The investigation is ongoing into the Wednesday’s killing of the British soldier, Drummer Lee Rigby by two alleged Islamist terrorists in south-east London.According to Lindsey German this attack could have been influenced by the British government’s foreign policy: the country has been involved in foreign military interventions in Afghanistan and then Iraq for over a decade.The first attacks – the 2005 London Underground bombings – took place “just after Tony Blair was re-elected, the week that the G8 leaders were meeting in Scotland,” she told RT, adding that in her view, those things were “clearly connected.”What happens now, she went on to say, is that wars abroad “are very much ignored by lots of the media.” At the same time, it is a great source of grievance to many people in Britain. As polls reveal, there is a very strong opposition to the war, particularly among working people. “But there are still many people being killed by drones in Pakistan and Yemen. The war has spread: there’s intervention in Syria, Mali. It has now spread to Africa as well as to parts of the Middle East and South Asia,” German pointed out.For a small group of people actions like the London butchering of the soldier is a way to deal with this, the expert believes.“I might disagree very much in terms of what should be done to oppose these wars. I believe in opposing them through campaigning, through demonstrating. But I think it is the sense of the frustration that people feel. And they feel as well that Muslims are being more and more demonized in this country and elsewhere in Europe. And this is one of the responses that people have,” German said. She believes, that “we should listen to the words of the perpetrators” themselves who very clearly linked the attack with the wars abroad. Besides that, “the British security services who for getting on for 10 years now have been saying that the wars abroad will make terrorism much more likely here in Britain.”The fact that the British government and the Mayor of London “won’t acknowledge this I think is really a continuation of a view and a policy which simply is carrying on with these wars in the face of all recognition that actually these wars haven’t succeeded in doing anything – let alone getting rid of terrorism,” German reasoned.The UK security services will now be investigated after it was revealed that MI5 knew of both suspects in the Woolwich murder for eight years.However, according to Claude Moniquet from the European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center, it was not possible to prevent the tragedy. The suspects were known mainly for participation “in violent demonstrations and radical opinions,” he told RT. “As you know, in Great Britain the freedom of speech and freedom of opinion is quite a dogma so it’s impossible to act against people for their beliefs and what they say,” the expert on terrorism observed. Besides that, nothing in the past indicated that this particular man “could kill in the streets in cold blood.”In Moniquet’s opinion, attacks like the recent violence in London and the Boston Marathon bombings are becoming “a trend” and are likely to continue since it is very simple to organize them: you only need a knife or a homemade bomb to bring terror to the streets.“Of course, you will never reach the violence of 9/11, or the Moscow underground attack, or Madrid or London. But if in the coming year, we have four-five attacks like this in the US and some European countries, and each time the attacker kills 2-3 people, it will have a real impact on the relations between Islam and the western world,” Moniquet, who is former French intelligence officer, noted. And that is exactly what terrorists want as they belong “to the ideology of Al Qaeda,” he concluded. … Read More
NDAA debate: US programming the war machine
Not only does the National Defense Authorization Act establish funding levels for the various agencies in charge of our national defense, but it also sets the guidelines under which that money will be spent. If you remember what’s been in previous NDAA guidelines regarding the president’s war powers, Guantanamo Bay or indefinite detention, then you know this coming debate is extremely important. The President knows it, too. He’s set to deliver a national security speech on Thursday outlining his programming vision for the American war machine, including how to handle Guantanamo Bay prisoners of the ‘War on Terror,’ where authority over drone targeted killings should lay, and what powers the Executive Branch should have in confronting threats around the planet (or, just how broadly the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force should be interpreted).Reining in DronesWith the nomination of its architect, John Brennan, to head the CIA earlier this year, the White House’s drone targeted killing program caught the eye of Congress, which is now eager to inject more oversight into the policy. Congressman Mac Thornberry (R-TX), the Vice Chair of the House Armed Services Committee, recently introduced legislation requiring notification to Congress of any target killing missions in countries not currently at war with the United States.“As we work to keep Americans safe from evolving threats, we must ensure that every action is consistent with our civil liberties and freedoms. This balance can only be achieved by proper oversight and accountability, and it is Congress’s job to provide both, ” Rep. Thornberry said in a press release.The legislation, so far, has garnered more than two dozen other co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle. And, as chair of the Emerging Threats and Intelligence Subcommittee in charge of writing portions of the new NDAA, Rep. Thornberry reportedly intends to insert this targeted killing oversight legislation into the 2014 NDAA.There could be broader support for the measure coming from the Congressional Left – the Progressive Caucus, which recently held a hearing on the Executive’s drone program and called for more Congressional oversight.“Congress has been yielding too much power to the executive ,” Rep. Keith Ellison, the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), told me.