they feared that Morales, or others connected to him in the US, could seek to harm them. Details of their written evidence were read out at the Old Bailey in London on Wednesday by Mark Summers QC, one of the lawyers for Assange, who is fighting extradition to the US on charges relating to leaks of classified documents allegedly exposing US war crimes and abuse.
The below leaked image was previously described by El País: “Julian Assange’s friend Stephen Hoo walking into the Ecuadorian embassy in London with one of the cyberactivist’s babies in 2017.”
#8: As part of espionage operation against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, the owner of Spanish security company obsessed over whether Assange was father of child who was brought into Ecuador embassy. He ordered diaper to be stolen for DNA testing. https://t.co/iHcI2pNdhL — Kevin Gosztola (@kgosztola) April 18, 2020
Again, the defense is hoping the testimony is a damning enough indictment of the CIA and its partners’ massive intrusion on Assange’s basic legal rights and protections as to prevent the US requested extradition.
US wanted to kill WikiLeaks founder and make it look like accident:https://t.co/HsR7DebDxx — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 25, 2020
Indeed considering two star eyewitnesses for the defense (who themselves essentially were involved in the prior invasive surveillance of Assange) are fearful enough about what they have to offer as to essentially seek a form of temporary ‘witness protection’ by the London court, this should make it glaringly obvious that the whole thing is a political witch hunt of a whistleblower who exposed American war crimes abroad.
Should the UK deem that Assange is at risk of cruel punishment or even death if extradited to US custody, it must strike down the request based on existing laws.
Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permission


wearechange--2020-09-30--Kyle Rittenhouse to Sue Joe Biden Over ‘White Supremacists’ Campaign Ad

Kyle Rittenhouse is pursuing a libel case against the Joe Biden and his campaign after the former Vice President included the 17-year-old in a Wednesday campaign advertisement suggesting he is a white supremacist – despite the Anti-Defamation League finding no evidence he was or is connected to any extremist movements .
According to his attorney , Lin Wood , a lawsuit is headed straight for Biden .
“ I will rip Joe into shreds .
Ask witnesses who have had the misfortune of sitting across the table from me under oath , ” Wood added .
Rittenhouse , whose defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was arrested after killing two BLM attackers and injuring a third in Kenosha , Wisconsin during an August 25th BLM protest .
The teen was in Kenosha to protect businesses in anticipation of rioting and property destruction in the wake of the shooting of Jacob Blake by police .
Video from the scene shows Rittenhouse being chased down the street before falling on the ground and firing his weapon , while earlier footage shows him shooting BLM protester Joseph Rosenbaum – who had acted aggressively earlier towards Rittenhouse , who was charged with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and first-degree reckless homicide , has claimed self-defense .

Kyle Rittenhouse is pursuing a libel case against the Joe Biden and his campaign after the former Vice President included the 17-year-old in a Wednesday campaign advertisement suggesting he is a white supremacist – despite the Anti-Defamation League finding no evidence he was or is connected to any extremist movements.
The ADL said there was no evidence that Kyle Rittenhouse was connected to any extremist movements pic.twitter.com/pih1rBPRm4 — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) September 30, 2020
According to his attorney, Lin Wood, a lawsuit is headed straight for Biden.
Yes it is. The only thing that saves Chris Wallace is that he did not use Kyle’s name or likeness. @JoeBiden & his campaign recklessly did. Meets the “of and concerning” requirement of libel law. Joe is going to be sued. Successfully.https://t.co/n1qBiDj6no https://t.co/Pp8OQaAm9W — Lin Wood (@LLinWood) September 30, 2020
Busy day! Pleased to announce that @ToddMcMurtry & @RonColeman will be joining my legal team in pursuing libel case for Kyle Rittenhouse against Joe Biden & his campaign. No need to turn up hearing aide, Joe. You can easily hear footsteps of army for justice coming to visit you. — Lin Wood (@LLinWood) September 30, 2020
“I will rip Joe into shreds. Ask witnesses who have had the misfortune of sitting across the table from me under oath,” Wood added.
Rittenhouse, whose defense funds have raised over $500,000, was arrested after killing two BLM attackers and injuring a third in Kenosha, Wisconsin during an August 25th BLM protest. The teen was in Kenosha to protect businesses in anticipation of rioting and property destruction in the wake of the shooting of Jacob Blake by police.
Video from the scene shows Rittenhouse being chased down the street before falling on the ground and firing his weapon, while earlier footage shows him shooting BLM protester Joseph Rosenbaum – who had acted aggressively earlier towards Rittenhouse, who was charged with six criminal counts including first-degree intentional homicide and first-degree reckless homicide, has claimed self-defense.
Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permission


wearechange--2020-09-30--SHOCKER: Trump And Biden Actually Agree On Vaccines!

In this video , we go over the crap show that was the first Donald Trump-Joe Biden presidential debate , @ @ @ @ @ actually agree on something .
OH YEAH , since we are not corporate or government @ @ @ @ @ .
YOU CAN ALSO SUPPORT US ON

In this video, we go over the crap show that was the first Donald Trump-Joe Biden presidential debate, including the surprise that they actually agree on something.
Sign up on lukeunfiltered.com or to check out our store on thebestpoliticalshirts.com.