1. 9/11 Truth press conference.
Representatives Stephen Lynch (D-MA) and Walter Jones (R-NC) spoke at a press conference today about the need to declassify the 28 pages of the 9/11 report, which implicates terror aid and funding from Saudi Arabia and possibly other countries. 2015 will be the year of 9/11 Truth and this is 0.1% of it.
2. Resolution to end the occupation of Palestine failed by one vote.
The December 30th vote would have called for Israeli military forces to end the occupation within 3 years.
The resolution failed by one vote, receiving eight “yes” votes and two “no” votes with five nations not casting a vote. The 2 no votes unsurprisingly came from the United States and Australia.
France, China, Russia, Jordan, Chad, Luxemburg, Argentina and Chile voted for it.
Until shortly before the vote, council diplomats had expected the resolution to get nine “yes” votes. But Nigeria, which was believed to support the resolution, abstained. Its ambassador, U. Joy Ogwu, echoed the U.S. position saying the ultimate path to peace lies “in a negotiated solution.”
Nigeria isn’t alone in failing to vote for it, Britain, Rwanda, Nigeria, Lithuania, and South Korea also abstained.
The American objection was explained by U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power, saying there needed to be a negotiated peace agreement between Israel and Palestine and should not be forced by a rigid timetable. “We voted against this resolution not because we are comfortable with the status quo,” Powers said before defending the situation. Powers then said “peace must come from hard compromises that occur at the negotiating table,” as if the process so far has been honest and productive. The resolution was reduced to a political game with Powers calling it a “staged confrontation that will not bring the parties closer” because it didn’t account for the “security concerns” of Israel.
Palestinian official Saeb Erekat said that they may return to the Security Council because 5 new members are joining in 2015 and could be more friendly to the effort. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said Wednesday that they will continue their efforts join the International Criminal Court, allowing charged to be brought against Israel for war crimes.
The pressure on Israel to end the occupation of Palestine has become more targeted as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement grows. In Europe, Sweden voted to recognize Palestine and France passed a non-binding show of support for a Palestinian state.
3. Rand Paul backs bill to cut US aid as UN accepts Palestinian bid to International Criminal Court.
Days after Israel freezes Palestine tax funds over the ICC bid which would allow Palestinians to bring charges over Israeli war crimes?
WTF News: Retaliation against Palestine has come from the United States as well with Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) that would freeze about $440 million in US aid to Palestine as a response to the Palestinian ICC bid.
Free Beacon: Rand Paul Offers Another Pro-Israel Bill to Cut Palestinian Aid
Paul reportedly introduced the bill just hours before he was to meet with top Jewish donors.
Paul has been seeking to bolster his standing in Jewish circles, where some leading voices remain skeptical of his isolationist foreign policy views.
This is the second time that Paul has taken the lead to eliminate aid to the Palestinians.
The senator spearheaded a bill in April to cut off U.S. aid to the PA in response to its formation of a unity government with the terror group Hamas.
Unlike the current piece of legislation, last year’s bill would have made U.S. aid contingent on the unity government explicitly recognizing Israel’s right to exist.
Doug Stafford, a senior Paul adviser, told the Free Beacon that the United States has no business funding “an anti-Israel propaganda trial” at the ICC.
“The Palestinian Authority received well over $400 million last year to peacefully interact with Israel,” Stafford said. “Currently, the Palestinian Authority is trying to join the anti-American International Criminal Court and they are claiming war crimes by Israeli soldiers. Sen. Rand Paul does not think American tax dollars should be used to fund an anti-Israel propaganda trial.”
Sen. Paul has been trying very hard to improve his image in relation to Israel since the 2012 US Presidential campaigns where his father Rep. Ron Paul was seen as falling short in terms of effort at arguing his positions.
The extreme measures, amounting to economic warfare, have been justified by the US and Israel under the familiar reason that Palestinian authorities are attempting to sabotage the peace process by seeking out membership to a peaceful international treaty which would allow them to present their multiple cases in a respected court of law. Given that the United States (nor Israel) is not a part of the ICC as it has not been ratified by the US Congress, the conflict of interest is clear. Both countries have stated that they wish for the negotiations to continue outside of this because it is not conducive to a two-state solution, rationale which seems to defy logic in light of the international law mechanisms available.
The tension in the region has been increasing after multiple isolated incidents of violence on both sides of the border and a curious incident where rocks were thrown at US officials and their security by Israelis. The incident reportedly included the US security forces “brandishing” guns at the Israelis, though it is unclear exactly what happened. This was disputed by many and there were also reports that the Israeli crowd had weapons including clubs and axes.
