Friday, November 17, 2017

Declassified Israeli Transcripts Discuss Ethnic Cleansing

teleSUR | Nov 17, 2017

Israeli soldiers observe the compound known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary and to Jews as the Temple Mount, just prior to their attack on Jerusalem’s Old City, during the 1967 war. | Photo: Reuters
Recently declassified cabinet meeting transcripts show that top Israeli officials discussed ethnic cleansing tactics to deal with Six-Day War fallout.

Declassified cabinet meeting minutes show that top Israeli cabinet officials contemplated an ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip and Galilee, rewriting history textbooks in favor of a pro-Zionist version of history, and censoring political speech in newspapers to deal with the fallout of the Six-Day War in 1967.

The material posted to the Israeli archives website shows hundreds of pages of previously classified cabinet meeting minutes, including those between August and December of 1967, which followed closely after the Six-Day War in June. From this archive, Israeli officials demonstrated a lack of direction following the war in which the Israeli military conquered and illegally occupied East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai Peninsula.

Officials initially contemplated the difficulties of administering the illegally occupied lands.
“At some point we will have to decide. There are 600,000 Arabs in these territories now. What will be the status of these 600,000 Arabs?” Prime Minister Levi Eshkol asked.

“I suggest that we don’t come to a vote or a decision today; there’s time to deal with this joy, or better put, there’s time to deal with this trouble,” he said. “But for the record I’m prepared to say this: There’s no reason for the government to determine its position on the future of the West Bank right now. We’ve been through three wars in 20 years; we can go another 20 years without a decision.”
Later documents show that Eshkol felt the pressure of ethnic diversity in the occupied lands which were under the illegal administration of the ethnocentric occupying forces.

“The strip of this country is like a miserable, threatening neck for us, literally stretched out for slaughter,” he said. “I cannot imagine it — how we will organize life in this country when we have 1.4 million Arabs and we are 2.4 million, with 400,000 Arabs already in the country?”

Eshkol and his cabinet later floated a covert ethnic cleansing policy by “working on the establishment of a unit or office that will engage in encouraging Arab emigration.” The prime minister added, “We should deal with this issue quietly, calmly and covertly, and we should work on finding a way from them to emigrate to other countries and not just over the Jordan [River].”

Eventually the cabinet discussed more extreme plans.

“Perhaps if we don’t give them enough water they won’t have a choice, because the orchards will yellow and wither,” Eshkol said in one meeting. The prime minister also discussed the idea of initiating a war of aggression against Palestinians to force them to leave their ancestral lands.

“Perhaps we can expect another war and then this problem will be solved. But that’s a type of ‘luxury,’ an unexpected solution.”

Realizing the optics of the illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing, Education Minister Zalman Aranne remarked:

“I do not for one minute accept the idea that the world outside will look at the fact that we’re taking everything for ourselves and will say, ‘Bon Appetit,’” he said. “After all in another year or half a year the world will wake up; there’s a world out there and it will ask questions.”

After 50 years, Israel has instituted a “apartheid regime” in Palestine, according to a landmark United Nations report that has since been retracted following political backlash.

Rima Khalaf, the former UN Under-Secretary General and ESCWA Executive Secretary, affirmed the report’s findings by saying that the report “clearly and frankly concludes that Israel is a racist state that has established an apartheid system that persecutes the Palestinian people”.

---

ExtraSensory.News doesn't have ads. Why? Because Google won't allow it. Other alternative sites are plastered with them. We do not accept funding from big corporations or Government controlled entities. In order to survive, we need your help. You can support this website by subscribing.


The strange journey of Lebanon's Saad Hariri

SOTT | Nov 17, 2017 | Robert Bridge

© Jamal Saidi / Reuters
A poster showing Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri
RT - In early November, Lebanese PM Saad Hariri shocked the world by unexpectedly flying to Saudi Arabia and announcing his retirement. The Lebanese people suspected foul play on the part of Riyadh. Now they may finally have a chance to hear the full story.

