News and Entertainment

Breaking News
Featured Events
  • 1 members
Featured Radio Stations
Featured Businesses
  • 16 members
  • 16 friends
  • 12 members
  • 15 friends
  • 17 members
  • 14 friends
  • 15 members
  • 15 friends
  • 14 members
  • 14 friends
  • 15 members
  • 15 friends
  • T


    23 members
  • 20 friends
  • 9 members
  • 10 friends
July 20—Diane Sare, independent candidate for U.S. Senate in New York, gave an interview on July 19 to the Cynthia Pooler’s podcast, “Issues that Matter.” Sare began by stating that she had publicly warned on July 1, in her campaign newspaper New Federalist, that there was an extreme danger of an assassination attempt against Donald Trump. She set that forecast within the global context of the May 15 assassination attempt against the Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico—a brilliant voice for peace in Europe—and the clear pattern of the U.S. press putting a target on Trump. She said that this attempt on Trump’s life is not the last catastrophic destabilizing action which the global Western establishment is going to trigger, in the near term, in the U.S.At every point in the interview, Sare raised the discussion from a mass of detailed speculation about the assassination attempt in the U.S. to the strategic reality that “we are in a moment of transition, the BRICS are emerging”—a new, better reality is forming globally. Sare provided a gripping demonstration in the dialogue on how to “lift people up.”Sare told Pooler and their audience: “It really depends on Americans finding their citizenship…. People cannot sit on the sidelines. You must be in the street at this point. There’s no guarantee of a fair election. It is important for people to think! We don’t want to be the little people that Friedrich Schiller talked about in the French Revolution…. Please, do not get incensed over petty issues. We’re going to either win or lose everything for generations to come in this moment. And, therefore, we really have to be big people and big thinkers, and we should think about what the world should look like fifty years from now after we’re dead, and then … we have to fight for that.” 
July 20—Only seconds after Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche opened the 59th consecutive online meeting of the International Peace Coalition (IPC) July 19, the meeting was subject to an extended disruption, which attack underscores the growing strategic importance of the weekly IPC sessions. About 30 minutes later, the meeting resumed with tighter security.Note that flights were grounded all over the world today, ostensibly due to a collapse of Microsoft systems cloud, initially attributed to a CrowdStrike update, which disrupted emergency services, hospitals, airlines, trains, media and banks as well.The International Assassination BureauThe July 13 attempt on the life of former U.S. President and Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump was an early topic of discussion. Helga Zepp-LaRouche reminded the participants that if Trump had not moved his head a fraction of an inch and avoided death, the effect on the domestic situation would have been dramatic. Trump has expressed his desire to end all wars on the planet, and even if there is only a slight chance that he intends to do that after being elected, that chance for peace would have been eliminated. Prof. Cliff Kiracofe, from the Washington Institute for Peace and Development, added that “We have in our history other assassination attempts against U.S. Presidents.” In the cases of Lincoln and McKinley, the objective was to break up economic development. Trump has occasionally made statements that hearken back to the economic development policies of McKinley and Henry Clay; a successful assassination could possibly have blocked a new industrial policy for the United States. Later, during the discussion, LaRouche activist Kynan Thistlethwaite brought to people’s attention The LaRouche Organization’s report, “Stop NATO’s World War: Dismantle the International Assassination Bureau,” released in February 2023. Zepp-LaRouche responded by listing many of the political, financial and civil rights leaders who have been killed since the 1960s, saying that the common denominator is that these were individuals who were crucial for their nations. Kiracofe added that the list should include the pro-peace politicians in Japan who were killed in 1930s, making a world war inevitable.Diplomacy Versus Violence“All the people who are reasonable think that you have to go to diplomacy,” said Zepp-LaRouche, but the leaders of the EU are charging headlong in the opposite direction. She commented on the unfortunate reelection of Ursula von der Leyen to a second term as president of the EU Commission, saying that her speech was “so bellicose … unquestioned commitment to the policies of the Israeli government, not the Israeli people.” Von der Leyen actually called Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s diplomacy “appeasement,” and called for a strategic defeat of Russia. Zepp-LaRouche further mentioned the “hair-raising warmongering” of new EU foreign policy chief (and an EU Commission vice president) Kaja Kallas, who will replace Josep Borrell.Jonathan Kuttab, Executive Director of Friends of Sabeel North America—A Christian Voice for Palestine, and Co-Founder of Non-Violence International, joined as a featured speaker for today’s meeting. He began his remarks saying, “I’m willing to say that there are those who have a vested interest in violence…. I can talk about grave violations of international law … war crimes, genocide … but I’m not going to do that.” He continued: “We absolutely, desperately need to seek other methods for conflict resolution … we need to stop the demonization of each other … every liberation movement has been called a terrorist organization….” He advocated dialogue with all parties, Hamas included, saying, “We need to start the process … we are willing to break the taboos, we are willing to initiate contacts.”He described that in the late 1980s and early 1990s, peace activists in Israel, the U.S., and elsewhere conducted a serious campaign to urge politicians to talk to Yasser Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization. The PLO changed its charter, renounced violence, accepted the principles of compromise, and accepted conditions.Is there any reason a similar process should