Israel Bombs Near Damascus - Palestinian Militants, PFLP-GC, Return Fire

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://yalibnan.com/2015/12/20/israel-army-shells-south-lebanon-after-cross-border-rocket-attack/ yahoo/AFP http://yalibnan.com/2015/12/20/israel-army-shells-south-lebanon-after-cross-border-rocket-attack/ Israel army shells south Lebanon after cross-border rocket attack December 20, 2015 by yalibnan The Israeli military said it shelled unspecified targets in neighbouring south Lebanon shortly after cross-border rocket fire hit northern Israel on Sunday. “The Israel Defence Forces have responded with targeted artillery fire following the rockets that hit Israel earlier today from southern Lebanon,” an English-language army statement said. Israeli military sources told AFP that one rocket crashed into the Galilee region and the impact of another was heard. No casualties were reported. The sources said the military ordered local residents into bomb shelters. In Lebanon, the national news agency NNA said Israel fired nine rounds of artillery at the south. The rocket fire from the Hezbollah heartland of south Lebanon followed the killing of Samir Kantar, a militant in the Shiite group notorious for the 1979 murder of three Israelis, including a four-year-old girl. Hezbollah said the 54-year-old Kantar was killed in an Israeli air strike near the Syrian capital Damascus on Saturday night. There was no confirmation from Israel that it was responsible for Kantar’s killing. Several rockets were fired from Lebanon in summer 2014 as Israel waged war against the Palestinian Islamic group Hamas in Gaza. Israeli artillery returned fire. The border region has otherwise been largely quiet since Hezbollah and Israel fought a devastating war in 2006 that left much of southern Lebanon in ruins. Northern Israel The mayor of Nahariya and the head of the Shlomi Regional Council in northern Israel ordered Sunday the opening of bomb shelters in their respective locales, after at least three rockets landed earlier in the evening in open areas of the Western Galilee region according to Israeli media. All three rockets reportedly  landed near Shlomi, a small town near the Lebanese border, while sirens sounded in Nahariya, a larger coastal city about 10 kilometers southwest. PFLP-GC takes responsibility for attack The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, a Syria-based Palestinian terror group, took responsibility for the rocket fire, according to Lebanese media cited by Israel’s Channel 2. UNIFIL UNIFIL, the UN force charged with overseeing security in south Lebanon, released a statement saying it had stepped up patrols along the border between Israel and Lebanon in a bid to tamp down on cross-border violence. The statement noted that UNIFIL radars detected three rockets shot at Israel earlier in the evening. UNIFIL chief Luciano Portolano added that he was in contact with officials in Lebanon and Israel in a bid to restore calm. “This is a serious incident in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and is clearly directed at undermining stability in the area. It is imperative to identify and apprehend the perpetrators of this attack. Additional troops have been deployed on the ground and patrols have been intensified across our area of operations in coordination with the LAF to prevent any further incidents,” Portolano said, according to the UNIFIL statement. A Lebanese source told AFP that the rockets were Katyushas. yahoo/AFP http://yalibnan.com/2015/12/20/israel-army-shells-south-lebanon-after-cross-border-rocket-attack/ SUMMARY Israel Military -- to AFP: x1 rocket crash Galilee region -- no casualties NAA -- Lebanon news agency reports -- x9 rounds artillery from Israel South Lebanon -- reportedly fires rockets -- following killing of Samir Kantar (Hezbollah) Hezbollah -- says 54-yo Samir Kantar killed -- Israel air strike near Damascus Syria -- no confirmation from Israel Israel - Lebanon -- last rockets fired between Lebanon & Israel -- during mid 2014 Gaza War -- Israel vs Hamas in Palestine / Gaza -- several rockets reportedly fired from Lebanon -- otherwise, border region quiet -- Israel returned artillery fire Israel - Lebanon 2006 -- Israel devastated much of southern Lebanon Northern Israel -- Shlomi Regional Council -- orders opening bomb shelters -- x3 rockets landed, Western Galilee, near Shlomi -- (Lebanon border proximity) -- { Israel media reports  } Syria-based Palestinian group Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC) -- takes responsibility for rocket fire (Israel Ch.2, cites Lebanese media) UNIFIL -- established 1978 -- following Israel invasion of Lebanon -- to supervise withdraw of troops & restoration of security -- since then, abt 540 personnel in Lebanon -- rotating every 6 months -- plus: abt 100 others at UNIFIL headquarters at Tibnin -- total of 47 Defence Forces personnel -- killed - first 23 years of mission http://www.military.ie/overseas/current-missions/unifil/ United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNFIL) -- created by UN Security Council -- March 1978 -- to confirm Israel withdrawal from Lebanon -- to restore peace / security -- to assist Lebanese govt in restoring authority -- mandate adjusted twice: -- 1982 -- 2000 UNSC -- enhanced UNIFIL force after July/Aug 2006 crisis -- to monitor cessation hostilities -- to accompany & support Lebanese armed forces southern Lebanon -- assist humanitarian access civilians / displaced returns http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/unifil/ UNIFIL statement: -- x3 rockets shot at Israel detected -- chief Luciano Portolano mediating -- b/w Lebanon & Israel to restore calm -- additional security ground troops deployed -- patrols intensified in co-ordination with LAF UNSC - UN Security Council -- UNIFIL, Luciano Porolano -- says: violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 -- wants to identify & arrest perps AFP - Agence France-Presse -- two sources: 1. Israeli military sources - re Galilee x1 rocket 2. unidentified 'Lebanese source' - claims Katyushas fired UNSC - RESOLUTION 1701 (2006) Calls for End of Hostilities Between: Hezbollah & Israel Permanent Ceasefire -- ceasefire based on: -- Creation of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel -- {other than UN, Lebanese Forces} http://www.un.org/press/en/2006/sc8808.doc.htm -- 2006: Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah -- said Lebanon would honour Resolution -- said once Israel ceases offensive, -- Hezbollah rockets on Israel will stop -- resolution required respect for Blue Line (Lebanon) -- border demarcation b/w Lebanon & Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Line_%28Lebanon%29 LAF - Lebanese Armed Forces -- military of Republic Lebanon army airforce navy motto: Honour, Sacrifice, Loyalty -- first formed 1600s -- under Prince Fakher el-Din II the Great -- major victory against Ottoman Empire Army -- Ottomans under lead of Pasha of Damascus -- Battle of Majdel Anjar -- 5,000 Lebanese vs 12,000 Syrians -- Lebanon captured Pasha of Damascus -- 1861 - 1914, no Turkish troops permitted -- to station within Lebanon boundary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_Armed_Forces PFLP-GC Popular Front of the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC) -- small, Palestinian nationalist militant org -- based Syria -- founded 1968 by Ahmed Jibril -- 1970s & 1980s -- involved in Palestinian insurgency Southern Lebanon -- various BIG attacks against Israel -- Syrian 'civil war' -- fighting on side of Syrian govt -- groups paramilitary wing: Jihad Jibril Brigades https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_Front_for_the_Liberation_of_Palestine_%E2%80%93_General_Command ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Wanted to know more about Israeli bombing near Damascus. Trying to avoid Western sources.  Got onto this, as I initially thought I was onto a local paper.  Nope. AFP. Frenchies.  Potentially taking dictation from Israel? Went with it for fun, to see what they had. If the militant Palestinian group in Syria has claimed responsibility, I'd believe them, going by quick look of 1970s & 1980s events. Still don't know what excuse Israel used to bomb near Damascus. On re-reading, it looks like a total of x3 rockets detected (UNIFIL radars) and that's it for the rockets ... I think (I found it confusing the rockets thing a bit confusing). I haven't looked up the guy that got killed, but his group's 'resume' re big attacks is extensive (on Wikipedia). So was it a deliberate Israeli assassination? Brain's only in pictures mode right now (sort of going cross-eyed reading this), so I might have to let it be. The peacekeeping force in Lebanon since 1978 doesn't sound like a huge success if they're still there today (37 years). If Israel's bombing near Damascus, why are the Palestinian guys (allies of Syria) bombing back at Israel considered in violation of the UNSC resolution?   And I'm assuming it's them, as the article leaves us to guess as to who should be arrested and held responsible.  As in, it doesn't call for their arrest specifically, even tough the Palestinian militants have claimed responsibility. Somehow, I don't think these UN guys are going to have much luck with the UN peacekeeping law enforcement arrest-plan.  Katyusha | Катюша rocket launcher -- name adopted after WWII war song, 'Katyusa' -- roughly translated it's a:  'Katie' -- aka -- 'Stalinorgel' (Stalin's organ) -- launch sounds like a church organ -- wow, they're big -- I thought it was the hand-held jobs* -- these are the truck mounted ones *proof-reading this, I got a laugh at how clueless I am.  Imagined the hand-held launcher firing 'rockets' all the way to Israel.  HOW YOU SAY 'KATYUSHA' - AUDIO https://en.wikipedia.org/wikiFile:Ru-%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8E%D1%88%D0%B0.ogg The rhythm is different to an English rhythm, or maybe that's just the guy's 'audio voice'. more https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyusha_rocket_launcher [Wow, what a huge waste of time this is.  It's just shifting things around.  Think I might have to stop doing this so much.  lol]

VIDEO - GIF - Sea

ꕤ ThE HoneYmOon Is OvEr https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-puVOJF5jQ">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-puVOJF5jQ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- LOL ... I had fun doing this.  It's not really finished, but it will do for now. ꕤ

Undercover British Political Police: RAPE WOMEN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNERS

