BREXIT: Lying Dave the Pimp Sells Out Britons

BREXIT:   Lying Dave the Pimp Sells Out Britons http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/672774/Cameron-faces-storm-attack-ministerPenny-Mordaunt-Turkey PM faces storm for attack on his OWN minister after she spoke out on migration from Turkey DAVID Cameron was facing a backlash last night for launching an extraordinary attack on one of his own ministers who spoke out over the threat of a migrant surge from Turkey. By Macer Hall PUBLISHED: 05:45, Mon, May 23, 2016 | UPDATED: 14:44, Mon, May 23, 2016 The Prime Minister claimed Defence Minister Penny Mordaunt was “absolutely wrong” to warn that staying in the EU put Britain at risk of having to open our borders to Turkish citizens. But Leave campaigners backed Ms Mordaunt and said Britain will be at the mercy of murderers and terrorists from countries like Turkey if it remains controlled by Brussels. The Portsmouth North MP, who backs quitting the EU in the referendum on June 23, said it was “very likely” that Turkey will join the EU within the next eight years. That would mean Turkey’s 78 million citizens getting the right to live anywhere in the EU, including Britain, under free movement rules. But Mr Cameron rebuked his minister during a TV interview and said Turkish membership was “not remotely on the cards” and would probably not be for a thousand years.     I do not think the EU is going to keep Turkey out     Defence Minister Penny Mardaunt But he faced an angry backlash from Leave campaigners last night, who highlighted his previous passionate support for Turkey joining the EU. The row, laying bare the angry rift over the EU referendum at the heart of the Tory government, erupted when Ms Mordaunt appeared as a guest on BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show yesterday. Ms Mordaunt said: “I do not think the EU is going to keep Turkey out. “I think it is going to join, I think the migrant crisis is pushing it more that way.” Pressed on her veto claims, the minister said that in the face of the migrant crisis “we will be unable to stop Turkey joining”. She added: “This is a matter for the British people to decide and the only shot that they will get at expressing a view on this is in this referendum. “I don’t think the UK will be able to stop Turkey joining.” Leave campaigners also say that Turkish membership will also cost NHS maternity services £400million in a decade. Mr Cameron hit back within the hour during an interview on the Peston On Sunday show on ITV. The Prime Minister said: “The Leave campaign is making a very misleading claim.” Mr Cameron said Ms Mordaunt’s claims were “absolutely wrong.” He added: “Britain and every other country in the European Union have a veto on another country joining. “That is a fact, and the fact that the Leave campaign is getting things as straightforward as this wrong should call in to question their whole judgment in making the bigger argument about leaving the EU.” Pressed on whether Ms Mordaunt was qualified to be kept on as a minister, the Prime Minister said: “Her responsibilities are in the Ministry of Defence, she is doing a very good job. But on this question of whether or not we have a veto, the leave campaign is wrong. “It is not remotely on the cards that Turkey is going to join the EU any time soon. They applied in 1987. “At the current rate of progress they will probably get round to joining in about the year 3000 according to the latest forecasts.” Leave campaigners pointed out that Mr Cameron has repeatedly backed Turkish membership of the EU and once pledged to help “pave the way from Ankara to Brussels”. Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the Vote Leave campaign group, said: “David Cameron has said he wants to pave the road to Ankara and has repeatedly confirmed it is government policy for Turkey to join the EU. “The EU is speeding up the process of Turkey joining and we are paying nearly £2billion to help make it happen. If it isn’t on the cards why are taxpayers footing the bill for it already? “As with so much in the referendum the ‘Remain’ campaign are saying one thing now before the vote but are planning for the exact opposite after 23 June. The only safe option is stop handing Brussels £350million a week and vote Leave.” Former Labour foreign secretary Lord Owen, a Leave supporter, said: “Only nine weeks ago David Cameron committed the country at the European Council to re-energise the accession process of Turkey into the EU.” Yesterday, Mr Cameron visited an Asda store in London with former Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman, also a Remain supporter, where the PM warned that a Brexit would force up food prices for shoppers. http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/672774/Cameron-faces-storm-attack-ministerPenny-Mordaunt-Turkey https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pms-speech-in-turkey A transcript of a speech given by Prime Minister David Cameron in Ankara, Turkey, on 27 July 2010. Prime Minister: Thank you, Mr President, and thank you for that very warm welcome. I can tell from your enthusiasm and the enthusiasm of the entrepreneurs that I met outside this incredible building that there is an enormous spirit of enterprise and entrepreneurialism and industry and business and trade here in Turkey, and that is one of the reasons that I want our two countries to build this incredibly strong relationship that I will be speaking about this morning. I have come to Ankara to establish a new partnership between Britain and Turkey. I think this is a vital strategic relationship for our country. As Prime Minister, I first visited our two largest European Union partners, then Afghanistan, then North America and now, I come to Turkey. People ask me, ‘Why Turkey?’ and, ‘Why so soon?’ Well, I can tell you why: because Turkey is vital for our economy, vital for our security and vital for our politics and our diplomacy. Let me explain. First, our economy. Over 400 years ago England’s first official diplomatic representative arrived in Istanbul. William Harborne came bearing gifts from Queen Elizabeth. As a nation, we sought the opportunity for our merchants to trade. More than 400 years on, I follow him to Turkey at least in part for the same reason. I ask myself this: which European country grew at 11% at the start of this year? Which European country will be the second fastest growing economy in the world by 2017? Which country in Europe has more young people than any of the 27 countries of the European Union? Which country in Europe is our number one manufacturer of televisions and second only to China in the world in construction and in contracting? Tabii ki Turkiye. Everyone is talking about the BRICs, the fast-growing emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. Turkey is Europe’s BRIC, and yet in Britain we export more to Ireland than we export to Brazil, Russia, India, China and Turkey all combined. With no disrespect to our partners and friends in Ireland, we have to change that. That is the first reason I am here today and it is why I have chosen to come to TOBB, right in the heart of the Turkish business community. The second reason for coming to Turkey is security. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pms-speech-in-turkey Turkey is a great NATO ally and Turkey shares our determination to fight terrorism in all its forms, whether from al-Qaeda or from the PKK. Yesterday we had yet another reminder of the human price that Turkey pays in facing up to terrorism. As a friend who has also suffered from terrorism, including right here in this country, we stand with you and we will do all we can to help ensure that democracy and the rule of law always win against terror.  [comment:  Turkey's a contributor to terrorism (like Dave), and it's as corrupt as all f*ck and decidedly undemocratic if you're a journalist.  ] You are not just a great ally; the fact is that Turkey’s unique position at the meeting point of East and West gives you an unrivalled influence in helping us to get to grips with some of the greatest threats to our collective security.  [comment:  great allies do not extort money from one another - eg Turkey from EU to keep marauders out.] I ask myself this: which country, with its commitment to the international effort in Afghanistan, sends a message to the world that this is a fight not against Muslims but against terrorism? Which Muslim majority country has a long established relationship with Israel while at the same time championing the rights of Palestine? Which European country could have the greatest possible chance of persuading Iran to change its course on nuclear policy? Tabii ki Turkiye. Whether in Afghanistan or in the Middle East, Turkey has a credibility that others in the West just cannot hope to have. So I have come here today to make the case for Turkey to use this credibility, to go further in enhancing our security and working for peace across our world.   [comment:  Jesus, who wrote that porky.  Turkey and 'credibility' in one sentence.   'Peace across our world' is definitely overkill.  Stop crawling and lying, Dave.  It's embarrassing.] The third reason I am here is political. I am here to make the case for Turkey’s membership of the European Union and to fight for it. Do you know who said this? ‘Here is a country which is not European, its history, its geography, its economy, its agriculture and the character of its people - admirable people though they are - all point in a different direction. This is a country which cannot, despite what it claims and perhaps even what it believes, be a full member.’ Now, that might sound like some Europeans describing Turkey. Actually it was General de Gaulle describing the United Kingdom, my country, before vetoing our accession to the European Union. So we know what it is like to be shut out of the club, but we also know that these things can change.   [comment:  Dave, it describes Turkey EXACTLY, you lying wanker.  LOL   Someone, hand Dave Erdogan's domes, minarets speech: 1998, Recep Tayyip Erdogan: "The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers..." [bbc]  ] When I think about what Turkey has done to defend Europe as a NATO ally and what Turkey is doing today in Afghanistan alongside our European allies, it makes me angry that your progress towards EU membership can be frustrated in the way that it has been. My view is clear: I believe it is just wrong to say that Turkey can guard the camp but not be allowed to sit in the tent. [comment:  Defend Europe?  Dave, the Turks invaded the seat of the Roman Empire, Constantinople (renamed 'Istanbul'), in what was European held Anatolia.  The Turks invaded Europe as far as the gates of Vienna.  But Dodgy Dave portrays Turkey as 'defender' of Europe.] I will remain your strongest possible advocate for EU membership and for greater influence at the top table of European diplomacy. This is something I feel very strongly and very passionately about. Together I want us to pave the road from Ankara to Brussels. To make the case for Turkey’s membership of the EU and to seize the huge advances I believe that we can make in our trade and in our security, there are three groups that we have to take on directly. First, there are the protectionists. They see the rise of a country like Turkey as an economic threat we must defend against, not as an opportunity to further our prosperity.  [comment:  keen to let unbridled capitalism and hordes of invading Turks rape the working classes of Europe.] Second, there are the polarised. They see the history of the world through the prism of a clash of civilisations. They think that Turkey has to choose between East and West and that choosing both is just not an option.  [comment:  Dave and Erdogan have much in common:  both slimy & both imprison journalists (Assange held over 5 years no charge - US-Anglo political prisoner).  However, that does not make for cultural compatibility, the desire or the capacity to absorb MILLIONS of aliens.] Third, there is the prejudiced, those who wilfully misunderstand Islam. They see no difference between real Islam and the distorted version peddled by the extremists. They think the problem is Islam itself and they think the values of Islam can just never be compatible with the values of other religions, societies or cultures.  [comment:   Genocidal Dave Cameron would like to pave the way to destruction of his own people, as he figures he can spare a few Britons here and there along the way to oblivious extinction, for the sake of making a fast buck or two, while giving his countrymen's nation to aliens from right under them.  ] All these arguments are just plain wrong, and as a new Government in Britain, I want us to be at the forefront of the international effort to defeat these arguments and I want to take each one in turn. First, the protectionists. Every generation has to make the argument for free trade all over again and this generation will be no different. As we build our economic relationship there are some who fear the growth of a country like Turkey, who want to retreat and cut themselves off from the rest of the world. They just don’t get it. They seem to think that trade is a sort of zero-sum game. They talk about it quite literally as if one country’s success is another country’s failure. That if our exports grow, then someone else’s must shrink. That somehow if we import low-cost goods - including from Turkey - that we are failing. As if all the benefits of Turkey’s exports go to Turkey alone when actually we benefit too from choice, from competition, from low prices in our shops. The whole point about trade is that everyone can benefit from it. So let me tell you what we are going to do to beat the protectionists. We are going to work harder than ever before to break down those barriers to trade that still exist, to cut the global red tape, like by streamlining customs bureaucracy and to work towards completing the trade round that could add $170 billion to the world economy. Prime Minister Erdogan and I were discussing this last night, how we can push forward at the G20 this autumn and we’re going to do everything we can to re-open Britain for business. Two hundred years on from William Harborne, the first resident Turkish Ambassador arrived in London. One of his team wrote the first Turkish account of life in Britain. He said quite simply, ‘British weather is disagreeable.’ I’m not sure much has changed on that front, and I certainly can’t change the weather, but I can do a lot to change the climate for trade and investment in Britain. That’s why we are cutting corporation tax to 24%, the lowest in the G7. We’re creating the most competitive corporate tax regime in the G20. And we are cutting the time it takes to set up a business. We are welcoming new business to Britain. And we are delighted that so many Turkish people are visiting, studying, and doing business so successfully in the United Kingdom. And we are encouraging British business to be more ambitious in developing new markets, as Turkish businesses have done. Vodafone, Tesco and HSBC are just three of the big British investments already in Turkey. I want to see many, many more. Today the value of our trade is over $9 billion a year. I want us to double this over the next five years. We cannot let the protectionists win the argument. The truth is that trade is the biggest wealth creator we have ever known. And when we talk about stimulus it is trade and a trade deal that can give the biggest stimulus to our economies right now.  [comment: money, money, money and making it easy for the wealthy while punishing the working class.  But who makes this money?  It's the corporations, it's the elites.  The same elites that have given Britain away from under Britons.  The average man will be punished by this EurTurkish super state. ] Second, let me turn to the next group of objectors, the polarised. They see the history of our world as a clash of civilisations, as a choice between East and West. They just don’t get the fact that Turkey can be a great unifier, because instead of choosing between East and West, Turkey has chosen both. And it’s this opportunity to unite East and West that gives Turkey such an important role with countries in the region in helping us to deliver improved security for all of us.  [comment:  LOOK HOW TURKEY HAS 'UNIFIED' SYRIA WITH SARIN ATTACK, ARMED ISLAMISTS & ROBBERY OF SYRIAN OIL, BOUGHT FROM ISIS.   LOOK HOW TURKEY 'UNIFIED' THE ARMENIANS & THE KURDS.  Turkey discrimination against:  Alevis, Christians, Jews, Yezidis http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5833/secular-turkey Erdogan promotes Muslim Brotherhood style of political Islam & he stirs up Turkish nationalist sentiments among Turks residing in Europe:   “One country, one flag, one religion!” https://kazodaily.wordpress.com/2015/10/13/france-allows-islamic-extremist-butcher-erdogan-to-preach-violence-in-strasbour/  ] This matters most of all in Afghanistan. Turkey provides a vital transport hub for equipment heading to Afghanistan for the fight against the Taliban. But it also has a unique influence in promoting the regional, political and economic cooperation that is so crucial to Afghanistan’s stability and security. For international forces to leave we need to know that the Afghans can take control of their own security. That means the development of the Afghan National Security Forces is absolutely vital. And I welcome Turkey’s plans to do even more military and police training.  [comment:  Wow, if they do that to their own co-religionists, imagine what Turkey would be capable of doing to Europe.] Just as Turkey is playing a pivotal role in Afghanistan, it can also do so in the Middle East. Turkey’s relationships in the region, both with Israel and the Arab world, are of incalculable value. No other country has the same potential to build understanding between Israel and the Arab world. I know that Gaza has led to real strains in Turkey’s relationship with Israel, but Turkey is a friend of Israel, and I urge Turkey, and Israel, not to give up on that friendship. Let me be clear: the Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla was completely unacceptable. And I have told Prime Minister Netanyahu we will expect the Israeli inquiry to be swift, transparent and rigorous. Let me also be clear that the situation in Gaza has to change. Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions. Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp.  [comment:  DAVE'S LYING AGAIN!!!!!  ] But as, hopefully, we move in the coming weeks to direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians so it is Turkey that can make the case for peace and Turkey that can help press the parties to come together and point the way to a just and viable solution. And, just as we look to Turkey to play this role in the Middle East, so it is Turkey that can help us to stop Iran from getting the bomb. Let us be frank about this: Iran is enriching uranium to 20% with no industrial logic for what they are doing other than producing a bomb. If Iran’s nuclear programme is peaceful, why won’t Iran allow the IAEA to inspect? Why does Iran continue to seek to acquire military components? And why does Iran continue to threaten Israel with annihilation?  [Comment:   Britain, USA, Saudi Arabia & Israel would all like to cripple Iran.  Someone remind Dave who has the nukes in the region.   ] Even if Iran were to complete the deal proposed in their recent agreement with Turkey and Brazil, it would still retain around 50% of its stockpile of low-enriched uranium. So we need Turkey’s help now in making it clear to Iran just how serious we are about engaging fully with the international community.   [comment:  nukes deal done.] We hope that the meeting held in Istanbul between the Turkish, Brazilian and Iranian Foreign Ministers will see Iran move in the right direction. The new sanctions that the EU announced yesterday are designed to persuade Iran to give the international community confidence that its nuclear programme really is peaceful, as Iran insists.  [comment:  nukes deal done.]   I also encourage Turkey to maintain its efforts to achieve the ambition of zero problems with all its neighbours, including Iraq. And I welcome the important work that Turkey has done in recent months to improve regional cooperation in the Western Balkans. Again, it is your unique relationships and influence in the region which can play such a vital role in helping to bring about progress and reconciliation.  [comment:  SUCKING UP MUCH, DAVE?   Bet it's all lies.  LMAO] But all of this - all of this - hinges on people breaking away from the polarised view of a false choice between East and West. With Turkey it is not East or West, it is East and West together. And we very much welcome that combination.  [comment:  TURKEY IS NOT THE 'WEST', Cameron.  Turkey is an Asian, ethnocentric Islamic nation in Asia, that is a historic foe of Europe, with a dreadful record of abuses of civil rights, law and democracy.  That includes international law violations.] Third, let me turn to the prejudiced - those who don’t differentiate between real Islam and the extremist version.   [comment:  Erdogan would disagree with that, Dave.  Erdogan says that's offensive.  Islam is Islam.  There is no Islam other than Islam.  ] They don’t understand the values that Islam shares with other religions like Christianity and Judaism that all of these are inherently peaceful religions. Nor do they understand that Turkey is a peaceful country, with a long history of religious tolerance.  [comment:  Well, I suppose Dave's got a point there.  Both Islam and Christianity are big on martyrdom.  But I think they approach it from different directions.  Christians are big into grovelling, performing foot worship, & punishing themselves.  The other ideology prefers to express martyrdom outwardly, with explosives.   F*ck me dead.  Dave said "long history of religious tolerance".  Dave outright lied - see religious intolerance.   Don't you care about the suffering of Kurds and the Armenians, Dave?  WHAT A LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Turkey discrimination against:  Alevis, Christians, Jews, Yezidis http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5833/secular-turkey I will always argue that the values of real Islam are not incompatible with the values of Europe, that Europe is defined not by religion, but by values. The EU is a secular organisation. And Europe welcomes people of all faiths, or none. Likewise, Turkey is a secular and democratic state. This is all the more reason to make Turkey feel welcome in Europe.   [comment:  Dave, you dope.  Turkey is neither secular no democratic. It's a dictatorship which imprisons journalists (kind of like Britain in that regard, but on a much larger scale).  Note the following: “We are a Muslim country and so we should have a religious constitution,” said Turkish Parliament Speaker Ismail Kahraman on Monday, lamenting that the name Allah is not mentioned even once in the country’s founding charter. “Secularism would not have a place in a new constitution,” he said. Kahraman was addressing an Islamic scholars and writers conference in Istanbul. As the head of the parliament, it’s Kahraman’s job to pen a new draft constitution for Turkey. AKP has its roots in political Islam and has been pushing for constitutional amendments during its 13-year rule in Turkey. It wants to empower the office of president from a purely ceremonial function to a fully-fledged head of state. Such a reform would benefit incumbent President Tayyip Erdogan, who traded the prime minister’s seat for that of the president’s in 2014. https://www.rt.com/news/340937-turkey-secular-constitution-dropped/ Dave needs to quit with the 'real Islam' schtick.  It's offensive to Erdogan.  There's only one Islam.  Erdogan told us. I know Turkey has already made significant reforms in just the last few years. The bans on teaching and broadcasting of Kurdish - scrapped. A new state Kurdish television station - now up and running. The death penalty - scrapped. The penal code - reformed. Democratic institutions - strengthened. These are significant changes. And they should be recognised.  [comment:  get a load of what Turkey has been up to since Dave's, 'reforms' speech:  here] In encouraging you to go further, I’m not asking you to be a different country, to abandon your values, your traditions or your culture. We want you to be Turkey - because it is as Turkey that you can play the unique role I have described in building greater security and greater prosperity for all our citizens.   [comment:  Dave wants Erdogan to have Turkey, but Dave and his money-grabbing kind don't want BRITONS to have Britain.  Dave the Pimp wants to sell access to Britain like Britain's a whore, and Britain's children will be left to fend for themselves in a brutal, free market capitalist arrangement with limited capacity to meet public needs.] But we want you to push forwards aggressively with the EU reforms you’re making. We want you to take the necessary measures to open up the competition chapter as the next step in the accession process. Because just as countries draw great strength from the openness of their societies, so Europe will draw fresh vigour and purpose from a Turkey that embraces human rights and democracy.   [comment:  Translation ... OMG, violent, abusive dictatorships are fine with Dave, as long as money's to be made.   Ghengis Khan had a better human rights record than Turkey has.  LOL  ] And we want you to continue to work towards a solution in Cyprus, despite our disappointment that a huge effort six years ago was unsuccessful. We will work with you in every way we can as you do this. Of course we won’t always agree on everything, but our common objective is to convince the doubters - whether they are the protectionists, the polarised or the prejudiced - that the case for Turkish membership of the European Union is indisputable, just as I already believe it is.   [comment:  LMAO ... don't hold your breath on Cyprus, Dave.   Dave's mantra here for all to see, turn it around & use it to kick him in the balls:  PROTECTIONIST, POLARISED, PREJUDICED.   Oh, and 'REAL ISLAM' (where there is no such distinction, according to Erdogan).   These are Dave's magic words.  Words Dave or some Hollywood starlet will use to manipulate the electorate.  Do not listen to this liar.   Put your fingers in your ears and sing:  la, la, la, la, la, la, la ... VOTE EXIT.] So this is how I see it. The protectionists are wrong. All the countries that increase their trade with Turkey will be winners. The losers will be those that don’t. The polarised are wrong. Turkey doesn’t have to choose between East and West. It’s precisely because you have chosen both that you have such an opportunity to enhance security for us all. The prejudiced are wrong. The problem is not Islam, but the wrong assumptions the prejudiced make about Islam. And a European Union without Turkey is not stronger but weaker, not more secure but less secure, not richer but poorer.    [comment:  DAVE THE PIMP has given Turkey carte blache.   Emphasise the horrific record.  LOL ] The strategic partnership that I am signing today with Prime Minister Erdogan sets out our ambitions for a modern partnership between Britain and Turkey. Central to this partnership is the conviction that Turkey deserves its place at the top table of European politics, and that is what I will fight for.  [Comment:  LOL ... emphasise Turkey's SINS.  ] To the doubters - I would just ask this: more than any other country, which European country’s growth could drive growth for us all? More than any other, which country’s influence over security in the Middle East could help us to tackle the causes of terrorism and bring greater security for all of us? More than any other, which country’s accession to the EU could make a stronger EU with greater global influence for us all? And the answer I simply give is this: Tabii ki Turkiye. Çok Tesekkur ederim. Thank you very much. [comment:  Someone let Daddy ISIS, Dave the Pimp, know that he and Turkey are facilitators of terrorism & insecurity ] Tabii ki Turkiye. Çok Tesekkur ederim Of course, Turkey. Thank you so much

Germany: Freedom of Expression - Erdogan Insult 'Serious Crime Against Humanity'