In the latest twist in this incredible tale, Saad Hariri is expected to leave Saudi Arabia for France in several days before traveling to Beirut where he will reportedly formally resign as prime minister. To say Hariri's return will be a momentous event would be a great understatement. Naturally, speculation is rife among Lebanese citizens that Hariri, a Sunni Muslim politician with strong bonds to Saudi Arabia, was coerced to quit.

Lebanese President Michel Aoun said Thursday that he looked forward to Hariri's return following the latter's acceptance of the French invitation. "I await the return of PM Hariri to Beirut so we can decide on the situation of the government - if he wants to resign or rescind his resignation," Aoun said, according to presidential sources quoted by Reuters.

Earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron invited Hariri to France after speaking to him and the Saudi Crown Prince, the Elysee Palace said on Wednesday. Macron insisted that the invitation is not an offer of political exile.

The flight of Hariri

This sensational story began on November 3 when Hariri suddenly and without apparent warning boarded a flight from Beirut to Saudi Arabia. The next day, from the capital Riyadh, he announced his resignation, pointing to the "regional interference" of Iran and Hezbollah as the reason for his decision. He also said he feared assassination, which is certainly reasonable given that his father, former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, was killed in a massive truck bombing in 2005.

Analysts are of the opinion that Riyadh had grown exasperated with Hariri's power-sharing arrangement with Hezbollah. And with Iran and Hezbollah's success in helping to defeat Islamic State terrorists in Syria, tossing President Bashar Assad a veritable lifeline, this was seen as the last straw.

Hariri's flight to Saudi Arabia and subsequent resignation, however, was just one earthquake among many to rock the kingdom at about the same time.

On the evening of Hariri's announcement, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) initiated an extraordinary anti-corruption raid, which led to the arrest of 11 princes, four ministers and many businessmen. The Riyadh Ritz Carlton has been converted into a luxury jailhouse to hold the detainees. In addition to tightly consolidating King Salman's son's grip on power, the move could potentially add $800 billion to Saudi coffers. There was probably hope in Riyadh that all of the events, taken together, would spark chaos on the streets of Lebanon. However, if that is the case, that effort failed, as has been the case with so many Riyadh initiatives of late. In fact, Lebanon seems to have been energized and united by the Hariri scandal.

"In one week of Hariri being in Saudi Arabia, the Lebanese PM has achieved more in unifying the Lebanese than he could ever have hoped for in a lifetime of politics," Beirut-based journalist Martin Jay wrote in an RT opinion piece this week.

As if the purge of Saudi Arabia's princedom and business elite were not enough, MbS began a dangerous saber-rattling display aimed at regional countries.

Saudi saber-rattling

Days after Hariri announced his resignation, Riyadh accused Lebanon of "declaring war on Saudi Arabia" because of purported "aggression" by the Iran-backed Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah. In reality, however, this was a poorly feigned attack on Iran, which for Riyadh is the real bugbear in this story.

Although Iran-Saudi relations have been strained for over a decade, things really took a turn for the worse in January 2016, following the execution of a prominent Saudi Shiite cleric.

Then, on June 7, 2017, Iran suffered its first terrorist outrage in a decade as Islamic State militants carried out attacks against the Iranian Parliament building and the Mausoleum of Ruhollah Khomeini, leaving 17 civilians dead and 43 wounded. Many Iranian officials suggested that the attacks were the work of "foreign governments," including Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia is beginning to suspect that it is being outmaneuvered in its 'near abroad' by Tehran, which now enjoys an arc of influence extending from Iraq to Lebanon, and beyond, as well as in the tiny outposts of Yemen and Qatar. Riyadh exaggerates the danger of this "Iranian influence," while at the same time failing to recognize its flatfooted foreign policy as a major reason for its setbacks of late.

