Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
3/26/2017 10:33:16 AM

ISIS CLAIMS DEADLY ATTACK ON RUSSIAN BASE IN CHECHNYA

BY


The Islamic State militant group (ISIS) has claimed an attack in Russia’s North Caucasus region of Chechnya that killed six servicemen, according to SITE Intelligence Group, citing a statement by ISIS.

Militants attacked the base of the 140th Artillery Regiment in the predominantly Muslim region in the early hours of Friday morning, the National Anti-Terrorism Committee (NAK) said.

Russian forces returned fire, but six servicemen died and three sustained injuries, one of whom is in a serious condition after a blow to the head.

National guard head Viktor Zolotov told state news agency RIA Novosti that no civilians were harmed. All of the attackers were “neutralized.”

“Over the course of the clash that ensued all members of the group were neutralized,” a statement from the committee said. “The arms were recovered from the bandits, while two of them had suicide belts on.”

Hours later SITE reported that ISIS had confirmed its “Caucasus Province” carried out a “six-man suicide raid” that claimed six soldiers’ lives and injured three others, alluding to the attack in Chechnya.

(Newsweek)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
3/26/2017 10:49:19 AM

Suicide Bombing, Israeli Attacks, U.S. Mobilization Are Not Isolated Events Or Coincidences In Syria

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1162
61587 Posts
61587
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
3/26/2017 11:06:57 AM

Netanyahu's honeymoon with Trump ends abruptly

Updated 2356 GMT (0756 HKT) March 25, 2017



Jerusalem (CNN)This was supposed to be Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's victory lap.

After a combined 10 years leading the government, he finally had a Republican president in the White House, with a Republican House and Senate to boot. It should have been the perfect match for Netanyahu's right-wing coalition.
    The prime minister would be free of the condemnation of construction in West Bank and East Jerusalem settlements that became routine under former President Barack Obama, the right wing believed. President Donald Trump would allow Israel to build and build freely.

    Within 10 days of Trump's inauguration, Israel approved plans for more than 6,000 housing units in settlements as well as the first brand-new settlement municipality in the West Bank in nearly two decades.
    Heaping praise upon Trump at their first news conference together in Washington, Netanyahu said: "There is no greater supporter of the Jewish people and the Jewish state." Vice President Mike Pence is expected to also receive a warm reception when he addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) at its large annual conference in Washington, which begins on Sunday.
    And the settlement movement rejoiced at the new White House leadership.
    "I think (Trump) loves Israel," said Chaim Silberstein, spokesman for the Beit El settlement outside of Ramallah. "I think he loves the biblical heartland of Israel, which is here." Some even spoke in messianic terms.



    President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, as they arrive at the White House in Washington, DC, on February 15, 2017

    Education Minister Naftali Bennett, head of the right-wing Jewish Home party and one of the most outspoken Israeli opponents of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, declared after the elections, "The era of a Palestinian state is over."
    But for Netanyahu, the honeymoon period lasted less than two months.
    Trump quickly walked back his oft-repeated campaign promise to move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and he criticized Israeli settlements as "not good" for peace.
    At their joint White House appearance, Trump told Netanyahu to "hold back on settlements for a bit." Trump wanted a chance to conclude what he called "the ultimate deal": peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
    On Thursday, after two rounds of talks spanning the US and the Middle East, the White House put out a statement saying that the American delegation "reiterated President Trump's concerns regarding settlement activity in the context of moving towards a peace agreement," adding, "The Israeli delegation made clear that Israel's intent going forward is to adopt a policy regarding settlement activity that takes those concerns into consideration."