In typical fashion, now Israel is proceeding to charge Palestinians with war crimes.
Israel is looking at ways to prosecute senior Palestinians for war crimes in the United States and elsewhere in response to Palestinian steps to join the International Criminal Court, an Israeli official said on Saturday.
The Palestinians delivered to UN headquarters in New York on Friday documents on joining the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and other global treaties, saying they hoped to achieve “justice for all the victims that have been killed by Israel, the occupying power.”
Maybe they have, but clearly not on the scale of the Israeli military and secret services.
4. How did a Sandy Hook victim end up mourned as dying in the recent Pakistan school attack? Self explanatory (unless you are not been aware of the ongoing Newtown fraud)
It is an unsolved mystery how Noah Pozner’s photo was seen at a memorial in Pakistan
5. Pedophile Scandal
The recent pedophile scandals have been hidden but now bigger names are being mentioned, like United Kingdom’s Prince Andrew.
- Paedophile Jeffrey Epstein allegedly tracked down young girls he abused
- Billionaire is said to have promised to ‘look after’ them if they kept quiet
- Those who did not cooperate with him were harassed, court papers claim
- Scale of the alleged cover-up was revealed as files became public
- Came as Duchess of York sprang to defense of her ex-husband, Andrew
- The Prince is accused of having sex with Epstein’s under-age ‘sex slave’
- Yet vital evidence that could put Andrew in the clear is likely to stay secret
- Duke of York fiercely denies all accusations made by Virginia Roberts
Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz moves to sue lawyers representing alleged teen ‘sex slave’ for defamation, but they sue him first NY Daily News
Dershowitz denies it – NY Times
The firestorm has now pulled in Bill Clinton, which could be a message to Hillary suggesting that she not run for president because of the multiple skeletons in the Clinton closet.
More on the target, Jeffrey Epstein, who is connected to many celebrities and politicians.
She spent the next four years with Epstein. For three of those years, she was under Florida’s age of consent – 18.
‘Basically, I was training to be a prostitute for him and his friends who shared his interest in young girls,’ she says.
That stage of his alleged abuse started after two years when he asked Miss Roberts to fly to his Caribbean island and make a friend of his ‘feel how you make me feel’.
She says she was given to men, aged from their 40s to their 60s, either on the island or on Epstein’s New Mexico ranch. In interviews with The Mail on Sunday after the settlement of the original legal action, Miss Roberts claims she met Prince Andrew three times.
6. Oil price crash worse since Lehman, second worst in last 28 years
Part of an interview featured on Zero Hedge with James Stafford of OilPrice.com and Arthur Berman discusses some of the real reasons beyond the geopolitical tension like Ukraine and Saudi influence. Supply and demand, and ultimately the Economic Collapse…
OP: The Current Oil Situation – What is your assessment?
Arthur Berman: The current situation with oil price is really very simple. Demand is down because of a high price for too long. Supply is up because of U.S. shale oil and the return of Libya’s production. Decreased demand and increased supply equals low price.
As far as Saudi Arabia and its motives, that is very simple also. The Saudis are good at money and arithmetic. Faced with the painful choice of losing money maintaining current production at $60/barrel or taking 2 million barrels per day off the market and losing much more money—it’s an easy choice: take the path that is less painful. If there are secondary reasons like hurting U.S. tight oil producers or hurting Iran and Russia, that’s great, but it’s really just about the money.
Saudi Arabia met with Russia before the November OPEC meeting and proposed that if Russia cut production, Saudi Arabia would also cut and get Kuwait and the Emirates at least to cut with it. Russia said, “No,” so Saudi Arabia said, “Fine, maybe you will change your mind in six months.” I think that Russia and maybe Iran, Venezuela, Nigeria and Angola will change their minds by the next OPEC meeting in June.
We’ve seen several announcements by U.S. companies that they will spend less money drilling tight oil in the Bakken and Eagle Ford Shale Plays and in the Permian Basin in 2015. That’s great but it will take a while before we see decreased production. In fact, it is more likely that production will increase before it decreases. That’s because it takes time to finish the drilling that’s started, do less drilling in 2015 and finally see a drop in production. Eventually though, U.S. tight oil production will decrease. About that time—perhaps near the end of 2015—world oil prices will recover somewhat due to OPEC and Russian cuts after June and increased demand because of lower oil price. Then, U.S. companies will drill more in 2016.