For example, in its three-year war against Yemen, which has already killed some 10,000 civilians, a humanitarian disaster of epic proportions is underway, threatening some 7 million Yemenis with starvation. The turbulent events of Nov.4 were partially designed, it seems, to shroud the Yemen breakdown.

As Saad Hariri issued his resignation from Riyadh, and Saudi princes and officials were being rounded up and arrested, the young Crown Prince, 32, said his military had intercepted a Houthi ballistic missile, launched from Yemen towards an international airport on the outskirts of the Saudi capital. Some analysts are of the opinion no rocket was ever fired. In any case, MbS blamed Iran for supplying the Houthi rebels with missiles.

"The involvement of the Iranian regime in supplying its Houthi militias with missiles is considered a direct military aggression by the Iranian regime," MbS told UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson in a telephone conversation. He added for good measure that the move "may be considered an act of war against the kingdom."

At this point in our Arabian mystery, it cannot be denied that Riyadh is working closely with the United States and Israel. It did not go unnoticed, least of all by Iran, that US President Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, had paid a visit to the Crown Prince just one month before the November tumult began.

Although the contents of that meeting have never been made public, Iran's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, fired off a tweet that got no Trump response: "Visits by Kushner & Lebanese PM led to Hariri's bizarre resignation while abroad. Of course, Iran is accused of interference."

Judging by the secretive Kushner meeting, Riyadh appears to be working as a proxy of sorts for the region's real power-brokers, the United States and Israel.

"We don't know if the Saudis are playing a game whereby they will let Hariri go back to Lebanon as a reminder... that they can go to any extreme to remove power from him," Beirut-based Martin Jay told RT via telephone.

Now it remains to be seen if Saad Hariri and his family will remain a long-term guest of Emmanuel Macron in Paris, or if he will, as promised, continue on to the next leg of his mysterious journey back to Lebanon, where he will certainly be the center of attention from all sides.

---

ExtraSensory.News doesn't have ads. Why? Because Google won't allow it. Other alternative sites are plastered with them. We do not accept funding from big corporations or Government controlled entities. In order to survive, we need your help. You can support this website by subscribing.

Another False Flag Terror ADMISSION: Snipers In the Ukraine “Protests”

Washington's Blog | Nov 16, 2017

© the russophile.org
Snipers Fired At BOTH Police and Protesters In Ukraine


Remember the protests in Ukraine which led to the old leader being replaced?

If you’ll recall,  the ruthless slaughter of people by snipers was the event which turned world opinion against the Ukrainian Prime Minister, and resulted in him having to flee the country.
Italy’s 11th largest newspaper – Il Giornale – reported on an admission by several of the snipers (Google translation) :
“Everyone started shooting two or three shots at a time. It went on for fifteen, twenty minutes. We had no choice. We were ordered to shoot both on the police and the demonstrators, without any difference. I was totally outraged.

So Georgian Alexander Revazishvilli remembers the tragic shootout of 20 February 2014 in Kiev when a group of mysterious snipers opened fire on crowds and cops massacring over 80 people. That massacre has horrified the world and changed the destiny of Ukraine by forcing President Viktor Yanukovich accused of organizing the shootout. But the massacre also changed the fates of Europe and our country, triggering the crisis that will lead to sanctions against Putin’s Russia. Sanctions revealed a boomerang for the Italian economy ( Watch the video ).
Revazishvilli’s confessions and two other Georgians – gathered by writers in the documentary “Ukraine, the hidden truths” aired tonight at 23.30 on Matrix, Channel 5 – reveal a different and disconcerting truth. The truth of a massacre and the same opposition that accused Yanukovych and his Russian allies. Revazishvilli and his two companions – met and interviewed in the documentary – are a former member of the security services of former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili and two former militants of his party. Hired in Tbilisi by Mamuka Mamulashvili, Saakashvili’s military adviser, are tasked with supporting – along with other Georgian and Lithuanian volunteers – ongoing demonstrations in Kiev in return for a $5,000 final fee.