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2015/12/09/undercover-policing-how-women-forced-the-police-to-own-up UNDERCOVER BRITISH POLITICAL POLICE:  RAPE WOMEN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNERS Undercover police: How women forced the Met to own up Wednesday, 9 December 2015 9:18 AM By Jenny Jones When the inquiry into undercover policing re-opens today we should congratulate several strong women. First, there are the innocent women who had their lives torn apart by police officers who deceived their way into their beds and their family lives. These women pursued a brave civil action against the Metropolitan Police and after many years forced a much-delayed and reluctant apology. Secondly, there is Doreen Lawrence, the mother of Stephen Lawrence, whose equally dogged campaign for justice was subject to police spying. And thirdly we should congratulate Theresa May, the Home Secretary, who has made some very wise decisions about policing issues within the UK, since taking on the job. The Met's apology is not only an important vindication of all these women’s hard work in identifying the officers, it exposes how it institutionally supported those officers and their behaviour for so many years. The Met financed the lies. It refused to confirm or deny the existence of these police officers. And it spent hundreds of thousands of pounds fighting the court case against the women. No disciplinary action has been taken against the senior officers who authorised this huge waste of public funds and police time and resources. So will the Met continue to spin these acts as those of a few rogue officers who formed casual sexual relationships using their undercover identities? The truth is the taxpayer funded officers to form long term emotional bonds with these women as a deliberate tactic to gain access to the network of campaigners whom they wanted to spy upon. I'm curious as to how the Met will try to justify their policy of Neither Confirm Nor Deny (NCND), as this was the brick wall which the women faced when they initially brought forward their allegations and it was this policy which forced them into taking a civil action. How could any of these women have faith in a police investigation into undercover officers where the Met wouldn’t even acknowledge that they exist? My own questions to the Mayor of London on this highlighted this inconsistency. The Met has maintained a blanket policy and has defended that position in court, but they also claim to regularly carry out risk assessments about the danger faced should officers have their identities exposed. If it does revisit risk assessments on undercover operatives, do they always find the officers would be 'placed in significant danger as a result of their identities being revealed'? If that's the case, why bother doing the risk assessments in the first place? One of the big things missing from this inquiry is what UK undercover officers were doing while working in continental Europe. This has already been raised in the German Parliament. We know that some of them operated abroad and the inquiry should assure itself that the rule- breaking which went on in the UK stopped at the English Channel. The refusal of the inquiry to look at this, despite my appeals to the Home Secretary, will leave an air of suspicion about what our police got up to on foreign soil. The Met has maintained that the Special Demonstration Squad was an aberration, which functioned outside the normal channels of accountability within New Scotland Yard. But if it was an aberration, it was an aberration that was allowed to continue for 40 years. While I would support much of the Met’s undercover work which is short term and aimed at serious crime, it’s clear it sees spying on thousands of innocent people who are involved in perfectly legitimate campaigns as a regular part of their work. I say this as someone who was labelled a domestic extremist and was on the Met database for 10 years. This was not only a waste of public funds, but damaging to the democratic process, especially when the Met Police are spying on people who are trying to hold them to account for their failures, as I was. It crosses a line to pry into the lives of campaigners who are taking court cases against them, or organising public meetings criticising their actions. There may sometimes be legitimate reasons for the Met Police to do so, but they should have to justify every action, to ensure that it isn't simply about saving themselves from public embarrassment. Baroness Jenny Jones is a Green Party peer and London Assembly member. http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2015/12/09/undercover-policing-how-women-forced-the-police-to-own-up UNDERCOVER BRITISH POLITICAL POLICE:  RAPE WOMEN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNERS Undercover police had children with activists Disclosure likely to intensify controversy over long-running police operation to infiltrate and sabotage protest groups Rob Evans and Paul Lewis Saturday 21 January 2012 07.15 AEDT Two undercover police officers secretly fathered children with political campaigners they had been sent to spy on and later disappeared completely from the lives of their offspring, the Guardian can reveal. In both cases, the children have grown up not knowing that their biological fathers – whom they have not seen in decades – were police officers who had adopted fake identities to infiltrate activist groups. Both men have concealed their true identities from the children's mothers for many years. One of the spies was Bob Lambert, who has already admitted that he tricked a second woman into having a long-term relationship with him, as part of an intricate attempt to bolster his credibility as a committed campaigner. The second police spy followed the progress of his child and the child's mother by reading confidential police reports which tracked the mother's political activities and life. [ ... ] EXTRACT - CONTINUED AT SOURCE http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jan/20/undercover-police-children-activists BRITISH POLICE TACTICS A HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION ... IS *ENDORSED* BY EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (2012) KETTLED BY BRITISH POLICE: Baroness Jenny Jones is a Green Party peer and London Assembly member  - Wikipedia. Kettling -- aka 