    Netanyahu now finds himself walking a tight-rope between a new president interested in a peace deal and an empowered right-wing determined to sink the two-state solution once and for all. In the face of this political pressure and a corruption investigation, it is increasingly possible that the Israeli leader may soon have to face elections.
    Ever the cautious politician, Netanyahu had previously warned his governing coalition -- which includes Jewish Home and Netanyahu's own Likud Party -- not to celebrate too much over Trump's victory. He even forbade his ministers, Bennett included, from speaking to Washington officials without his approval, especially about settlements and annexation.
    But after Trump's inauguration, Israel's right-wing felt there was no reason to hold back. The pressure on Netanyahu from Jewish Home and even those within Likud kept growing.
    For Netanyahu, building in the settlements isn't just a promise he's made to the approximately 420,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank; it is also about long-term political survival, as Netanyahu and Bennett battle for the same right-wing constituency.
    Netanyahu has boasted that there is no government that will be more pro-settlement than the current one, and he can't afford to be outflanked on the right by his own coalition partners. At the same time, no Israeli leader -- on the right or left -- would risk angering Israel's primary international ally.
    "I think we can say now what is clear is that if the right in Israel thought that Mr. Trump is going to join Mr. Bennett's party, it made a very grave mistake," Yehuda Ben Meir, a principal research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies told CNN. "As I think any intelligent person can realize, Donald Trump is President of the United States. The United States has interests throughout the world."

    Ben Meir continued, "To a certain degree, Mr. Netanyahu has really locked himself into this dilemma, and we will have to see how he maneuvers through it. ... It depends on what is the position of President Trump. It's not clear yet."
    The tension was evident in mid-March in Netanyahu's first meeting with Jason Greenblatt, Trump's special envoy for international negotiations.
    Greenblatt, who served as Trump's business attorney before becoming an adviser on Israel, may have seemed likely to be in sync with the Israeli Prime Minister. Before the elections, he wrote an op-ed for CNN insisting that Trump would recognize Jerusalem as the eternal, undivided capital of Israel and would move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Those moves, warned the Palestinian leadership that sees East Jerusalem as its capital in any future Palestinian state, would essentially sink the process of forging a two-state solution.
    In a meeting that lasted more than five hours, Greenblatt and Netanyahu reaffirmed the strong bond between the United States and Israel, with the former emphasizing Trump's commitment to Israel's security. But the statement addressing the settlements issued Thursday made clear that the US is looking for Israel to rein in construction.
    So far, the parties have not found a framework for settlement construction acceptable to Trump and Netanyahu. After marathon meetings between Greenblatt, Netanyahu Chief of Staff Yoav Horowitz and Israeli Ambassador to the US Ron Dermer, the two sides still had not finalized an agreement. Trump's "concerns regarding settlement activity" remained. So did Netanyahu's desire to keep building.
    One day after Netanyahu's first meeting with Greenblatt, Trump's envoy met Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah. According to a readout of that meeting, Abbas stressed the Palestinian commitment to a two-state solution, while Greenblatt emphasized Trump's desire for peace through direct negotiations.
    The statement mentioned the possibility of a meeting in Washington between Abbas and Trump -- which would only ratchet up the pressure on Netanyahu to make concessions if Abbas presents himself as a partner for peace, willing to compromise for the sake of an agreement.
    Israel's right, however, wants to move in the other direction. During Greenblatt's visit earlier in the month, politicians from Jewish Home and Likud had planned to introduce a bill to annex Ma'ale Adumim, a West Bank settlement just outside Jerusalem.
    Israel has never annexed any part of the West Bank it captured in the 1967 war outside of East Jerusalem. Israeli settlements there are illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this on historical and religious grounds.
    "Trump is genuinely interested in making peace. He's been very consistent about that. I think he sees it as a personal challenge," said Chemi Shalev, a senior columnist with Haaretz, an Israeli daily newspaper. "And he had to get over bad relations with Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia, and part of that is that the Saudis have made it clear to him that if he's thinking of creating (a regional) anti-Iranian bloc, at least part of that has to be a semblance of a peace process with the Palestinians."
    To some degree, President Barack Obama's deep opposition to settlements helped Netanyahu navigate the thorny politics of the issue. It gave him the political cover to satisfy the right wing with only small steps on settlements -- making the case that he could do not more -- so that he didn't face major blowback from the US, international community and Israeli center and left.
    Trump is making some signs that he's no fan of settlements either, but the right doesn't see his opposition as stiff enough to warrant Netanyahu caving in and therefore is unlikely to be satisfied with small steps. (For one thing, both the President and his pick for ambassador to Israel have given money to the Beit El settlement's schools.)
    The current term of Israel's government runs until late 2019. Few think it will last that long.
    In addition to the political pressure Netanyahu faces, he is under criminal investigation in a corruption probe, suspected of receiving gifts from overseas businessmen. So far, he has been questioned by police four times, though police and the attorney general's office have been guarded with information about the investigation.
    Netanyahu has sworn the investigations will lead to nothing, as they did when he was investigated in his first term as prime minister in the late '90s. But an indictment would put political and public pressure on him to step down despite his promise not to do so. Under Israeli law, he has to step down only if he is convicted and if that conviction is upheld through the appeals process.
    As the investigation inches along, election fever is in the air. Three parties have called for early primaries.
    Netanyahu's former defense minister, Moshe Ya'alon, announced he has split off from the Likud to form his own party. Yair Lapid, head of the Yesh Atid centrist party and one of Netanyahu's primary rivals, has been running even with Netanyahu's party in recent polls. Right-wing Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel has promised to leave Netanyahu's coalition if the premier agrees to any limitation on settlement construction.
    "Even though (the coalition) doesn't want elections, there's a growing sense that elections may be around the corner in any case, and in that case the Jewish Home will press on with the annexation of Ma'ale Adumim and will attack whatever arrangements Netanyahu has with Trump," said Shalev. "It'll go from bad to worse from the point of view of the stability of the coalition."
    Netanyahu himself threatened elections one week ago, despite strenuous objections from his coalition and his own party. Critics have pointed out that calling an election would also, under Israeli law, freeze the criminal investigation of Netanyahu. It may also be a way of keeping the smaller parties in the coalition in line.
    It is a sign of the instability in a government that was supposed to be reinforced by Trump's victory, not undermined. Netanyahu finds himself trying to balance the demands of his own coalition with the unpredictable expectations of a president who is not the partner Israel's right wing thought it was getting.