Germany:  Freedom of Expression - Erdogan Insult 'Serious Crime Against Humanity' https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/04/12/could-this-poem-trip-up-angela-merkel/?tid=sm_tw How a vulgar poem is giving Germany’s Merkel a real headache By Rick Noack April 12 at 7:48 AM It all started with a joke. Last week, German comedian Jan Böhmermann aired a segment on his show in which he read an openly offensive poem, directed at Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in which he accused him of bestiality and other unsavory things. The Turkish politician previously criticized a much less controversial satirical segment that aired on another German channel. But Böhmermann went too far for Erdogan. The Turkish president officially filed charges against the German comedian on Monday — using a little-known German law. But it could cost German Chancellor Angela Merkel her job, according to some commentators. Respected German weekly Der Spiegel argued in its lead story Tuesday that Merkel — among the most powerful women in the world — "could stumble" over the scandal that started as a laugh. Merkel has survived far worse crises. So why is the Böhmermann controversy so dangerous to her office, according to German media? Insulting a head of state is a criminal offense in Germany, and it's up to Merkel to decide whether Erdogan's case can be heard in German courts. And here's where it gets really complicated. Merkel and the European Union recently negotiated a refugee deal with Turkey that arguably saved her chancellorship, and — for the moment, at least — greatly decreased the influx of refugees and migrants. But Merkel has also made clear in the past that she strongly supports freedom of the press. Erdogan has been accused of shutting down newspapers and threatening journalists at home. By filing charges against Böhmermann, who works for one of the country's main public television stations, ZDF, Erdogan has taken his fight abroad. He also puts Merkel into an awkward position. If she accepts Böhmermann to be charged for insulting Erdogan, critics will accuse her of sacrificing press freedom. But if she refused to accept the charges Erdogan put forward, she could threaten German-Turkish relations at the worst possible time, when a crucial refugee deal is being implemented. If Turkey withdrew from the deal as a consequence, it would dash hopes of European nations of finding a way out of the migrant crisis. "The whole country now watches, as Erdogan embarrasses the chancellor and parades her like in a circus ring," Der Spiegel commented Tuesday. The current scandal is also considered a delayed consequence of Merkel's decision to allow hundreds of thousands of Syrians into the country last fall. Her policies have made her so politically vulnerable that even a joke could now turn into a serious threat to her office — partially because Merkel has so far refused to clearly side with Böhmermann and those arguing that a potential trial is a threat to freedom of the press. The chancellor even called the comedian's poem "deliberately offending" — a comment that some interpreted as support for Erdogan. "The scandal undermines her credibility and exposes her failed migration policies," German news channel n-tv said Tuesday. Tensions have risen for days. On Monday, Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmus said that the poem — which has since been deleted from ZDF's website — was not only an insult against Erdogan but against all Turks. "That is why the Republic of Turkey demands that this impertinent man is immediately punished for insulting a president, within the scope of German law," Kurtulmus was quoted as saying. He went on to call the poem a "serious crime against humanity" that had "crossed all lines of indecency." Böhmermann could face jail time or a fine if a German court found him guilty. Other prominent members of the public, including Mathias Döpfner, head of the country's influential Axel Springer publishing company, have already declared support for the comedian. Böhmermann has deliberately provoked the public in the past and might even have expected to face a trial. For Merkel, though, his joke is starting to create real problems. Also read: A German comedian read a lewd poem about Turkey’s Erdogan. Now he could face jail time. Rick Noack writes about foreign affairs and is based in Europe. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/04/12/could-this-poem-trip-up-angela-merkel/?tid=sm_tw Zeit.de German to English Translation EXTRACTS http://archive.is/l4fal Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has filed a criminal complaint against Jan Böhmermann. So the Mainz Prosecutors said on Monday evening , the complaint against the ZDF satirist received by them. ... A criminal complaint will now be examined in addition to the already pending due to attack on the institutions and representatives of foreign states. ... Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmuş said in the southeastern Turkish city of Sanliurfa, the poem is not only an insult of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, but from all 78 million Turks. ...  Kurtulmuş that Turkey would exert "absolutely no political pressure" in Germany. He threw Böhmermann before but having committed a "serious crime against humanity".  The poem had "exceeded all limits of shamelessness".  ... ... The Turkish government refers, in calling on the paragraph 103 of the German Penal Code. It says: "Who is a foreign head of state (...) offended with imprisonment up to three years or fined, punished in case of defamatory libel with imprisonment from three months to five years." For a prosecution in such cases, it need in addition to the request for prosecution of Turkey, a corresponding authorization on the part of the federal government. The party leader of the Greens demanded meanwhile, to delete the paragraph for insulting representatives of foreign states from the Criminal Code. A paragraph to "lese majeste" is no longer appropriate. It could not be, "that other countries judge how we interpret freedom of speech." Received support Böhmermann also by former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis. The tweeted, Europe has lost in the refugee crisis his soul, now it lose its humor. His demand: "Hands off @janboehm".     Europe first lost its soul (agreement with Turkey on refugees), now it is losing its humor. Hands off @janboehm ! Https://t.co/w6bTJjp0QG         - Yanis Varoufakis (@yanisvaroufakis) April 11, 2016  http://archive.is/l4fal Defamation - German Criminal Penal Code Section 103 Defamation of organs and representatives of foreign states (1) Whosoever insults a foreign head of state, or, with respect to his position, a member of a foreign government who is in Germany in his official capacity, or a head of a foreign diplomatic mission who is accredited in the Federal territory shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years or a fine, in case of a slanderous insult to imprisonment from three months to five years. (2) If the offence was committed publicly, in a meeting or through the dissemination of written materials (section 11(3)) Section 200 shall apply. An application for publication of the conviction may also be filed by the prosecution service. http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#p1035 GERMAN CRIMINAL CODE Translation of the German Criminal Code provided by Prof. Dr. Michael Bohlander http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/index.html#gl_p0008 Criminal Code of 1871 -- appears to be the codification of:     1.  Hohenzollern Empire penal code; and     2.  Weimar Republic penal code. http://www.dmlp.org/blog/2012/l%C3%A8se-majest%C3%A9-16th-century-censorship-meets-21st-century-law Lèse Majesté: 16th Century Censorship Meets 21st Century Law Posted July 12th, 2012 by Marie-Andree Weiss When hearing the expression “lèse majesté,” images of the Queen of Hearts ordering heads to be chopped off ASAP may come to mind. Marie-Antoinette, the queen who was once a “majesté” in France, herself lost her head during the French Revolution. Surely, the crime of lèse majesté is now a thing of the past? Lèse Majesté Law is Heavily Enforced in Thailand Not quite, as some monarchies still prosecute this crime. Several of the European monarchies still have lèse-majesté laws, including Norway, where prosecuting the crime can only be carried out by the king or with his consent. Thailand, a constitutional monarchy, has had a lèse-majesté law since 1908, the year of the enactment of its first criminal code. Although the political powers of the king (currently King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who has reigned since 1946) are limited, the monarchy is held in high regard.  A clause in the Thai constitution states that "The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated. No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action." Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code states that "Whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to 15 years." The code does not define, however, what constitutes a defamation or an insult. Thailand has been enforcing its lèse majesté law quite aggressively lately. It seems that the law has been used by Thailand prosecutors to suppress political speech critical of the monarchy, particularly speech by partisans of former Prime Miniter Thakshin Shinawatra, who are known as the "Red Shirts." In September 2006, a military coup d’état deseated Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and dissolved the Parliament. Since 2009, the Thailand public prosecutor has filed 12 lèse majesté suits against the Red Shirts, or persons suspected of supporting them. For instance, Ampon Tangnoppakul was sentenced last November to 20 years in prison by a Thai Court, for having sent four text messages to a government official criticizing Thailand’s royal family. He claimed that he never sent these messages, and that he does not even know how to send text messages. Mr. Tangnoppakul died last May while serving his sentence. He was not the only person incriminated of lèse-majesté in Thailand. Surachai Danwattananusorn, who has criticized the 2006 coup d’état, was sentenced in February 2012 to seven and a half years of prison for having insulted the monarchy. Journalists and bloggers are also feeling the heat. The editor of a Thai political website was sentenced in 2012 to a eight-month suspended sentence because she had not removed comments believed to be insulting to the monarchy, an offense under section 15 of the Thai Computer Crime Act. Impact of the Thai law on Foreigners It has been argued that Facebook could be prosecuted in Thailand under its Computer Crime Act if one of its users posts derogatory comments about the Thai government or the Thai king. Section 17(2) of the 2007 Thai Computer Crime Act indeed provides that a person committing an offense under the Act is publishable in Thailand, if the injured party is the Thai government or a Thai. Also, section 14(3) of the Act criminalizes imputing data in a system (posting on a blog is imputing data) which is the commission of the offense relating to national security according to the criminal code. Lèse majesté is criminalized by the criminal code. Thai censorship is also felt abroad. Google revealed in its last Transparency Report that it received four requests from Thailand’s Ministry of Information, Communication and Technology to remove 149 YouTube videos. These videos were allegedly insulting to the monarchy and thus violated Thailand's lèse-majesté law. Google stated that it had restricted 70 percent of these videos from view in Thailand in accordance with Thai law. Oui, Lèse Majesté is Still a Crime in France Lèse majesté does not necessarily refer solely to insulting a monarch. “Majestas” was defined by Ulpian, a Roman jurist, as "crimen illud quod adversus Populum Romanum vel adversus securitatem ejus committitur" – that is, the crime committed against the Roman people or against its security. “Majestas” referred to the Roman state as a whole, and this, as early as the Roman Republic, before Rome became an empire. Interestingly, some republics criminalize lèse majesté. One of these is France. The French law on the freedom of the press, first enacted on July 29, 1881 (French Press Law), is still in force after many amendments, and now regulates all media, including blog postings. Its article 26 criminalizes offending the president of the republic by “speech, shouts, threats uttered in public places or during public meetings, or by writings, printed materials, drawings, engravings, paintings, emblems, images or any other medium of written words, spoken words, or images sold, distributed, or displayed in public places or public meetings or by any way of electronic communication to the public.” It is a felony punishable by up to a 45,000 euro fine. The law was used in 2008 by then-President Nicolas Sarkozy, in a case that stirred much emotion in France, Hervé Eon, a French citizen, was arrested in August 2008 as he was standing on the side of a road holding a placard card which read “casse toi pauv’ con“ (“get lost you a$$...”). Mr. Eon was quoting the insult uttered by Mr. Sarkozy himself at a disgruntled voter during his visit at the Paris agricultural fair a few months earlier, an exchange captured on a video which quickly became viral. Eon was tried for having offended the French president, under article 26 of the French Press Law. The criminal court found him guilty, and fined him a suspended sentence of 30 Euros. A court of appeals confirmed the judgment. Eon then announced his intention to file a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, but it does not seem he followed up on that intent. [Ed. note (4/3/2013) -- It turns out that Eon did in fact file a complaint with the ECHR; see Marie-Andrée's coverage of the ECHR's ruling in the case here.] Insulting Guests is Bad Manners, and also Carries a Prison Term if They Are Foreign Heads of State One can regret that Eon did not file suit, as France abolished another article of the French Press Law, article 36, which criminalized insulting a foreign head of state, a foreign head of government, or the minister for foreign affairs of a foreign government, following a 2002 ruling by the European Court of Human Rights against France, Colombani and others against France. In that case, the director of publication and a journalist of Le Monde had been convicted by the Paris Court of Appeal for defamation of then-king of Morocco, Hassan II. The short article stated that the king’s entourage was implicated by a confidential report on drug trafficking in Morocco. The Court of Appeal found that the journalists had not published these facts in good faith, and that the publication was “tainted with malicious intent.” The European Court of Human Rights noted (§56) that a politician “is certainly entitled to have his reputation protected, even when he is not acting in his private capacity, but the requirements of that protection have to be weighed against the interests of open discussion of political issues, since exceptions to freedom of expression must be interpreted narrowly.” However, the Court found that the conviction of the journalists by the French courts “incontestably amounted to an interference with the applicants' exercise of their right to freedom of expression” as guaranteed by article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The case was a victory for journalists and bloggers, as the offense was punishable at the time by one year of imprisonment or a 300,000 francs fine (more or less $60,000), quite a hefty sum. Germany, also a signatory of the European Human Rights Convention, as is every member state of the European Union, has not taken stock of the Colombani case. Paragraph 103 of the German Federal Criminal Code still criminalizes insulting a foreign head of state, the representative of a foreign state, or the head of a diplomatic mission, § 103 StGB:     Any person who offends , by reference to their position, a foreign head of state, a member of a foreign government, or the leader of a foreign diplomatic mission, acting in their official capacity, while being present within the Federal Republic of Germany or within a Federal Territory, will be punished by imprisonment up to three years or a fine. If the offence is defamation, the penalty will be imprisonment from three months to five years. Are Changes Ahead? No changes seem to be ahead in Thailand. In France, several French representatives in May 2012 sponsored a bill aiming at suppressing article 26 of the French Press Law. In the bill’s explanatory memorandum, the representatives stated that article 26 was “akin to an incongruous relic of the old Regime lèse-majesté, repealed from the Criminal Code in 1830.” The representatives argued that at the time of the enactment of the French Press Law, during the Third Republic, the president merely played the role of an arbitrator. He was not elected by direct universal suffrage, and was thus above partisan political debates. However, the French president has been elected by direct universal suffrage since 1962. Criminalizing offenses to such a very active participant in the democratic debate is thus not appropriate in a democracy, according to the sponsors of the bill. The bill was not enacted. France recently changed majority. The Senate and the House are now held by a socialist majority, and François Hollande, a socialist, was elected president in May. It remains to be seen if a bill will again be presented to abolish article 26 of the French Press Law. In the meantime, insulting the king of Thailand or the president of France on a blog still carries a risk of prosecution.  However, though France or say, Norway, may chose to enforce their laws if one of their own nationals is the author of a lèse majesté crime, it is very unlikely that they would ever ask a foreign content provider to remove content offensive to the head of state, or would prosecute a foreigner, as Thailand does. As the French say, it is best to wash ones’ dirty laundry at home. Marie-Andrée Weiss is a solo attorney admitted in New York, and her admission is pending in France. Her practice focuses on intellectual property, privacy, and social media law. She frequently writes on these topics and on European Union law. http://www.dmlp.org/blog/2012/l%C3%A8se-majest%C3%A9-16th-century-censorship-meets-21st-century-law ---------------------- ---------------------- COMMENT Sarkozy is such a creep.  What a nasty rat. I'm not too keen on that Yanis Varoufakis economist / statistician, either.  He's such a shill for neocon globalist agenda. Erdogan is positively despicable.  Europe, take back Anatolia.  LOL European laws are ridiculous.  Look at the way all these laws can be misused. Merkel needs to tell Erdogan to get stuffed:  the German law's incompatible with article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (*freedom of expression*).