OP: How do you see the shale landscape changing in the U.S. given the current oil price slump?
Arthur Berman: We’ve read a lot of silly articles since oil prices started falling about how U.S. shale plays can break-even at whatever the latest, lowest price of oil happens to be. Doesn’t anyone realize that the investment banks that do the research behind these articles have a vested interest in making people believe that the companies they’ve put billions of dollars into won’t go broke because prices have fallen? This is total propaganda.
And they say that they will be fine at $60 oil prices? Are you kidding? People need to wake up and click on Google Finance to see that I am right. Capital costs, by the way, don’t begin to reflect all of their costs like overhead, debt service, taxes, or operating costs so the true situation is really a lot worse.
So, how do I see the shale landscape changing in the U.S. given the current oil price slump? It was pretty awful before the price slump so it can only get worse. The real question is “when will people stop giving these companies money?” When the drilling slows down and production drops—which won’t happen until at least mid-2016—we will see the truth about the U.S. shale plays. They only work at high oil prices. Period.
OP: What, if any, effect will low oil prices have on the US oil exports debate?
OP: Given technological advances in both the onshore and offshore sectors which greatly increase production, how likely is it that oil will stay below $80 for years to come?
Arthur Berman: First of all, I’m not sure that the premise of the question is correct. Who said that technology is responsible for increasing production? Higher price has led to drilling more wells. That has increased production. It’s true that many of these wells were drilled using advances in technology like horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing but these weren’t free. Has the unit cost of a barrel of oil gas gone down in recent years? No, it has gone up. That’s why the price of oil is such a big deal right now.
Domestic oil prices were below about $30/barrel until 2004 and companies made enough money to stay in business. WTI averaged about $97/barrel from 2011 until August of 2014. That’s when we saw the tight oil boom. I would say that technology followed price and that price was the driver. Now that prices are low, all the technology in the world won’t stop falling production.
Many people think that the resurgence of U.S. oil production shows that Peak Oil was wrong. Peak oil doesn’t mean that we are running out of oil. It simply means that once conventional oil production begins to decline, future supply will have to come from more difficult sources that will be more expensive or of lower quality or both. This means production from deep water, shale and heavy oil. It seems to me that Peak Oil predictions are right on track.
Technology will not reduce the break-even price of oil. The cost of technology requires high oil prices. The companies involved in these plays never stop singing the praises of their increasing efficiency through technology—this has been a constant litany since about 2007—but we never see those improvements reflected in their financial statements. I don’t doubt that the companies learn and get better at things like drilling time but other costs must be increasing to explain the continued negative cash flow and high debt of most of these companies.
The price of oil will recover. Opinions that it will remain low for a long time do not take into account that all producers need about $100/barrel. The big exporting nations need this price to balance their fiscal budgets. The deep-water, shale and heavy oil producers need $100 oil to make a small profit on their expensive projects. If oil price stays at $80 or lower, only conventional producers will be able to stay in business by ignoring the cost of social overhead to support their regimes. If this happens, global supply will fall and the price will increase above $80/barrel. Only a global economic collapse would permit low oil prices to persist for very long.
7. Russia signs law for labeling foods containing genetically modified organisms
Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed the Russian Federation Code of Administrative Offences into law, including a new article establishing liability for the violation of mandatory requirements for the labeling of food products that contain GMOs.
8. Monsanto earnings.
Monsanto said Wednesday that its earnings fell 34 percent in its first fiscal quarter as South American farmers cut back on planting corn, reducing demand for the company’s biotech-enhanced seeds.
U.S. farmers harvested record crops of soybeans and corn last year, sending prices on those food staples to their lowest levels in years. That has resulted in farmers in South America and elsewhere reducing the number of acres they dedicate to corn. The company said lower corn plantings in the U.S. will likely reduce second quarter results by 5 to 10 percent compared with the prior year.
Monsanto said its business was also affected by reduced cotton planting in Australia and a shift in timing for its chemical business.
The St. Louis-based company reported a profit of $243 million, or 50 cents per share, down from $368 million, or 69 cents per share, in the prior year period. Earnings, adjusted to account for discontinued operations, came to 47 cents per share in the most recent quarter.
The results topped Wall Street expectations. The average estimate of analysts surveyed by Zacks Investment Research was for earnings of 34 cents per share.
Or Monsatan period. More on this later given the fuckery in Paris today.
