Netanyahu Indicted On Corruption Charges

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oXW7VCxIBs

Keiser Report: Forever Wars & Negative Rates (E1468)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV04tXmuvv8

Egypt’s Media Crackdown Can be Stopped

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h26mUYLtCjw&feature=emb_logo

Narrative Managers Faceplant In Hilarious OPCW Scandal Spin Job

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/11/27/narrative-managers-faceplant-in-hilarious-opcw-scandal-spin-job/

Before we begin I should highlight that Bellingcat is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, which according to its own cofounder was set up to do overtly what the CIA had previously been doing covertly, namely orchestrating narrative management geared toward the elimination of governments which refuse to comply with US interests. NED is funded directly by the US government, which means that Bellingcat is funded by the US government via an organization set up to promote imperialist regime change agendas. Bellingcat is also funded by Open Society Foundations, another imperialist narrative management operation.Imperialist propaganda firm Bellingcat has published a response to the ever-expanding OPCW scandal, and it's got to be seen to be believed.

Syria has been the target of what may be the most sophisticated propaganda campaign in history, and Bellingcat has been consistently rallying behind even the most transparently ridiculous tools of this campaign. This includes the notorious Bana Alabed psyop which at its height saw CNN staging a fake, scripted interview featuring a seven year-old girl assigning blame to Bashar al-Assad for an alleged sarin gas attack in Khan Shaykhun. Bellingcat's stellar investigative work (which has been praised in fawning puff pieces by mainstream outlets like The Guardian and The New Yorker) concluded that this obvious propaganda construct was in fact nothing other than a little girl and her mother independently composing viral tweets, giving interviews and authoring books about how the Syrian government must be toppled via western interventionism.

Bellingcat's latest phenomenal report on how you're supposed to think about important geopolitical disputes, titled "Emails And Reading Comprehension: OPCW Douma Coverage Misses Crucial Facts", addresses the leaked OPCW email which was recently published by WikiLeaks and various other outlets revealing that the OPCW omitted crucial information from its Douma report which indicated that a chemical weapons attack was unlikely to have occurred. I encourage you to go and check out Bellincat's new masterpiece for yourself; don't worry about giving them clicks, that's not where they get their money.

The first thing you'll notice about Bellingcat's article is that at no point does it even attempt to address the actual inflammatory comments within it, such as the OPCW whistleblower's assertion that the samples tested where a chlorine gas attack is alleged to have occurred in April 2018 contained levels of chlorinated organic compounds which were so low that it would be unreasonable to claim with any confidence that a chlorine gas attack had occurred at all. The whistleblower writes in the leaked email to the OPCW cabinet chief that the levels "were, in most cases, present only in parts per billion range, as low as 1-2 ppb, which is essentially trace quantities."

As we discussed previously, early skeptics of the establishment Douma narrative highlighted the bizarre fact that when the OPCW published its Interim Report in July of last year its report contained no information about the levels at which the chlorinated organic chemicals occurred. Chlorinated organic chemicals occur at trace levels in any industrialized area, so they are only indicative of a chlorine gas attack when samples test at high levels. The email said they didn't. The OPCW omitted this in both its Interim and Final Reports.

The whistleblower told journalist Jonathan Steele that the levels found "were comparable to and even lower than those given in the World Health Organisation’s guidelines on recommended permitted levels of trichlorophenol and other COCs in drinking water."

“Had they been included, the public would have seen that the levels of COCs found were no higher than you would expect in any household environment”, the whistleblower said.

In a new Fox News interview with Tucker Carlson, Steele explained the significance of this revelation.

"The main point is that Chlorine gas degrades rapidly in the air," Steele said. "So coming in two weeks later, you wouldn't find anything. What you would find is that the gas contaminates or affects other chemicals in the natural environment. So-called 'chlorinated organic chemicals.' The difficulty is they exist anyway in the natural environment and water. So the crucial thing is the levels, were there higher levels of chlorinated organic chemicals found after the alleged gas attack than there would have been in the normal environment?"

"When they got back to the Netherlands, to The Hague where the OPCW has its headquarters, samples were sent off to designated laboratories, then there was a weird silence developed," Steele continued. "Nobody told the inspectors what the results of the analysis was. It was only by chance that the inspector found out through accident earlier the results would come in and there were no differences at all. There were no higher levels of Chlorinated organic chemicals in the areas where the alleged attack had happened where there is some suspicious cylinders had been found by opposition activists. So it didn't seem possible that there could have been a gas attack because the levels were just the same as in the natural environment."

