Tag: PARIS

NYT: Trump ‘Siding with Autocrats’ by Weighing Terror Label for Muslim Brotherhood

Members of the Arab-Israeli Islamic Movement chant slogans during a protest in support of deposed Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi (portrait) and against the army crackdown on Muslim Brotherhood supporters, in the northern Israeli city of Nazareth on August 17, 2013. AFP PHOTO / AHMAD GHARABLI (Photo credit should read AHMAD …

By Edwin Mora

U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration would be “siding with autocrats and roiling [the] Middle East” if it joins several Islamic countries in designating the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) a terrorist organization, the New York Times (NYT) argued this week.

NYT has itself in the past sided with several leftist leaders including Russia’s Joseph Stalinin lying about the Soviet genocide; with Cuba’s Fidel Castro in inflating the size of his guerrilla prior to the Cuban Revolution; and taking money for ads from socialist Nicolás Maduro’s regime.

The Trump administration has been considering labeling MB a terrorist group since soon after taking office in January 2017.

NYT has joined opposition to the move expressed by the likes of Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), which leads the world in jailed journalists.

On Monday, the Times argued that designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization would “ignite a firestorm in the Middle East,” adding:

Government lawyers had warned that the Muslim Brotherhood did not meet the legal criteria to be designated a terrorist organization. And in a volatile region where American troops were already battling Islamist extremists, the three men believed, taking on the Brotherhood was one fight too many.

The newspaper goes on to note that Trump officials who opposed labeling MB a terror group – namely former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, former Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, and Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the president’s former national security adviser – are now gone.

Their departure has reportedly opened the door for “autocratic leaders” like Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt to influence the U.S. to move forward with the designation.

NYT reported:

The Trump administration has resurrected the proposal to brand the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, prompting a fierce debate between the government’s political appointees and its career experts.

The designation would impose wide-ranging American economic and travel sanctions on companies and individuals who interact with the loose-knit Islamist movement that was founded in Egypt and is recognized as a legitimate political entity in many Muslim-majority governments.

It is the president’s latest major foreign policy decision that appears to have been heavily influenced by autocratic leaders without first being fully vetted by career American government officials.

NYT identified the “autocratic leaders” as Sisi, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), all of whom have already outlawed MB in their respective countries.

The newspaper said those leaders “revile” MB simply because they consider the group a political opponent.

Several Muslim-majority countries — Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt — and Russia have already outlawed MB.

Qatar, which has long housed the group, and Turkey appear to remain ardent supporters.

Nevertheless, the Washington Post (WaPo) argued on Monday that “calling the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group would make all Muslims scapegoats.”

In December 2017, MB threatened to “wage war” against the United States in response to Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the American embassy there, a move that angered several Muslim countries and jihadi groups like al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL).

For NYT, that is not reason enough to label the group terrorists. On the contrary, the paper claimed that “unlike the Islamic State or Al Qaeda, there is no evidence that the Egyptian group has called for, or directed, terrorist attacks against American interests.”

Critics have linked the NYT to anti-semitism in recent weeks. Citing unnamed Trump officials, the news outlet noted that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and John R. Bolton, the current national security adviser, have expressed support for the terrorist designation for MB.

The U.S. has already designated top MB offshoot Hamas, a Palestinian group intent on destroying Israel, a terrorist organization.

NYT did not identify the so-called opponents of the designation within the Trump administration.

“Beyond Turkey and Qatar, the Brotherhood or offshoots are also a recognized political party or represented in governments in Morocco, Mauritania, Tunisia, Jordan, Bahrain, and Kuwait,” it reported.

The newspaper acknowledged that officials under former President Barack Obama also considered naming MB a terrorist group. NYT, however, did not accuse of Obama of “siding with autocrats” over the consideration as it has with President Trump.

For years, some Republicans in Congress have been proposing the label.

0

‘We feel alien at home’: Austrians flood popular newspaper with desperate messages over migration

CAP

Austria’s largest newspaper has received an unexpected response after its columnist claimed that the term “population replacement” was not appropriate for the Alpine land. Hundreds of people said it is the reality they live in.

Austria’s Kronen Zeitung daily has admitted that it received“hundreds” of letters from its readers in just over a week, after they said they felt like foreigners in their own homeland because of mass immigration.

The strong response was provoked by the paper’s columnist, Conny Bischofberger. In an interview with Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache, she called the notion of “population replacement” a concept used by “far-right extremists.”

ALSO ON RT.COMIntegration failure: Report finds 51% Vienna pupils don’t speak German at home

The term, which describes the gradual replacement of a native population by immigrants, is popular among those on the far-right. They use it to portray growing ethnic and religious diversity as a result of some deliberate malicious actions taken by “anti-popular forces.”