***

The following day,
Mamulashvili and the leaders of the protest explain to volunteers who will face a police assault at the Conservatory building and at the Ukraine hotel. In that case – he says – we must shoot at the square and sow the chaos. But one of the protagonists confesses to having received another explanation, much more comprehensive. “When Mamulashvili arrived, I also asked him. Things are getting complicated, we have to start shooting – he replied that we can not go to the pre-election presidential elections. But who should shoot? “I asked. He replied that who and where it did not matter, you had to shoot somewhere so much to sow chaos.

“It did not matter if we fired at a tree, a barricade, or the molotov.
confirms another volunteer – what counts was sowing confusion.
BBC interviewed the head of the opposition’s security forces at the time, who confirms that snipers were killing both sides … protesters and police:


And the former Ukranian government security boss said the same thing. Specifically, he said:
Former chief of Ukraine’s Security Service has confirmed allegations that snipers who killed dozens of people during the violent unrest in Kiev operated from a building controlled by the opposition on Maidan square.

Shots that killed both civilians and police officers
were fired from the Philharmonic Hall building in Ukraine’s capital, former head of the Security Service of Ukraine Aleksandr Yakimenko told Russia 1 channel. The building was under full control of the opposition and particularly the so-called Commandant of Maidan self-defense Andrey Parubiy who after the coup was appointed as the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Yakimenko added.
So the chief of the government’s security forces, the head of the opposition’s security forces, and the snipers themselves  all admit the snipers were killing both protesters and police.
Similarly:
[Ukrainian Health Minister Oleh] Musiy, who spent more than two months organizing medical units on Maidan, said that on Feb. 20 roughly 40 civilians and protesters were brought with fatal bullet wounds to the makeshift hospital set up near the square. But he said medics also treated three police officers whose wounds were identical.
Forensic evidence, in particular the similarity of the bullet wounds, led him and others to conclude that snipers were targeting both sides of the standoff at Maidan — and that the shootings were intended to generate a wave of revulsion so strong that it would topple Yanukovych and also justify a Russian invasion.
And the Estonian foreign minister – after visiting Ukraine – told the EU foreign affairs minister that the Maidan opposition deployed the snipers – and fired on both the protesters and the police – to discredit the former government of Ukraine.

The Snipers Were Associated with the Maidan Protesters


While the mainstream media has proclaimed that the sniper fire was definitely from government forces, some of the above-cited sources dispute that claim.
Additionally, BBC reported at the time:
Reporting for Newsnight, Gabriel Gatehouse said he saw what looked like a protester shooting out of a window at the BBC’s Kiev base, the Ukraine Hotel.
BBC interviewed a Maidan protester who admitted that he fired a sniper rifle at police from the Conservatory, and that he was guided by a military veteran within the Maidan resistance. Here are actual pictures a reporter took of Maidan snipers, recently published by BBC:


(There were reportedly at least 10 Maidan snipers firing from the Conservatory.)

The Frankfurther Allgemein reported that Maidan commander Volodymyr Parasjuk controlled the Conservatory at the time:
Volodymyr Parasjuk – the leader in “self-defense units” of the revolution who had called the night of Yanukovich’s escape, on the stage of Maidan to storm the presidential residence one year ago.

On the day of the massacre Parasjuk was staying with his unit in the colonnaded building of the Kiev Conservatory right at the Maidan. In the days before the death toll had risen, and the fighters grew the conviction alone with limited power as before will not be able to overthrow Yanukovych. “There were at that time many guys who said you have to take the weapon and attack,” said Parasjuk recalls. “Many,” he himself had since long ago it had firearms, often their officially registered hunting rifles.
Tagesschau – a German national and international television news service produced by state-run Norddeutscher Rundfunk on behalf of the German public-service television network ARD – also reported in 2014 that at least some of the sniper fire came from protesters.