Bellingcat simply ignores this absolutely central aspect of the email, as well as the whistleblower's point about the symptoms of victims not matching chlorine gas poisoning.

"In this case the confidence in the identity of chlorine or any choking agent is drawn into question precisely because of the inconsistency with the reported and observed symptoms," the whistleblower writes in the email. "The inconsistency was not only noted by the FFM team but strongly noted by three toxicologists with expertise in exposure to CW [Chemical Weapons] agents."

Bellingcat narrative management reaches bargaining stage on road to acceptance, now emphasising that OPCW final report downgraded its conclusion to suggest merely “possible” use of chlorine.

https://t.co/NbRYPmfYuR

— Tim Hayward (@Tim_Hayward_) November 25, 2019

Bellingcat says nothing about these revelations in the email, and says nothing about the fact that the OPCW excluded them from both its Interim Report in July 2018 and its Final Report in March 2019, the latter of which actually asserted the exact opposite saying there was "reasonable grounds that the use of a toxic chemical as a weapon took place. This toxic chemical contained reactive chlorine. The toxic chemical was likely molecular chlorine.”

Bellingcat completely ignores all of these points, which are literally the only reason any of this is in the news at all, instead opting to make silly, pedantic arguments that the text of the email and the Interim and Final Reports indicate that some of the whistleblower's concerns appear to have been partially addressed by OPCW leadership in its publications. To make this argument, Bellingcat highlights how some of the wording in the reports was changed to appear a bit less conclusive, such as changing "likely" to "possible" and changing "reactive chlorine containing chemical” to "chemical containing reactive chlorine”.

By highlighting these barely-significant changes Bellingcat attempts to spin the narrative that there was no internal OPCW coverup of its investigators' findings at all, which is of course invalidated by the fact that its Final Report concluded that a chlorine gas attack had taken place despite the whistleblower clearly stating that there is no basis upon which to conclude this. It's also obviously invalidated by the fact that not one but two whistleblowers have come forward, meaning they plainly do not feel as though their concerns were met.

"Ian and I wanted to have this issue investigated and hopefully resolved internally, rather than exposing the failings of the Organisation in public, so we exhausted every internal avenue possible including submission of all the evidence of irregular behaviour to the Office of Internal Oversight," the whistleblower told Steele. "The request for an internal investigation was refused and every other attempt to raise our concerns was stone walled. Our failed efforts to get management to listen went on over a period of nearly nine months. It was only after we realised the internal route was impossible that we decided to go public”.

"Ian" is Ian Henderson, the OPCW ballistics expert whose Engineering Assessment which was leaked this past May. Henderson concluded that, contrary to what the OPCW's Final Report strongly implies, the cylinders found at the scene in Douma were more likely to have been manually placed there, i.e. staged. The anonymous whistleblower informed Steele that all but one of the OPCW's investigative team agreed with Henderson's assessment. This too was left out of all OPCW reports, and Bellingcat's piece completely ignores it, instead writing only that "Three independent analyses by experts in three different countries were carried out, and all reached complimentary conclusions: the damage at the impact sites is consistent with the cylinders having fallen from height."

Just so all my followers are clear, Tucker Carlson and the merry band of alt left grifter idiots trying to convince you that 1 of the 257 chemical attacks in Syria was a false flag are wrong, again, and never even bothered to read the report they say is wrong https://t.co/IRJQzC0VaL

— Danny Gold (@DGisSERIOUS) November 26, 2019

With the temerity only an NED paycheck can get you, Bellingcat argues that this vapid pedantry which has no bearing on the actual story whatsoever completely invalidates all reporting on the OPCW scandal.

"Although this letter appears to be at least superficially damaging to the OPCW, after reading the actual reports published by the OPCW it is clear that this letter is outdated and inapplicable to the final Douma report," Bellingcat concludes. "If the people covering this story had actually taken the time to read the letter and the FFM reports, they may well have chosen to publicize it in a very different manner."

Empire apologists have taken this ridiculous, nonsensical line of argumentation as gospel and run with it on social media, sharing Bellingcat's embarrassing faceplant with triumphant, chest-thumping captions.

"Just so all my followers are clear, Tucker Carlson and the merry band of alt left grifter idiots trying to convince you that 1 of the 257 chemical attacks in Syria was a false flag are wrong, again, and never even bothered to read the report they say is wrong," tweeted Newshour's Danny Gold.