not be started with Hamas?Zepp-LaRouche thanked him and introduced him briefly to the Oasis Plan of Lyndon LaRouche, which is “making big steps forward.”What Has Become of International Law?Richard A. Falk is an American professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University and Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor’s Chairman of the Board of Trustees. Not able to attend in person, he provided a video in which he reminded viewers that the Likud/religious party coalition which came to power in 2023 has been characterized as “the most extreme in the history of Israel,” with the “rather transparent intention of completing the Zionist project of Greater Israel,” including the annexation of the West Bank. The most extreme government figures were given jurisdiction over the occupied territories; settlers were given a green light to terrorize the Palestinians. The events of Oct. 7 provided the pretext for genocide, and diverted attention from the West Bank, which was the core of the coalition strategy. Falk described this as the second phase of the death of the two-state solution, phase one being the settlements policy.During the discussion, an activist reported on the July 19 ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is unlawful and should come to an end “as rapidly as possible.” Kiracofe pointed out that this decision addresses what has been exactly the principal legal issue since 1948, when the U.S. intervened to block a one-state solution, a democratic republic where Arabs and Jews would have equal rights, in favor of partition. Did the UN have legal authority to cause partition? The ICJ has been prevented from addressing this until now.Elena Radu, a Romanian lawyer, is President of the Coalition for the Defense of the Rule of Law. She is leading a campaign to make null and void the treaty made by Romania’s President with Ukraine, which could put Romania at war in 24 hours. The Romanian Constitution does not authorize a President to enter into such agreements, only Parliament may do so. One Member of Parliament has initiated an action to nullify the treaty, and 26 other MPs support it. Two other Romanians on the IPC call also spoke out on the war danger, and other participants urged the IPC to support this action against the treaty. Zepp-LaRouche called for publication of their demands.In concluding remarks, Zepp-LaRouche reiterated her call for a “Council of Reason.” She returned to the image of Trump averting death by a tiny movement of his head, finding in it a metaphor for the precarious world situation: “This is the condition of all humanity, and if you assume that, then you get off your couch.” In response to a question from a Canadian professor on the question of pessimism, she said, “I’m not exactly euphoric about the world situation … why am I nevertheless an optimist?” She reminded participants that Gottfried Leibniz said that “the universe is made in such a way that a great evil always evokes a greater good.” That greater good is within reach; colonialism started around 1500, and now it is ending, with China playing a critical role. The end of 500 years of evil exploitation opens up the possibility of the New Paradigm toward which many of us have dedicated our lives. Averting another world war is not just a desperate act of self-preservation, it is the key to the success of that new paradigm.
July 20—In a scathing rejection of Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and East Jerusalem, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an Advisory Opinion on July 19. It directs Israel to “bring an end to its unlawful presence” in the territories, to “cease immediately all new settlement activities, and evacuate all settlers from” the territories. Furthermore, the ICJ Opinion holds “all states,” “international organizations” and the UN “under obligation” to “not recognize as legal” the “unlawful presence of the State of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” and thereby must not “render aid or assistance” to the ongoing Israeli occupation.This case arose from a December 2022, UN General Assembly resolution which sought that the ICJ give an advisory opinion on the “legal consequences” arising from then “ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination” due to the “prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation” of Palestinian territories since 1967. Later, the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and the African Union joined the request. At the outset of delivering today’s opinion, ICJ President Nawaf Salam noted that the Court’s findings are not related to events in the aftermath of October 7, 2023, but rather many of the findings date back to the 1967 start of the occupation.In an extraordinary detailed opinion the Court examined 11 areas of concern regarding “Israel’s policies and practices” in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: 1) settlement policy; 2) transfer of settlers; 3) exploitation of natural resources; 4) extension of Israeli law to the West Bank and Jerusalem; 5) forced displacement of Palestinian population; 6) violence against Palestinians; 7) Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem; 8) annexation of OPT; 9) discriminatory legislation and measures; 10) residence permit discrimination; and 11) impact on Palestinians’ right to self-determination.The high court pointed, throughout its opinion, that Israel’s “prolonged occupation” of the OPT is in violation of international human rights law which delineates certain obligations of the “occupying power” e.g. a “duty to administer the territory for benefit of the local population.” Under lawful occupation, an occupying power “cannot transfer title of sovereignty” to itself. Yet, in the case of settlements policies carried out by Israel, exactly such transfers have occurred.As to “natural resources” an occupying power has an obligation to “safeguard” the capital of these resources, and moreover to “ensure adequate supply of foodstuffs for the local population, including water.” But “evidence” shows that “Israel exploits natural resources … for benefit of its own population.” Such actions by Israel are in violation of “its obligations under international law.”The 83-page opinion has many more examples of Israel’s disregard and/or violation of international law. Having found that Israel’s continued occupation is “unlawful,” a