'containment' -- aka 'corralling' -- fm German 'kessel' - 'cauldron' or 'kettle' -- term used to describe encircled army about to be annihilated -- thus a MILITARY TACTIC Kettling - Police Military Tactic -- in protest terms, aim is to prevent splintering of protesters -- to prevent forced splintering of police -- kettle formed by large cordons of police surrounding protesters -- once kettle formed (ie once protesters are surrounded) -- police cordon is tightened, incl. use of baton charges -- to restrict territory occupied by protesters -- police deny protesters access to food, water, and toilet facilities -- for arbitrary period determined by police -- protesters & bystanders therefore harassed & assaulted before being arbitrarily held captive -- protesters imprisoned by cordon for several hours, 'cooling' -- and left with one choice of exit: controlled by the police CRITICISMS Kettling - Police Military Tactic -- indiscriminate -- results in detention of law-abiding citizens & bystanders -- denied food, water & toilet facilities for excessively long periods, in some cases -- tactic used to foment disorder to change focus of public debate 2012 European Court of Human Rights -- following legal challenge -- ruled kettling lawful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettling ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Jenny Jones, Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb was kettled at demonstration against student fees in December 2010 Zain Sardar, from the Young Greens: "People have been kettled for up to nine hours without food and without medical assistance ..." "Kettling is an infringement of the fundamental right to peaceful protest." http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-12293394 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- European court says 'kettling' tactics in 2001 lawful 15 March 2012 "Kettling" tactics used by the Metropolitan Police to contain crowds in 2001 were lawful, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled. The controversial method was used during anti-globalisation demonstrations in London on 1 May 2001. The court said there had been no violation of Article 5 - the right to liberty and security - of the European Convention on Human Rights. Three people - George Black, a Greek national from Australia; Bronwyn Lowenthal and Peter O'Shea - who had nothing to do with the demonstration, took the case to Europe claiming they were "deprived of their liberty". They were joined by Lois Austin, from Basildon, Essex, who had been taking part in the protest. 'Volatile conditions' The court said: "The police had imposed the cordon to isolate and contain a large crowd in dangerous and volatile conditions. "This had been the least intrusive and most effective means to protect the public from violence. Although the police tried to start dispersing the crowd throughout the afternoon, they had been unable to do so as the danger had persisted." It was the first time the court in Strasbourg had been asked to rule on kettling. [...] The European Court's Grand Chamber of 17 judges, presided over by Belgium's Francoise Tulkens, said: "Even by 2001, advances in communications technology had made it possible to mobilise protesters rapidly and covertly on a hitherto unknown scale. "Article 5 did not have to be construed in such a way as to make it impracticable for the police to fulfil their duties of maintaining order and protecting the public." The judges ruled that the convention also placed a duty on the police "to protect individuals from violence and physical injury". Earlier this year, in a separate case, the Met won its appeal against a High Court ruling over kettling tactics used during G20 demonstrations in 2009. [ ...] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-17378700 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT What the British political police have done to these women political campaigners, for the sake of British authorities infiltrating and spying on Britons exercising their lawful and democratic political rights, is depraved and worse than being killed (in my view). Doing a quickie check on Baroness Jenny Jones, I came across 'kettling' and it drew my attention. The term most likely arises from the military tactic of surrounding opposing forces. So now I know what kettling is and what those references 'cauldron' were, when I was following the self-defence action in Novorossiya without a clue what they were talking about.  Maybe I've read about kettling since and have forgotten, which is possible.  Apologies in advance if I'm repeat posting.  lol While I can understand the reluctance of courts to prevent police being able to do their work (which does, indeed, involve maintenance of order and protection of  the public),  indiscriminate and aggressive policing (such as kettling) which can (and has) been misused and is illegitimate as a police tactic (see 9-hour kettling reference above). In upholding the tactic of kettling protesters and bystanders (ie indiscriminately assault, imprisonment & protracted cruelty meted out by law enforcement authorities), the European Court of Human Rights has proven itself to be as illegitimate as the law enforcement authorities it has backed. The ECHR is another joke institution.  Don't expect much of this 17-judge farce. ------------ Protesters need to read military manuals (or even historic information about Roman battle formations etc), to figure how to circumvent the cauldron thingy.   Pre-planned protester splinters might be the go. Can't believe I've flipped sides.  Usually I side with the authorities whenever I see what looks like a violent rabble that needs hosing down or something. I'm bound to flip and do a 360 ... I'm not much of a rebel.  lol ꕤ