“The President has said let’s put a legal architecture around this thing, ” he added. “The Progressive Caucus said we’re diving in head first. ”Rep. Ellison laid out his vision of what codifying the drone program would look like: “We’ve got to put some real rules on this, ” he said. “There’s no way anyone should be killed by an American drone unless they are actively in pursuit of killing American and there is a legitimate internationally recognized justification on the basis of self-defense. ”When asked if the NDAA is the place to fight this battle over drones, Rep. Ellison said, “Yes. That is a good vehicle to raise these issues. We plan to really push back on this endless war program in the process.”The White House is expected to announce on Thursday its intention to partially move the drone program out of the Central Intelligence Agency and to the Department of Defense, where more oversight is possible. However, the White House reportedly would like to keep the CIA operating drones in Pakistan, where it can “maintain deniability.”But the CPC is willing to go a step further beyond drones and push to repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, which President Obama has used to justify drone strikes abroad in countries we’re not currently at war with. Rep. Ellison has signed on with Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) on a bill to completely repeal the AUMF.This is a bicameral interest. A recent hearing in the Senate exposed a dangerously broad interpretation of the AUMF by the Department of Defense. Officials with the DoD suggested that the AUMF gives the White House authority to use military force anywhere in the world, from the Congo to Boston, against terrorist organizations affiliated with Al-Qaeda. It was also argued by the Pentagon that this authorization for a worldwide War on Terror will likely last 20 to 30 years.Sen. Angus King (I-ME) reacted to the Pentagon’s AUMF assertions, saying, “This is the most astounding and most astoundingly disturbing hearing that I’ve been to since I’ve been here. You guys have essentially rewritten the Constitution today .”Any action to change the AUMF in the NDAA would have significant impact not just on drones, but also on issues of indefinite detention that have been raised in previous years’ NDAAs and, in particular, what to do about the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.Closing GuantanamoWith the current hunger strike at Guantanamo now well beyond 100 days, there’s been renewed attention on the facility on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.At the end of April, President Obama once again promised to close the facility. According to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, the President will put forward his new plan to close Gitmo in Thursday’s speech.In last year’s NDAA, Congress put up a series of restrictions on transferring prisoners out of Gitmo. Those will all be addressed again in the coming weeks and months. And there’s recently been a new push in Congress to close Gitmo.Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) wrote a letter to the White House urging the President to use a “national security waiver” to transfer the 86 Gitmo prisoners who’ve been cleared for release or transfer. Also, Sen. Dianne Feinstein wrote to the White House asking them to “revisit the decision to halt [Guantanamo] transfers to Yemen .” And Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) held a rare hearing on Capitol Hill about Gitmo, alleging that torture has taken place at the facility and that it needs to be closed.Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA), have suggested they may be willing to revisit the issue of closing Guantanamo, but have bemoaned the White House’s lack of a clear plan on how to close it. And considering the Pentagon has recently asked for $450 million to renovate Gitmo, there are legitimate questions about just how serious the White House is when it comes to closing the facility.The coming NDAA debate will also address issues related to a missile defense shield on the East coast, changes to how the military responds to sexual assault and recommendations on how to better secure diplomatic missions around the world.So, with that, let the programming of the American war machine begin! … Read More
Insult and punishment: Russian MPs mull softer penalty for religious offenses
The ‘anti-blasphemy’ bill was submitted to the Russian parliament’s lower house in September, in the wake of infamous case against the punk band Pussy Riot.The draft law – bitterly criticized by rights activists and lawyers – passed first reading in April when MPs voted to add a new article to the Russian Penal Code.Under the bill, public insults and humiliation of divine services as well as believers’ feelings was to be punished with a fine of up to 300,000 roubles ($US 9,500), up to 200 hours of forced labor or up to three years in prison. Vandalism and desecration of holy sites would cost the offender up to 500,000 roubles (over $US 15,000) or up to 5 years behind bars.Ahead of the second out of three required readings, the Duma’s committee on law worked out amendments to the legislation. The initial idea to add a new article to the code was dropped. Instead, lawmakers suggest amending the existing Article 148 (‘Obstruction of the Exercise of the Right of Liberty of Conscience and Religious Liberty’).The committee also changed the wording of bill which has been slammed by opponents for being too loose and could therefore lead to outrage.Now, if new version of the bill is passed, a person could be sent to court for “public actions which indicate obvious disrespect towards society and aimed at insulting believers’ religious feelings.” An offender would have to pay up to 300,000 roubles in fines, or a sum of money equivalent to their two years’ salary. One could also be sentenced to up to 240 hours of compulsory community service or up to a year in jail.The Duma committee also proposes that these offenses committed in places for religious ceremonies or services must be subject to fines of up to 500,000 roubles ($US15,000), or a sum of money equivalent to offenders salary for up to 3 years. Alternatively, violators may face up to 480 hours of compulsory community service or up to three years in prison.Besides that, the lawmakers recommended to toughen criminal liability for illegal obstruction of activities of religious organizations or administration of religious ceremonies. Such violations must be subject to fines of up to 300,000 roubles. If committed by an official or with the use of force, such crimes could be punished with up to one year behind bars.The idea to protect believers’ feelings by the law was prompted by a large number of sacrilegious situations and events that took place in 2012. Apart from infamous Pussy Riot’s “punk prayer” staged in the Moscow’s main cathedral, there were also desecration of icons, the Nazi and Satanist graffiti in churches and synagogues and cutting down of memorial Orthodox crosses in various Russian regions. … Read More