After she was confronted by people asking why they should not use the term, Bischofberger dismissed it in an explanatory piece as a conspiracy theory and a mere “feeling” that “may or may not correspond with the real general demographic developments.” However, she apparently failed to strike a chord with Kronen Zeitung readers, who sought to explain that this was a reality they have been living with for years.

On the streets, on public transport and in the municipal buildings: We feel alien at home.

“We were a happy household until 10 years ago. Then everything collapsed like a house of cards,” one person wrote to the newspaper.

“The mood in our condominium has deteriorated so much that we (65 and 68) are ready to move away to finally be able to live in peace again,” another couple wrote.

CAP

“Foreign-language parents with their children do not bother to speak our language… It’s sad, but one doesn’t feel well anymore,” another message read.

In our elementary school, no more excursions are conducted out of consideration for foreign languages, the diet is adapted to religious wishes and the violence of the foreign elementary school boys is frightening.

After receiving hundreds of similar messages, Bischofberger still insisted that, for many people, the notion of “population replacement” came in handy as it allowed them “not to think about the problem behind” mass immigration. However, she also admitted that “it would be cheap to defame all those people, who wrote to the Kronen Zeitung, as xenophobes, racists or far-right extremists.”

Those people were apparently asked “to accept too much migration” and did not receive enough attention from the authorities, the columnist said.

ALSO ON RT.COMTwitter up in arms after ex-Austrian MP says that girls wear headscarves to avoid migrant assaults

Austria took in one of the largest numbers of asylum seekers per capita during the refugee crisis. Some 150,000 people were accepted by the Alpine land since 2015 – which accounts for over one percent of its total population. Such developments gave rise to widespread anti-immigrant sentiment and brought a conservative coalition to power, which adopted a strict stance on migration.

Foreigners constitute 15.8 percent of the Austrian population, and 29.6 percent in the capital, Vienna, according to a 2018 survey. In February, a former MP from the conservative Austrian People’s Party, Marcus Franz, sparked a heated discussion on social media by saying that Austrian-born girls wear headscarves to prevent assaults from migrants on the streets of Vienna.

0

Democratic Congressman Admits Impeaching Trump Is All About 2020

See the source image

By JOSH HAMMER

The Daily Wire has covered the ongoing impeachment obsession of congressman Rep. Al Green (D-TX) numerous times before.

In December 2017, The Daily Wire reported that Green “brought dead-on-arrival articles of impeachment against Trump” to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. At the time, the House voted overwhelmingly against Green’s attempt to commence impeachment.

In May 2018, The Daily Wire reported that Green changed his tune, instead vowing to commence impeachment proceedings after Democrats regained the House. Per The Daily Wire’s Emily Zanotti:

“There’s a good likelihood there will be articles of impeachment” brought against the President, Rep. Green said. “Here is a point that I think is salient, and one that ought to be referenced. Every member of the House is accorded the opportunity to bring up impeachment. This is not something the Constitution has bestowed upon leadership. It’s something every member has the right and privilege of doing.”

Green’s impeachment advocacy has indeed continued unimpeded since his party took over House leadership. In March 2019, Green discussed his continued efforts with C-Span:

Since then, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Democratic leadership has actually forsworn impeachment — as has the chairwoman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

But this past weekend, Green seemed to let the cat out of the bag when it comes to his own impeachment motives. On MSNBC on Saturday, Green conceded that his impeachment efforts are a transparent ploy to help defeat Trump in 2020.

Here is the relevant portion of the underlying exchange, per RealClearPolitics:

MSNBC HOST: You have been calling for starting articles of impeachment since 2017, but a new Quinnipiac poll taken after the release of the redacted Mueller report said 66% say Congress should not start impeachment proceedings, there’s a sharp partisan divide, with only 4% of Republicans favoring impeachment. Are you afraid this talk will help the president’s re-election?

REP. AL GREEN: I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected. If we don’t impeach him, he will say he’s been vindicated. He will say the Democrats had an overwhelming majority in the House and didn’t take up impeachment. He will say we have a constitutional duty to do it if it was there and we didn’t. He will say he’s been vindicated.

The Washington Free Beacon noted more of the intense exchange: “‘We must impeach this president. If we don’t, it’s not the soul of the nation that will be at risk only, it is the soul of the Congress that’s at risk. Congress has a duty, a responsibility and obligation that only it can fulfill. No one else can. No other entity can. It is Congress that will have to act,’ [Green] said. ‘If we allow political expediency to trump moral imperative, we will have created a shameful situation of this Congress that will never live down, history won’t be kind to us. We must impeach him.'”

But going forward, no matter how many times Democrats try to impeach the president, it seems that their true motive for attempting to do so has now been revealed to the public.

