Archive | July 29, 2014

From Gaza: I’m a Human Being, Not a Human Shield*

From Gaza: I’m a Human Being, Not a Human Shield*

By Walaa Ghussein

A Palestinian holds clothes and bullets which witnesses said were left behind by Israeli forces in the Shejaia neighbourhood in Gaza City July 26, 2014.

A Palestinian holds clothes and bullets which witnesses said were left behind by Israeli forces in the Shejaia neighbourhood in Gaza City July 26, 2014.

Do you feel like Hamas is using you as a human shield?’

I’ve been asked this question by many people since the last campaign of Israeli aggression against Gaza in 2009, and the subject has received reams of media coverage over the last few weeks – far more coverage, in fact, than Israel’s killing of hundreds of civilians, its destruction of residential houses and its bombing of hospitals, schools and children’s playgrounds.

First of all, let’s make one thing clear. It’s been shown during the recent days of aggression in Gaza that there is no evidence of Hamas using Palestinians as human shields. This has been verified by international journalists reporting from Gaza, including Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s Middle East editor.

What basis do people have for claiming Hamas is using innocent people to shield its weapons?

What evidence do they have?

The answer is: none.

A Palestinian firefighter works during efforts to extinguish a fire at Gaza’s main power plant, after it was hit in Israeli shelling

The people of Gaza are clustering where they are safe, not where they can sit on Hamas rockets. Am I being used as a human shield just for refusing to leave my house, my supposedly safe zone? I have already been forced to flee my house, and I’m still not safe.

The other 1.8 million people living in Gaza are in a similar situation. Our collective home is a rectangular tract of land, about 25 miles long and just a few miles wide, bordered by the Mediterranean Sea on one side and Egypt on another. In such a place, it’s difficult for civilians to hide or go anywhere to avoid Israel’s airstrikes, artillery and gunboat shells. They have no choice but to stay in their houses waiting to get killed, while Israel continues propagating flimsy accusations that we are being used to hide weapons.

On 24 July a spokesman for UNRWA, the UN’s refugee agency in Gaza, said they had received no warning before Israeli forces shelled a school in Beit Hanoun and killed at least 17 displaced civilians who had taken shelter there, and this was not the first time Israeli forces have bombed schools serving as shelters in the besieged Gaza Strip. These schools shelter elderly people, women, children and UN employees; the same people who, according to Israel’s PR machine, have been ordered to evacuate their homes before IDF bombing raids.

A Palestinian father reacts at the Shifa hospital morgue after his son was killed in an explosion at a public garden in Gaza City. Locals blamed the blast on an Israeli air strike, but Israel denied responsibility, saying it was a misfire by a rocket launched by Hamas militants

The civilians in that Beit Hanoun school were not used as human shields for Hamas, it was their own decision to take that school as a last resort, believing that a UN school would be a safer place for them while Israel was terrorising their areas and destroying their houses. Beside schools, Israel has targeted hospitals, opened fire on medics and ambulances, and banned them from entering under-fire areas to evacuate civilians and save their lives – as happened in Al-Shojae’ya and Khuza’a.

And let’s clarify another point: Hamas is not just a military wing, it’s also a political organisation embedded in civilian life, and its members are civilians too. We’re talking about a movement that runs hospitals, shops and many civic services and offices in Gaza. So when Israel decides to destroy everything related to Hamas and its infrastructure, it means destroying the whole City.

When the IDF targets a house because it belongs to a Hamas member, that means destroying the house and killing the target’s whole family as well as whoever is staying in that house. Neighbours are often caught up in the carnage as well. These people are not human shields; they are simply in the wrong place when the rocket lands.

As a Palestinian living in Gaza, I refuse and denounce the false claims of being used as a human shield for Hamas. It disturbs me that the world cares much more about these arguments than the fact that Israel is committing inhumane war crimes against me and my people. We’re all together in this; the Israeli killing machine does not differentiate between civilians or military members, they kill everything that moves.

