http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27887639Classed as “external communications”, such activity can be covered by a broad warrant and intercepted without extra clearance, spy boss Charles Farr said.The policy was revealed as part of a legal battle with campaign group Privacy International (PI).PI labelled the policy “patronising”.It is the first time the UK has commented on how its legal framework allows the mass interception of communications, as outlined by US whistleblower Edward Snowden in his leaks about global government surveillance.The former National Security Agency contractor revealed extensive details of internet and phone snooping and has since fled the US and sought temporary asylum in Russia.Charles Farr, director general of the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism, told PI that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and web searches on Google – as well as webmail services such as Hotmail and Yahoo – were classified as “external communications”, which meant they could be…View original 246 more words
Three al-Jazeera journalists could be jailed for up to 15 years
****Editors note of LASPM: I am so happy that someone in this Universe took action and Jail these arrogant Al-Jazzera journalists. All journalists who work in this rag tag of newspaper have BLOOD IN THEIR HANDS and for all the money of the world I would not work for them. They are the ones who caused the chaos in Libya and when they finished with us they run off to Syria, Egypt and now to Ukraine. So if one country has the balls to jail them I am for it a 100%. Way to Go Egypt.
Prosecutors sought the highest possible jail terms for three al-Jazeera English journalists on trial in Egypt, after accusing them, in their closing statements on Thursday, of making “a devilish pact” with the ousted Muslim Brotherhood.
Mohamed Fahmy, Peter Greste and Baher Mohamed now face prison sentences worth 15, seven and 15 years, after being held since December on charges of smearing Egypt’s reputation, aiding the Brotherhood, and doctoring footage.
In the trial’s 11th session, the prosecution finally closed its case, claiming that the three journalists had collected material from the Muslim Brotherhood and edited it to imply that Egypt was engaged in a civil war. ****(doesn’t that remind you of Libya the so-called demonstration in Benghazi and that the Jamahirya government was killing innocent people? Which now Jalil the 1st betrayer came out on national t.v Arabia saying that all was a BIG LIE! Which channel was first in Feb 2011 in Benghazi? yes you guessed it Al Jazeera, copying old videos from other countries with trouble and saying it was Benghazi, while the Youtube in Libya was SHUTDOWN FOR OVER FIVE YEARS. Also al Ciajeera built-in DOHA Qatar the GREEN SQUARE manipulating the Libyan nation that they had lost to the REBELS AND NATO. They came out later and admitted it. They had the audacity to say that the Jamhirya army was rapping Libyan women when it was the Qatari army and Journalist who did the rapes. So I am not surprised if they (Al Ciajeera)doctored any footage in Egypt.)The lead prosecutor, Mohamed Barakat, said al-Jazeera’s reports on sexual assaults and street protests were among those aimed at smearing Egypt’s reputation in the outside world.
“Freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to lie and spread false information,” said Barakat.
The prosecution did not specify which raw footage or news packages had been doctored. In previous sessions, its evidence has included footage of horses taken from Sky News Arabia, a BBC documentary about Somalia and a press conference from Kenya. It also included dozens of raw videos of al-Jazeera interviews with figures from all sides of Egypt’s spectrum – including the Muslim Brotherhood, the group that led Egypt until last July, but which has since been banned.
Al-Jazeera and, particularly, its Arabic wing is hated by pro-government Egyptians *****(not only the Egyptians, The Libyans have kicked their butt out of Tripoli, Syria the same, Palestine) for its perceived bias in favour of the Brotherhood and for giving a voice to its supporters. ****(giving support to criminals is not right)
But in his defence on Thursday, Fahmy’s lawyer, Khaled Abou Bakr, stressed that it was a reporter’s job to interview activists of all political stripes – and to prosecute them for doing so was essentially to place journalism itself on trial.
“This is not a trial of these defendants alone – this is a trial of all journalists,” said Abou Bakr. ****(sorry Mr. Bakr, but this is not Journalism and the journalists that you defend are scums…. because of them or their colleagues real reporters in Libya were killed by NATO BOMBING or by the rebel scums for talking the TRUTH!)