few of the most forceful conclusions in voting the Opinion according to the summary are vote #4) Israel is “under obligation to bring to an end its unlawful presence in OPT as rapidly as possible”; #5) “under obligation to cease immediately all new settlement activities, and to evacuate all settlers…”; and #6) has the obligation to make reparation for the damage caused to all the natural or legal persons concerned in the Occupied Palestinian Territory."As to the international communities’ obligations vis-à-vis the OPT, these points are most crucial: #7) all states must “not recognize as legal” the “unlawful presence of” Israel in the OPT and “not render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by” such continued occupation; and #9) the UN, “especially the General Assembly … and the Security Council, should consider the precise modalities … required to bring to an end … the unlawful presence of” Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.The ruling, which undercuts Israel's longstanding arguments that have justified the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem , carries no weight—in other words it does not compel the Israelis to do anything. For implementation,  the ruling would have to be acted upon by the UN Security Council, where​ sources have said that the U.S. would veto any call for Israel to leave the occupied territories or an effort, by force if necessary, to make them do this.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu lashed out at what he called the ICJ's "lies" saying "the Jewish people do not occupy their own land." Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said the ruling was "antisemitic" and added that the time for annexation of the West Bank  is now; Ben-Gvir and similar lunatics have create a movement to support increased illegal settlement and eventual annexation; the U.S. government has condemned such actions. Israel's Foreign Ministry rejected the ruling, which it called "blatantly one-sided."Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas welcomed the court's decision, calling it a "victory for justice," adding "The Palestinian presidency urges the international community to demand that Israel, as an occupying power, end the occupation and withdraw unconditionally."Meanwhile, several sources have wondered what has happened with the prosecutor's request for indictments by the International Criminal Court, which is not affiliated with the ICJ, for indictments of Netanyahu and his co-evil twin Hamas leader Y. Sinwar, and others for crimes against humanity. One source reported that the U.S. had through "sand in the gears of the court to delay and indictment of Bibi
July 20—Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán was active in his self-described peace mission July 18 at the European Political Community summit at Blenheim Palace, involving many heads of state among the 40-plus attendee nations and organizations. Yesterday Orbán sent out a message via X on the event, including a short video showing him with French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and others. Orbán’s text stated, “Thousands and thousands are dying on the battlefield every day. We will find no  on the battlefield, but only at the negotiating table. My goal is to convince European leaders to make a shift to a pro-peace policy.” Timed for the Blenheim Palace gathering, Orbán’s office released the full text of his July 12 letter to the EU leadership. “As fragments of my report to President @CharlesMichel on my  have surfaced, I decided to release the whole document for the sake of clarity and context,” Orbán wrote. The link to the full text of the letter is posted in his tweet.The text of the letter seems to largely confirm what has already been reported about it through media leaks. While “maintaining the current high-level political contacts with Ukraine, reopening direct lines of diplomatic communication with Russia and the rehabilitation of such direct contacts in our political communication,” Orbán wrote. He considers the EU’s policy on Ukraine has resulted in the “global isolation of the transatlantic community” and loss of appreciation from the Global South. Besides the Global South, Orbán also commented on China which, he says, “will continue its policy also formulated in international documents calling for a ceasefire and peace talks. However, China will play a more active role only if the chance for success of its engagement is close to certain. In their evaluation this is not the case at the moment.”“It is obvious that he [Biden] is not capable of modifying the current U.S. pro-war policy and therefore cannot be expected to start a new policy,” Orbán said. The EU “has copied” that pro-war policy of the U.S. so far, but it can find a “window of opportunity” to begin a new chapter that can lead to creating “the conditions for a temporary ceasefire and/or start peace negotiations.”Orbán proposed opening discussion on three proposals:“a. the initiative to conduct high-level political talks with China on the modalities of the next peace conference;“b. while maintaining the current high-level political contacts with Ukraine, reopening direct lines of diplomatic communication with Russia and the rehabilitation of such direct contacts in our political communication;“c. the launch of a coordinated political offensive towards the Global South whose appreciation we have lost concerning our position on the war in Ukraine resulting in the global isolation of the transatlantic community.”Orbán also included a 43-second video statement on his intention to continue his peace mission at the European summit, saying in English: "I think that there is no solution of this conflict on the battlefield. They hope so, but I don’t. I don’t believe it at all. So, because I know the Russians. I know the Soviet Union. I know the Ukrainians. I belong to a neighboring country. I know the whole context. It’s impossible to find a solution on the battlefield. We will lose every day thousands of innocent people. So to lose the human lives is the most precious thing we can lose and we do it every day, thousands and thousands. We have to stop it.“As a neighboring country this is my opinion. Solution is not on the battlefield. The solution is at the negotiation table, ceasefire, negotiation table. That’s what I try to convince them [the EU leaders] of. But you know it takes time.”