Source*

Related Topics:

Israel’s ‘Eid Gift to Palestinians*

Operation Protective Edge: The Dead Have Names*

The Real Jihad is in Palestine*

DEBKA Report: Saudi, Egypt and Israel Orchestrated Palestinian Holocaust*

How GCHQ Monitors Germany, Israel, the EU and Africa*

Irish Shops Urged to Remove Produce from Israel*

Deir Yassin, the Beginning of the Palestinian Holocaust. 1948*

US Congress: Bill to Outlaw Muslim Brotherhood*

Advertisements

U.S. is Buying Disputed Iraqi Kurdish Crude Oil*

U.S. is Buying Disputed Iraqi Kurdish Crude Oil*

Divide and rule is an old colonial tool that spreads chaos within a country so that the population is distracted by fighting each other leaving the invading force free to do as it pleases. This practice still works for our unelected global governors quite well as exampled by Iraq with the current assistance of ISIL…

By Anderson LaMarca

United Kalavrvta tanker carrying crude oil from Iraqi Kurdistan

Today a Marshall Islands-flagged tanker ‘United Kalavrvta’ carrying crude oil from Iraqi Kurdistan was anchored near the Port of Galveston, Texas, despite Washington’s long-standing concern over independent oil sales from the autonomous region. It would be at least the second time a U.S. company has taken delivery of oil that the Baghdad government says was smuggled from the country.

Crude offloading could begin as soon as the tanker passes the Coast Guard inspection. A spokesman with the U.S. Coast Guard in Houston said the tanker had informed the agency that it intended to discharge its cargo into smaller vessels for delivery at the Texan port.

The Coast Guard was communicating with the U.S. National Security Council, State and Homeland Security departments about the vessel’s arrival and status, said Coast Guard Petty Officer Andy Kendrick.

The ship, which carries approximately 1 million barrels of crude (worth more than $100 million at international prices), took on the disputed oil in Turkey, through a pipeline from the Kurdish oil fields in northern Iraq that bypasses the Iraqi state oil company.

The semi-autonomous government in Kurdistan argues the exports are within its rights under Iraq’s federal constitution, but Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki insists all Iraqi oil must be brokered by the state oil company.

The shipment is significant because it is one of the first from the new pipeline through Turkey, which Baghdad emphatically calls a smuggling operation. To make matters more tense with Baghdad, the Kurds seized northern oil fields from ISIS control to keep them out of the hands of the Jihadist insurgents who control the northwest of the country.

Maliki’s government, though, is too busy dealing with the ISIS insurgency to take action against the Kurds, and the new parliament has yet to form a government or confirm Maliki as the next prime minister.

A sale of Kurdish crude oil to a U.S. refinery would infuriate Baghdad, which sees such deals as smuggling, and raises questions about Washington’s commitment to preventing oil sales from the autonomous region.

Washington has expressed fears that independent oil sales from Kurdistan could contribute to the break-up of Iraq as the government in Baghdad struggles to contain the Jihadist insurgents that have captured vast swathes of the country.

Hypocritically, Washington has pressured companies and governments not to buy crude from the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG), but it has stopped short of banning U.S. firms from buying it outright.

Speaking at a State Department briefing Friday (Juky 25), deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf said U.S. policy toward Kurdish oil sales hasn’t changed.

Iraq’s energy resources belong to all of the Iraqi people. The U.S. has made very clear that if there are cases involving legal disputes, the United States informs the parties of the dispute and recommends they make their own decisions,” she said.

Analysts have said that if there is a buyer for the oil, and no one stops the sale, it would represent a major step toward independence for Kurdistan. This is something the United States, at least officially, has opposed, insisting instead on maintaining a unified Iraq. The fear is that an independent Kurdistan in Iraq could re-ignite Kurdish separatist movement in Turkey and Iran.

On Thursday (July 24) an official at SOMO, Iraq’s central state oil marketer, reiterated that it would sue any company buying Kurdish oil and blacklist them from deals for Iraq’s sizeable crude exports.