“If you go and film someone saying: ‘Down with the president,’ that doesn’t mean that you agree with it.” ***(true! but its how you portray it, and if you only ask the MB and not the rest of the Egyptians well my friend you are being bias)
Shouting from the defendants’ cage during a recess, Fahmy himself said that his trial was an affront to any journalist working in Egypt. “If we’re in jail because we called [Egypt's 2013 regime change] a coup, why aren’t CNN and the BBC in the cage?” he said. “Why isn’t every journalist in the cage?” ****(several reasons to why CNN AND BBC and every prestitute media journalists are not in jail yet but very soon it will be also their turn. For the time being you are the first caught red-handed.)
In a detailed defence, Abou Bakr said the prosecution’s case was severely flawed because its key witnesses had admitted in court that they were not qualified to judge whether the journalists had endangered Egypt – contradicting the central claims of the written testimonies they had supplied in the run-up to the trial.
Abou Bakr also highlighted a string of procedural flaws in the prosecution’s case, ranging from the failure to allow defence lawyers access to all the prosecution’s evidence; an inability to pinpoint any specific video that proved the accusations; and the uncertainty about which of the defendants’ equipment belonged to whom.
Following a brief speech by Greste and Mohamed’s lawyer, Yusri Sayed Sami, who repeated many of Abou Bakr’s points, the trial was adjourned until 16 June – when the lawyers of several students indicted alongside the three journalists will be allowed to make their defence.
This raises the prospect of a verdict by the end of June, which was welcomed by Greste’s younger brother, Mike, who has flown from Greste’s home in Australia to attend the trial. “With any luck we’re on the home straight, and with two more sessions we could be finished,” said the younger Greste at the end of Thursday’s proceedings. “But it’s the judge that needs to be convinced of their innocence.”
A fourth al-Jazeera journalist, Abdullah Elshamy, has been under arrest without charge in a separate case since August. To raise awareness for his case, Elshamy has been on hunger strike for more than 130 days. As punishment, he was recently moved to solitary confinement.
He and his three colleagues are among 16 journalists jailed in Egypt, according to the US-based Committee to Protect Journalists.
*****(This article was written from the Guardian, but I have to say something about the US-based Committee to Protect Journalists were were you when NATO BOMBED THE Libyan TV STATION WITH Journalists in it who were killed on the spot, where were they when NATO & USA forced Most Satellites to close down the Libyan Jamahiryia broadcast? so that we could not have a voice and say the truth? Only Syria stood by our side and gave us one of their channels.
Where were you when al Ciajeera built the Green square of Tripoli in Doha Qatar to manipulate the International community and the Libyans is that real JOURNALISM? Why didn’t you protect us then? WELL DONE EGYPT next should be REUTERS, BBC, CNN, FOX, FRANCE 24, SKY NEWS ARABIC AND AL ARABYA.)
BBC and Guardian cover up US role in Iraq looting
By Ann Talbot
Looting of archaeological sites and regional museums is continuing in Iraq despite the responsibility under international law of the US as the occupying power to protect cultural sites.
The journal Archaeology is documenting the extent of looting. Journalist Roger Atwood, who specialises in the antiquities trade and is in Mosul, reports that 30 bronze panels that once hung on a gate leading into the Assyrian city of Balawat have been stolen from the museum there along with numerous cuneiform tablets and 20 valuable books. At Hatra, a first century B.C. world heritage site to the south of Mosul, looters have hacked out a carved face from the apex of a stone archway.
Meanwhile in Baghdad some of the artefacts stored offsite for safety have been recovered and some of the stolen items have been returned to the city museum. Among those returned is the famous Warka vase, a 5,000-year-old ceremonial vessel from the city of Ur. According to the British Museum, which has two members of staff working in the Baghdad Museum, at least 28 items from the exhibition halls remain missing along with numerous less spectacular objects that have an important research value.
The major pieces that have been recovered are some of the artefacts from the Assyrian city of Nimrud and some material from the royal burials at Ur, which were stored in the vaults of the Central Bank at the time of the first Gulf War. The presence of this material in the bank vaults is not a revelation. A visiting Unesco delegation was told about it in May, but it was inaccessible because the vaults were flooded. Moreover, the recovery of these artefacts does not minimise the damage that has been done and is still being done by organised looting.