    (cnn.com)

    "Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

    +1
    Luis Miguel Goitizolo

    1162
    61587 Posts
    61587
    Invite Me as a Friend
    Top 25 Poster
    Person Of The Week
    RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
    3/26/2017 5:54:03 PM

    SOMALIA’S DROUGHT RAISES A THORNY ISSUE—TALKING TO AL-SHABAB

    BY

    Just hours after Somalia’s new prime minister named his first cabinet at the presidential compound in Mogadishu Tuesday, a massive explosion occurred just a few hundred yards away.

    Footage of the aftermath of the blast shared on social media showed several burnt-out vehicles and a crater-like dent in the ground where the explosion occurred outside Somalia’s national theater. Somali police said that at least 10 people were killed in the blast, which happened when a suicide attacker rammed a car bomb into a security checkpoint.

    On Wednesday, a familiar foe claimed responsibility for the attack: Al-Shabab, an extremist militant group affiliated to al-Qaeda, which is waging war on the Western-backed federal government.

    The assault is the latest obstacle to meaningful engagement between the new Somali government and Al-Shabab, at a time when analysts and diplomats have said it is most needed: the current drought in Somalia, which is at risk of escalating into famine, is part of what a senior U.N. official recently called the “worst humanitarian crisis since the creation of the United Nations” in 1945.