“The government of Iraq will reserve the right to sue any company, refinery or trader that buys the Iraqi crude that KRG is illegally offering,” said an official from Baghdad’s state oil marketer SOMO.

“Our foreign legal team is watching closely the movement of the vessel and is ready to target any potential buyer regardless of their nationality.”

The interesting fact about buying disputed oil is that not too long ago, the US Navy seized a North Korean ship off the Mediterranean island of Cyprus, stopping an attempt by a Libyan militia to sell its shipload of crude in defiance of Tripoli.

Source*

Related Topics:

U.S. Rewarded Blackwater with $200+mn Contracts after Contract to Assassinate Iraqi Official*

One State Thinks of its Citizens and Lower Gas Prices*

Snowden: Al Baghdadi was Trained By MOSSAD*

S. Rape and Sodomy of Iraqi Women and Children*

International Legislators and Activists Seeking Justice for Iraqis*

The Treasure at the Heart of Iraq

Rothschilds’ Glencore South Sudan Oil Grab

Recolonizing Africa: Consolidating African Oil Assets*

Eugenics: Ebola Virus Being Spread Intentionally

Eugenics: Ebola Virus Being Spread Intentionally

Remember Haiti? Hundreds have been dying as a result of a ‘new strain’ of cholera that was introduced by the U.N. Peacekeeping Force, who until now refuses to leave the island.

Over 660 may have died according to WHO in Africa. It doesn’t take an expert to realize something is seriously wrong when with every week that passes, another person is added to the death toll from a dangerous virus that disappears as suddenly as it appears has gone out of control…why?

Suspicions were further raised with the death of eugenist Richard Rockefeller recently, when it came to surface that he was head of Doctors Without Borders with projects in South America, Africa, and Southeast Asia. So what intent is there when WHO and MSF (Doctors Without Borders) decide to take over the bioweapons laboratory in Kenema hospital – a result of thousands marched on the lab following allegations by a former nurse that Ebola was being put into circulation deliberately. With Israeli International Group crisis founder George Soros and Bill Gates involved, one would think that the nurse knew exactly what she was talking about.

Sierre Leone

Global governance’s WHO will assume control of critical government functions and implement forced vaccination and quarantine plans. With a failing medical health system, these pharmaceutically dependent organizations, are trying to Westernize/modernize the health system in Africa to the extent that Africa becomes dependent on pharmaceutical drugs that makes them big money, that many Africans cannot affording after centuries of their wealth ripped off to find that they end up having a vicious cycle of pharmaceutically induced diseases that makes more money for unelected global governors.

The family of Saudatu Koroma an Ebola patient in Sierre Leone stormed the hospital and forcefully removed her and took her away, why? They know at least that she is more likely to die in hospital than out. After all what experience does the likes of WHO have with the Ebola virus – so enters MSF/Doctors without Borders which faired no better in the cholera pandemic in Haiti.

The Kenema Government Hospital, located 300km east of Freetown, Sierra Leone, an area with the highest incidence of Lassa Fever in the world.

At the epicentre of the current Ebola epidemic is the Kenema Government Hospital in Sierra Leone, which houses a US a biosecurity level 2 bioweapons research lab.

The partners and people leading the viral fever bioweapons lab inside Kenema Government Hospital read like a roll call of New World Order organizations.

Others involved in the funding include:

Tulane, Scripps Research Institute, Broad Institute, Harvard University, University of California at San Diego, University of Texas Medical Branch, Autoimmune Technologies LLC, Corgenix Medical Corporation, Kenema Government Hospital (Sierra Leone), Irrua Specialist Teaching Hospital (Nigeria) and various other partners in West Africa.