And remember, the snipers who admitted firing at both sides were associated with Mikhail Saakashvili and his party.  Saakashvili was a huge supporter of the Maidan protesters from the very beginning.  As Newsweek reports:
Saakashvili was a supporter of the Ukrainian revolution since the beginning of Euromaidan ….
Indeed, the Maidan protesters who deposed the old Ukrainian prime minister were so pleased with events that they rewarded Saakashvili by appointing him leader of Ukraine’s largest region.

Former AP and Newsweek reporter Robert Parry summarizes what kind of guy Saakashvili is:
The latest political move by the … regime in Ukraine was to foist on the people of Odessa the autocratic Georgian ex-President Mikheil Saakashvili, a neoconservative favorite and currently a fugitive from his own country which is seeking him on charges of human rights violations and embezzlement.
***

According to a New York Times profile last September, Saakashvili was there “writing a memoir, delivering ‘very well-paid’ speeches, helping start up a Washington-based think tank and visiting old boosters like Senator John McCain and Victoria Nuland, the assistant secretary of state.”

McCain and Nuland were key neocon backers of the coup that ousted Yanukovych and touched off the bloody civil war that has killed thousands of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, while also reviving Cold War tensions between the West and Russia. Before the coup, McCain urged on right-wing protesters with promises of U.S. support and Nuland was overheard hand-picking Ukraine’s new leadership, saying “Yats is the guy,” a reference to Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who became prime minister after the coup.
***

The Georgian prosecutors also have charged Saakashvili with human rights violations for his violent crackdown on political protesters in 2007.

Context: Sniper Attacks As False Flag Terror


Random shootings are a type of false flag terror.    For example, in 1985 – as part of the “Gladio” false flag terror campaign (see number 12) – snipers attacked and shot shoppers in supermarkets randomly in Belgium, killing twenty-eight and leaving many wounded.

Shooting both sides is an especially big red flag for a false flag …

Specifically, when authoritarian regimes want to break up protests, they might shoot protesters. On the other hand, when violent protesters shoot government employees, they might be trying to overthrow the government.

But when secretive snipers kill both protesters and the police, it is an indication of a “false flag” attack meant to sow chaos, anger, disgust and a lack of legitimacy.

This has happened many times over the years. For example:
  • Unknown snipers reportedly killed both Venezuelan government and opposition protesters in the attempted 2002 coup
---
ExtraSensory.News doesn't have ads. Why? Because Google won't allow it. Other alternative sites are plastered with them. We do not accept funding from big corporations or Government controlled entities. In order to survive, we need your help. You can support this website by subscribing.

Trump Drinks Water. Who Owns the Fake News Media and What Are Their Motives?

The Truth Factory | Nov 16, 2017


The Truth Factory links..

---


ExtraSensory.News doesn't have ads. Why? Because Google won't allow it. Other alternative sites are plastered with them. We do not accept funding from big corporations or Government controlled entities. In order to survive, we need your help. You can support this website by subscribing.

US complicit in war crimes in Yemen, but mainstream media won’t report it ‒ journalist

RT America | Nov 16, 2017

The Saudi-led, US-supported war in Yemen has left 10,000 civilians dead from battles and cholera, while more than 7 million face starvation. Congress, however, never actually authorized any military support. How then did the US end up fueling one of the worst humanitarian crises of the century while supporting Al-Qaeda in Yemen? RT America’s Ashlee Banks discusses with Harry Stuckey, investigative journalist and publisher of Vox News.


---

ExtraSensory.News doesn't have ads. Why? Because Google won't allow it. Other alternative sites are plastered with them. We do not accept funding from big corporations or Government controlled entities. In order to survive, we need your help. You can support this website by subscribing.


France Reveals Agenda To Become A Pedophile Haven As It Eyes Lowering Age Of Consent To 13

Activist Post | Nov 15, 2017 | Aaron Kesel

French politicians have revealed their hidden agenda to lower the age of consent in France to 13 years old. No you aren’t reading The Onion, these lunatic lawmakers in Paris want to enable pedophiles. This comes after two men were acquitted in separate cases of rape for having sex with two 11-year-old girls.