    Internally displaced Somali families rest as they flee from drought-stricken parts of the Lower Shabelle region before entering makeshift camps in Somalia's capital Mogadishu on March 17. Many Somalis suffering from the drought are living under al-Shabab, which controls many rural parts of southern Somalia.FEISAL OMAR/REUTERS

    Somalia’s government is barely a month old: The new president, Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo, was only inaugurated on February 22, and the cabinet ministers appointed Tuesday have not yet been approved by Parliament. And yet the challenge facing it is huge. Not even six years after a famine that claimed the lives of more than a quarter of a million people, Somalia is again at risk of human disaster on an enormous scale. Some 6.2 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance, and the United Nations is appealing for $825 million to avert a catastrophe in the Horn of Africa country. There are increasing reports of Somalis across the country starving to death, along with pictures of skeletal livestock, left to perish without pasture. As clean water becomes more scarce, Somalis are turning to unsafe water sources, resulting in cholera outbreaks.

    The new government has formed a National Drought Response Committee and has urged Somalis in the diaspora to donate; the committee’s chairman tellsNewsweek that around $2 million has already been raised, and a further $3 million in donations has been pledged. Aid has started to come from the international community, and the United Nations has also been active in openingdrought relief centers in some of the worst-affected areas.

    But any national response in Somalia is being hampered by the fact that the government does not control all its territory—Al-Shabab still controls significant portions of Somalia, particularly in the South and in rural areas. Former Somali president Hassan Sheikh Mohamud told Newsweek in September 2016 that the militants held around 10 percent of territory in the country.

    Analysts say that, even in areas that Al-Shabab does not fully control, the militant group still exerts a semi-territorial presence that can deter government or humanitarian actors. The chairperson of the National Drought Response Committee, outgoing Deputy Prime Minister Mohamed Omar Arteh, has publicly stated that some of the areas worst-affected by the drought are under Al-Shabab’s control. Finally, the ongoing conflict between the militant group and the Somali security forces, backed by an African Union mission, has played a role in food shortages in Somalia by displacing many and halting agriculture.

    This poses a conundrum for the government, U.N. and other humanitarian actors—to open channels of communication with an extremist militant group in order to ensure aid reaches civilians; or to keep the lines down, potentially risking the fate of a substantial swathe of the Somali population.


    Somali President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed, known as Farmajo, makes an address in Mogadishu after he was elected president on February 8. Farmajo has offered a "good life" to al-Shabab fighters who put down their weapons.MUSTAFA HAJI ABDINUR/AFP/GETTY

    The U.N.’s top official in Somalia has already indicated that the drought might necessitate a change of tact with the militants. “The drought is highlighting the need to engage with Al-Shabab, because al-Shabab controls areas where large numbers of people live,” said Michael Keating, the special representative of the U.N. Secretary-General in Somalia, at a talk at U.S. think tank the International Peace Institute in January. (Keating did add a caveat to his statement about engaging with the militants: “We are not there yet.”)

    Keating was unavailable when contacted for further comment by Newsweek , but the U.N.’s deputy humanitarian coordinator in Somalia, Vincent Lelei, says it has had “no contacts with Al-Shabab militants regarding the drought response thus far” and that there were no plans to coordinate efforts with the group. Lelei added that Al-Shabab “has not provided access directly to U.N. humanitarian agencies to reach people affected by the drought in areas under its control.”

    Somalia’s new president has shown an eagerness to offer Al-Shabab members another path. In his inaugural speech, President Farmajo outlined a strategy for winning over disaffected youth and promised a “good life” to militants who dropped their weapons. But this has not yet translated into open communication between government officials and the militant group.

    “We are not [communicating with Al-Shabab and we don’t intend to do so...There are no channels of communication,” Mohamed Omar Arte, the chairman of the National Drought Response Committee and outgoing deputy prime minister, tellsNewsweek from Mogadishu. But this does not mean that civilians in Al-Shabab-controlled areas are not receiving aid, Arte says. The committee, he adds, is using “networks” to ensure that those in need are given supplies, while other government sources tell Newsweek that religious and traditional elders are being used as intermediaries with the militants.

    “If I explain what we do then it might jeopardize the whole operation,” says Arte. “[But] the most important thing for us is to deliver and that is what we are trying to achieve, to try to reach every Somali and provide the support and aid that they require, wherever they are and regardless of which authority they are under.”