Summary - Anglo-US Academia (International Relations Discipline) etc - Abetting Illegitimate Use of State Power

ꕤ Summary SOURCE http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/12/18/are-us-academics-who-cite-wikileaks-blackballed/ TITLE "Are US academics who cite WikiLeaks blackballed?" SUMMARY [pursuant to my understanding of article] TOPIC Anglo-US Academia International Relations Discipline Associations & Journals ABETTING illegitimate use of state power Censorship thus:  political suppression Intellectual Dishonesty & Bias ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- IN SUMMARY [PURSUANT TO MY UNDERSTANDING] WikiLeaks -- published 2,325,961 diplomatic cables -- & US State Dept records -- cables insight into: diplomacy foreign relations issues of sovereignty Julian Assange WikiLeaks publisher WikiLeaks contends that: International Studies Quarterly (ISQ) (US Journal) {published by International Studies Association (ISA)} DO NOT accept academic submissions based on WikiLeaks material ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Anglo-American academic institutions  + prestigious associations & journals INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DISCIPLINE -- shun (blackball) wealth of WikiLeaks published diplomacy material ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Scholars -- in the thousands affected undergraduate PhD students fellows academic researchers -- employment market unsteady -- concerns re career:  self-censorship understandable Case Example #1 - Institutions: Columbia University School of International & Public Affairs (SIPA) -- groom future diplomats {New York Times} -- 2010:  institution sent students email WARNING -- warning via SIPA alumnus (graduate):   WORKING AT U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT warning against:  commenting on or posting WikiLeaks material - in social media -- e-mail stated doing so "would call into question" "ability to deal with confidential information" -- "part of most positions with the federal government" Comment if this is the warning re mere 'social media' from the educational authorities scholars are likely to take the hint otherwise   Case Example #2 - Institutions: Columbia University Graduate Class Produced:  anonymous academic paper / report, title: “WikiLeaks and Iraq Body Count: the sum of parts may not add up to the whole — a comparison of two tallies of Iraqi civilian deaths” Link | Publisher SUMMARY - ABSTRACT WikiLeaks and Iraq Body Count: the sum of parts may not add up to the whole-a comparison of two tallies of Iraqi civilian deaths. Carpenter D, Fuller T, Roberts L. PURPOSE Sensitivity analysis of commonly-cited Iraq Body Count (IBC) tally compared to WikiLeaks (Iraq) War Logs release HYPOTHESIS study began with hypothesis that of 66,000 fatalities reported in WikiLeaks (Iraq) War Logs were largely same press reports and tallies elsewhere [DISPROVED:  ONLY (46.3%) FATALITIES REPORTED] RESULTS - HYPOTHESIS DISPROVED PRESS REPORTS & OTHER TALLIES WERE SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN FATALITIES RECORDS CONTAINED IN WIKILEAKS MATERIAL Of 2,409 WikiLeaks (Iraq) War Log records 488 (23.8%) had likely matches in IBC records { ie  Iraq Body Count (IBC) } large fatality events more like to appear in both datasets eg  94.1% of greater than 20 killed likely matches (compared to single fatalities at 17.4%) skew towards records of large events in both datasets IBC previously reported only 2035 (46.3%) of 4,394 fatalities reported in WikiLeaks (Iraq) War Logs CONCLUSION passive surveillance systems may be selective in types of events detected in armed conflict Higher detection: bombing events events occurring in less violent regions result:  skewed image of mortality profile in Iraq CAUTION members of press & researchers should be hesitant to draw conclusions re nature or extent of violence from passive surveillance systems of low or unknown sensitivity http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23388622 Columbia University grad. class anonymous report -- refers to the 2010 warning e-mail -- states it would be unwise to name students that participated Case Example #3 - Individual: Cynthia McKinney former US presidential candidate Green Party -- forced to scrub any reference to WikiLeaks material -- in PhD dissertation (dissertation subject to peer review) Daniel W Drezner -- member ISA -- member ISQ web advisory board -- professor (international politics) -- argued:  diplomatic cables published by Wikileaks -- not significant & claimed academic indifference to same HOWEVER WikiLeaks published cables:     -- are relied upon by INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COURTS     -- are basis of voluminous coverage     -- by academic disciples outside international relations     -- (fields scholars are not career dependent re govt institutions) Drezner conceded forces opposing WikiLeaks so powerful scholars would avoid WikiLeaks material for "fear of being blackballed" Blackball boycott, ostracise, veto admission, ban, shun, cast out, exclude -- Drezner argued 'other explanations' (The Washington Post) NOTE HOWEVER: SA and ISQ concerns re handling material that US government forbids ISQ has PROVISIONAL POLICY According to ISQ editor quoted by Gabriel J. Michael in Yale Law School paper: policy prohibits direct quotations as well as data mining (use of info) policy was developed in consultation with legal counsel {see reference to Gabriel J. Michael below (or in article)} IN CASE YOU MISSED IT Anglo-American academic institutions  + prestigious associations & journals INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DISCIPLINE deliberately shun (blackball) wealth of WikiLeaks published diplomacy material therefore: -- bias towards interests of US empire -- shaper of distorted view of world -- engaged in grooming of INTERNATIONAL STUDIES grads -- for jobs in service of questionable US govt interests failure to understand intersection between geopolitical & tech developments [Assange contends] Given: intimidation of scholars censorship of academia self-censorship of scholars -- consequent gap in scholarly analysis -- therefore, WikiLeaks has brought together     journalists     researchers     experts on international law     foreign policy experts -- to produce book: The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to US Empire (2015) Link | Verso Books Experts on US foreign policy include: Robert Naiman Stephen Zunes Gareth Porter WIKILEAKS MATERIAL EXPOSES 2 US ADMINISTRATIONS (BUSH & OBAMA) USE BRIBES & THREATS TO PREVENT U.S. FACING  WAR CRIMES ALLEGATIONS U.S. DIPLOMATS EFFORTS TO MAINTAIN TIES WITH DICTATORS U.S. FUNDING OPPOSITION GROUPS IN SYRIA - LINK U.S. ACCEPTANCE OF ISRAEL VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW Such actions indicative of American superpower -- modus operandi (manner of operating): "might makes right" -- contempt for international justice -- contempt for rule of law WikiLeaks Analysts Review: meaning of human rights in context global 'war on terror' US dealings re International Atomic Energy Agency / re Iran nuclear development International Studies Association (ISA)     prestigious publisher of:     US journal:  International Studies Quarterly (ISQ)     several other disciplinary journals    Mark Boyer ISA executive director -- denies formal policy against publishing WikiLeaks material BUT refers to journal editor discussion re implications -- of publishing material that is PROHIBITED BY U.S. GOVERNMENT Gabriel J. Michael Yale Law School author of academic paper: Who’s Afraid of WikiLeaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research Link | Publisher ISQ (JOURNAL) PROVISIONAL (TEMPORARY)  POLICY Gabriel J. Michael assertion re ISQ: "... ISQ has adopted a “provisional policy” against handling manuscripts that make use of leaked documents if such use could be interpreted as mishandling “classified” material." [Crikey] ISQ provisional policy, according to ISQ editor quoted by Gabriel J. Michael in Yale Law School paper: prohibits direct quotations as well as data mining developed in consultation with legal counsel Editors are currently “in an untenable position” ISQ’s policy will remain in place pending broader action from the ISA (publisher of several titles) Blogger Comment International Studies Quarterly (ISQ) policy or 'provisional policy' effectively bans publication of WikiLeaks (& other material) that is prohibited by the US government (publication by publisher banned, ostensibly due to potentially adverse interpretations of classified materials handling) in the event of US govt legal challenge for publishing in relation to WikiLeaks material despite WikiLeaks material "cables [going] into the heart of an empire" re matters of significance that impact on individuals on a global scale If my understanding is correct: ISQ policy provisional policy amounts to adopting a course in favour of abetting intellectual dishonesty abetting political suppression compliance with US govt censorship of academia submission to US government intimidation submission to illegitimate use of state power summary continued WIKILEAKS WikiLeaks has provided the public with vital information re matters of enormous future consequence  (in terms of how states operate) material that the US empire has sought to DENY the public eg.  TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP FREE TRADE AGREEMENT     {in negotiation} wherein the US empire: "... aims to rewrite the global rules on intellectual property rights and would create spheres of trade which would be protected from judicial oversight." [Crikey] Article points out that: "... the leaked cables shed light on how states negotiate significant treaties, aiming to keep citizenship participation in politics out." and concludes that when academia bans the use of important leaked material, the public loses out. ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT I think it might be easier to read the article than to read my summary of the article. What was supposed to be summary / simplification of the article has turned out sort of complicated. I don't know if it's the layout or what. Anyway, I'll hopefully stand some change of remembering the material now that I've dwelled on it. Hope I've got everything straight. Something is missing, but I can't figure out what. [I've not properly proofread my summary  ... & my fingers are crossed that I understood everything.   Hypothesis (above) must have been disproved if less than half the fatalities were reported -- compared to the total fatalities in the leaked WikiLeaks material (that's how I understand it).] ꕤ

International Relations - Anglo-US Academia: Censorship, Intellectual Dishonesty & Bias