The Associated Press reported that a bill was being prepared by French lawmakers to set a minimum legal age for sexual consent for the first time, and the country’s Justice Minister Nicole Belloubet said Monday that she thinks 13 years old could be a reasonable age.
“The question of the age below which the minor’s consent is presumed not to exist is crucial, because there are obviously extremely shocking and unacceptable situations,” Belloubet said.
The comments came after Belloubet told France’s RTL radio network that age 13 was a “limit that is worth considering” for the legislation. However, she noted that judges themselves should have the ability to assess whether someone was old enough to give consent on a situational basis.

France currently lacks a justified law to prosecute pedophiles since there is no minimum fixed age of sexual consent that is defined as rape. Yes, you read that right, in the year 2017 there is no minimum age of sexual consent in France that prosecutors can use against pedophiles.

However, that’s not to say that France doesn’t have an age of consent, which is 15, but prosecutors still have to prove sex was non-consensual to prove the criminal conviction of rape.

French law defines rape as any act of sexual penetration committed on others “by violence, coercion, threat or surprise.” Further the law states: “Committing a sexual offence against a minor under the age of 15 without violence, constraint, threat or surprise is punished by five years’ imprisonment and a fine of €75,000.”

The law only states that an adult who performs a sexual act with a person under the age of 15 “without violence, coercion, threat or surprise” can be prosecuted for “sexual abuse,” not statutory rape.

Despite another law which classifies an adult who performs a sexual act with a person under the age of 15 “without violence, coercion, threat or surprise,” somehow the Justice Minister wants to lower it to 13. There is something seriously wrong with that picture.

A jury last week acquitted a 30-year-old man who was accused of raping an 11-year-old girl in 2009, French media reported. The jury in the Paris suburb region of Seine-et-Marne found that while there had been a sexual relationship between the girl and the man, it did not constitute rape according to the legal definition in France.

This mirrors an earlier case in September where a 28-year-old man was acquitted when he was tried for having sex with an 11-year-old girl from Val-d’Oise, north of Paris. The young girl reportedly followed the man home from a park, but prosecutors said once again there had been “no violence, no constraint, no threat, and no surprise” to constitute the rape charge; therefore, the court ruled she had consented to the abuse.

These two acquittals sparked shock and anger across Paris as many expressed their disbelief for the ruling, TheLocal.Fr reported.

France’s “Ethics Minister,” Marlene Schiappa, also said her government was debating a defined age for irrefutable non-consent, between 13 and 15, as part of a new anti-sexism and sexual violence bill.

Speaking on BFM TV, Schiappa, a junior minister for gender equality, said Sunday that the cut-off could be between the ages of 13 and 15.
Below a certain age, it is considered that there can be no debate on the sexual consent of a child, and that any child below a certain age would automatically be considered to be raped or sexually assaulted.
In the UK the age of sexual consent is 16, but children under the age of 13 have additional legal protections that declare they cannot consent to sexual activity below that age, BBC reported.

While the age of consent in the U.S. varies state by state, it is usually set between 16 to 18 years old.

Other European countries like Germany and Portugal have a lower age of consent of 14. Now France wants to go even lower than its allies with an age of consent at 13.

The UN’s Human Rights body urges countries to protect children from sexual exploitation, so if France wants to lower sexual consent laws maybe they should also turn in their United Nations membership as well. Secondly, France needs to have Interpol step in and investigate all the politicians and justices pushing this abhorrent disgusting law that will only aid child pornographers and abusers.

---

ExtraSensory.News doesn't have ads. Why? Because Google won't allow it. Other alternative sites are plastered with them. We do not accept funding from big corporations or Government controlled entities. In order to survive, we need your help. You can support this website by subscribing.