    A volunteer serves internally displaced Somali people with cooked food from the United Nations World Food Programme initiative at the Sorrdo camp in Hodan district of Somalia's capital Mogadishu on March 11. More than 6 million Somalis are in need of aid due to the drought.FEISAL OMAR/REUTERS

    Nevertheless, given the severity of the drought and the limited access to Al-Shabab areas, Somalis living under the militants are likely to be at greater risk, says Abdirashid Hashi, the director of Somalia’s first think tank, the Heritage Institute for Policy Studies.

    “If the situation is as dire as it is now, then you can imagine that in the areas that Al-Shabab controls, where they are the only ones helping [civilians]...the situation is much worse,” Hashi says.

    Besides, for Al-Shabab, the drought appears to represent a propaganda opportunity. Sagging white bags of rice, flour and sugar, topped with yellow jerry cans of palm oil, are pictured neatly stacked in piles in the sparse, dry dustlands of southern Somalia in images shared on pro-Al-Shabab social media channels. A video shows a Somali man allegedly saying: “Al-Shabab has provided us with food aid, may Allah bless them.” The militant group has its own welfare wing, the Al-Ihsaan Charity Organization—and its own drought emergency committee, whose chairman told Reuters that civilians living under the group’s authority “are free” to leave for new pastures in search of food. He also criticized international aid agencies for “talking” while “dying people need action to save them.”

    Both the U.N. and Somali government sources told Newsweek that anecdotal evidence suggested the militants were providing some degree of drought response, though the images and videos have not been independently verified.


    Al-Shabab recruits walk through the Somali capital of Mogadishu, March 5, 2012. The Al-Qaeda-aligned group has been found to recruit hundreds of child soldiers into its armed insurgency.MOHAMED ABDIWAHAB/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

    Al-Shabab’s publicity drive may point to an awareness that their response to the 2011 famine did not endear them to Somalis. The group obstructed humanitarian agencies from delivering aid to those under their authority: A 2013 study by U.K.-based think tank the Overseas Development Institute and the Heritage Institute in Mogadishu found that the militants charged exorbitant registration fees of up to $10,000 for aid agencies to work in their areas. In other cases, Al-Shabab simply burned food aid and even killed charity workers. The famine resulted in 260,000 deaths, and the militants lost face over reports that its fighters kept food aid for themselves in many cases rather than distributing to the needy.

    Al-Shabab has not indicated any desire to negotiate with the federal government, and any talks would be complicated and delicate. The group does include some moderate elements, and there have been several cases of Al-Shabab fighters renouncing violence for politics, which may be a promising sign for the government’s plan to deliver an effective drought response.

    The devastating impact of the drought, however, may force Somalia to consider the previously inconsiderable: In some areas, like Somaliland—which is not under al-Shabab control— 80 percent of livestock have reportedly perished.But a hardcore of the group remains, as the continued suicide and car bombings in and around Mogadishu attest: Two explosionswere reported in the capital on Friday, causing an unknown number of casualties, although the group has not yet claimed responsibility.

    “In order to operate in these areas, you need to have contact with Al-Shabab, so I’m supportive of that, I think it’s worth a try,” says Al-Shabab expert Stig Jarle Hansen, a research fellow on Harvard University’s international security program. “[The drought] is now an emergency, so it’s actually worth the risk.”


    (Newsweek)

    "Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

    +1
    Luis Miguel Goitizolo

    1162
    61587 Posts
    61587
    Invite Me as a Friend
    Top 25 Poster
    Person Of The Week
    RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
    3/26/2017 6:32:29 PM
    Bullseye

    The 'Peaceful Revolution' narrative in Syria by the West was a lie from the beginning

    This week is the 6th anniversary of the beginning of the Syrian conflict. Despite the mounting evidence and the collapse of Washington and London's failed project, many liberal 'humanitarian interventionists' in the West are still clinging to the imaginary storyline of 'freedom fighters' in Syria battling against an evil authoritarian tyrant in their fragile bid to preserve their dream of a progressive liberal democratic future in the Middle East. A fairy tale for the ages...