Despite the devastating losses that have been suffered and the continued looting, however, certain journalists have made it their business to assert that the extent of the problem has been exaggerated and even to claim that Iraqi archaeologists are responsible for stealing whatever is missing. This campaign of denial and disinformation can only compound the damage already done to Iraq’s cultural heritage. Not only will it distract from the task of tracking down the artefacts that are flooding onto the antiquities market, but it is also being used to discredit Iraqi archaeologists and to take control of the country’s history out of their hands.
The BBC is leading the way in this scurrilous campaign. In a prime-time documentary screened June 9, art and architectural historian Dan Cruikshank made a number of unsubstantiated claims. He suggested that the Baghdad Museum was a legitimate military target, that the looting was “an inside job” and that the staff were unsuitable to be left in charge of Iraq’s cultural heritage because they had been members of the Ba’ath Party.
Cruickshank’s claims were immediately taken up by Guardian correspondent David Aaronovitch, who declared that the staff of the Baghdad Museum were “apparatchiks of a fascist regime”. He poured scorn on the world’s journalists and academics for believing the stories about looting.
In an April 15 column Aaronovitch had already asked, “Is this plundering really so bad?” “There is a lot of sentimentality attached to archaeology by outsiders,” he went on. He belittled the importance of cultural history in giving the Iraqi people a sense of their identity when compared to the evidence of mass murder in Abu Ghurayb prison. It did not really matter if archaeological artefacts were looted and ended up in western museums which were already full of material from all over the world.
Aaronovitch was, therefore, understandably enthused by Cruickshank’s documentary. In a June 10 article, he accused Dr. Dony George of Baghdad Museum and archaeologists internationally of deliberately creating a false picture of “100,000-plus priceless items looted either under the very noses of the Yanks, or by the Yanks themselves. And the only problem with it is that it’s nonsense. It isn’t true. It’s made up. It’s bollocks.”
It is, he claims, an “indictment of world journalism” that anyone believed this story. Only Dan Cruickshank’s “remarkable programme” has exposed it as a lie.
Cruickshank’s programme was indeed remarkable. But this was mainly for the contrast between what it showed and what it claimed. Cruikshank could not bring to bear a single fact to substantiate his allegations.
Some aspects of the programme might be dismissed as merely bad journalism and a pathological desire for self-dramatisation. Clad in a combat jacket and keffiyeh, Cruikshank insisted on being filmed camping out on the doorstep of the museum with his primus stove because it was too dangerous to move about the city. This impression of an intrepid reporter braving a threatening city was belied by the crowds of smiling Iraqis who cheerfully waved at the camera as he drove through Baghdad ostentatiously wearing a flak jacket the next day.
To watch Cruikshank you would believe that he was the only Westerner in Baghdad apart from the US Marines. He breathlessly entered the vaults of the Central Bank as though he alone had made this discovery. The presence of a team from the television series National Geographic Ultimate Explorer, who had paid to have the vault pumped out, was not mentioned. National Geographic magazine report that the vault had been flooded by bank staff in an attempt to protect the stored artefacts from looting.
Far from the world being ignorant about the fate of Iraqi archaeology until Cruikshank arrived, a number of international teams have been present in Baghdad and elsewhere advising on conservation, reporting on looting and attempting to itemise what has been lost. Few of them have been accorded the assistance that Cruikshank seems to have received from the US authorities. A team of international experts assembled by Unesco met with considerable obstruction in their mission to Baghdad. British Museum director Neil MacGregor told the Art Newspaper that negotiations with the US authorities were “tortuous” and that the size of the delegation had to be reduced.
That Cruikshank seems to have met with every assistance from the US authorities is hardly surprising since it was their story that he told.
He interviewed marines who told him that the museum had been fortified and a centre of Iraqi resistance. Had that really been the case it would have been reasonable to expect US forces to have occupied the museum and not left it unguarded as they did. The only evidence of fortification Cruikshank offered was a crude dugout roofed with corrugated iron and earth on the lines of a World War II Anderson shelter. This, Dr. Dony George told him, the museum staff had made for themselves to shelter in during the air raids. There was some evidence that Iraqi soldiers had used rooms in the museum, which in a city that had been the scene of a running battle for several days was hardly surprising.
Cruickshank’s aim was to implicate the staff in the looting of the museum. He criticised them for not clearing up the looted galleries, ignoring the fact that international experts had advised them to leave the debris. The whole scene will have to be treated as an archaeological excavation so that broken material and scattered pieces can be retrieved scientifically and forensic evidence gathered for a future war crimes trial.