July 19—Ukrainian opposition leader Viktor Medvedchuk has written a letter to Donald Trump warning that the assassination attempt on July 13 may have been tied to Ukraine, RT reported this morning. “Dear Mr. Trump, you have become a personal enemy of the Ukrainian neo-Nazi [Volodymyr] Zelenskyy, and this scoundrel will stop at nothing to prevent you from winning the presidential election,” Medvedchuk wrote on July 16. “I think that there will be a Ukrainian trace in the case of the assassination attempt on you.”According to Medvedchuk, the current government in Kyiv has an interest in prolonging the conflict, because ending it would bring into question their legitimacy. Zelenskyy’s “criminal regime” would lose U.S. support when Trump returns to the White House and faces “deserved punishment for its crimes,” he wrote. “The day before the assassination attempt on you, Mr. President, the head of Ukrainian military intelligence stated that the Ukrainian authorities had attempted to assassinate Russian President Vladimir Putin, and a few days earlier, the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine promised to destroy Ukrainians who advocate peace with Russia,” Medvedchuk told Trump.In fact, Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, has already been put on a Ukrainian hit list as an alleged “Russian foreign propagandist,” demonstrating that the Ukrainian threat is indeed real.Intelligence sources have disputed the FBI's claim that a demented "loan assassin" Thomas Matthew Crooks, was the would-be assassin; the 20 year old was killed by a Secret Service sniper. These sources say that NATO, and its assassination bureau, of which the notorious Ukrainian Secret Services work with and for and which has assets in this country and abroad, was behind the attempt and they indicate that there was a second shooter, at least, if not a third as well, involved.
July 19—GOP Presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump will quickly demand peace talks between Russia and Ukraine if he wins the Nov. 5 presidential election, and has developed “well-founded plans” for doing so, Hungary's Primie Minister Viktor Orbán has claimed after private discussions with the Republican candidate, the Financial Times reported July 15. That prospect means the EU should reopen direct diplomatic communication with Russia and start “high-level” negotiations with China to find a peaceful solution to the war in Ukraine, Orbán said, in a private letter to EU leaders following consultations in Moscow and Beijing.Orbán also said in the letter, that on the basis of his recent discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Ukraine's self-proclaimed President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the “general observation” was “that the intensity of the military conflict will radically escalate in the near future.”“We can expect no peace initiative coming from [Trump] until the elections. I can however surely state that shortly after his election victory, he will not wait until his inauguration, but will be ready to act as a peace broker immediately,” Orbán wrote in his letter sent to European Council president Charles Michel and other EU leaders, the FT reported. "He has detailed and well-founded plans for this. That means the EU should anticipate the shift in U.S. policy, Orbán said, and either embrace the need for immediate negotiations between Russia and Ukraine or take on more responsibility for funding Ukraine’s defense, implying that a Trump-led United States will not continue to fund NATO's war on Russia.Sources report that Trump has told confidants this week that he intends to label the war in the Ukraine "Biden's folly," and says that the United States should have talked with Putin before he was forced to move into the Ukraine. The GOP candidate reportedly stated that, if he had been President,  he would have forced the Ukraine to allow a free plebiscite to people living in its eastern regions as to whether they wanted to leave the Ukraine, obtain autonomy, or join the Russian Federation. A Russian-conducted vote folund majority support for the latter, and the regions have now been accepted into the Russian Federation."What kind of lunatic<" said reportedly Trump, referring the demented and apparently senile Biden, "would send more than a half million Ukrainians to the death in a war they could never have won to bleed an alleged enemy (Russia) who had offered a peaceful solution? He is really a war criminal for forcing this and now he risks nuclear war. This is Biden's War, Biden's Folly, under the direction of the worst commander-in -chief in history."