WATCH:

 

0

UNEQUIVOCALLY AND ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT A DOUBT – OBAMA KNEW ABOUT SPYING AND WAS IN ON IT

CAP

by Jim Hoft May 7, 2019

We now know without a doubt the former President Barack Obama was in on the Deep State’s actions to spy on President Trump and entrap his team members.  We don’t know how much spying and attempts of entrapment went on, but we do know Obama was aware of it all.

Democrats and Deep State dirty cops have claimed for months that there was no spying on the Trump campaign.  Now we know without a doubt that there was not only spying, but the dirty cops in the Deep State attempted to entrap Trump team members through this spying.  We also know without a doubt that Obama was in on it.

We know Obama was in on it based on numerous pieces of information. 

For starters we know that Obama spied on numerous people for years while he was President.  Obama took the US Intelligence community and corrupted it.  He used the US intelligence apparatus to spy on anyone and everyone and especially his enemies.  We put a list of the many individuals and entities Obama spied on that we know of here.

We also know that Hillary’s long lost emails were found in the White House.  This was reported by Judicial Watch in April 2019 –

Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch announced that Bill Priestap, former Assistant Director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division admitted, in writing and under oath, that the FBI found Hillary Clinton’s emails in the Obama White House — specifically the Executive Office of the President!

The FBI also admitted that almost 49,000 Hillary Clinton emails were reviewed as a result of a search warrant for emails found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop.

We know that Susan Rice, Obama’s former National Security Advisor, left a email on the last day that she and Obama were in office that confirms Obama was in on it.  Senators Grassley and Graham sent a letter to Rice asking about this email –

Ambassador Rice appears to have used this email to document a January 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting between President Obama, former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates regarding Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election.  In particular, Ambassador Rice wrote:

“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book’.  The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective.  He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.” 

Rice and Obama must have felt guilty about their crimes because they sent this email in an attempt to cover up their illegal actions.  Unfortunately, nobody is buying it.
We also know that Obama, in essence, told incoming President-elect Trump in the Oval office that he was involved in the Deep State coup.  Obama did this inadvertently by advising Trump not to hire General Michael Flynn.

President Obama warned Donald Trump against hiring Michael Flynn as national security adviser in the days after the 2016 election, according to three former Obama administration officials.

The warning came during an Oval Office meeting between Obama and Trump after the Republican’s victory. Flynn had been fired by the Obama administration as the head of the military’s intelligence branch.

This was plastered all over the media in May 2017 a few days before the Mueller Special Investigation was put into place by Rod Rosenstein.  Obama had to know about the coup in order to make this recommendation to Trump months earlier but the media only thought about using this to discredit both Trump and Flynn.  Now its coming back to haunt Obama.

In March 2019 Deep State coup participant James Clapper said to CNN’s Anderson Cooper –

One point I’d like to make, Anderson, that I don’t think has come up very much before, and I’m alluding now to the President’s [Trump’s] criticism of President Obama for all that he did or didn’t do before he left office with respect to the Russian meddling. If it weren’t for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set off a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably, special counsel Mueller’s investigation.

President Obama is responsible for that, and it was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place. I think it’s an important point when it comes to critiquing President Obama.

 

Finally, if Clapper hasn’t said enough, former US Attorney Joe DiGenova was on the radio yesterday and he said point blank says that Obama knew about it all –

Obama was in on it.  It was a sham.  The Mueller investigation was a sham.  Obama spied on the opposition party.

 

0

Report: Facebook Sets Up ‘War Room’ for European Elections

Zuckerberg to face pressure on taxes in meeting with Macron

By Lucas Nolan

Politico recently profiled Facebook’s new “European election war room” ahead of upcoming E.U. elections.

A recent report from Politico provides an insight into Facebook’s new “election war room” established ahead of the upcoming European election. Facebook has previously deployed a similar “war room” in the United States ahead of the midterm elections in November 2018. In October, Breitbart News reported on the war room providing an insight into the aim of the project. Facebook’s Product Manager of Civic Engagement, Samidh Chakrabarti, said in an interview that the war room is a physical room which will be used to “take quick and decisive action” against possible cases of foreign interference during the midterm elections.

See the source image

“We have many measures that we’ve put in place to try to prevent problems: the political ad transparency, blocking fake accounts, combating foreign interference, and preventing the spread of misinformation. But we know we have to be ready for anything that happens,” stated Chakrabarti. “And so that’s why we’ve been building this war room, a physical war room [with] people across the company, of all different disciplines, who are there. So, as we discover problems that may come up in the hours leading up to the election, we can take quick and decisive action.”

Now, Politico has reported on the company’s efforts to establish a similar project in Dublin, Ireland ahead of the upcoming European elections. Politico described the project writing:

See the source image

The group of twentysomething coders, engineers and content specialists sit hunched over multiple screens, scanning the platform for potential illegal behavior. Wall-mounted television monitors keep them up to date on the latest chatter on the world’s largest social network, Instagram and WhatsApp. A single European Union flag hangs on the wall, next to a poster emblazoned with the slogan “New Ways of Seeing.”