The fact that the staff were reluctant to talk to him and refused to open store rooms Cruikshank took as evidence that they were guilty of looting. He ignored the obvious explanation that they were unwilling to reveal the whereabouts of hidden artefacts with Baghdad under armed occupation by a hostile power. They were, he claimed, all members of the Ba’ath party as though this were damning evidence of guilt. In a one-party state, membership of the ruling party is almost inevitable for people who want to hold official posts in museums or universities. It does not implicate them in the crimes of the regime.
Aaronovitch was quick to take up Cruickshank’s allegations and to amplify them, going so far as to accuse Dr. Dony George of being a fascist. By throwing such emotive language about he is attempting to create the atmosphere of a witch-hunt against Iraqi intellectuals.
There is a serious agenda behind this vicious journalism. Wealthy collectors in the West are casting avaricious eyes on the museums of archaeologically rich countries like Iraq. The American Council for Cultural Policy (ACCP), which advised the US government in the run-up to the Iraq war, has led the way in calling for legislation restricting the export of art objects and archaeological artefacts to be ignored in the US courts.
The ACCP has evoked a storm of opposition in the US, where even the robber barons saw the wisdom of putting their money into public museums and libraries and the selfish acquisitiveness of the ACCP runs counter to a strong sense of the importance of such public institutions.
The Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) has vociferously opposed the ACCP and is campaigning for legislation that will prevent plundered artefacts being brought into the country. So strong has opposition been that the Wall Street Journal—a paper that could be expected to warm to the ACCP’s free market attitudes—has carried an article calling on them “to put their money into restitution and reconstruction within that country [Iraq].” It would, the article points out, be tax deductible.
For the obscenely wealthy and criminal clique that surrounds the Bush administration, however, the benefits of tax deductible charity are no longer enough. They may have been warned off in the US, but it is their attitude to the history of semi-colonial countries that finds an echo in Cruickshank’s film and Aaronovitch’s article.
A former student radical from the Euro-wing of the Communist Party of Great Britain, Aaronovitch has cultivated a particular brand of educated philistinism that mixes a passing acquaintance with culture and ugly right-wing rhetoric. It is to the credit of Guardian readers that they have found Aaronovitch’s articles thoroughly repugnant. His defence of looting elicited a response from the Assistant Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, who criticised his flippancy in “sniggering over the genitalia of Greek gods”. His latest article accusing the staff of the Baghdad Museum of being fascists produced a defence of these internationally respected scholars from chairman of the British School of Archaeology in Iraq, Doctor Harriet Crawford; Doctor Eleanor Robson of All Souls College, Oxford; and Doctor Jane Moon of the Centre for the Study of Global Ethics.
Doctors Crawford and Robson write, “Our high opinion of the character of Dr. George and his colleagues has been formed over two decades of working with them throughout an era of extraordinarily difficult circumstances—from the Iran-Iraq war to the few months leading up to the most recent conflict. George deserves the world’s praise, not its condemnation, for saving so many of Iraq’s treasures, and strong practical support in restoring the museum to functionality.”
Cruickshank and Aaronovitch’s unfounded and ignorant comments lend themselves to a deliberate campaign of vilification against Iraqi intellectuals that aims to dismantle the entire system of laws and institutions that has been built up in Iraq to protect the country’s archaeology and to further research into its history. This is looting on a grand scale. The intention is not merely to acquire this or that artefact, but with regime change to declare open season on the Middle East’s great museums.
What Does it Mean to be a Friend of Israel?
Would you condone such vicious behavior?
The message is simple: DON’T EVER VOTE FOR A FRIEND OF ISRAEL.
Please distribute this video as widely as possible. It is one of the few chances that the Un-chosen People have of fighting back.
But be careful who you ask for advice. If I were a Friend of Israel (perish the thought) I would try to infiltrate as many anti-Israel organisations that I could, including websites that purported to be pro-Palestinian.
Remember Mossad’s motto: “By way of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War.”
International Solidarity Movement
6-year-old child detained on his way to school – YouTube
Palestinian being Tasered سلاح جديد يستخدمه الاحتلال على مواطن مقدسي بتل الربيع
Nabi Sala Video
انظرو كيف تعامل النساء-Women in Palestine
Gaza in Plain Language — YouTube (Joe Mowrey – Anthony Lawson)
The BBC/Panorama programme Death in the Med. It is best to search the web for a version that can be watched where you are.