Assange warns US communications dominance threatens Latin America’s sovereignty
Speaking via videoconference to an audience at Uruguay’s University of the Republic, Assange pointed to Latin America’s dependency on hardware and traffic handling by the United States as a source of vulnerability to monitoring by overzealous intelligence agencies, including the CIA, NSA and FBI. The world-famous whistleblower has been living in Ecuador’s London embassy for the past year under the auspices of political asylum.“The penetration of the internet in all facets of society, substituting traditional mail and telephone and even physical interaction between individuals has placed in the hands of the US information provided by telecoms for the majority of humanity,” said the author of“Criptopunks,”his latest book to be published.Assange pointed to the growing prevalence of social networking and products offered by companies such as Google as another potential concern for Latin Americans.“The countries of Latin America are uploading profiles of their citizens, unknowingly, in computer systems within huge servers in California, controlled by Google, Facebook, Yahoo and others. These are directly or indirectly controlled by mechanisms, both legal or otherwise, via intelligence services of the United States and peripheral organizations,” he said.The remarks made by Assange to his audience in Montevideo, were published widely by many Spanish-language newspapers in the region, and included what seemed to be a veiled jab at recent revelations that the US Department of Justice had conducted widespread phone surveillance on the Associated Press.The government of the US “has not demonstrated scruples in following its own laws in intercepting these [phone] lines to spy even on its own citizens,” remarked Assange.He added that in the US there “did not exist” laws that impeded the US from “spying on citizens of foreign countries.”The US National Security Agency “receives and processes” millions of communications, according to Assange, and the agency boasts a budget “greater than the FBI and the CIA combined.”Assange warned the audience in Montevideo that, with the use of Google, Facebook and other new trends, there’s a massive privacy threat, to an extent that would have only been the stuff of science fiction not long ago. … Read More
Obamacare to penalize nearly half a million Native Americans
“A lot of folks are going to get stuck with the bill,” Jay Stiener of the National Council of Urban Indian Health told the Associated Press.Members of federally-recognized American Indian tribes have received government-funded health services since 1787. Throughout the US, there are 33 hospitals and 59 health centers that provide services including prenatal care, baby well-checks, dentistry and eye glasses to Native Americans.The US government has treaty obligations to care for the well-being of Native Americans, but may soon abandon many of its legal responsibilities. President Obama’s health care reform will force thousands of Native Americans to purchase their own health insurance or pay a minimum fine of $695 to the Internal Revenue Service. Indian health advocacy groups estimate up to 480,000 people will be affected, AP reports.Only those who can prove that they are “Indian enough” will be exempt from the mandate. Native Americans will have to show documentation that they belong to one out of 560 tribes that are federally recognized by the US Bureau of Indian Affairs.There are more than 100 US tribes that are recognized by states, but not the federal government. Members of these tribes would no longer receive the free or subsidized healthcare that they are guaranteed by the Indian Health Service (IHS), which is a division within the US Department of Health and Human Services.“This could lead to some tribal citizens being required to purchase insurance or face penalties even though they are covered by the HIS,” Rep. Tom Cole, a Republican congressman and member of the Chickasaw Nation tribe, told AP.Additionally, Native Americans who do not have documentation of their tribe membership will be forced to purchase insurance or pay a fine. This becomes particularly troublesome for Native Americans under the age of 18, since many tribes only provide official membership to adults. Even if both parents of the minors are members, their healthcare coverage may not apply to their children unless they also have the proper documentation. The health care reform would also complicate the situation for Native Americans who live in metropolitan areas or suburbs. Some tribal governments require members to live on the reservation to gain documentation, which few people do. Nearly two-thirds of American Indians and Alaska Natives currently live in cities, which hinders their ability to receive membership cards from their tribes. News of the restrictions that Obamacare will impose upon American Indians has sparked outrage, particularly among those who will face financial consequences due to something that is out of their control.“I’m no less Indian than I was yesterday, and just because the definition of who is Indian got changed in the law doesn’t mean that it’s fair for people to be penalized,” Liz DeRouen, a Native American who usually receives healthcare at a government-funded clinic in North Carolina, told AP. “If I suddenly have to pay for my own health insurance to avoid the fine, I won’t be able to afford it.”DeRouen is a former tribal administrator for the Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians, but she lost her membership due to an argument with other members. But even though she lost documentation as a tribe member, she is still genetically considered a Native American.The Obama administration currently has no solution to the hardships the Affordable Care Act will inflict upon the Native American population, but the IRS and the US Treasury have jointly scheduled a public hearing forMay 29to discuss establishment of who qualifies for the exemption from the insurance coverage requirement.Nearly 30 percent of all Native Americans live below the poverty line, and forcing them to pay fines or purchase insurance would likely just increase this number. … Read More
Google Is Expected to Start a Competitor to Spotify
Google is set to introduce a subscription music feature to compete against fast-growing new streaming services like Spotify, according to several people briefed on its plans. … Read More
Russia to expel US diplomat accused of spying
http://www.youtube.com/v/9TvH_hIFXE0?version=3&f=videos&app=youtube_gdata Original source - Russia to expel US diplomat accused of spying