"So the letter written by the dissenting OPCW employee on Douma investigation was sent two weeks before the interim report was released and nine months before the final one. In the final one, the employee's concerns were addressed. Where's the cover up?" tweeted Telegraph's Josie Ensor.

"WikiLeaks et al are lying to you in defence of the Assad regime," tweeted odious Syria narrative manager Oz Katerji.

Tucker Carlson spreads disinformation about a deadly chemical attack in Syria https://t.co/aFtPwpUtE8

— Eliot Higgins (@EliotHiggins) November 26, 2019

Media Matters For America, another narrative management firm founded by troll army commander David Brock, has also picked up Bellingcat's ridiculous arguments and run with them in an even dumber article titled "Tucker Carlson spreads disinformation about a deadly chemical attack in Syria".

"Despite the seemingly scandalous accusation in the leak, Carlson is misrepresenting the nature of the WikiLeaks documents and their significance," MMFA claims. "Investigative journalists at Bellingcat found that the leaked letter was in fact referring to an 'interim report' issued in July of 2018, before the OPCW released its final conclusions. A side-by-side comparison shows that the concerns addressed in the letter 'are present, or else are in modified form, in the final report.'”

Which is of course false, as explained above.

MMFA's other claims are nothing other than simple regurgitation of the very reports that are now being invalidated by the leaks that Tucker Carlson highlighted on his show. Their entire argument boils down to "This old information is in contradiction to that new information," which is of course the entire bloody point.

"These claims contradict and misrepresent the available evidence regarding the attack, the conclusions of multiple governments, and they are based on a Syrian and Russian misinformation campaign seeking to discredit investigators and absolve Assad of responsibility for the atrocity," MMFA argues, linking to a 2018 BBC article saying Assad was responsible for the Douma incident, a 2018 Guardian article about the US government's unsubstantiated claim to have secret proof of Assad's guilt, and a 2018 Guardian article claiming that Russia is wrong about its skepticism of the western Douma narrative, respectfully.

Which is the same as saying "You're wrong because we disagree with you. Here is evidence of our disagreeing with you last year."

This is the best the spin masters can do, and the OPCW scandal is only going to unfold more. Should be fun.

Caitlin Johnstone | November 27, 2019 

Honduran Journalist Killed Leaving Station

AP. November 26, 2019

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Honduran authorities say a television journalist has been shot to death shortly after leaving his station.

Security spokesman Jair Meza Barahona says that José Arita was killed after leaving Channel 12 in the north coast city of Puerto Cortes Monday night.

The initial investigation suggests that four men were waiting for Arita outside and began shooting at close range.

Meza Barahona says the killing could have been related to Arita’s work.

The president of the Honduras College of Journalists says that 84 journalists have been killed in Honduras since 2001. Dagoberto Rodríguez says that only seven of those killings have been solved.

The Inter American Press Association says that Arita was the fourth journalist killed in Honduras this year.

Mexico Steps Up Pressure on U.S. Congress to Approve Trade Deal

Reuters. November 25, 2019

MEXICO CITY/WASHINGTON — Mexico's government on Monday ramped up pressure on Democratic lawmakers to approve a new North American trade deal, urging U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to push it through Congress and rejecting demands for greater labor market oversight.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said he would this week send another letter to Pelosi, a Democrat, pressing for the ratification of the three-nation deal agreed last year known as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

"I'm sure that Mrs Pelosi and the lawmakers of the Democratic Party are going to help us," Lopez Obrador told a news conference, saying he believed Congress would approve the deal before the end of 2019.

Mexico also wrote Pelosi last month.

Several U.S. business executives and congressional aides said Monday it is increasingly unlikely Congress will approve USMCA before January.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday said, "Pelosi should put it up for a vote because, at some point pretty soon, you're going to have Canada and you're going have Mexico say, 'What's going on? Send the agreement back. Let's not make the deal.' And I wouldn’t blame them at all."

Pelosi's office did not immediately comment.

Standing alongside Lopez Obrador, Jesus Seade, deputy foreign minister for North America and the Mexican official in charge of USMCA negotiations, said he was "pessimistic" the accord would be approved by U.S. lawmakers before 2020.

"Far from reaching a deal, in the last two weeks, statements from certain labor sectors have re-emerged, floating ideas that would be totally unacceptable to Mexico," Seade said.