Video - Assange & Philip Giraldi (ex-CIA) - Topic: RUSSIA, TURKEY & SYRIA

ꕤ ASSANGE VIDEO TOPIC:  RUSSIA, TURKEY & SYRIA SOURCE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOu520INXqA&feature=youtu.be ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Video posted on YouTube by Russia Today. Supporters of Russia and Syria aren't happy with Julian Assange's suggestion that Russian intelligence didn't anticipate the Turkish strike on their pilots in Syria. Assange refers to it as the "severe incompetence of the Russian intelligence services".  Ouch.   Assange goes on to say it was "... severe incompetence in relation to Ukraine, and severe incompetence in relation to Turkey because there were plenty of warning signals being given off by the Turks." Assange asks "Why weren't those warning signals properly understood?", before saying that this is not to justify what Turkey did. Assange says that in a realpolitik analysis, those messages should have been understood and that we should think about what will happen in about 6 months time, when the West, Russia and Iran are committed in various ways to the elimination of ISIS, because the establishments in those countries consider it a partial threat to their own interests. He goes on to say this wasn't always the case, and that ISIS was fed in various ways by Western interests and interests of Saudis and so on. Assange suggests that there will come a point in about 6 months time, where ISIS is almost completely debilitated, to the point where it will no longer have organised control of some portion of territory, and that ISIS will be back to being a guerilla group. Assange suggests out that in 6 months time when ISIS is practically eliminated as a significant force, Syria will have had hardware from about 10 or 12 different countries bombing Syria , and he asks:  what are all those forces going to do then, are they just going to go home?     Damascus is 70km away, and they can just steer 70km to Damascus if they want, so it's a very dangerous situation, Assange says. Assange also points out 'nationalistic imperatives' in Turkey and in Russia, and that the Syrian [government] is fighting for its life. Former counter-terrorism specialist and CIA military intelligence officer Philip Giraldi (what was basically said (not entirely word-for-word)): Erdogan has very skilfully (and sometimes clumsily) fear-mongered on a number of levels and on a number of issues to the Turkish people, and the fear-mongering has enabled Erdogan to aggrandise power, in both legal and illegal ways, in Turkey, and now Turkey has a head of state who is an autocrat, who essentially is not limited by any rules and feels himself free to do whatever he wants. Regarding the shoot-down, Giraldi disagrees with Assange to a certain extent: Shooting down a plane is an act of war, particularly when the plane was not threatening Turkey in any genuine way and the disturbing element for me is the fact that this was not a decision made by a colonel or a general on the border defending Turkey's airspace, this was a decision made at the highest levels of the Turkish government, and that means that Erdogan was setting up or provoking an act of war type situation with the Russians with two objectives: One is being to scuttle any plans for a grand alliance against ISIS, as he does not want that, for a number of reasons. The second reason would be to try to pull NATO in, in an attempt to support his view of Assad, his view of ISIS and, most particularly, his view of the Kurds.   The Kurds are essential to Turkish thinking -- strategic thinking.  The Kurds are the enemy.  ISIS is not the enemy.  Assad is only the enemy because, in a sense, they see him as a surrogate for the Kurds. Giraldi thinks Erdogan's created a global crisis by shooting down the Russian aircraft, as it could have escalated.  Giraldi says he thinks Erodogan is reckless and that this was a manifestation of his recklessness. And that's all folks. Lots of interesting points made. I've not watched multi-national conflicts in the Middle East for long enough to be able to weigh up any of this.  I think this is an edit from one of the videos I have banked up to watch.  I think I need to quit messing around with graphics editors and shuffling pictures around. Really enjoyed that. ---------------------- ꕤ The ex-CIA guy, Giraldi, comes across like he might be good natured and unassuming.  Nothing like I imagined CIA.  He seems nice. The Assange audio always seems to be muffled (but this wasn't as muffled as the last video I'd been watching). The last  (French) video I watched (some of) was a shocker.  Tried to transcribe but it was hard going ...  I'm also super tired, which doesn't help.  Kept drifting off to sleep in the bath.  lol  ꕤ

Russia's Nuke Capabilities, Western PsyOps & EU-NATO 'Refugee Crisis' PsyOp Invasion of Europe

ꕤ Article SOURCE Счастливого Рождества России Schastlivogo Rozhdestva Rossii http://www.therussophile.org/pepe-escobar-russia-and-its-lethal-arsenal-is-ready-for-war.html/ Originally Published:  scott.net Pepe Escobar: Russia and its lethal arsenal is ready for war Ashley Bailey ⋅ 16.12.2015 Nobody needs to read Zbigniew “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski’s 1997 opus to know US foreign policy revolves around one single overarching theme: prevent – by all means necessary – the emergence of a power, or powers, capable of constraining Washington’s unilateral swagger, not only in Eurasia but across the world. The Pentagon carries the same message embedded in newspeak: the Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine. Syria is leading all these assumptions to collapse like a house of cards. So no wonder in a Beltway under no visible chain of command – the Obama administration barely qualifies as lame duck – angst is the norm. The Pentagon is now engaged in a Vietnam-style escalation of boots on the ground across “Syraq”. 50 commandos are already in northern Syria “advising” the YPG Syrian Kurds as well as a few “moderate” Sunnis. Translation: telling them what Washington wants them to do. The official White House spin is that these commandos “support local forces” (Obama’s words) in cutting off supply lines leading to the fake “Caliphate” capital, Raqqa. Another 200 Special Forces sent to Iraq will soon follow, allegedly to “engage in direct combat” against the leadership of ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, which is now ensconced in Mosul. These developments, billed as “efforts” to “partially re-engage in Iraq and Syria” are leading US Think Tankland to pen hilarious reports in search of “the perfect balance between wide-scale invasion and complete disengagement” – when everyone knows Washington will never disengage from the Middle East’s strategic oil wealth. All these American boots on the ground in theory should be coordinating, soon, with a new, spectacularly surrealist 34-country “Islamic” coalition (Iran was not invited), set up to fight ISIS/ISIL/Daesh by no less than the ideological matrix of all strands of Salafi-jihadism: Wahhabi Saudi Arabia. Syria is now Coalition Central. There are at least four; the “4+1” (Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq plus Hezbollah), which is actually fighting Daesh; the US-led coalition, a sort of mini NATO-GCC combo, but with the GCC doing nothing; the Russia-France direct military collaboration; and the new Saudi-led “Islamic” charade. They are pitted against an astonishing number of Salafi-jhadi coalitions and alliances of convenience that last from a few months to a few hours. And then there’s Turkey, which under Sultan Erdogan plays a vicious double game. Sarajevo All Over Again? “Tense” does not even begin to describe the current Russia-Turkey geopolitical tension, which shows no sign of abating. The Empire of Chaos lavishly profits from it as a privileged spectator; as long as the tension lasts, prospects of Eurasia integration are hampered. Russian intel has certainly played all possible scenarios involving a NATO Turkish army on the Turkish-Syrian border as well as the possibility of Ankara closing the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles for the Russian “Syria Express”. Erdogan may not be foolish enough to offer Russia yet another casus belli. But Moscow is taking no chances. Russia has placed ships and submarines capable of launching nuclear missiles in case Turkey under the cover of NATO decides to strike out against the Russian position. President Putin has been clear; Russia will use nuclear weapons if necessary if conventional forces are threatened. If Ankara opts for a suicide mission of knocking out yet another Su-24, or Su-34, Russia will simply clear the airspace all across the border via the S-400s. If Ankara under the cover of NATO responds by launching the Turkish Army on Russian positions, Russia will use nuclear missiles, drawing NATO into war not only in Syria but potentially also in Europe. And this would include using nuclear missiles to keep Russian strategic use of the Bosphorus open. That’s how we can draw a parallel of Syria today as the equivalent of Sarajevo 1914. Since mid-2014 the Pentagon has run all manner of war games – as many as 16 times, under different scenarios – pitting NATO against Russia. All scenarios were favorable to NATO. All simulations yielded the same victor: Russia. And that’s why Erdogan’s erratic behavior actually terrifies quite a few real players from Washington to Brussels. Let Me Take You on a Missile Cruise The Pentagon is very much aware of the tremendous heavy metal Russia may unleash if provoked to the limit by someone like Erdogan. Let’s roll out an abridged list. Russia can use the mighty SS-18 – which NATO codenames “Satan”; each “Satan” carries 10 warheads, with a yield of 750 to 1000 kilotons each, enough to destroy an area the size of New York state. The Topol M ICBM is the world’s fastest missile at 21 Mach (16,000 miles an hour); against it, there’s no defense. Launched from Moscow, it hits New York City in 18 minutes, and L.A. in 22.8 minutes. Russian submarines – as well as Chinese submarines – are able to launch offshore the US, striking coastal targets within a minute. Chinese submarines have surfaced next to US aircraft carriers undetected, and Russian submarines can do the same. The S-500 anti-missile system is capable of sealing Russia off from ICBMs and cruise missiles. (Moscow will only admit on the record that the S-500s will be rolled out in 2016; but the fact the S-400s will soon be delivered to China implies the S-500s may be already operational.) The S-500 makes the Patriot missile look like a V-2 from WWII. Here, a former adviser to the US Chief of Naval Operations essentially goes on the record saying the whole US missile defense apparatus is worthless.  [comment:  I wouldn't be relying on that.  US military just wants more funding.] Russia has a supersonic bomber fleet of Tupolev Tu-160s; they can take off from airbases deep in the heart of Russia, fly over the North Pole, launch nuclear-tipped cruise missiles from safe distances over the Atlantic, and return home to watch the whole thing on TV. Russia can cripple virtually every forward NATO base with tactical – or battlefield – small-yield nuclear weapons. It’s not by accident that Russia over the past few months tested NATO response times in multiple occasions. The Iskander missile travels at seven times the speed of sound with a range of 400 km. It’s deadly to airfields, logistics points and other stationary infrastructure along a broad war theatre, for instance in southern Turkey. NATO would need to knock out all these Iskanders. But then they would need to face the S-400s – or, worse, S-500s — which Russia can layer in defense zones in nearly every conceivable theater of war.  Positioning the S-400s in Kaliningrad, for instance, would cripple all NATO air operations deep inside Europe. And presiding over military decisions, Russia privileges the use of Reflexive Control (RC). This is a tactic that aims to convey selected information to the enemy that forces him into making self-defeating decisions; a sort of virus influencing and controlling his decision-making process. Russia uses RC tactically, strategically and geopolitically. A young Vladimir Putin learned all there is to know about RC at the 401st KGB School and further on in his career as a KGB/FSB officer. All right, Erdogan and NATO; do you still wanna go to war? http://www.therussophile.org/pepe-escobar-russia-and-its-lethal-arsenal-is-ready-for-war.html/ Full-spectrum dominance aka full-spectrum superiority strategic doctrine control over all dimensions of battlespace / warfare: terrestrial aerial maritime subterranean extraterrestrial psychological biotechnological cyber-technological Professor Philip M Taylor University of Leeds an expert consultant to the US and UK govts re psychological ops, propaganda & diplomacy -- 2005,  global information environment control dismissed by Prof Philip Taylor: full-spectrum dominance in global information environment impossible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-spectrum_dominance Missed Perceptions By Jason Vest  | December 1, 2005 No one is sure how well psychological operations have worked in Afghanistan or Iraq, but that's not stopping efforts to step them up, using contractors to do it. From the State Department to the Pentagon, winning hearts and minds is an increasingly important element of U.S. national security strategy. But while Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Karen Hughes has been the highest-profile example of U.S. public relations in action, the Defense Department quietly has been tinkering with its own systems of overseas influence. Among these are psychological operations, or PSYOPS. But after-action reports on the invasion of Iraq are skeptical about PSYOPS' success, and a psychological operations unit in Afghanistan recently tried to "demoralize" the enemy by desecrating Islamic corpses. Questions about these matters have led some policymakers to wonder how enhancing PSYOPS will complement other elements of military information operations, such as public diplomacy and public affairs. In addition, increasing reliance on contractors to conduct these operations is raising eyebrows, especially because the contract prices aren't small and some firms hired have murky pasts. Psychological operations, defined by the military as the "systematic process of conveying messages to selected foreign groups to promote particular themes that result in desired foreign attitudes and behaviors," traditionally have been the nearly exclusive purview of the 4th PSYOPS Group (Airborne) of the Army's Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the military services have shown renewed interest in mass persuasion. For example, two-and-a-half years ago at Fort Bragg, N.C., the Army unveiled its Special Operations Forces Media Operations Complex, a 51,756-square-foot facility replete with all the tools 4th PSYOPS requires-printing presses, studios and digital audiovisual production facilities-in the service of producing materials to win hearts and minds wherever the U.S. military finds itself in the world. Col. James A. Treadwell, the 4th's commander, said at the time that the facility's opening "marks PSYOPS as a growth field." But PSYOPS had entered a boom phase well before the new complex's ribbon was cut. From the post-9/11 involvement in Afghanistan to the end of what have been termed "major combat operations" in Iraq, Army PSYOPS units produced a deluge of media, including but not limited to 150 million flyers and leaflets and more than 20,000 radio broadcasts in Afghanistan and Iraq. And in the wake of Baghdad's collapse, there was a tremendous sense of satisfaction that a virtually uninterrupted flow of PSYOPS material had played a critical role in hastening the almost anticlimactic end of Iraq's military. But when the Army's mammoth Operation Iraqi Freedom lessons-learned report was published in 2004, it revealed that PSYOPS weren't all they were cracked up to be. Part of this had nothing to do with quality; some PSYOPS units had been incredibly useful, but failed in their duty as "force multipliers" simply because there weren't enough of them. This was hardly surprising, as PSYOPS accounts for only 4,800 soldiers, 76 percent of whom are reservists. But the report also concluded that, for reasons that had nothing to do with numbers, PSYOPS simply hadn't had as profound an effect as some had thought. Not long after the lessons-learned report, the Pentagon's Defense Science Board-echoing an earlier Defense Planning Guidance report and a somewhat neglected 2003 Pentagon "Information Operations Roadmap"-concluded that when it came to conception and coordination of strategic communications, including PSYOPS, the military's efforts had languished. The board strongly endorsed a number of nascent structural and philosophical efforts at Defense and elsewhere to win a global battle of ideas. So about two years ago, Treadwell was ordered from piney Fort Bragg to subtropical Tampa, Fla., where, from MacDill Air Force Base, he now commands one of the newest and perhaps least known elements of Special Operations Command: the Joint Psychological Operations Support Element (JPSE, or more colloquially, "gypsy"). Described in official literature as a unit comprising "more than 50 senior military and civilians with a deep knowledge of psychological operations," JPSE's raison d'être isn't to horn in on the Army's PSYOPS turf, but rather to spare commanders across services and commands the agony of going through multiple layers of bureaucracy for support. And, according to a press release earlier this year, JPSE is devoting itself not to the darker aspects of psychological warfare but to propagating truthful messages. In addition to facilitating more agile PSYOPS support, JPSE also is beginning to do something psychological operations traditionally hasn't: consider the big picture, according to Professor Philip M. Taylor of England's University of Leeds. "PSYOPS has really only worked in tactical/operations contexts, but in today's global infosphere, there's no longer any such thing as tactical information-everything has a strategic capability. This is where PSYOPS has traditionally been weak," says Taylor, one of the world's leading experts on psychological operations, public diplomacy and propaganda, and a consultant to the American and British governments. "JPSE is a recognition that 4th PSYOPS has been quite effective at the tactical/operational levels but less so at the strategic, and is part of the roadmap by which all components of information operations are to become more closely coordinated than they have thus far." Policymakers have realized, he adds, that mechanisms of delivery and the messages themselves have to be integrated. Nancy Snow, senior research fellow at the University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy and adjunct assistant professor with USC's Annenberg School for Communication, adds that when it comes to trying to create a unified front in the practice of strategic communications, it's not uncommon for each tactical element to see itself as holding the magic strategic bullet. Thus, it's devilishly difficult to bring order to communications chaos, leading Taylor to wonder whether such integration, including that of PSYOPS, can be accomplished. A Mixed Bag PSYOPS have been a part of American military and