BBC Bias: The Gaza Freedom Flotilla (Anthony Lawson)
BBC Trust’s Finding re complaints about Death in the Med
source: Anthony Lawson
Shooting Outside Libyan Parliament Delays Vote
By ESAM MOHAMED Associated Press
A spokesman for the interim Libyan parliament said shooting broke out outside the main entrance to the parliament on Tuesday, causing lawmakers to postpone the selection of a new prime minister in the capital, Tripoli.
Parliament spokesman Omar Humaidan said there was an exchange of fire when presidential guards prevented an armed group from entering the building while members of the interim parliament were holding a special session to select a new prime minister, more than a month after sacking liberal-leaning Prime Minister Ali Zidan.
Humaidan said that the armed group was believed to support Mohamed Boukar, a candidate who had lost in a first round of voting. There were injuries on both sides, but members of the interim government were unharmed.
Lawmaker Hussein al-Ansari said that in voting on Tuesday the parliament had two candidates to choose from: 42-year-old businessman Ahmed Matiq from the country’s third biggest city of Misrata, and Omar al-Hassi, a political science professor from the country’s second largest city of Benghazi. Al-Hassi is backed by the hard-line Islamist bloc in parliament while Matiq is supported by independents.
The vote to choose a new prime minister was postponed until May 4.
Libya has seen a severe deterioration in security over the past two years following the ouster and the killing of longtime
dictator Moammar Gaddafi in an eight-month civil war. ****(IT WAS NOT A CIVIL WAR BUT AN ILLEGAL INVASION FROM THE WEST WANTING A REGIME CHANGE JUST LIKE SYRIA AND UKRAINE.)
Earlier in the day, a car bomb exploded in front of a military compound in the restive eastern city of Benghazi, killing two soldiers, security officials said.
The official says the bombing took place early on Tuesday morning in front of the special forces barracks near the Benghazi airport. He says two other soldiers were wounded by the explosion. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to talk to journalists.
The government has depended on unruly militias to fill the security vacuum in the absence of a strong police force or a unified military.
**Editors note: It’s a shame that till today the west media insists in saying that Libya had a civil war let me explain what a civil war means. When your country is divided politically into two parties for example communist party with liberal party and both are 45% of the population with one party and another 45% is with other party take a look at Greece in the years 1945 and onward till 1974 they had a civil war.. with an in-between Junta from 1967 till 1974. Italy had a sort of civil war in the 70′s, as did Spain, Latin America had a lot of civil wars as also Central and South Africa had its share, but the GREATEST CIVIL WAR WAS IN AMERICA BETWEEN THE NORTH AND SOUTH. Libya had none of the above, CIA and its partners had it planned since the 80′s for a Regime change as Qaddafi didn’t suit their interests. So when they started their big plan with Arab spring starting with Egypt to take down Moubarak who would not agree to hit Iran they had to bring him down, then came to Tunis with Ben Ali having the same problem into not agreeing to hit Iran so he was brought down. This gave them the excuse of planting SNIPERS ON ROOFTOPS IN BENGHAZI HITTING BOTH CIVILIANS AND POLICE on a small-scale demonstration. The second plan was sending videos to YOUTUBE which in Libya was shut down for over five years so that means the videos were taken from another country who had YOUTUBE availability. The third step was to involve the CIA MEDIA sending only news from their point of view without even bothering to listen to the 90% of the population which was with the Jamahirya. From my own experience I was invited by the BBC RADIO to talk and they had promised me that there would be three anti Qaddafi speakers and three pro Qaddafi speakers on their show, alas there were only five speakers of anti Qaddafi and only I on that radio show and their excuse was we couldn’t find any pro Qaddafi people to come to the show, knowingly that there was another interview with pro Qaddafi people but they did not want to show to the international community that FRANCE. UK AND USA (F.UK.US) WAS GOING TO RAPE LIBYA AND BRING IT DOWN TO ITS KNEES because we did not want to hit Iran, we wanted to make Africa independent and we would never recognize Israel. My country for the last 43 years did not own a dime to foreign banks we had our own gold and we were one of the richest countries in Africa.