Mexico, which ratified the USMCA, is eager for approval because the country's exports and foreign direct investment are heavily dependent on having unfettered access to the U.S. marketplace.

U.S. lawmakers have held up approval over concerns lower-cost Mexico will continue to be able to attract investment at the expense of U.S. workers.

Lopez Obrador's left-leaning government pledged to improve workers' pay, and earlier this year pushed through a labor bill that will strengthen the rights of trade unions.

The president, Seade and Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard all underlined that Mexico had fulfilled its commitments under the USMCA framework as they urged Congress to pass the deal.

Among the sticking points were U.S. attempts to establish dispute panels for labor, Seade said. Mexico's position is panels should be allowed across the board, not for specific areas.

Enforcement remained a bone of contention, Seade said, noting that there were those on the U.S. side seeking to impose "more intrusive" mechanisms to bind Mexico.

"We told them we won't accept that," he said.

The USMCA was agreed after a lengthy negotiation to replace the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Trump Says U.S. Will Designate Drug Cartels in Mexico as Terrorist Groups

Liam Stack and Kirk Semple. New York Times. November 26, 2019

President Trump said in an interview posted online Tuesday that he planned to designate Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations, owing to what he said was the high number of Americans killed by their activities.

The comments, which were made in an interview with the former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly and posted to his personal website, represent a shift in United States policy that the Mexican foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard, told reporters on Monday he did not believe would happen.

“I will be designating the cartels,” Mr. Trump said in the interview. “I have been working on that for the last 90 days. You know, designation is not that easy, you have to go through a process, and we are well into that process.”

Deadly violence by drug cartels in Mexico gained new attention in the United States in recent weeks after the killing of six children and their three mothers, all dual Mexican and American citizens, who were part of a fundamentalist Mormon community in the north of the country.

After that ambush, Mr. Trump said on Twitter that the time had come “for Mexico, with the help of the United States, to wage WAR on the drug cartels and wipe them off the face of the earth.”

In the interview posted online Tuesday, Mr. Trump declined to say what measures he would consider taking once the cartels had been designated as terrorist organizations. When Mr. O’Reilly asked if drone strikes in Mexico were a possibility, the president replied, “I don’t want to say what I am going to do, but they will be designated.”

“Look, we are losing 100,000 people a year to what is happening and what is coming through from on Mexico,” the president said, without elaborating. “They have unlimited money, the people, the cartels, because they have a lot of money, because it is drug money and human trafficking money.”

The administration of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador of Mexico seemed to be caught off-guard by Mr. Trump’s declarations.

In a statement issued Tuesday night, the Mexican Foreign Ministry said it had “entered into communication with the various corresponding authorities” of the United States “to know the content and the reach” of Mr. Trump’s statements. The ministry also said it would seek to set up a high-level meeting “as soon as possible” to address the issue.

“The Government of Mexico will continue its diplomatic work towards an understanding that, through cooperation and intelligence, guarantees the security of both countries,” the statement said.

Mr. Ebrard, the foreign minister, had said a day earlier that he did not expect the United States government to seek to designate Mexican drug trafficking organizations as terrorists, and suggested that the two countries were already working together closely enough in the fight against those groups without the need for that legal designation.

“You do not need to designate or classify a specific group as terrorist so that we act together against it,” Mr. Ebrard said.

Once a group has been designated as a terrorist organization, it is illegal for people in the United States to knowingly provide support for it, and its members are barred from entering the country. Financial institutions are also forbidden from doing business with the organization.

Arturo Sarukhán, a former Mexican ambassador to Washington, said that the designation would create “a series of collateral effects” with profound implications for the relationship between the United States and Mexico.

The designation would not only have an impact on the bilateral strategy to combat narcotrafficking, but could also have “very broad and brutal political, diplomatic, financial, economic and commercial consequences,” he said in an interview on Milenio Televisión, a Mexican network.

It would also have the political effect of reinforcing “this narrative of Mexico as a threat to the national security of the United States,” Mr. Sarukhán said, noting that the timing coincided with the start of the presidential campaign.

“It’s something that really can be very, very, very disruptive for the bilateral relationship,” he said.

The interview between Mr. Trump and Mr. O’Reilly that was posted online on Tuesday evening was a clip from a longer conversation between the two. Mr. O’Reilly said that the full interview would be available to people who bought a premium membership to his personal website.