Yet despite Facebook’s  40-person European election “operations center,” which got underway on April 29, the tech giant is struggling to keep on top of the threats.
Political groups from Hungary to Spain have been able to circumvent Facebook’s new political transparency tools to quietly buy partisan social media advertising aimed at swaying potential voters, according to an analysis by POLITICO. That includes paid-for messages by Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian prime minister, Verein Recht und Freiheit (Association for the Conservation of the Rule of Law and Civil Liberties), a support group for right-wing politicians in Germany and Petra De Sutter, a Belgian candidate for the Green Party.

It seems that Facebook is aware, however, of accusations of censorship and bias. The company’s chief lobbyist in Europe told Politico that Facebook is avoiding taking too harsh a line on the content allowed on the platform:

“We recognize that some people think we should remove everything,” said Richard Allan, Facebook’s chief lobbyist in Europe, in reference to the reams of political content now flooding the digital platform. “But we have concerns of removing everything during a political election.”

“We don’t believe it’s the right place to be for us to be the regulator of political campaigns,” he added. Facebook may not want the role, but its global reach puts it at the heart of the democratic process from France to the Philippines.

 

Politico described the new Dublin team tasked with monitoring misinformation, writing:

The team, which includes speakers of all of the EU’s 24 official languages, is split along national boundaries, with specialists — primarily men who would not look out of place in any startup office — monitoring activity on both Facebook’s social media platforms and those of rivals, notably Google and Twitter.

Facebook would not say how much content the group reviews daily, though each Facebook staffer had multiple screens open monitoring news events and other political discussions online.

Once an issue is flagged, Facebook’s engineers can then work with their counterparts across Europe and elsewhere to determine if the activity infringes the company’s standards, and then delete, play down or leave the content on the network, depending on the outcome. Topics for review include possible misinformation, voter suppression and hate speech, and the company said that it had investigated hundreds of incidents within the last week.

“Even though we’re a tech company, speaking face to face is invaluable,” said Sturdy, the Facebook executive.

0

SUPPORT PJW IN THE FIGHTBACK AGAINST CENSORSHIP

Support PJW in the Fightback Against Censorship

Here’s how you can help

 | Infowars.com – MAY 6, 2019

Facebook and the mainstream media are trying to silence me by falsely labeling me an “extremist”.

Conservatives and anyone who challenges the leftist orthodoxy are being deplatformed.

People have asked how they can support me.

I have created a SubscribeStar at https://www.subscribestar.com/paul-joseph-watson

The fight back against censorship requires resources.

I appreciate you having my back more than ever.

Please consider giving a small amount here if you wish to protect my voice from being silenced.

Or if you prefer, you can make a one time Paypal donation here.

Also, it’s imperative that you sign up for my free newsletter here so we can stay in touch.

CAP

0

WATCH: Walmart Leverages Tech Censorship For Lower Ad Rates According to Arkansas YouTuber

Boogie Walmart Tech CensorshipBoogie Walmart Tech CensorshipCAP

Boogie revealed that the tech censorship crisis may be inspired, at least partially, by advertisers’ desire for a lower rate.

By

During an appearance on the H3 podcast, the famous YouTuber revealed a personal conversation he had with a contact in Walmart advertising who said they do not care about big tech censorship, but are looking forward to the lower advertising rates they expect to pay as a result.

Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Twitter have all faced some extent of an advertiser boycott, with the blame levied on users who are deemed not to be “advertiser friendly.”

This has been YouTube’s excuse to demonetize popular right wing channels, and likely went into consideration for Twitter when they summarily banned Infowars, and Facebook and Instagram last week when they went a step further and said they would ban any user who so much as posted a link to Infowars video content or Alex Jones.

Boogie2988, a YouTube streamer who became famous for his parody videos, video game live streams, and for chronicling his weight loss journey, offered a nuanced take during the podcast.

“I know a lot of people that work at Walmart,” Boogie said on the podcast, “And I know people that work in advertising at Walmart, and somebody from Walmart, and I won’t say which person specifically, said to me ‘We don’t really care about any of that censorship crap, we don’t really care about any of the drama.’”

He continued, quoting his conversation with an anonymous Walmart advertising employee, “‘We care about lowering our bids, so we’re going to do a six months or one year hiatus, and when we come back, we’re going to have much lower bids.’”

If true, it would seem the exodus of large advertisers from big tech platforms, and the sacrifice of many large content creators that followed, may be driven almost entirely by finance.

If YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter are perceived as dangerous places to advertise, the cost of doing so on the platforms would naturally decrease exponentially.

As Twitter user Justin Whang wrote succinctly, “Advertisers played YouTube like a fiddle.”

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