The Kenema bioweapons lab is the only testing centre for Ebola in Sierra Leona yet has the highest number of victims. Tulane University conducts bioweapons research on behalf of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. The Ministry of Health and Sanitation, Sierre Leone announced week this it had ordered Tulane University to stop Ebola testing and the US bioweapons laboratory at Kenema to be relocated in response to growing anger from locals, especially the nurses at Kenema hospital went on an indefinite strike on Monday following the death of three of their colleagues on Sunday.. They might have to enforce that request, and preferably not anywhere in Africa or anywhere else by any other name.

All new confirmed cases are to be directed to Kailahun Hospital.

Eugenics Agenda

In 2006, Chairman of the Environmental Science Section of the Texas Academy of Science, Forrest Mims conveyed the following:

I watched in amazement as a few hundred members of the Texas Academy of Science rose to their feet and gave a standing ovation to a speech that enthusiastically advocated the elimination of 90% of Earth’s population by airborne Ebola. The speech was given by Dr. Eric R. Pianka (Fig. 1), the University of Texas evolutionary ecologist and lizard expert who the Academy named the 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist.

Something curious occurred a minute before Pianka began speaking. An official of the Academy approached a video camera operator at the front of the auditorium and engaged him in animated conversation. The camera operator did not look pleased as he pointed the lens of the big camera to the ceiling and slowly walked away.

This curious incident came to mind a few minutes later when Professor Pianka began his speech by explaining that the general public is not yet ready to hear what he was about to tell us.

Because of many years of experience as a writer and editor, Pianka’s strange introduction and the TV camera incident raised a red flag in my mind. Suddenly I forgot that I was a member of the Texas Academy of Science and chairman of its Environmental Science Section. Instead, I grabbed a notepad so I could take on the role of science reporter.

One of Pianka’s earliest points was a condemnation of anthropocentrism, or the idea that humankind occupies a privileged position in the Universe. He told a story about how a neighbour asked him what good the lizards are that he studies. He answered, “What good are you?”

Pianka hammered his point home by exclaiming, “We’re no better than bacteria!”

Pianka then began laying out his concerns about how human overpopulation is ruining the Earth. He presented a doomsday scenario in which he claimed that the sharp increase in human population since the beginning of the industrial age is devastating the planet. He warned that quick steps must be taken to restore the planet before it’s too late.

Professor Pianka said the Earth as we know it will not survive without drastic measures. Then, and without presenting any data to justify this number, he asserted that the only feasible solution to saving the Earth is to reduce the population to 10% of the present number.

He then showed solutions for reducing the world’s population in the form of a slide depicting the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. War and famine would not do, he explained. Instead, disease offered the most efficient and fastest way to kill the billions that must soon die if the population crisis is to be solved.

Pianka then displayed a slide showing rows of human skulls, one of which had red lights flashing from its eye sockets.

AIDS is not an efficient killer, he explained, because it is too slow. His favourite candidate for eliminating 90% of the world’s population is airborne Ebola (Ebola Reston), because it is both highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years. However, Professor Pianka did not mention that Ebola victims die a slow and torturous death as the virus initiates a cascade of biological calamities inside the victim that eventually liquefy the internal organs.

After praising the Ebola virus for its efficiency at killing, Pianka paused, leaned over the lectern, looked at us and carefully said, “We’ve got airborne 90% mortality in humans. Killing humans. Think about that.”

With his slide of human skulls towering on the screen behind him, Professor Pianka was deadly serious. The audience that had been applauding some of his statements now sat silent.

After a dramatic pause, Pianka returned to politics and environmentalism. But he revisited his call for mass death when he reflected on the oil situation.

“And the fossil fuels are running out,” he said, “so I think we may have to cut back to two billion, which would be about one-third as many people.” So the oil crisis alone may require eliminating two-thirds of the world’s population.

How soon must the mass dying begin if Earth is to be saved? Apparently fairly soon, for Pianka suggested he might be around when the killer disease goes to work. He was born in 1939, and his lengthy obituary appears on his web site.

When Pianka finished his remarks, the audience applauded. It wasn’t merely a smattering of polite clapping that audiences diplomatically reserve for poor or boring speakers. It was a loud, vigorous and enthusiastic applause.