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/12/18/are-us-academics-who-cite-wikileaks-blackballed/ http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/12/18/are-us-academics-who-cite-wikileaks-blackballed/ Are US academics who cite WikiLeaks blackballed? Chris Spannos | Dec 18, 2015 12:46PM While WikiLeaks continues to make strong interventions into the global news cycle, important debates have been simmering between editor Julian Assange and international relations scholars about whether or not the more than 2 million US diplomatic cables and State Department records WikiLeaks began publishing in 2010 (2,325,961 to be exact) are relevant to understanding how the world’s super-power operates and if Anglo-American academic institutions in the international relations discipline are biased toward the interests of US empire. The debate raises difficult questions. Do the cables provide insight into full-spectrum diplomacy, foreign relations, and concepts of sovereignty? If so, how can the indifference of certain prestigious associations and journals in the international relations discipline to WikiLeaks’ material be explained? Do these powerful institutions prefer to turn a blind eye to evidence that shows their theories wanting? Do they operate to provide a distorted view of the world and help prepare international studies graduates for jobs serving questionable US government interests? Speaking to Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine in July 2015, Assange suggested that institutions within the international relations discipline have failed to understand the intersection between current geopolitical and technological developments. Specifically, Assange charged that the US journal International Studies Quarterly (ISQ), published by the prestigious International Studies Association (ISA), would not accept manuscripts based on WikiLeaks’ material. Professor of international politics Daniel W. Drezner hit back on July 30 in The Washington Post, arguing that there were other explanations for why the journal was not publishing WikiLeaks’ material. However, he did concede that it is possible that the “structural forces” opposing WikiLeaks were so powerful that a scholar would eschew WikiLeaks’ publications for “fear of being blackballed”. For the thousands of undergraduate to PhD students, fellows and academic researchers facing a precarious employment market, self-censorship for fear of freezing one’s career is not unlikely. One publicised incident from November 2010 concerning the office of career services at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), which according to The New York Times “grooms future diplomats”, provides the perfect illustration. That year the office sent an email to students warning them against commenting on or posting WikiLeaks’ documents on social media because “engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government”. The warning came to the office through a SIPA alumnus working at the State Department. Years later, the tone of the warning continued to reverberate through the halls of one of the most reputable universities in the world. In documenting human rights abuses in June 2013 a Columbia University graduate class produced the anonymous academic paper “WikiLeaks and Iraq Body Count: the sum of parts may not add up to the whole — a comparison of two tallies of Iraqi civilian deaths”. The acknowledgements section of their report refers to the 2010 warning email and states that in light of that email it would be “unwise and perhaps unethical to acknowledge all the participating students by name”. Others participating in a peer-review process have cited additional factors curtailing their use of comprehensive and illuminating WikiLeaks publications. Former US presidential candidate for the Green Party Cynthia McKinney, for example, says that she was forced to scrub her PhD dissertation from any reference of WikiLeaks material. However Drezner, who is an ISA member and on the ISQ’s web advisory board, claims that WikiLeaks’ published diplomatic cables “are not nearly as significant as Assange believes” and that the “academic universe is indifferent to WikiLeaks”. A surprising claim, given that international human rights courts have not been indifferent to evidence derived from WikiLeaks’ published cables, including cables that show the insidious ways in which European officials attempt to conceal CIA torture in secret prisons. To help address the gap in scholarly analysis of the more than 2 million US diplomatic cables and State Department records published by WikiLeaks since 2010, WikiLeaks has produced a new book, The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to US Empire, published September 7, 2015. The book brings together journalists, researchers and experts on international law and foreign policy to examine the current cables and records. The documents are extensive. They expose US efforts —  across Bush and Obama administrations — to use bribes and threats to keep the US protected from facing war crimes allegations, conveying the fading effervescence of concepts such as “international justice” or “rule of law” in the face of a superpower that clearly believes that “might makes right”. Analysts review the efforts US diplomats take to maintain ties with dictators. They examine the meaning of human rights in the context of a global “War on Terror”. Like the cables they seek to illuminate, the 18 chapters of the book touch upon most major regions of the world. Experts on US foreign policy such as Robert Naiman, Stephen Zunes and Gareth Porter examine cables that reveal US meddling in Syria, US acceptance of Israeli violations of international law, and how the US dealt with the International Atomic Energy Agency in relation to Iranian nuclear development. The book offers a user guide written by WikiLeaks’ investigations editor Sarah Harrison on how to research WikiLeaks’ cables including meta data and content. Writing in the book’s introduction, Assange proposes that the diplomatic cables provide “the vivisection of a living empire, showing what substance flowed from which state