intelligence endeavors since World War II. They range from above-board and even earnest to devious and mendacious. One of the problems with persuasion and perception manipulation is that success is not always easy to gauge and can become the subject of fierce debates. Policymakers and practitioners alike are grappling with this reality as they seek to figure out the PSYOPS part of a larger strategic communications equation. Pre-invasion airdropped leaflets, for example, historically have been intended to affect a population by countering disinformation, promoting ideology and image, and appealing to the survival instincts of soldiers and civilians. Studying the leafleting efforts of the Army's 4th Psychological Warfare Group in 2002-2003, two University of Texas professors found that the majority of leaflets dropped on Iraq were of the survival motif, exhorting Iraqi soldiers to quickly surrender and imploring Iraqi civilians to shelter in place during the invasion, as well as to preserve their oil facilities. Given the quick collapse of the Iraqi military and the lack of refugee crisis that certain Pentagon planners were convinced was inevitable, some observers, including the Texas professors, posited that the 4th's leafleting efforts played a key role in the successful invasion. Yet as some in the military noted then and later, there was no metric for objectively determining this. "In retrospect, [the leaflets] did seem to have the effect intended," wrote Lt. Col. Steven Collins in "Mind Games," a paper published in the summer 2003 issue of NATO Review. But, he added, just as PSYOPS is geared to slant perceptions, so too, can perceptions slant the analysis of psychological operations. The problem with the leaflets was "the problem with all PSYOPS actions: the difficulty in determining the cause of behavior during a war. Did the Iraqi military melt away primarily as a result of PSYOPS, or of bombing by coalition aircraft, or of lack of logistical support, or a combination of all three?" At best, Collins concluded, PSYOPS' role "remains an important variable to determine." In early 2004, the Army Command General and Staff College's Combined Arms Research Library published a detailed study of major combat operations in Iraq. Its conclusion: PSYOPS were at best a mixed bag. "PSYOPS units can point with satisfaction to success in minimizing damage to the oil fields and keeping civilians off roads," it said. "However, they do so with risk since there is very little evidence available yet to support that contention. . . . Moreover, the PSYOPS effort enjoyed far less success in encouraging Iraqi units to surrender. . . . PSYOPS produced much less than expected and perhaps less than claimed." Such considerations have led some to wonder whether military efforts such as JPSE are neglecting ways to improve PSYOPS in its strongest areas, tactical and operational, by beginning to dabble in the strategic. In a 2004 briefing, Marine Col. G.I. Wilson and two retired military officers observed that the problem with PSYOPS has less to do with the operations themselves and more to do with how they are, or are not, integrated into existing combat forces. Holding that psychological and information operations should be incorporated into every basic military consideration, Wilson and his colleagues suggested that in places such as Iraq, "regional fusion centers" should be established where the tactical and strategic mission specialists could work together to help frame and guide ongoing operations. Similarly, a recent National Defense University study held that the priority for PSYOPS should be doctrinal and structural reforms focused on the tactical level, because it's impossible for military PSYOPS to adequately compensate for a weak national strategic communications program. And, says Taylor, even the most ambitious and effective PSYOPS reform can be easily undermined by soldiers' actions, for example, desecrating Afghan bodies or the Koran. "Democracies are their own worst enemies in this field," he says. "It's true, though rarely recognized in the control-freakery world of the military, that full spectrum dominance is impossible in the global information environment," even over U.S. soldiers. 'Sorry, It Wasn't Us' Further, Taylor adds, groups contracted by the government to do PSYOPS or related work and analysis also can do damage. "There are plenty who have messed up and been fired; there are risks," he says. "But if the attitude is 'Something has to be done,' who is going to do it? There are so many PR firms willing to take bucks from the U.S. government. "Outsourcing is either a sign of recognition that the military is not terribly good at certain types of persuasion, or a way of distancing the U.S. government from the messages. If that company then does something which is controversial, the government can say, 'Sorry, it wasn't us, but we'll fire the company that did this supposedly in our name.' " Those concerned about the state of both PSYOPS and contracting paid close attention to JPSE's June announcement that it was giving indefinite delivery/ indefinite quantity contracts to three contractors for media approach planning, prototype product development, commercial quality product development, product distribution and dissemination, and media effects analysis. While JPSE commander Treadwell said the initial contracts were likely to be in the $250,000 range, the potential maximum value of each tender, $100 million, stirred great interest as did the choice of contractors. It wasn't necessarily surprising that Arlington, Va.-based defense contractor SYColeman got one of the JPSE tenders, based on its formidable number of existing contracts with the Pentagon; media work, however, is not something the company lists among its core competencies. Similarly, while San Diego-based Science Applications International Corp. has dozens of offices worldwide devoted to administering its Pentagon contracts, most of SAIC's work has been in the areas of engineering, systems and quantitative analysis, not media. Indeed, the last time it won a contract for media work-specifically, setting up post-Saddam television operations in Iraq-it performed with such ineptitude that the company was excoriated not just by the Pentagon inspector general and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar, R-Ind., but also by its former project manager. SAIC ultimately lost that contract. Also inviting curiosity has been Lincoln Group, which despite having virtually no public profile and no demonstrable history in strategic communications-and having gone through multiple changes in name and orientation in less than three years-has landed two major media contracts with the U.S. military in the past year. "A lot of these things go on if not in secret, [then] kind of out of view with very little tracking or public accountability, and as such, we don't really know when things go wrong," says USC's Snow. "But none of it really addresses whether any of this will have any impact if the people they're trying to reach just won't have any of it because we have unpopular policies." http://www.govexec.com/magazine/features/2005/12/missed-perceptions/20710/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT That was interesting. Can't make out the first article. What are the chances of the Syria thing blowing up into a WWIII? Would Russia really nuke Turkey? I've no idea. Think it's rather cool how Chinese and Russian subs can creep up on US ships undetected. Eighteen minutes to hit target seems like a long time to me.  That would be 18 minutes in which the target can either knock out your projectile and/or launch a barrage of projectiles back at you. I'll probably forget most of this, and  I certainly won't remember weapons numbers. What is cool is having confirmation for what I figured earlier:  warmongers know that they will create displaced persons. That means that those displaced in the Middle East and in Africa as result of military intervention COULD have been planned for, just as I suspected. As in, they could have set up in-situ facilities instead of letting Europe get invaded, like they have, the dirty, disgusting, and negligent dogs that these politicians are. The 'refugee crisis' spin and the whole 'Syrian refugees' Western media propaganda was a PsyOp to leverage forcing foreigners onto Europe's peoples (and manipulate public opinion), instead of the warmonger American empire paying for the support of non-European foreigners in-situ or transferring displaced (and other sundry invaders) to  USA soil. In fact, the US empire isn't paying for maintenance of the displaced (plus economically motivated invaders) that have been forced on Europeans:  it's European taxpayers that have forked out the money for the upkeep &  European taxpayers paying Turkey to ostensibly keep them out ... only Europe isn't shutting its borders, so that $3.2-billion to Turkey is probably going towards funding terrorists in the Middle East. Also, there's a correlation between the duration of war and the displaced, that's worth remembering. However, the vast majority of NATO-Merkel's 'Syrian refugees' are in fact economic immigrants from other Middle Eastern and African locations. So, what is with that? It looks like the assh*les of NATO-European Union sent out an invitation to Asia and Africa to deliberately relocate a regional population, to probably get a depopulation of Syria under-way (ie to encourage one), in an effort to weaken Syria, and the secondary gain might be some wage slaves among the tide of non-Europeans (and the reward for corporations is driving down European wages). I wish Europeans would take up arms and take down their pig governments that are destroying Europe. ꕤ