Questions for Dr. Doom

Then came the question and answer session, in which Professor Pianka stated that other diseases are also efficient killers.

The audience laughed when he said, “You know, the bird flu’s good, too.” They laughed again when he proposed, with a discernible note of glee in his voice that, “We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth.”

After noting that the audience did not represent the general population, a questioner asked,

“What kind of reception have you received as you have presented these ideas to other audiences that are not representative of us?”

Pianka replied, “I speak to the converted!”

Pianka responded to more questions by condemning politicians in general and Al Gore by name, because they do not address the population problem and “…because they deceive the public in every way they can to stay in power.”

He spoke glowingly of the police state in China that enforces their one-child policy. He said, “Smarter people have fewer kids.” …

With this, the questioning was over. Immediately almost every scientist, professor and college student present stood to their feet and vigorously applauded the man who had enthusiastically endorsed the elimination of 90 percent of the human population. Some even cheered. Dozens then mobbed the professor at the lectern to extend greetings and ask questions. It was necessary to wait a while before I could get close enough to take some photographs.

I was assigned to judge a paper in a grad student competition after the speech. On the way, three professors dismissed Pianka as a crank. While waiting to enter the competition room, a group of a dozen Lamar University students expressed outrage over the Pianka speech.

Yet five hours later, the distinguished leaders of the Texas Academy of Science presented Pianka with a plaque in recognition of his being named 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist. When the banquet hall filled with more than 400 people responded with enthusiastic applause, I walked out in protest.

Patenting Ebola

On October 26 2009, a patent was filed for the virus. The assumed ‘inventor’ is Jonathan S. Towner, Jonathan S. Towner, Stuart T. Nichol, James A. Comer, Thomas G. Ksiazek, Pierre E. Rollin.

Application: US 13/125,890

Publication: US20120251502 A1

The Original Signee: The Government of the US as Represented by the Secretary of the Dept. of health

Abstract

Compositions and methods including and related to the Ebola Bundibugyo virus (EboBun) are provided. Compositions are provided that are operable as immunogens to elicit and immune response or protection from EboBun challenge in a subject such as a primate. Inventive methods are directed to detection and treatment of EboBun infection.

Ebola the Moneyspinner…

After a period in which the tide has been turning against vaccines due to mounting side effects including death, the fear of Ebola spreading to the West might turn the tide in favour of the big pharmaceutical companies. Suddenly the call is being made to produce experimental vaccines .. the trouble is most vaccines out on the market cause harm are experimental, with no solid evidence that they cure the disease they claim to. Those big companies include Wellcome Trust in the U.K., and in the U.S. there is already a drug, TKM-Ebola drug by Tekmira Pharmaceuticals which partnered with U.S. Department of Defense on this one – a curious partnership.. To ramp up the campaign, the lie is being spread that: A number of patients have been discharged from Ebola treatment centres in Guinea after successfully beating the Ebola virus, says Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors withour Borders.

Related Topics:

Closer to the Truth of the Latest Ebola Outbreak*

Ebola Victim Lives to Tell the Tale*

Haitians Sue UN over Cholera Epidemic*

Reliving the Past of Human Experimentation

Polio Vaccine Spreads Polio-like Disease*

Increased Reaction to Drugs Caused By Vaccines

 

Courts Confirm MMR Vaccine Causes Autism*

CIA Vaccine Program in Pakistan*

50 African Children Paralyzed by Gates-Funded Meningitis ‘Vaccine’*

Victim of Flu Vaccine Paid off by Aussie Government*

Son of Cabal (Rockefeller) Dies, but not the Criminal Eugenic Agenda*

Drug Free Psychiatry and Beyond Globalized Eugenics

 

Black Women Targeted with Eugenics Drug*

Israel admits to Birth Controlling Ethiopian Women*

50 African Children Paralyzed by Gates-Funded Meningitis ‘Vaccine’*

Poor Asian, African, and Latin American Children Targeted by Gates and Others with Questionable Vaccines*