    From the beginning of hostilities in 2011, the US, UK, France, the EU, Turkey, Jordan, Israel and the Gulf monarchies, led by Saudi Arabia and Qatar - have all been pumping the fraudulent narrative of a 'Syrian Revolution', which was meant to be the latest peacefulinstallment of the fabled 'Arab Spring.' This ornate lie has been refined and recycled across all US mainstream, European and Gulf media outlets for the last 6 years, custom designed to give the false impression that "Assad is a brutal dictator" - and justifying the Western and Gulf-backing of religious extremist militants, followed by a protracted US-led 'Coalition' bombing campaign in Syria (all of which have been illegal under international law, and, US law for that matter).

    In truth, US-led plans to overthrown the Syrian government and reshape the country along sectarian lines goes way back...

    First, we have the 1986 documented US policy plan for regime change in Damascus, which was later followed by a series of events continuing in 2003 when Liz Cheney (daughter of Bush VP Dick Cheney) then head of Near East affairs at the US State Department) launched the dubious 'Middle East Partnership Initiative' (MEPI) to the tune of $100 million, and in 2004 when Washington launched 'Radio Free Syria,' run by a Washington-based NGO front called the Reform Party of Syria (RPS) and 'Syrian Democratic Coalition', run by a US-based Syria dissident, Farid N. Ghadry, financed by US State Department.

    In his own words, "Radio Free Syria will help us unite and consolidate the reformers inside Syria with the reformers pressuring the regime from the outside." [1] According to Sourcewatch: "Ghadry's crew, all US-based dissidents and united back then under the umbrella organization the 'Syrian Democratic Coalition' (SDC), discussed with officials from the vice president's office, the Pentagon and the National Security Council, how the "regime in Damascus could be weakened" and how to "prove criminal conduct by Syrian officials".

    After the talks, Ghadry, who was pushing for the US president to lean on Damascus personally, summed it up by saying that the call for democracy in Syria "is being taken very seriously at the highest level of the Bush administration". He was going to "work closely with the US administration and the EU" from his end so that 'Syria's oppressive Baath-regime' could be toppled. However, Ghadry, who was closely cooperating with Abdelnour, disappeared from the scene after he lied to the European Parliament and was dispossessed by his own party for "dubious conduct".[18]

    Then, there were the Wikileaks cables from 2006 confirming US regime change policy for Syria, and by US General Wesley Clark's admission in 2007 about the imminent take-down of Syria, along with 6 other target nations.

    Those are but a few of the exhibits which are publicly available and which help in disproving the popular mainstream lie, dutifully propagated by the likes of Barack Obama, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Ed Royce, Samantha Power, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, David Cameron, William Hague, Boris Johnson, Francois Hollande and countless other disingenuous political and media operatives.

    NOTE: If justice is ever served, perhaps one day these people might be held accountable for the human disaster of which they were pivotal in creating - or maybe they will go the way of Tony Blair and George Bush, off to a leisurely vacation on Necker Island, or on a water color painting retreat at Crawford Ranch.

    In truth, the US ignited a bloodbath in Syria, and the final touches of this operation were made by the disgraced US Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford (pictured in the video below, alongside Abdel Jabbar al-Okaidi, the violent terrorist militant FSA commander). Since Ford's ousting from Syria, the crimes accelerated with US and its allies engaging in massive illegal weapons trafficking, financing and providing political cover to violent militants including internationally designated terrorists groups (another violation of international and US law) inside Syria.

    All along, the West have armed 'rebel' militants and terrorists while simultaneously claiming to be opposed to the civil unrest in the so-called "Syrian Civil War."

    Watch this highly informative presentation by Kevork Almassian of Syrianna Analysis:
    (sott.net)

    "Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

    +1