organ and when”. Assange notes in his introduction that academic disciplines outside international relations, and where career aspirations do not go hand in hand with patronage by government institutions, have voluminous coverage of the cables. But the ISA does not accept submissions citing WikiLeaks’ material. Although ISA executive director Mark Boyer denies that the association has a formal policy against publishing WikiLeaks’ material, he says that journal editors have discussed the implications of publishing material that is legally prohibited by the US government. According to Gabriel J. Michael, author of the Yale Law School paper Who’s Afraid of WikiLeaks? Missed Opportunities in Political Science Research, the ISQ has adopted a “provisional policy” against handling manuscripts that make use of leaked documents if such use could be interpreted as mishandling “classified” material. According to an ISQ editor quoted in Michael’s paper, this policy prohibits direct quotations as well as data mining, and was developed in consultation with legal counsel. Stating that editors are currently “in an untenable position”. According to the editor, ISQ’s policy will remain in place pending broader action from the ISA, which publishes several other disciplinary journals. The ISA and ISQ concerns about handling material that the US government forbids —  which include WikiLeaks’ cables —  amount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The cables go into the heart of an empire, and reflect on matters that affect everyone. Without WikiLeaks, the public would still be in the dark about the Trans-Pacific Partnership “agreement” currently being negotiated. The treaty aims to rewrite the global rules on intellectual property rights and would create spheres of trade which would be protected from judicial oversight. Such agreements have the potential to change the fabric of how states operate, and the leaked cables shed light on how states negotiate significant treaties, aiming to keep citizenship participation in politics out. Where academia bans the use of important leaked documents the public loses out. SOURCE http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/12/18/are-us-academics-who-cite-wikileaks-blackballed/ Article by: Chris Spannos media activist Digital Editor @newint. Formerly at teleSUR, ZNet, NYT eXaminer, Imaginary Lines. Oxford, England @cspannos Julian Assange Editor, WikiLeaks Justice4Assange WikiLeaks Site WikiLeaks Twitter BOOK:  The WikiLeaks Files (2015) Link | here ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT That was a good article.  Did a summary, which I'll post and link to, once I edit. I'm sure everyone out there can read for themselves ... but it's my way of trying to remember. Don't know how much of this I'll remember.  It all makes sense now, but my retention isn't all that great. I've read an article recently on this topic, but I forgot all about it.  In a weird way, I even forget how serious the US are about targeting WikiLeaks.  I knew about an 'investigation' but documents released under US freedom of information provisions refer to FBI and Dept. of Justice 'proceedings', which would mean US law enforcement is (and has been) officially mounting a case. In turn, this means that Ecuador's decision to grant political asylum is vindicated. And shows how the British have done away with justice and democracy, to politically persecute Australian journalist, Julian Assange, who has: been detained for 5 years by the British, without charge; and has been subjected to a 3-year Ecuador embassy siege, at over $19-million (American dollars); in an effort to block his rightfully granted political asylum. In the article, this was a huge stand-out for me:  paraphrasing American efforts (bribes & threats) to dodge being held to account for war crimes. Resorting to bribes and threats means there's not one, but two, wrongs committed. WikiLeaks, having exposed the American war crimes, has also exposed US efforts to escape accountability for war crimes. That puts the American efforts to prosecute WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange (and WikiLeaks personnel/associates) into perspective:  and it's not a pretty one. Below is confirmation in US court documents that the FBI and US Department of Justice are officially conducting a 'proceeding' against WikiLeaks. Article Summary Anglo-US Academia, Associations & Journals (International Relations Discipline) Abetting Illegitimate Use of State Power Link | Post ꕤ

Video - Serbia - Ој, Ружице Румена | Serbian Folk Song

ꕤ Ој, Ружице Румена Serbian Folk Song Сербська народна пісня ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- This is lovely. It sounds Medieval to me. ꕤ

GIF Birthday - Cheka / KGB - 'Iron Felix' Dzerzhinsky - Russia

ꕤ Happy Birthday Cheka / KGB 20th December 1917    Statue 'Iron Felix' Felix Dzerzhinsky established Soviet secret police forces Director:  1917-1926 Cheka Soviet state security forerunner to KGB founded under Felix Dzerzhinsky upon decree by Lenin Cheka reportedly notorious for mass summary executions - see Russian Civil War *I have trouble remembering 'Dzerzhinsky'.  No problems with 'Iron Felix, though.  LOL ... I love that name. ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Transfer Louisiana Purchase 20 December 1803 French flag lowered in New Orleans formal Transfer from France to US for $27M Knights of Rhodes 20th December 1522 Knights of Rhodes Surrender to Suleiman the Magnificent permitted to evacuate settle in due course in Malta known as Knights of Malta ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- Enjoyed doing Cheka / KGB birthday GIF  ;) ꕤ