Bill Gates’ Polio Vaccine Program Eradicates Children, Not Polio*

Gates Next Contribution to Eugenics*

TPP, TPPA Goes EPA in the Recolonization of Africa*

Recolonizing Africa: Consolidating African Oil Assets*

Is South Africa Waking Up to the Innate Poison of GM Technology?*

Google Legally Required to Handover all Details about your G-Mail*

Google Legally Required to Handover all Details about your G-Mail*

By Katie Rucke

Privacy advocates were dealt a major blow on July 18, when a federal judge in New York ruled that law enforcement has the legal authority to search the entire email account of an unnamed individual who police believe was involved in a money laundering scheme.

Google is now legally required to hand over the entire contents of the unnamed individual’s Gmail account — including all emails sent, received and drafted, all contacts, and other information —  to federal prosecutors.

In his 23-page ruling, U.S. Magistrate Judge Gabriel Gorenstein wrote that email accounts should be treated like hard drives when it comes to search and seizure principles. In other words, Gorenstein believes law enforcement should be able to go through an individual’s entire email account if prosecutors can demonstrate probable cause showing a “sufficient chance of finding some needles in the computer haystack.”

“For example, in a drug investigation, it might be obvious based on information from an informant or other source that emails referring to the purchase or importation of ‘dolls’ refers to cocaine, but investigators might only learn as the investigation unfolds that a seemingly innocuous email referring to purchase of ‘potatoes’ also refers to a cocaine shipment,” the judge wrote.

This decision is significant because U.S. courts have historically ruled against federal prosecutors’ requests to search an email account in order to find incriminating evidence, citing the Fourth Amendment, which protects Americans from unreasonable search and seizure.

Given that there has been a rise in the number of requests from law enforcement officials in recent years for access to information hosted by companies such as Google and Yahoo, privacy advocates have expressed concern that this case may affect future money laundering and other financial crime cases, or even other types of crimes, as Gorenstein wrote in his ruling that those courts that did not rule in favor of law enforcement ignored all case law giving police the legal ability to comb through paper documents to determine whether a crime had been committed.

Hanni Fakhoury, an attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Judge Gorenstein is essentially saying that the Fourth Amendment grants police officers legal room to search irrelevant data in order to find relevant data. But the problem many privacy advocates see with this interpretation, especially in the Digital Age, is that law enforcement is able to retain large amounts of data for an extended period of time.

Gorenstein’s interpretation of the Fourth Amendment is also shocking, given that just last month the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police cannot just search an individual’s cellphone without first obtaining a warrant.

“The Supreme Court’s decision reinforces the notion that digital data can’t be equated with physical items like papers because it contains so much more information, in terms of both volume and quality,” Fakhoury said.

“When police enter a home to search for, say a shotgun, they can’t look at places where the weapon is unlikely to be found.

“But these broad digital searches allow the government to search through everything because the government believes the evidence could be anywhere. So that’s problematic in my mind,” he said.

Glenda Toma agrees. In a piece in the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, she says that the “diminishment of digital privacy is a startling trend.”

“When a warrant is authorized for a physical entity, such as a house or a car, there are stipulations as to what can be searched and where,” Toma pointed out.

“It has been rare for a judge to grant a so-called general warrant, or the unrestricted permission to search and seize, since it potentially contravenes the Fourth Amendment. So why do these rules not apply to digital privacy?”

In his ruling, Gorenstein did not outline a specific timeframe in which law enforcement officials would be able to search the individual’s emails, nor did the judge say how long law enforcement would have access to the email account — reasons why privacy advocates view this case as just one more reason why regulating digital privacy urgently needs to be addressed from a legal standpoint.

Source*

Related Topics:

Criminal Global Governors: The Right to ‘be forgotten’ a Problem for Google*

Google Sued for Harvesting Data on Children*

Google Fined for Spying on Wi-Fi Users*

How GCHQ Monitors Germany, Israel, the EU and Africa*