9. Ebola is not over.
10. CIA Torture Report
OUPSSS..The what? (Full report)
Watchdog Resigns After Revelation that CIA Hacked Senate to Cover Up Torture Program.
In case you were unaware, it was recently revealed that yes, the CIA hacked into senate computers to try to delete files related to the Senate’s investigation into the CIA’s secret torture programs.
It is essential to note that we do not know the whole of this situation, not even close.
11. Police Chief In Charge of Paris Attacks Commits Suicide.
Commissioner Helric Fredou, the person in charge of the Charlie Hebdo investigation, committed suicide on Thursday night in his office using his service weapon. The reasons behind the suicide are as yet unknown.
The Commissioner Fredou, like all agents SRPJ worked yesterday on the case of the massacre at the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo. In particular, he surveyed the family of one of the victims. He killed himself before completing its report.
This story has received very little coverage in the media as yet. Are the circumstances around his death suspicious?
Following the abominable shooting of Parisian journalists at Charlie Hebdo, United States politicians and officials are predictably claiming that mass surveillance of citizens is the solution to terrorism.
Former CIA director Michael Hayden told MSBNC:
“…metadata doesn’t look all that scary this morning, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the French services pick up cell phones associated with the attack and ask the Americans, ‘where have you seen these phones
Read more on: We Are Anonymous
Over at Defense One, an article cites various members of Congress who are using the murders of Charlie Hebdocartoonists at as an excuse to derail efforts to reform and rein in National Security Agency (NSA) domestic spying.
“To me, Congress having oversight certainly is important, but what is more important relative to these types of events is ensuring we don’t overly hamstring the NSA’s ability to collect this kind of information in advance and keep these kinds of activities from occurring,” Sen. Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, told National Journal.
Corker said that in recent months, public support for the NSA has been fading as national security risks increase, a dangerous prospect for stopping future terrorism plots. The only way public opinion changes, Corker says, is for the American people to be reminded that threats still exist.
“I think events like [the shooting in Paris] and people’s recognition that the only way to keep those from happening is through outstanding intelligence-gathering. That alone, unfortunately, does shape people’s opinions,” Corker said.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., also sent out a strongly worded statement following the attacks, urging Congress to reevaluate its attitude toward the national security community.
“I fear our intelligence capabilities, those designed to prevent such an attack from taking place on our shores, are quickly eroding,” Graham said. “I believe our national security infrastructure designed to prevent these types of attacks from occurring is under siege.”
The senators are overlooking one important fact: NSA domestic spying hasn’t prevented any terrorist attacks in the United States. As reported in an article, “Abolish the Intelligence-Industrial Complex“:
In response to [NSA whistleblower Edward] Snowden’s revelations, NSA director Keith Alexander essentially lied to Congress when he claimed that the NSA’s spying had contributed to thwarting 54 terrorist plots. In January, 2014, the New America Foundation think-tank issued a report that concluded that NSA domestic spying had had “no discernible impact on preventing acts of terrorism.” It certainly had no discernible impact on thwarting the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013 or the would-be Christmas jetliner bomber in 2009.
Also in January, President Obama’s own Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board(PCLOB) issued a report on the NSA’s domestic spying program that damningly found, “We have not identified a single instance involving a threat to the United States in which the telephone records program made a concrete difference in the outcome of a counterterrorism investigation.” The report added, “Moreover, we are aware of no instance in which the program directly contributed to the discovery of a previously unknown terrorist plot or the disruption of a terrorist attack.”
Similarly, in December President Obama’s own hand-picked Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies issued a report that found the NSA domestic spying was “not essential to preventing attacks.” But more importantly, the Review Group worried if there is another significant terrorist attack that “many Americans, in the fear and heat of the moment, might support new restrictions on civil liberties and privacy.” They added, “The powerful existing and potential capabilities of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies might be unleashed without adequate controls. Once unleashed, it could be difficult to roll back these sacrifices of freedom.”
The Review Group was prescient: Now the NSA-enablers in the Senate are trying to use the Charlie Hebdo tragedy to scare Americans into foregoing their constitutional right to be free from pervasive government surveillance.
13. MI5 seek new powers after Paris attack.
MI5 chief Andrew Parker described the Charlie Hebdo massacre as ‘a terrible reminder of the intentions of those who wish us harm’ – and went on to talk about the need to increase MI5′s capabilities to snoop on communications – See more at: http://yournewswire.com/mi5-seek-new-powers-after-paris-attack/